HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packets - 1989/12/04CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
CITY COUNCIL
DECEMBER 4, 1989
4:30 P.M. - MANAGEMENT AUDIT FOLLOW-UP TEAMBUILDING
-------------------------------------------------------
SPECIAL INFORMATIONAL MEETING/HEARING
REGARDING OF WETLAND 70N.ING ORDINANCE, NO.481
7:00 P.M.
AGENDA SESSION
1. Consideration of Proposed Ordinance No. 482 Regulating
Pigeons
2. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Petition for
Proposed Crosswalk on Silver Lake Road at Woodcrest Park
3. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Petition for
6'y Knollwood Extension
4. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Firstar
State Bank Highway 10 Moritorium Waiver
5. Consideration of Animal Pound Contract
6. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Organized
Garbage Collection
7. Consideration of Recycling Contract Renewal - (Info to
be provided Monday evening)
8. Consideration of Application for Membership on Planning
Commission By JoAnn Colleen
9. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Finance
Director's Request to Use City Personal Computer at Home
10. Consideration of Pay Request $2 - Mounds View Business
Park South
11. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Cigarette
Vending Machines
12. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding
Redevelopment
13. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding City Survey
Questions
AGENDA SESSION
PAGE TWO
DECEMBER 4, 1989
I
14. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Modified
City Hail Office Hours
15. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Reqarding Work Program
and Report on External Contacts
16. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Service
Awards
17. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Truck
Traffic
18. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding 1990 Annual
Meeting
19. Consideration of Staff Memorandum Regarding Hiliview
Road Apartments
20. Discussion of Future Locations of Edgewood Community
Center Programs and Services
21. Continued Discussion of Possible Community Center
22. Update on Police Negotiations
0
01
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING/HEARING
ORDINANCE NO, 481
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the
City of Mounds View will meet on Monday, December 4, 1989
and Monday, January 22, 1990 at 7:00 p.m. at the Mounds View
City Hall, 2401 Highway 10, Mounds View, Minnesota, 55112,
to consider Ordinance No. 481, Wetland Zoning Ordinance.
Anyone desiring to be heard with reference to this
matter may be heard at this meeting.
(FOCUS: November 29, 1989)
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk -Administrator
^^ ORDINANCE NO. 481
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF MOUNDS VIEW BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 48, ENTITLED, "WETLAND ZONING
ORDINANCE"
The City Council of the City of Mounds View does
hereby ordain:
SECTION I. Chapter 48, Entitled, "Wetland Zoning
Ordinance" is hereby amended and adopted as attached.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall take effect thirty
days after the dace of its publication.
Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View
on this day of , 1989.
Read and passed by the City Council of the City of
Mounds View this day of , 1989.
ATTEST:
Mayor
(SEAL)
Clerk -Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
1,
Oa .2 3. 89
CHAPTER 48
WETLAND ZONING ORDINANCE
48.01. TITLE COUNCIL FINDINGS POLICY PURPOSES AND MEANS.
Subdivision 1. Citation. Section 48.01 to 48. 15 may be cited as the
Wetlands Ordinance.
Subdivision 2. Findings and purposes. The Council finds that wetlands
within the City, as part of the ecosystem, are critical to the present and
future health, safety, and general welfare of the lava, animals, and people
Within the City, as well as within the Rice Creek Watershed D+.strict; chat
existing and potential development within the City and Rice Creek Watershed
possess increasing ecological and economic problems and demands, having the
effect of potentially despoiling, polluting, accelerating the aging,
eliminating or negatively and irretrievably altering both the wetlands and
their functions (and the processes associated therewith) which, if eoasassrad
az�i�si.ataiaadr properly managed will constitute important physical,
educational, ecological, aesthetic, recreational, and economic assets for
existing and future residents of the community and the Rice Creek Watershed
District. The City Council has in mind its statutory obligation to comply
with Chapters 104, 105, and 112 of Minnesota State Law, the regulations of
the Rice Creek Watershed District, Regulations of the Department of Natural
Resources, including provisions for protected waters, public Lew 92-500
(Federal Water Pollution Control Act), open space policies of the
Metropolitan Council and its guidelines encouraging protection and
enhancement of marshes, and wetlands in the flood plain area, and the public
interest in preventing irreparable destruction or deterioration of valuable
natural resources. Therefore, recognizing the obligation to protect these
assets and natural resource gifts from destruction or deterioration and
pollution of all kinds, the purposes of this Chapter are:
A. To preserve wetlands in as natural a state as possible; to serve
as natural retention and detention areas for surface waters; to
regulate the use of areas adjacent to the wetlands in order to
protect and enhance the natural function of the wetlands; to
provide for the protection, preservation, proper maintenance, use
and enhancement _ of wetland zoning districts; to minimize the
disturbance to them and to prevent or minimize damage from
excessive sedimentation, eucrophication, or pollution; to prevent
loss of baasfizi+l aquatic organisms, wildlife, and vegetation or
the habitats of the same; co provide for the protection of surface
anger of drought,
and ground—fz"b water supplies from the d
overdraft, pollution, or mismanagement; to secure safety from
floods; to reduce the financial burdens imposed upon the community
through rescue and relief efforts occasioned by the occupancy or
use of areas subject to periodic flooding; to prevent loss of life,
2362161/WZO/PLS
1
property damage, and the losses and risks associated with flood
conditions; to reduce
th—iob correction of erosion problems; skate-W tA-Psopac
to enhance And preserve auoid.-cb&
water
quality; and to enhance and preserve
extant —of natural drainage ways-ccucaaa.
B. The public interest necessitates sound land use development, as
land is a limited and irreplaceable resource, and the land within
the municipality is a resource to be developed in a manner which
will result in minimum damage to the quality of life, property,
threat to health and reduction of private/public economic loss
caused by drainage problems.
Subdivision 3. Means. It is futtber-osa the intent of the City to
eifeCLuaLe the purposes of this ordinance through the following c:eans:
A. Adopt a map designating the wetlands protected
by this Ordinance.
CB. Promote community education about the importance, function,
limitations, end impact "M"Z&laudaaaa of urbanization upon the
water resources-Laara of the community,
DC. To preserve and enhance wetlands within
the community through implementation of development regulations
that will ensure the design and construction of adequate on -sire
storm water, sedimentation and holding retention and detention
basins, flow control devices, and implementation of effective
erosion control techniques.
ED. To apply techniques such as density transfers to development
proposals in order to minimize ratios of impermeable surface to
open space.
FE. To establish means by which certain wetlands may be placed in the
public domain for purposes of enhancement, preservation,
pcuac-cionr and maintenance.
CF. To provide means by which the-daualoper an applicant and the City
will routinely obtain advice and input from various governmental
2362161/WZO/PLS 2
agencies and professionals in the field of fresh water biology,
hydrology, and civil engineering,
2G. To establish a system of permits and enforcement to effectuate the
intent of this ordinance.
48.02. WETLAND ZONING DISTRICTS. This Chapter Shall apply to wetland
zoning districts which are specifically identified on the zoning map
entitled, "^+.-.Y F w___�o1d_ 'riaw-Wetland Zoning District Map,!,- an official copy
of which shall be on file in the office of the Clerk-Administrecor and shall
be available for inspection and copying upon the terms and conditions as
established by the City. Tb" --p A wetland zoning district may be modified
Or eliminated saundad by four-fifthe affirmative vote of the Council after
Public Hearing and notice as set cut forth in Chapter 40 of this Coder but
wetland Wetland zoning districts may not be eliminated z, � Szom-- p ma
unless it can be shown that the original designation is in error or that
conditions have changed. When modifying or removing a wetland zoning
district, the Council shall use the criteria and methods established in the
FEDERAL MANUAL FOR IDENTIFYING AND DELINEATING JDRISDICTIONAL WETLANDS dated
January, 1989, as amended from time -to -rime
48.03. SCOPE. The wetland zoning district shall overlay the zoning
districts established pursuant to Chapter 40 of this Code-aa as amended, so
chat any parcel of land lying in a vetland zoning district shall also lie in
one or more of the established zoning districta. Lands lying within a
wetland zoning district shall be subject to the requirements established by
other applicable ordinances and regulations of the City. Within each watland
zoning district, all uses shall be permitted in accordance with the
regulations for the underlying zoning district, provided, however, that such
uses must also satisfy the additional requirements established in this
Chapter.
48.04. DEFINITIONS.
Subdivision 1. Alteration. Any change addition or modification
Subdivision 2. Building. Any structure used or intended for supporting
or sheltering any use or occupancy.
Subdivision 23. Development. The construction, installation or
alteration of any struccureri the extraction, clearing or other alteration
of land or terrestrial or aquatic vegetation; r-laad or the course, current
or cross section of any water body or wacercoursei or the subdivision of land
into parcels pursuant to Chapter 42 of the Municipal Code.
2362161/WZO/PLS 3
Subdivision 24. Dimenaional Re
Yard requirement., or structure hei ulrementa,
42 of A minimumnmaximum setback
the Municipal Code. 8ht or size established in
Chapter 40 and
Subdivision 65. Drainaag`y
A. Any natural, altered or artificial watercourse
beds and banks cnpeble of eonducrin
lends, which has definable
Watercourse beds not B confine runoff
to include r clearly defined a from adjacent
ha r, tree which would be inu hall be d-l'
trom a 24 hour rei nfell ndeced b eated
Years. h�v1°8 a recurrence into vela offonceairting
ten
B. An altered watercourse is chat which has been effected b
changes in straightening, deepening, nerrowin
original channel. Y man—made
8. or vid ening the
C. An artificial watercourse is that which has constructed by sun where there vea no
The limits been artificially
its of the watercourse bed Previous natural watercourse•
would be inundated b are confined
at:°rm having Y runoff resultin CO that area which
B e recurrence interval B from a IG hour
1 of once
Subdi vision n_auaZK ten years,
the Cit ton 6. Perml t.
euchori zin er An official document or f°rmence of e s certificate issued b
peci 'led acti vit
Subdivision 47, Person.
Partnership, asaoc iation or Any individual
other private or ' firm, corporation,
Subdivisio Bovernmencel entity,
n 38. Structure
in some"art
definite manner.
Subdivision 59. Wetland.
in size, rA_
hydrology as rt h dt
-- delineated an the
MaPa ced_r.,,_ �--
Subdivision 210. Wetland Buffer Aree,
feet, measured horizontally, Of a w Areas abutting
e [le nd. and within 100
"12161/WZO/PLS
4
Subdivision 911. Wetland Drainage District. That area tributary to the
Wetland Zoning District as delineated on the Wetland
Zoning District Map.
Subdivision 811. Wetland Zoning District. The areas delineated on the
oF wouad, Vial+ Wetland Zoning District Map which includes the wetlands
and wecland buffer areas.
48.05. WETLAND ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS.
Subdivision 1. U,spt no No
development, i'RBT
amp^ ' pL—p{:a{iWAt—itiLGWLir .
o4bu-44car4V_io shall be allowed within a wetland zoning district without
first having obtained a wetland alteration permit from the City as provided
for in Chapter 48.06 of this Code.
Subdivision 31. Whenever a wetland or drainage way is located on lands
that are being subdivided, the subdivider shall dedicate such wetland and/or
drainage way to the public as allowed per Minnesota Statutes 462 and shall
dedicate an easement to the public as required for purposes of improving,
maintaining, or protecting the area for drainage, phoapbow acripping water
quality enhancemenc or other purposes expressed in chic Chapter.
Subdivision 33. Notwithstanding the provisions of Chapter 40 of this
Code, the following shall apply to all lands proposed to be subdivided
pursuanc to Chapter 41 of this Code and lying within a wetland zoning
district:
are
districts. The purpose of controlling development density is to
-educe the financial burdens imposed on the community through
rescue and relief efforts occasioned by the occupancy or use of
areas subject to periodic flooding; to minimize loss of life,
property damage, and the losses and risks associated with flood
conditions; and to minimize the detrimental effects of urbanization
2362161/WZO/PLS 5
on the wildlife habitat Were uali . CY enhancement recreational
and aesthetic values of wetlands
Ar J. Minimum lot size - 20,000 square Peet.
g• 2. Minimum lot width - 125 feet as measured at the building
setback line.
J. All building$, other than accessory buildings as d tined in
Chapter 40 of this Code, shell he serback at least !00 feet
from the a werland
4. All accessory buildings shall be setback not less
setbaCk requirements set forth in Chapter 40.05 Su
C of Chia Code.
Subdivision 6. A�building or structure situated on an existing parcel
raxiari.ng--Fattala Of Rrecord, ow riot the date Of the original date of
Enactment of this ordinance, that does not meet the re ui cements of this
chapter shall be considered non -conforming pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 40.03 of this Code and will require a variance from the Council to
build or rebuild. i1—tLa_.pyrc�l
Chapter Ad if chm
A non -conforming parcel shall exist.
A. Where Aany portion of the parcel is contained within tha_asya
daU.nad--as-Zha Za Wetland • or
B. Where It-a.�18"t 20 percent of a parcel or at least 2,000 square
feet of the parcel, whichever is less, shall be contained within
the _Wetland Buffer Area. '•
A non -conforming building shall exist:
A. Where it does not meet buildin r or structure setback requirements-
B. Where is does not meet floor $lave tion requirements.
48.06. PERMITS.
Subdivision 1. The following activities in or upon a wetland zoning
district shall require a wetland alteration permit:
A. The digging, dredging, filling, draining, or in any way altering
or remo•.+,ng any material from a wetland.
2362161/WZO/PLS 6
^ B. The removal of vegetation Within
the wetland zoning_ district
abate s public nuisance•
except to
C• The construction, alteration, or removal of any structure.
D• The altering of any embankment or ponding area, or the changing of
the flow of water or ponding capacity•
8 �
E• The storing of materials which would interfere with the
flow of
water and/or ponding capacity.
P• Disposing of
A..=.fi+4uc waste materiels including, but not
CO, demolition debris_ and yj_ r _waste
limited
0• Installation or maintenance of essential cervices.
Subdivision 2. In consideration a! an application for
a wetland alteration permit, the city �++13—me
the issuance for
furnish end supply such information—L1equire chat the e
upon a vecland °° required in 48.06 PPlitint
alteration Permit application, (46i• In acting
relevant lectors specified in other the City Shall consider all
sections o[ this Chapter, including:
8A. The relationship of the
the impact of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan
Proposed use on the wetlands and
area. in the surrounding
CB• The impact Of the proposed vecland
alteration on the pboepgoF
habirac surface ve tar
and water store a fish end Wi ueli[ enhancement values o zldlttc
! the wetland.
Subdivision 3. Permit Standards,
�o++aasl Cit finds and . No permit shall be issued
_Y nd determines chat the proposed developmentunless the
the following standard,— unless a variance is
forth in thecomplies wick
Chapter 48. 14 of this Code. rented b the Council as set
A. 8 Alteration.
vecland may A minimum
y be allowed when necessary alteration
only when it will not have a Substantially or the use of property
effect esv but
determined by the or significantly adverse
hydrological characteristicsCam, upon the ecological and
Shall the restrictions setout b the wetland; however
be o in no ease
exceeded. Since the extent of !"lam& be
which ten 6e alteration
Permitted is limited, the
considering a permit Co++nc
applis.L Ci Cy when
Li.bl
apportionment of cation, Shall consider equal
alteration
oPportunicy--t�y,,�
2362161/NZO/PLS
7
,^ district psopacrg. The alteration opportunity within th,
shall be allocated among property owners in proportion to
be determined by analysis of the runoff from the entire
developed veclard drainage district resulting, from both the
two-year and 100-year frequency, 14-hour SCS Type I
distribution storms.
2.
Soil AnA
-D3a
ga..dirtrict"•f'or-i.ca
Any alteration shall not reduce the
existing water quality enhancement value of a wetland under
conditions of ultimate development, during both the two-year
and 100-year frequency, 24-hour SCS Type 1 distribution
storms. Water quality enhancement value of a wetland shall
be determined using methods approved by the City.
J. Any alteration shall not reduce the existing wildlife habitat
value of a wetland as measured using the methods approved by
the Cicy.
34. Only fill substantially free of chemical pollutants and
org-mic wastes, as determined by the City Council, may be
used.
45. 8illimg Alterations shall be carried out so as to minimize Elie
impact on vegetation.
2362161/WZO/PLS
26. lz Alterations shall not adversely sigaitican"), change the
water flow characteristics within the wetland as determined
by the Pit .
37. The size of the dcadgad altered area shall be limited to the
minimum required for the proposed action.
�a8
distsicr—akal.l--not--sasul.t
cuss-aa�f1
sa,—or,�.asar—poll.iuio�u
dasarmiaad-6;--cha_Couaail-
58. Work in the wetland will not be performed during the breeding
season of waterfowl or fish spawning season.
1_9. No part of any sewage disposal system requiring on -land or in -
ground disposal of waste shall be located closer than 100 feet
from the wetland. All on -land or in -ground sewage disposal
systems shall meet criteria set out in Minnesota Rule 6, MCAR
4.8040, "Individual Sewage Treatment System Standard."
2,10. oc�Vaste which would normally be disposed of at a solid
or hazardous waste disposal site or which would normally be
discharged into a sewage disposal system or sewer shall not
ba directly or indirectly discharged to a wetland.
311. Construction Serosion control measures and retention
Facilities shall be
designed to limit soil
loss from the development site to not more than five (5) tons
per acre per year. plans and supporting documentation for
such measures and facilities shall be developed and approved
by the city prior to commencement of construction.
+rig
512. The applicant for the wetland alteration permit shall be
required to demonstrate that after the development is
completed, the conditions on the site will be stabilized such
chat the yearly soil loss from the site will not be greater
than 0.5 tons per acre per year.
2362161/WZO/PLS 9
C
"1 613. Sediment and soil loss shall be determined utilizing the
"Universal Soil Loss Equation" as defined by the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service Technical
Field Guide as emended from time to time and as provided for
Ramsey Soil and Water Conservation District.
m inc�
run
data r
ad
*4+r-ia--ao--cases
b+--axcsmded.--S i.acw
itadr
-ahalLcoaaSde�xhm
ptaparty_ land
114. Stormwater runoff from a development may be directed to the
wecland only when substantially
free of ails sediment, debris, and chemical nollurn
WILY at rates which will not substantially ,-.aa. i
tha--Council, disturb vegetation or increase turbidity _s
determined by the City.
215. The proposed action shall not cause stormwater runoff from the
watlaad development to cake place at a race which would exceed
the aatuz" rate or volume of runoff_e_s Anticipated by the
Cities SurPe ce Na ter yena ement Plen.
216. The quality of water infiltrated to the water table or aquifer
shall remain substantially, as determined by the Ci �l,
unchanged by the dauaiopme" alteration of the site. l
tocal fill all-, 11
at to
l-n+tural--P-lood
he_pso}ac;a.d
ed
w"4+nd-uatauha4- 4d
2362161/WZO/PLS 10
17. All buildings ocher Chan accessory buildings, as defined in
Chapter 40 of this Code shall be setback at least 100 feet
from the wetland.
18. All accessory buildings as defined in Chapter 40 of this Code
shall be setback nor less than the requirements sec forth in
Chaffer 40.05 subdivision C.
119. The lowest floor elevation of buildings permitted in a wetland
zoning district shall be at least two (2) feet above the
elevation of the ♦diaeaat...wazlaad-bounAmry 100-year fregoeney
flood level.
:20. No daw.lopmsnt alteration shall be allowed which will endanger
the health, safety, or welfare of persona, or which may result
in unusual road maintenance costs or utility line breakages
due to soil limitations, including high (root action.
8 21. "guuioa—Removal of vegetation within a wetland zoning
district shall be permitted only when ouch.--wozk `•'""
s�uadar�s-of-Cola
reasonably required for the placement
of structures and use of property.
Subdivision 4. Conditions
A. 1. A wetland alteration permit may be approved subject to
compliance with conditions reasonable and necessary to ensure
compliance with the requirements contained in 48.06,
Subdivisions 1, 2, and 3. Such conditions may, among other
mattersr:
A. provide for the enhancement of wetland storm water
scorare. fish and wildlife habitat, and water quality
the enhancement of recreation and
c. limit the size, kind, or character of the proposed workri
d. require the construction of stormwater detention
facilities or other structuresri
e. require replacement of vegetationri
f. establish required monitoring or maintenance procedures
including the payment of costs for such proceduresri
2362161/WZO/PLS 11
stage the work over time and increments of land to be
developed,l
h_ require the alteration of the site design to insure
bufferingri
i_ require the provisional of a performance bondi
J_ or require the conveyance to the City of certain lands or
interest therein.
The dimensional requirements of the underlying zoning
ordinance may be modified in furtherance of the purposes of
this Chapter.
2. The permit application shell be dirauyd submitted to the
City. The City shall process the aermlr .....1:____.
���•.�aa—arup may refemit Che __ ana
permit application to the
Planning Commission or the City staff for review and report
or may direct that the permit application be processed
according to the procedures specified for the processing of
conditional use permits set forth in Chapter 40 of the
Municipal Code. Upon approval of the application for the
permit, the CLUY--1 may establish such terms and
conditions, in addition to those specifically cited in this
Chapter or Chapter 40 as is deems necessary to protect the
Public health, safety, and welfare, including the posting of
:hesurety to guarantee conformance to the purposes of
the permit and all laws regulating the activity. The
development controls provided in Chapter 59.07 of the
Municipal Code may also be required.
3• A wetland alteration permit may be processed coextensively
with any other application for_subd.iw,sy�ams vi
Pssm" approvals that may be required under other proes
of the Municipal Code.
B. The following drawings and exhibits
re wired with a may be
�� permit application:
1• The name and address of the subdivider, developer, and owner
or any other parry of inr
2. A legal description of the proposed site with a map showing
its location with indications of private access roads,
existing or proposed public roadways within and surrounding
the development site.
2362161/WZO/PLS
12
-� 3. A full and adequate description of all phases of the operation
and/or proposed physical changes.
4. A soil survey map of the proposed development site.
5. A topographic map of the development Area with contour
information at two (2) foot intervals or spot elevations at
two hundred (200) foot intervals and at a horizontal scale of
one (1) inch to one hundred (100) feet or larger.
6. A detailed site plan of the proposal showing proposed
drainage, grading, and landscaping.
7. A Site design map showing the location of existing and future
man-made features within the site and to a distance of five
hundred (500) feet surrounding the site or to the wetland
drainage district boundary, whichever is shorter.
8. Information on existing drainage and vegetation of all lands
within the site and to a distance of five hundred (500) feet
surrounding the site or to the wetland drainage district
boundary, whichever is Shorter.
9. The time period for commencement and completion of the
development, including time for staging of development, if
applicable.
10. Design specification and plan for all sediment and erosion
control measures as well as all grading and drainage
appurtenances and practices.
11. Engineering data related to computations of existing and
_ __,,,.... .......,... I:ry hvdreulics. and soil loss.
11. Such Additional information. As necessary to evaluate the
permit application.
Submivisiou 5. Time of Permit - Extensions and Renewals.
A permittee shall begin the work authorized by the permit within ninety
(90) days from the date of issuance of the permit unless ocherwisa—a
set forth in the permit. The
permittee shall complete the work authorized by the permit within the time
limit specified on the permit, which shall in no event exceed more than
2362161/W20/PLS 13
n twelve (12) months from the date of issuance unless such time limit is
extended by the Cit ' . The permittee shall notify the City at least
forty-eight (48) hours prior to the commencement of work. Should the work
not be commenced as specified herein, th6 permit shall become void.
Subdivision 6. Issuing Authority
A. The Issuing Authority for Wetland Alteration Permits shall be as
set forth here after:
2.
1. Administrative Issuing Authority: the City Engineer/Director
of Public Works, or his designee (Building Inspector or City
Planner) have the authoric to issue wetland alteration
permits which meet the standards in this chaprer if:
a. A. arm. gercy situatiun elistz rhich requires an
alteration within a wetland zoning district for the
purpose of preserving life or property.
b. The proposed alteration is limited to the vetland buffer
area, and does not adversely impact the adjacent wetland
and requires a permit for:
1. installation and maintenance of fences
2, landscaping nor including impervious surfaces;
J. construction, repair or maintenance of detached
garages and accessory buildings;
4. construction, repair or maintenance of public and
private utility facilities;
5. grading which does not adversely alter storm water
storage capacity, storm water flow direction or
runoff rate;
6. repair and maintenance of existing structures;
7. placement of structures not requiring
permanent foundations or pads for support;
Council issuing Authority: The City Council may issue Overland
alteration permits which meet the standards in this Chapter
and:
a, are beyond the scope of the administrative issuing
authority specified above;
2762161/WZO/PLS 14
~ b. which have been reviewed by City staff and referred to
the Council,
c, which hove been appealed to Council following denial by
City staff.
48.01. EXCEPTIONS; PERMIT.
A. Emergencies. Upon the declaration of an emergency by the
Couac." City.
emergency work necessary to preserve life or property sh..11
be permitted in a wetland zoning district.
B. Repairs. Upon application and Approval by the Couaeil City,
a person may repair or maintain any lawful use of land
existing on the date of adoption of this Chapter.
C. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code to the
contrary, the City
1 en.in .A bF •h- City by
daacal
may develop a municipally
owned recreation or perk facility on City owned lands which
will involve the development vi_rhin a wetlands zoning district
as part of an integrated plan comprising of nor less than 75
acres, where tba such development would reasonably conserves
and preserve and would enhance the environment by providing
facilities chat would protect the public health, safety and
welfare.
48.08. DEVELOPMENT DENSITY AND PARK LAND DEDICATION CREDIT TRANSFERS.
Subdivision 1. When land to be developed includes wetlands, the
developer thereof may receive a credit for the undevelopable portion of said
wetland, either:
A. toward the dedication of land requirements under Municipal Code,
Chapter 42.13, Parks and Playground Dedication, not exceeding the
amount of the developable lands in the development proposal; or
B. the development may be intensified so as not to exceed twice the
allowable land use densities prescribed under Chapters 40 and 42
of the Code provided, however, that said intensified land use must
be consistent with street dedication dimensions, parking
requirements, and screening, fencing and landscaping regulations
of the City; or
2362161/WZO/PLS 15
(Ii C. the building square footage requirements of the Municipal Code may
be intensified but not to exceed five (5) percent; or
D. any combination of A, B, and C above as agreed upon by developer
and City, keeping in mind that the public health, safety, and
welfare of the community is paramount.
Subdivision 2. Upon receipt of any of the credits herein, the developer
shall not._be
convey&d any wetlands
designated by this Chapter, for which a credit has been.w^••-
iven, usir--bs_eoauayed to the City
by-s+so7.utioa free
and clear of awy all encumbrances. ouix4a
48.09. ACQUISITION OP INTERESTS IN LAND. The municipality may acquire,
pursuant to law, fee title nr easement righta, by dedication., gift, purchase,
eminent domain, tax forfeiture, leasehold estates, part or all of any
wetlands or !and adjacent, abutting, contiguous, or affecting wetlands, for
the purpose of preserving such lands and protecting the public health,
safety, snd welfare. Ch.. gas authorized by Chapter 25 and Chapter 42 of the
Municipal Code or by other applicable law may be used to finance the
acquisitions authorized herein. The Council may abate those taxes and
assessments within wetlands as authorized by law.
48.10. RESPONSIBILITY. Neither the issuance of a permit nor compliance
1 with the conditions thereof, nor with the provisions of this Chapter, shall
relieve any person from any responsibility otherwise imposed by law for
damages to persona or properties; nor shall the issuance of any permit
hereunder serve to impose any liability on the m aicipality or its officers
or employees for injury or d.,mage to persons or -operty. A permit issued
pursuant to this Chapter shall not reliev! the permittee of the
responsibility of complying with any other requi !ments established by law,
regulation or ordinance.
48.11. PENALTY. Any person who violates the provisions of this
Chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Each day during which said
violation exists is a separate offense. Any violation of this Chapter is a
public nuisance and may be enjoined by civil action. Costs of any civil
enforcement shall be assessed against the property so enjoined. Any person
who, in violation of this Chapter, alters, changes or modifies any wetlands
shall restore such wetlands to their original condition.
48.12. SEVERABILITY. If any part of this Chapter is held to be
unconstitutional or otherwise illegal, the remainder of this Chapter shall
be deemed and held to be valid and remain in force and effect as if such
portion had not been included herein. If this Chapter or any provision
herein is held to be inapplicable to any person, property or work, such
holding shall not affect the applicability hereof to any other person.'s
property or work.
2762161/WZO/PLS 16
48.13. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT. The property within a designated wetland
which is restricted hereby or for which a development or other restrictive
easement is conveyed to the municipality shall not be subject to future
special assessments for the costa of public improvements for which such
assessments are authorized pursuant to Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code.
48.14. VARIANCE AND APPEALS.
Subdivision 1. e Anapplication for variance or appeal to the Council shall be proce3sed
according to
appeal, in Chapter 40 of the Municipal Code.
Subdivision 2. No variance may be granted which would allow any use
that is prohibited in the zoning district in which the property is located
or which will:
A. Result in incompatible land uses or which would be detrimental to
surface and groundwater resources supplies.
B. Increase the financial burdens imposed on the community through
increasing floods and overflow of water onto land areas within thin
City or onto land areas adjacent to Rice Creek.
C. Be not in keeping with land use plans and planning objectives for
the City or which will increase or cause danger to life or
property.
D. Be inconsistent with the objectives of encouraging land uses
compatible with the preservation of the natural land forms,
vegetation and rAs_mar.sbea_acd_wetlands within the City.
E. Include development of land and water areas essential to continue
the temporary withholding of rapid runoff of surface water which
contributes to downstream flooding, or water pollutionri. or
development of land and water areas which provide groundwater
recharge,l or development which diminishes the land or water which
are necessary to carry increased flows of stormwater following
periods of heavy precipitation.
Subdivision 3. No permit or variance shall be issued unless the
applicant, in support of his application, shall submit engineering data,
surveys, site plans and other information as the City may require in order
to determine the effects of such development on the affected land and water
areas.
48.15. WETLAND ZONING DISTRICTS.
2362161/WZO/PLS 17
Subdivision 1. Wetland Zoning District Nap.. Pursuant to Chapter
48.02, the wetland zoning districts delineated in the referenced wetland
zoning district map are hereby established.
Subdivision 2. Wetland Zoning Districts by Legal Description. Pursuant
to Chapter 48.02, the following described properties are hereby designated
as wetlands: (see Appendix A).
Subdivision 3. Inclusive. The wetland zoning districts designated in
Subdivisions 1 and 2 above are nereby established as wetland zoning districts
for the municipality.
2362161/WZO/PLS 18
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
'CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
+H, r SEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
ul WN `� L Regular Meeting
November 27, 1989
Mounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by 1. Call to
Mayor Hankner at 7:08 PM on Monday, November 27, 1989. Order
The Pledge of Allegiance was said. 2. Pledge of
Allegiance
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Peons, Wuori, Quick 3. Roll Call
and Mayor Hankner.
It was noted Councilmember Blanchard was absent.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Kerney, Clerk/Admini-
strator Pauley, Public Works Director Minetor and
City Planner Hren.
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to approve the November 4. Approval of
13, 1989 minutes as corrected. Minutes:
November 13,
4 ayes 0 nays 1989
Motion Carried
Mayor Hankner read the letters of commendation to 5. Special Order
Public Works Foreman Mike Ulrich and Maintenance of Business
Worker Gary Kardell, and presented the letters to
them, thanking them for the work they do on behalf
of the City.
Police Chief Ramacher reviewed crime statistics for
the first nine months of 1989 versus 1988, which
indicate that crime is up. He reviewed the activities
of the police department. In addition to making
arrests, 70% of their time is spent in public service.
Public works Director Minetor reviewed the activities
of the buildings, streets, garage, water and sewer
departments for the third quarter.
Park and Rec Director Saarion presented a video,
giving an overview of the park and rec department
and their activities for 1989.
11499
- November 27, ----
Mounds View City CouncUNAPPRGVED
page Two
_ _ ----------------------
Regular Meeting -------__
----------------------
Motion/Second: Paone/Wuori to set a special meeting 6. Public Hearing:
for t ng of December 18, 1989, at 7 PM and hold 1990 Budget
a public hearing at that time for the 1990 budget and and Property
property tax levy, with a potential reconvenement on Tax Levy
Decembet 26, 1989- Motion carried
4 ayes 0 nays
uley explained the public hearing
Clerk/Administrator. Pa
had to be rescheduled as according to law, it cannot
be held at the same time as the school board or county
hearings, and the school board was holding their hear-
ing this evening also.
Mayor Hankner closed the regular meeting and opened the
second public hearing at 7:42 PM.
Ms. Hren reviewed the request of the applicant to rezone
his property from R-1 to R-2, at 8280 Long Lake Road.
The Planning Commission has rewritten the policy con-
cerning R-2 districts, and she reviewed the criteria
established. After review of this request,Planning
quirements
Commission determined it did ennot
tdmeet the the request.
for rezoning and they
Eric Bradley, 8255 Greenwood Drive, stated heis
ments
against making an exception to the zoning require
and he is in support of the Planning
denial. He added he wants this to
remain a single
family, suburban, non -city
Mr. Bradley also asked the Council not
allow
rental
or commercial property into the neighborhood,
d he
stated safety concerns if R-2 is allowed. He added
if one exception is made, the next one becomes easier,
and so forth.
Bill rrits, 8072 Long Lake Road,ars stated he has lived
he is aginst the
in the areafor
45 ye especially concecnedawith the density
rezoning. in the future.
issue and use of the property
Warren Johnson, 8267 Greenwood Drive, stated he was
against rezoning of the property.
Jan Delaney, 8273 Greenwood Drive, stated she is
against rezoning of the property.
Scott Solem, 2573 Ardan Avenue, stated he is
against rezoning of th_ property.
Gary Weber, 2565 Ardan Avenue, stated he is against
rezoning of the property.
7. Public Hearing:
Consideration
of Rezoning
Request from
R-1 to R-2 for
Donald Anderson,
8260 Lono Lake
Road
Fj
UNAPPROVED_ November 27, 1989
Mounds View City Council page Three
--------------
Regular Meeting --------------
--
®Harriet Nelson, 8310 Long Lake Road, stated she had
originally owned the property and when she sold it to
someone other than Mr. Anderson, she did not believe
it would be for a duplex.
Charles Nelson, 8300 Long Lake Road, stated he is
against rezoning the property.
Don Anderson, pexplainedenue EheColumbia travels duringthe
owner of the property, p He plans to
winter and is concerned with security.
build. the unit and have family live in the other
section.
Mayor Hankner closed the public hearing at 7:55 and
reopened the regular meeting.
Motion/Second: Quick/Wuori to deny Ordinance No.
483 forthe rezoning of the property at 8280 Long
Lake Road.
4 ayes 0 nays
Councilmember Wuori pointed out the property is in the
middle of a single family residential neighborhood and
it should be left as it is.
Councilmembers Paone and Quick stated they agreed with
Councilmember Wuori's comments.
Mayor Hankner added she also agreed.witouthe comments
of the Councilmemb�and
se pointedzoned for Rere are
-2.
areas in the city hichare
Mayor Hankner closed the regular meeting and opened
the next public hearing at 7:57 PM.
Ms. Hren reviewed the request of the applicant for a
wetlands alteration permit. The property in question
is located within the wetland buffernarea She added
and a
public hearing is required by
there are no other issues to be addressed with this
proposal, and she does not feel there would be any
impact on the wetland with this construction.
Bill Doty, 3049 Porch addition shouldbe leallowed ein a
a three season
wetland buffer area.
Mayor Hankner pointed out the house was built before
the mapping was done.
Motion Carried
g, Public Hearing:
Consideration
of Request
for Wetland
Alteration
Permit for
Jerry Hauck,
2332 Sherwood
Road
UNAPPROVED Page
27, 1--
council --
pae Four
City Cou--
Regular Meeting
Mounds View - ___---_
---------------
_________________________'
d the notice he
2357 Sherwood Road, advise
Lyle Nelson, address on it. He stated
received had the wrong good addition for the
that he feelsthis
wuld be a
home and neighborhood.
Jerry Hauck, herwoohind the addition
d Road, pointed
2332 Sout the
houses on bototso es of his lot are be
he hopes to P d he is concerned
Tom Kosel5120 Jackson Drive, state been determined
,
but -If 'it has
act on the wetland area, he wol
with the wetland area,
there would be no imp u
not have a problem with this.
Mr. Hauck clarified there was no pad under the old
deck, just footings* and reopened
Mayor Hankner closed the public hearing
the regular meeting at 8:05 pm
-
theution NO-
Quick/panne to approve permitlfor Jerry
--ng a wetland alteration permit
2564, approving
Road, and waive the
Hauck, 2332 Motion Carried
4 ayes 0 nays
a recent issue 9. Residents
Requests and
referred to an article in the final Comments From
Lyle Nelson concerning He the Floor
of the New i8en9fornthelHardees development.
approval give did not agree with the comments
made by
who
stated that government is run by the people
the Mayorand he does not feel the Council was listen -
show up, le of Mounds View.
ing to the people
ined that showing up does not
Mayor Hankner expla
mean being in the room, but that residents
necessarily
She added she, as well as
can also call and write. to knock on doors as much as
other Councilmembers, try
possible. Approval of
Paulreviewed the items on the 10. Consent
Agenda
clerk/Administrator
Pnda•ey
proposed consent agenda, rove the consent
i to
Motlon�esentede/and rwaive athe reading of the
agenda, as p Motion Carried
resolutions.
4 ayes 0 nays
UNAPPROVEDem27, 1989
Page
Five
Mounds View City Council page Five
Regular Meeting -------------
` Ms. Bran reviewed the request of the applicant for a 11. ConResolution
tion
minor subdivision at 3049 Bronson Drive. The No. esol tion
Planning Commission has reviewed it and recommends Approving a
approval. Minor Sub-
division at
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to approve Resolution 3049 Bronson
No. 2565, approving a minor subdivision for Willard Drive
Doty, 3049 Bronson Drive, and waive the reading.
Motion Carried
4 ayes 0 nays
Ms. Hren reviewed the request of the applicant for
tion
12. ConResolution
esol tion
a minor subdivision at 2186 Bronson Drive. The
the request and
No.
Planning Commission has reviewed
Approving a
recommends approval to the Council.
Minor Sub -
Mr. had been
Mr. Hall stated the cars on the property Y
division at,
2186 Bronson
moved out yesterday and the majority of junk, or.
Drive
the property has been picked up.
Motion/Second: Quick/Hall to approve Resolution
No. 2566, approving a minor subdivision for Vernon
Hall, 2186 Bronson Drive, and waive the reading.
Motion Carried
4 ayes 0 nays
Mr. Minetor reviewed his memo of November 21 to the
13. Consideration
Council concerning the street light request for 8419
of
g Regardin
Regarding
Spring Lake Road. He also reviewed the criteria
is
ht
Streetlight
the street light policy and stated the area well
feel an additional street
Petition,
lit, and stated he did not
be installed. He did note, however,
Spring
9
light should
that the petitioner has had a high incidence of crime.
Lake Road
Councilmember Paone recommended watching the area for
had
a while. He noted also that many of the residents
signed the petition.
Mayor Hankner stated she would be interested in know-
ing what the crime was.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reported that history
has shown that lights do not deter crime.
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to table action on this
11, 1989-
until the next regular meeting on December
Motion Carried
4 ayes 0 nays
Mounds view City Council\\�I�F/L/._1'+Flr—JiLr_J
Page six
Regular Meeting
__________________
Hren reviewed the request of the applicant for
14. Consideratio `
of
Ms.
an address change. She explained in reviewing the
g
Regarding /
file it was noted there was difficulty
landscaping
7801 Sunnyside
Mr.Bayerkohler to comply with the
has reviewed
Road
required in 1986- The City Forester
required landscaping
the situation and agreed the
and suggested a revised plan, which
was excessive
Mr. Bayerkohler has installed. She also clarified
the Planning Commission has not reviewed the revised
would be up to
landscaping plan. Final approval
the Council.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley clarified that after
not be
discussion with Attorney Karney, this would
development agreement, and the
an amendment to the
Council can accept the alternate landscaping plan
being adequate.
Motion/Second: Hankner/Wuori to accept the revised
landscape Plan, according to Rick Wriskey's
suggestions.
Motion Carried
3 ayes 1 nay
Councilmember Quick voted gainst the motion.
Mr. Hren advised the new sign had gone up without
does create another
removal of the old sign, which
problem.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley suggested the Council
with
could have the first reading of the ordinance
the second reading would not occur
the understanding
until the old sign was taken down.
Mayor Hankner stated she agreed, with the addition
Forester's
that the landscaping must also be to the
satisfaction.
Councilmember Wuori noted the Planning CommisiOn
usually accepts the recommendation of the Forester
for plantings.
Councilmember Quick stated he felt by passing the
resolution, they were sending the flag up that the
City does not require compliance.
Motion/Second: Hankner/Wuori to have the first
reading of Ordinance No. 480, amending the e47
cipal Code of Mounds View by amending Chapter r 47
entitled "House and Building Numbers", with
sthe
condition there be no second reading
uch
time as the old sign has been removed
and the theForrevised
landscaping plan has been approved
ster
as completed.
Motion Carried
4 ayes 0 nays
Mounds View City Council Nov.mber 27, 1989
Regular Meeting -Page Seven
------------------------ -- - - - -- - - ----------
r 1 Councilmember Quick stated he feels people should
meet their end of the bargain.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley advised this item had 15. Consideration
been approved on the November 13 consent agenda, of MSA Computer
so no action was required. Hardware and
Software
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed the memo from 16. Consideration
Finance Director Brager to the Council, dated of Staff Memo
November 1, concerning the purchase of a personal Regarding
computer. The funds are available. Purchase of
Personal
Motion/Second: Hankner/Paone to authorize the purchase Computer
of a personal computer from Northgate Computer Systems
in the amount of $3,374.00 and the purchase of a laser
printer from Entre Computer Systems in the amount of
$1,049.00 for the Finance Director, to be charged to
account 100-4190-703, City Hall, Equipment.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained there were pur- 17. Consideration
chases authorized in 1988 for which the work was not of Staff Memo
completed until 1989, for which budget transfers must Regarding
be made at this time. Budget
Transfers
Motion/Second: Wuori/Paone to direct Staff to
prepare a resolution that would authorize budget
transfers and place it on the consent agenda for the
December 11 meeting.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mayor Hankner stated this action would be waived until 18. Consideration
the public hearing, which has been rescheduled for of Staff Memo
December 18. Regarding 1990
Budget
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to table action on this Additions
item until December 18, 1989.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mr. Minetor reviewed the request of the petitioners 19. Consideration
for the installation of two street lights between of Staff Memo
County Road i and Hillview, on Long Lake Road, and Regarding Street
recommended approval of the request. Lights on Long
Lake Road
Mounds rView-City-Council-lJI�APP�1 I�IFI 1 November 27, 1989
Regular Meeting Page Eight
Motion/Second: Quick/Wuori to approve the request �.
for installation of streetlights between County Road
I and Hillview, on Long Lake Road, with the final
determination of location to be made by NSP.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Ms. Saarion presented samples to the Council of
20. Consideration
recycled paper that is available for the City news-
letter.
of Bids for
1990
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated it is clearly in
Newletter
Printing
the budget, and is cheaper than what the City has
Contract
been paying for the present newsletter for non -
recycled paper, and it also meets the goals of
the Council for concern with the community and
environment.
Motion/Second: Wuori/Hankner to accept bid t3
from Nystrom Publishing, for doing the entire
newsletter on recycled paper, with the cover
being semi -glossy, at a cost of $14,597.44.
4 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Mr. Karney reported he had met with the attorneys 21. Report of
for Hardees and the developer and reviewed changes Attorney
suggested by both sides to the development agreement.
Mayor Hankner questioned why none of the changes
were suggested two weeks ago when they met to work
on the development agreement.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley stated the City typically
does not change a development agreement at the
request of a developer.
Ted Rose, no address given, asked if Burger King
had requested any changes at the time of their
development agreement.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley replied the attorneys
from their corporate office spent a good deal of
time reviewing it but they did agree with the
Cily's wording. He noted if the Council starts
making changes, all types will be requested.
Motion/Second: Paone/Wuori to authorize Attorney
Karney to bring the development agreement back to
Hardees with the only change being that proposed by
Attorney Karney in paragraph 1.
4 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
November 27, 1989
Page Nine
1 'Ms. Hren reported that at the request of Councilmember 22. Report of
Blanchard, the status of the K Gas soil was looked Staff
into. The tanks have been removed and the fire deparat- Members
ment indicates there is some contamination of the area.
Mr. Minetor reported MnDOT has requested an informa-
tional meeting on January 8 for new Highway 10, to
make a presentation of what is proposed to be con-
structed and answer questions.
Councilmember Paone had no report.
Councilmember Wuori had no report.
Councilmember Qu:.ck commended the public works
employees who worked on Friday and had the situation
well under control concerning the water problem.
Mayor Hankner requested a special meeting be set for
December 5 to have the performance review for
Clerk/Administrator Pauley.
Motion/Second: Hankner/Quick to have a special
meeting on December 5 for the purpose of conducting
the performance review for the Clerk/Administrator.
4 ayes 0 nays
Clerk/Administrator Pauley had no report.
There being no further business before the Council,
Mayor Hankner adjourned the meeting at 9:16 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
23. Report of
Councilmembers:
Councilmember
Paone
Councilmember
Wuori
Councilmember
Quick
Mayor Hankner
Motion Carried
24. Report of
Clerk/
Administrator
25. Adjournment
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA
P v W, j Regular Meeting
j i ` AL - November 13, Hall AMounds View City Hall
2401 Hwy. 10, Mounds View, MN 55112
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Mounds View City Council was called to order by 1. Call to
Mayor Hankner at 7:00 PM on Monday, November 13, Order
1989.
The Pledge of Allegiance was said.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Councilmembers Paone, Wuori, Quick,
Blanchard and Mayor Hankner.
ALSO PRESENT: City Attorney Karney, Clerk/Administra-
tor Pauley and City Planner Hren.
f Motion/Second: Quick/Wuori to approve the October
" 23, 1989 minutes as corrected.
5 ayes 0 nays
Notion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to approve the October
30, 1989 minutes as presented.
5 ayes 0 nays
2. Pledge of
Allegiance
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of
Minutes:
October 23,
1989
Motion Carried
October 30,
1989
Motion Carried
Mayor Hankner stated she had received four letters 5. Residents
from residents who live along Hillview Road, across Requests and
the street from the apartments, who are concerned Comments from
that the four plexes are getting run down, junk cars the Floor
are in the area, and the behavior of the residents
who live there.
Lou Bedbury, 2084 Hillview Road, stated he has lived
in the neighborhood for 39 years, and he is concerned
with the garbage and general state of conditions.
Warren Hertenstein, 2102 Hillview Road, stated garbage
blows around, the appearance is bad, people do not
take care of their children, and they are left un-
attended to play in the street.
Mr. Tischler, 2126 Hillview Road, stated they are
four plexes, but have five mail boxes. He stated
' Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
the owner uses a rear entrance and does not see what is
going on.
Public Works Director Minetor joined the meeting at
7:08 PM.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained the housing code
for the City, but he noted it does not address
decorating. He further explained there has been a
problem with the buildings in question, as the owner
defaulted on the loan, but TCF will not put it into
receivership. The City is trying to find someone who
will accept responsibility for the buildings. He
suggested anyone. with complaints call the community
service officer: or 911 if it is a safety issue,
with the children. He also noted the other buildings
are an absentee landlord situation.
Attorney Karney advised one person has already been
prosecuted for violation of the public nuisance code.
Mayor Hankner asked Attorney Karney and Clerk/Admini-
strator Pauley to look into what other legal procedures
could be followed, what is in the City's jurisdiction,
or what laws would have to be changed for the City to
have control.
Attorney Karney advised residents to call the police
department with complaints, as they would then cite
the owner of the property. He added if it is in
receivership, TCF would also be cited.
Mayor Hankner advised Staff will look into what legal
position they have under current law and what would
be required to change state and local ordinances.
Councilmember Quick asked that Item 5 be removed from
the consent agenda.
Mayor Hankner asked that Item 1 be removed also.
Motion/Second: Wuori/Quick to approve the consent
agenda, minus Items 1 and 5, and waive the reading
of the resolutions.
5 ayes 0 nays
Mayor Hankner asked that the public hearing date
under Item 1 be changed to December 4, as she was
not going to be at the December 11 meeting.
November 13, 1989
Page Two
-----------------
6. Approval of
Consent
Agenda
Mounds View City Council November 13, 1989
Regular Meeting Page Three
----------------------------------------------
Motion/Second: Hankner/Quick to set a public hearing `1
on Ordinance No. 481 amending Chapter 48 of the
Municipal Code entitled "Wetland Zoning Ordinance"
for 7:00 PM on December 4, 1989.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Councilmember Quick asked that any action or setting
of hearings on Item 5 be tabled until the next
regular agenda session, to allow time to discuss
the issue.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley pointed out this is only
setting the public hearing, and the individual has
the right to be heard. He added it might be considered
arbitrary and capricious to not grant a hearing date
at rhjs time. Tho item w_1.1 be on the aa_enda seasion
agenda for next week.
Motion/Second: Paone/Blanchard to set a public
hearing on the request from Donald Anderson, 8280
Long Lake Road, for rezoning from R-1, single family
residential, to R-2, single and two family resi-
dential for 7:10 PM on November 27, 1989.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carr
Mayor Hankner closed the regular meeting and opened
7. Public Hearing:
the first public hearing at 7:24 PM.
Consideration
of Request for
City Planner Hren reported a correct map did go out
Wetland Altera-
to the residents. She reviewed the request of the
tion Permit for
applicant for a wetlands alteration permit to build
Khosrow
a kitchen and garage addition onto his home, which
Daivairi, 7028
is in the wetland buffer zone. She noted the
Knollwood Drive
driveway is shared with a neighbor, and the easement
agreement must be recorded with Ramsey County.
It was noted the applicant, Khosrow Daivari, was not
present.
Mayor Hankner reported they are in the process of
revising the wetland ordinance so that this type of
approval is not needed in the future.
Mayor Hankner closed the public hearing and reopened
the regular meeting at 7:27 PM.
Mayor Hankner closed the regular meeting and opened 8. Public Hear*
the second public hearing at 7:27 PM. Presentation
Results of
Silver View Pond
Management Study
November 13, 1989
Mounds View City Council page Five
Regular Meeting ------ ------
-------------------------------------
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to accept the report
and r to the Park and Rec Commission, Environ-
mental Quality Task Force and Silver View Park Task
Force.
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Paone/Wuori to change the location
of the parking signs under Item 4 on the consent
agenda, from the east side to the west side of
Greenfield Avenue.
Notion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Cwnsiderable discussion on the issue followed.
Jim Carter, 7660 Greenfield, stated moving the signs
to the other side of the street is not going to help.
He stated there had been a flasher out over the week-
end, and they have had numerous problems with the
conduct of people in the apartments.
Mayor Hankner noted the Council is trying to respect
the wishes of the residents and the request they made.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley read the exact wording of
the petition presented to the City.
Mayor Hankner stated that had the petition been worded
to not have parking on either side, the Council most
likely would have done that. However, the request
was to move the no -parking to the residents side of
the street, which is what the Council has done.
Arlen Ubengae, 7594 Greenfield, explained he had started
the petition, and his concern was getting the parking
..ca «tie reside^'.F aide of the street initially, and the
first step would be to move it to the other side. He
suggested if that didn't work, maybe limiting parking
to two hours.
Sandy Ubengae, 7594 Greenfield, stated the intent was
to simply move the parking across the street. She
added she believes the residents further down the
street have more problems.
Mrs. Schamberg, no address given, stated she felt
the petition was clear.
Mr. Carter agreed that would be a starting point but
it would be better to not have it on either side of
T,the street.
Mounds View City Council Ncvember 13, 1989
Regular Meeting Page Six
Clerk/Administrator Pauley explained they must con-
sider the ramifications of what no parking on both
sides of the street could bring, and if it just
shifts the problem down the road. The Council does
have the authority to do so, but their practice has
been to evaluate the situation before making any
decision.
Linda Nelson, 7520 Greenfield, suggested starting
with no parking on the residents side, then taking
it one step further if necessary.
Mayor Hankner stated that to get going, they will
change the signs to the residents side and research
the issue further. She added Mr. Carter can petition
for a sign in front of his own hume, in the meantime.
After the signs have been relocated, Staff will
evaluate the situation for 30 days and report back to
the Council.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley reviewed the list of items
9. Second Reading
raised last week at the special meeting concerning
and Adoption
the Hardees development. The items the neighbors
of Ordinance
were most concerned with were traffic, operating
No. 479, Amend -
hours, deliveries, landscaping, alternate locations,
ing Chapter ---I
litter, exterior lighting, garbage and volume of
of the Muni(._
outside speakers.
pal Code
Robert Rais, no address given, stated he favored
an alternate location within the same triangular
area as proposed, closer to Highway 10.
Public Works Director Minetor reviewed the submitted
lighting plan and reported spillage would be very
minimal.
Mayor Hankner reviewed the process to date, noting
that the public hearing was already held, and no
one came in then, and the first reading has also
been held.
Doug Sinclair, of Tenant Services, a consultant
to Paster Enterprises, presented a letter to the
Council, giving their responses as asked for on
each issue presented, and he read the letter. He
noted they have addressed all concerns, complied
with all requirements of the Planning Commission
and City Council, and they respectfully request
Council action on the second reading of the ordi-
nance at this time.
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
�~ Mike Diamond, of Cardinal Development, reviewed what
is planned for the speaker for the drive through
facility.
Mayor Hankner noted the Planning Commission worked
long and hard on this proposal before sending it
on to the Council, and the Council is now taking all
input into consideration.
She added it was tier belief that the first issue to
address would be the alternate location. However,
Paster Enterprises has stated there is no possibility
of relocation.
Mr. Sinclair explained that to relocate to an alter-
nate site on the property would not work due to both
parking and traffic control problems, and 'agreements
made with tenants in the center already, and to
relocate within the triangular area would not work
due to layout and configurations.
Warren Johnson, 7710 Greenwood Drive, stated his
main concern is still traffic, and he has talked to
both the County and the State, who have said the
City can control it. He added they need some type
of control to keep people from crossing over all
four lanes.
In addressing the traffic issue, it was felt physical
barriers would not work. Fire Chief Fagerstrom re-
viewed the safety issues involved, and Attorney Karney
gave the legal opinion that the City could be held
liable if emergency service was delayed due to the
placement of barriers on County Road I.
Mark Thompson, of Benshew and Associates, gave the
background in the traffic study that was done, and
other work they have done in the City.
It was the opinion of the majority of the Council
that the traffic should stand as presented by Paster
Enterprises.
Clerk/Administrator Pauley advised the development
agreement could address looking at traffic again
in 12 months and possibly reassessing it then. If
that is the desire of the Council, it should be
stated now.
Molly Ryan, 7755 Eastwood Road, stated if the Council
is not going to consider the residents opinions now,
Gwould they listen to them in one year.
Mr. Minetor explained a subjective approach does not
work, and they need to base their decisions on
November 13, 1989
Page Seven
Mounds view City Council
Regular Meeting November 13, 1989
---------------- Page Eight
--------------------------------------------
actual accidents or incidents, not just the squealing
of tires. ^1
Mayor Hankner requested that a 12 month evaluation be
added to the development agreement.
There was discussion on whether the City could make
Hardees jump through hoops in setting operating hours,
and if it would be arbitrary and capricious to require
different hours of them than of similar businesses in
the City with the same zoning.
A representative from Hardees reported the Planning
Commission suggested Hardees set their nours as
business dictates, with the Council to review in 12
months.
The majority of the Council agreed the City needs to
give Hardees the opportunity to set their own hours
and either prove or disprove problems, with a review
to be done on July 31. The criteria to be considered
in the review is whether they create a public nuisance,
or any changes to the public health, safety and welfare.
JoAnne Koleen, 2617 County Road I, asked if Burger
King operates 24 hours a day.
Attorney Karney reported they could, but they chose
to close. -
Councilmember Wuori added Burger King discovered they
did not have enough volume, and it is their corporate
Policy to close.
Mrs. Lee, 7745 Eastwood, stated that just because the
property was zoned that way for the past 20 years, does
not mean a restaurant was there.
It was agreed the hours for delivery would be 6 AM to
8 PM.
The development agreement will require landscaping to
be maintained, including a fence, if it is required.
Mr. Sinclair stated they would like the landscaping
to remain as it is proposed. The proposed plantings
would be evergreens, which would provide year-round
cover.
There was discussion on the height of a fence, and
Policing concerns. The majority of the Council agreed
to requiring a fence on the inside of the berm,
directly adjacent to the drive lane, to policing heights.
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting November 13, 1989
------------------------------ -- Page Nine
Mr. Paster stated they have had fences in other cities,
as requested by residents, but they cannot control
vandalism and have maintenance and upkeep problems with
them.
It is the policy of Hardees to make sure litter is
picked up at all times.
Lighting and garbage pick-up will be as per the memo
provided to the Council, as well as the volume of the
speakers, which will be subject to a review in July.
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to have the second reading
n
and adoptioof Ordinance No. 479, amending the Muni-
cipal Code of Mounds View by amending Ch3oter 41
entitled "Specific Rezonings", and waive the reading.
Councilmember Paone - aye
Councilmember Wuori - aye
Councilmember Quick - aye
Councilmember Blanchard - aye
Mayor Hankner - aye Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Quick/Wuori to approve Resolution No. 10. Consideration
2554 recommending approval of Mounds View Square of Resolution
development stage and final stage plan review of a
conditional use permit/planned unit development for a No. 2554
Hardees convenience food restaurant, Planning Case No.
276-89, and waive the reading.
4 ayes 1 nay
Mayor Hankner voted against the motion.
Nayor Hankner requested the following changes
be made to proposed Resolution Pb. 2555, based on
the Council discussion earlier in the meeting, that
a traffic evaluation be done 12 months from the
date of the certificate of occupancy, the operating
hours would be at the choice of Hardees, with a
review of the hours on July 31, 1990, the hours of
deliveries would be 6 ,V9 to 8 PM, landscaping will
be as per the site plan with all plantings including
a fence adjacent to the driveway inside the berm for
headlight encroachment, at a height for policing
Purposes, replacement and/or maintenance of all
landscaping as needed, material of the fence to be
determined by Staff, and the volume of the speaker
would be according to the letter dated November 13,
1989 to the Council, sun
1990. ject to review an July 31,
;lotion Carried
11. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2555
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
-----------------
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to approve Resolution
No7.555, as amended, authorizing the Clerk/Admini-
strator and Mayor to execute Development Agreement
No. 89-93 with Paster Enterprises and Hardees Corpora-
tion, Mounds View Shopping Center, and waive the
reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
November 13, 1989
Page Ten
--------------
Ms. Ryan stated it is very apparent to her that the
Council is unresponsive to the needs of the residents,
who did not want Hardees at all. If they had to have
it, they at least wanted stipulations and they didn't
get any of the conditions they asked for. She stated
that would be remembered at election time.
Councilmember Blanchard replied that Council has done
its best to be responsive, and the residents put the
Council in a difficult spot by not appearing until
after the public hearing and then wanting the Council
to change everything. She added a lawsuit would have
been very expensive. The Council has leaned over
backwards to work with the residents, and the residents
admitted they had received the notices of the hearing
but had other things going on and didn't attend.
Attorney Karney pointed out the Council represents all
the people of Mounds view and must keep in mind what
is best for all.
Mayor Hankner noted how difficult it is to get people
involved, and the residents need to pay closer attention
to what is going on.
E
Motion Carried
0
Ms. Saarion reviewed the background of the proposed 12. Consideration
access through the Twin Cities Arms Plant, for the of ResolutionNo. 2556
development of the Rice Creek regional trail
corridor.
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Wuori to approve Resolution
No. 2556, for access through the Twin Cities Arms
Plant for the development of the Rice Creek Regional
Trail Corridor, and waive the reading.
Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
Mayor
Hankner explained why anew
task force is
Consideration
13. of Appointment
Appoinve me
being
proposed for Silver View
Park. It will con-
looking
of
silt
of seven members, and Staff
will begin
Park Master
for alternates.
A quorum will
list
be the majority.
of members.
Plan Task
Mayor
Hankner reviewed the
proposed
Force
Mounds View City Council
Regular Meeting
------------------------
n
Motion/Second: Quick/Hankner to appoint Debbie
Ashworth, George Andres, Adeline Lee, Ron Margo,
David Long, Dave Radermacher and Ron Fagerstrom to
the Silver View Park Task Force.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Paone/Blanchard to approve Resolu-
tion No. 2543, requesting the Metropolitan Council
HRA to apply for and implement a deferred loan
program within the City of Mounds View, and waive
the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
November 13, 1989
Page Eleven
Motion Carried
14. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2543
Motion Carried
Motin/Second: Quick/Wuori to approve Resolution 15. Consideration
No. 2557, authorizing the use of Municipal State of Resolution
Aid funds for the City's share of costs for traffic No. 2557
signal upgrades on Truck Highway 10 between Silver
Lake Road and County Road H, and waive the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to accept as presented 16. Consideration
the Hillview Park pleasure rink expansion, as outlined of Hillview
in the November 8, 1989 memo from Park and Rec Park Pleasure
Director Saarion. Skating Rink
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Paone to direct Staff to
implement and investigate a temporary measure for
posting property which is proposed for planning
action, and submit to the Council in three weeks
a formal policy resolution.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Blanchard/Quick to approve Resolu-
tion No. 5561, approving the request for a wetland
alteration permit for Khosrow Daivair, 7028 Knoll -
wood Drive, and waive the reading.
Motion Carried
17. Consideration
of Policy He-
Quiring Signing
of Properties
por Planning Act
Motion Carried
18. Consideration
of Resolution
No. 2561
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mounds View City Council Regular Meeting November 13: 1989 ---------••----------------------
Page Twelve
Motion/Second: Paone/Wuowri to approve Resolution 19. Considerati No. 2559, approving the appointment of Michelle of Resolution
Hren as a permanent full time employee, and waive No. 2559
the reading.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Public Works Foreman Ulrich reviewed his memo of 20. Consideration
November 9 to the Council, requesting the purchase of Staff Memo
of fall protection for the water towers. This is Regarding Fall
a budgeted item. Protection
Motion/Second: Quick/Paone to award the bid to Equipment
VikinT g Safoty Products for two fall protection c_ection systa.�.s
plIjs installation, for $4,792.00, to be charged to
water capital improvement fund 700-4121-703.
5 ayes 0 nays Motion Carried
Mr. Ulrich reviewed his memo of November 9 to the
Council
21. Consideration
concerning the rebuilding of the Groveland
lift station.
of Staff Memo
Regarding Re-
Motion/Second: Wuori/Blanchard to award the bid
3uilding of
Croveland Li=-':
to Waldor Pump to rebuild the Groveland lift station
Station
for $10,963.00, to be charged to the sewer utility
repairs account, #730-4122-515.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Mr. Minetcr reviewed his memo of November 9 to the
22. Consideration
Council concerning the request of Dynamic Designers
for
of Staff Memo
acceptance of the installed parking lot curb.
Regarding
There was discussion on whether concrete should be
Developer's
Request at
required at this point. It was the consensus of
the
7660 Woodlawn
Council that concrete is required.
Drive
Motion/Second: Quick/Wuori to interpret the code
4406 3 to
require concrete curbing.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion Carried
Mr. Freetag, of Dynamic Designers, stated it should
specifically state extruded concrete, to avoid
confusion.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to approve Resolu- 23. Consideratio-
tion No. 2560, certifying the 1990 proposed general of Resolutio,d
fund, forestry fund and debt service property tax No. 2560
levies and budgets, and setting the date for a public
November 13, 1989
Mounds View City Council Page Thirteen
Regular Meeting ------------------"
---------------
----------------------
hearing on the same pursuant to present truth in
taxation legislation, and waive the reading. Motion Carried
5 ayes 0 nays
24. Consideration
brought the
Council up
to date on the pro-
land-
of Staff Memo
Ms.Hren
in
There is a
9 uestion on
as
and Approval
perty question.
scaping and what the
developer
hasdone,
this
nance
of ordinance
480
opposed to what was
originally
planned
No.
development.
Motion/Second: Quick/Blanchard to table this until
th=zo
e ne lar. Council session.
q ayes 0 nays
Attorney Kerney had no report.
Ms. Hren reported the Planning Commission had re-
quested Council approval to spend funds for a
traffic study for Mounds View Business Pack South,
but Everest Development has now withdrawn their
request.
t
The Planning Commission will be holding an infor-
mational meeting on Wednesday, at 7:30, concerning
the possible extension of Knollwood Drive.
Councilmember wuori had no report.
Councilmember Quick had no report.
Councilmember Blanchard had no report.
Councilmember Paone had no report,
that the Council be updated at
Mayor Hanknec asked
the next agenda session on police negotiations, as
well as have Staff look at two or three scenarilul.
for also reportednshefandste collection Clerk/Administrator Pauley
She also rep concerning possible
had attended a breakfast meeting cam.
facilities for the community education program.
Motion Carried
25. Report of
Attorney
26. Report of
Staff Members
27. Reports of
Councilmembers:
Councilmember
wuori
Councilmember
Quick
Councilmember
Blanchard
Councilmember
Paone
Mayor Hankner
November 13, 1480
Mounds view City Council Page Fourteen
Regular Meeting ----------------------
----------------------
Mayor Hankner noted the building conditions are not safe
at the construction site of the Silver View Park picnic
shelter and asked that Staff look into it.
Motion/Second: Hankner/Quick to issue a certificate
of occupancy for the Firstar lease space at 5273
Program Avenue, Building G, Mounds View Business Park.
5 ayes 0 nays
Motion/Second: Hankner/Blanchard to issue a temporary
certif f occupancy for Bakers Square, 5275
Quincy Street.
5 ayes 0 nays
There being no further business before the Council,
Mayor Hankner adjourned the meeting at 11:27 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk/Administrator
28. Report of
Clerk/
Administrator
Motion Carried
Motion Carried
29. Adjournment
91
is
P
ORDINANCE NO. 482
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE OF MOUNDS VIEW BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 91, ENTITLED, "ANIMALS"
SECTION I. Chapter 91.03 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code shall be amended to read as follows:
91.03, Subdivision 1, (3) "Animal" - Any mammal of the
rodent family, including but not necessarily limited to,
rabbits, hares, and 'hamsters, and any fowl including but not
necessarily limited to chickens, pigeons (other than racin
or carrier as requiated by Chapter 91.04 of this Code),
SECTION II. Chapter 91.04 of the Mounds View Municipal
Code shall be amended by renumbering it to 91.05.
SECTION III. Chapter 91 is hereby amended by adding the
following:
91.05 Racing and Carrier Pigeons
Subdivision 1. Definitions.
(2) "Racing pigeon" means a pigeon registered with a
national pigeon racing organization and used as a game
competitive bird.
(3) "Loft" - A structure in which the carrier or racin,
nioeons are housed.
(4) "Keep" providing food water, and shelter for
animal defined herein.
(5) "Private Property" means all premises owned by
erivate individuals including all structures located
thereon front yards side yards and back yards.
Subdivision 2. Permit. No person shall keep more
two carrier or racing pigeons on any premises in the C
without first obtaining a permit as provided in this
subdivision and no person shall keep or harbor pigeons
except in compliance with this section.
C
ORDINANCE NO. 482
PAGE TWO
(a) A site plan showing the location and size of
the property and the location, size and type
of all structures for the housing of the
pigeons_
(b) The maximum number of pigeons to be kept on
the premises at any one time.
(c) A petition signed by over 50 percent of all
registered Landowners or those occupying land
within 500 feet of the applicant s property
agreeing to the location of pigeons on the
premises.
(2)
(3) The annual license fee for the keeping of pigeons
shall be established by resolution of the City
Council.
Subdivision 3. Permitted Number.
No more than 50_pigeons may be kept at
Subdivision 4. Loft.
(2)
All premises on which pigeons are kept or maintained
11 be
^ ORDINANCE NO. 482
PAGE THREE
(3) All pigeons shall be fed within the con
areas outs
n a
(4) All grains and foods stored for the use of the
pigeons shall be kept in rodent free containers.
6. Penal
SECTION IV. This ordinance shall take effect thirty
(30) days from and after the date of its publication.
Read by the City Council of the City of Mounds View on
this day of , 1989.
Read and passed by the City Council of the the City of
Mounds View on this day of , 1989.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Clerk -Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ty Attorney
MEMORANDUM
Memo To :Mayor and City Council Members
From :Ric Minetor, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
Date :June 28, 1989
Subject :Proposed Crosswalk on Silver Lake Road
at Woodcrest Park
A resident uas requested a crocc::alk a-rOss silver Lake Road to
serve Woodcrest Park and the neighborhood to the west. Silver
Lake Road is a Ramsey County road; the County follows guidelines
for crosswalks. Normally, they prefer to see sidewalk or pathways
on each side of the road at the crosswalk. There are no sidewalks
along Silver Lake Road and the entrance to Woodcrest Park, is off
Woodcrest to the east.
We have 2 options: We could request the County to place the
crosswalk to align with Woodcrest Drive to the east realizing
that the pathway along Silver Lake Road is currently unimproved
and may require a slight variance from their policy.
Alternatively, we could request the crosswalk to align with
Woodcrest Drive to the west and we would need to construct a
small bridge over the ditch on the east side of Silver Lake Road.
I recommend the first option. i further recommend we consider
providing an ag-lime pathway from the intersection with Woodcrest
to the west and the crosswalk location, this would be
approximately 200 feet in length. Material costs for this would
be approximately $150; labor and equipment costs would be
approximately $400. Costs for a small bridge would undoubtedly be
significantly higher.
2&) lqgQ
Ela�n� Cn%vim 7Y�-'Z)5�'
'Dill) , V'l mzre? 7
i text'
�nu�cc�es-)gym Y�xf nZi f�75. cudn�d -t6 ,tee
/1 Duel)e tY) n')V ;ci'4�2, and U-#r WOu&4 LcIPPOIIL ✓Ix;
j��', Leo C jp!,C
Q/1.P Q /�Lc/Y)�,P�L �.tL% P I'u !!7 U-
t6 GUX --h O j):2 uU-
V1��c cn l� �r�t wz MAW
✓! )c lei "h Q ,96WO Zc 4x JU,/I O'Yis) t�Xe
O )C�19Gc z1' Ord oatlG L �-Le ram,
T
00 ✓1:r �- �1,
J
Sr��)_�u� 2�•� h.:�!�r'�- � Cc,;(�c.<:'� �i,%L �i c!'?c�`cLr1! .;�)�
L��.L6C7) (L
hut-
uCo�'r
otGlc/s tr1Q Pk � � Coe 0-7 clod �.
. at Gc�J2eSc� [O, Diu C'�L` st�l� t�v
off)
b12 rarer ¢� p&601 Jt17011 r (�� �C� ��u4r dowh
H
E.0
C
i
�YCV�� ►�i�4�4r.�',n GIB I-
r'
I
4um).er or
Q Ji/�) �7Ct�1�lY) Z80 f (.(.aCom�s , a• 3eh
ECKy 57R11UP 2914 uboccrO- X. �
x .L,ndz it )L'dc cav,b� Zs3Z Wonczv-5t DrLT Z
Lx o ✓t `t I. a i r � �e-. a ff `j 6 IN G od t i P *
G
QL
n
l G)(71 7o7S �CffL� -ti cCi�= a
xv 71 � 7071 KNoll M)ofl pP a
,.ti ?c6arC� wua�
17
mil. qc/o w.
vac.% T w.ui
655� �'.wuwc•:;n OQ
= _e14
co
�v 3
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Planner Hren
DATE: November 29, 1989
SUBJECT: KNOLLWOOD DRIVE EXTENSION PETITION
Mr. Ken Sjodin of Counselor Realty submitted the subject petition
on November 28, 1989. The signatures on the petition indicate
that these people are in favor of the extension of Knollwood
Drive. In the past there have been proposals to extend Knollwood
Drive, however, those have nct been approved for one reason or
another. At this time, the Planning Commission and Staff are
looking for some direction as to the appropriate route to pursue
with regard to the extension of Knollwood Drive.
The Planning Commission has tabled action on the request for a
minor subdivision from Fireside Homes, who own the property at
8148 Groveland Road. The minor subdivision, if approved, would
create a landlocked parcel which goes against the policy outlined
in the City Code.
Staff is unable to locate the file regarding the Knollwood Drive
extension, therefore, if you have any maps or proposed road
extension layouts we would appreciate receiving a copy of them.
MMH/BAC
7F ;
PETITION FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
OCTOBER, 1989 lt6v -"I
Ft
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW NOV1989
REtE1VED
COUNTY OF RA14SEY c Co of
STATE OF MINNESOTA ANpS��
To the City Council of Mounds View, Minnesota:
We, the undersigned owners of the benefited property aescribed below, hereby petition
that said real property be improved by street, curb and gutter, storm sewer, street
light(s), water and sanitary sewer pursuant to Mo;:nds View Municipal Code, Chapter 26.
The real property is described as all property abutting on the proposed extensions of
Knollwood Drive and Sherwood Street; bounded on the North by Ardan Avenue, on the West
by Spring Lake Road, on the South by Highway 10, and the East by Groveland Road. (See
attached plot.)
SIGNATURE OF OWNERS
10.
I. f1/7s' S'4xl/ t Llc. A
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
W,
'f ...a -' -' I
V M0E 6101 8819
/i 1 mvt 91 MM e407 ,
IL 39O 0394 e403 6
anal e3e0 8380 e391 f
a385 e3e7 e
W 9370 6f71 74 0363 e;
esn e:
x L636o 6360 e339 e3
8350 0 8340 0547 es
e160 8335 --
Q am �5 e336 w
8325
ft
J e3z0 v 6325 b316 e315 es
e510 ails �711
83oo AS03 e312 B29i
It9
ez zes et9 e2e9
�ez0 9275 8201 e151
e710 w 7B• e270 8265 a"
Z ez6o u ALM ez./ .R
ea elAs 528 �I y
F N
— ezw c . W ers3 aue a exs �
� 6E15 -
az0l 821 dill
a I a 8177 e2 v 8�91 Jl
113 BI 0 At 5 �D
oil
(n\2 all 138 _ e16M
1
5. 6
28
\ e16,�
-
y' I
I \Y4 0
e38B
B
183-73
ee5ssg, ee3s w
eeasl7.676ae
65.m
""A�
e3s-
es3i
AM]83,56334
e6..N....
_0
e735850
I.
r" .. " 821f
am:'N N
ItOY" et Riy �
37-4,� f3T?T?L�71e17s
812?
8046
e00S
799m
GO ow7
e0o1 "
nes
75'et
>990 79
N
45
799oi nn
lry9
7180 r if
I
B-3
a
m0' S
7949
7954 i 79!
_
7/ hU
7W N 79A
a
932
7930 793
33
x r
7901
n
7Q97
'
B-3
re = rels re reel
701e
4
Nalylfw
0
�. 7e:o s 7ers 7ee0' re» .
R'
2
`
�
7ee6 7e91
LL rlelo, ]els 1870 7865
a
7e9
f7 n
7876 7885
ea
" �M.
786o
g o 1e•A z
B50
ezl
37
1�` q
7er0 7e77
7941
rye7
7ee3
7330.
e
iesl
7e21
el
/•�l'l
B-3
\`'
69 7
tr
T
S(` �p7 `77]�67
759 749
i/N
,�
B-2
18
_
1. prin4
. 99
7ie7
ti^
R-3
��7a.
7]53
I,�II:c
7 9
720
729
77Z3
zil z7719771e
7713
L
' 7 T71
711
B-Z
COUNTY
R0.0
1
76e6
7642 76M
74 7.
7f✓70
77
6.20
4&4-ev �/
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council
Planning Commission
FROM: City Planner Hren
DATE: November 28, 1989
SUBJECT: FIRSTAR BANK SIGN REQUEST, 2711 HIGHWAY 10,
PLANNING CASE NO. 285-89
Firstar Bank located at 2711 Highway 10 has applied for a waiver
of the Highway 10 moritorium district requirements to allow for
the construction of a new sign on their property. The property
is located within the Highway 10 moritorium district and, as
such, is subject to the restrictions outlined in Ordinance No.
466. A copy of the Highway 10 moritorium district ordinance is
attached for your review.
Assuming that the moritorium district was not in place, the
proposed sign would meet all requirements as outlined in Chapter
39, the Sign Code. The moritorium ordinance allows for an appeal
process by which the applicant can request a waiver of the
requirements if they meet the conditions outlined in Section 6
entitled, "Appeal Provisions". The conditions are as follows:
1. That the modification is necessary to alleviate any undue
hardship.
2. That the proposed use will not affect the integrity of the
Comprehensive Plan.
3. That the use will not affect the City's planning or zoning
ordinance or the interim ordinance district.
4. That the proposed use is consistent with the letter and
intent of this ordinance.
5. That the proposed use will not affect the health, safety
and general welfare of the City.
The City must make a determination that the request meets or does
not meet the criteria listed above and act accordingly.
MMH/BAC
Attachment
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL \J%� " S
FROM: LIEUTENANT DAVVE BRICK
47L-
DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 1989
SUBJECT: ANIMAL POUND CONTRACT
Attached please find a draft of the proposed Animal Pound
Contract Between Brighton Veterinary Clinic and the City of
Mounds View. This contract was developed by staff and
reviewed and agreed upon by the Clerk-Adminirstrator and
City Attorney as well as by Dr. Keith Hedges of the Brighton
Veterinary Clinic.
DB/MJS
t
W
ANIMAL POUND CONTRACT
An agreement by and between the City of Mounds View,
a municipal corporation, hereinafter called the City, and
Dr. Keith Hedges, doing business as the Brighton Veterinary
Clinic, 2615 Mississippi Street, New Brighton, Minnesota,
hereinafter referred to as the Poundkeeper, for and in
consideration of the covenants and agreements herein contained,
the parties agree as follows:
1. That the Poundkeeper warrants that it has good
and sufficient facilities for the impounding,
keeping and care of dogs and cats which may be
brought to it by the City.
2. That the Poundkeeper will receive, keep, board
and care for all animals entrusted to them by
the City.
3. That the Poundkeeper will receive and properly
dispose of all dead animals delivered by the
City for a cost of $11.00 per animal.
4. The Poundkeeper shall train the City animal
wardens in the safe and humane handling and
apprehension of animals.
5. The Poundkeeper shall, :n all cases except where deemed
inappropriate by the Poundkeeper, administer
distemper vaccine to all animals impounded and
shall attend to the medical needs of all animals.
The City shall pay to the Poundkeeper fifty
percent (50%) of the costs incurred by reason
of this paragraph unless the animal owner claims
their animal, then the owner shall pay all costs.
6. If any animals shall not be reclaimed by the
owner within five (5) regular business days, as
defined in MSA 35.71, the City shall have no
right or interest in such animal and the Pound -
keeper may dispose of such animal in a proper and
humane manner or in accordance with the provisions
of MSA 35.71, Subd. 3. Animals which may have been
impounded for the required five day period and not
reclaimed by their owner may be sold to persons other
than the owner upon payment of all fees due to the City.
7. The City shall pay to the Poundkeeper the sum of
$6.00 per day for each dog boarded and $5.00
per day for each cat boarded, but not to exceed
seven (7) days. The City shall pay the Pound -
keeper $19.00 for each animal destroyed up to
40 pounds, and $22.00 for each animal destroyed
over 40 pounds. These animals shall be destroyed
in a proper and humane manner. The City shall pay
-2-
the Poundkeeper $11.00 for any deceased animal brought
in. The City will not pay the Poundkeeper any
impounding fees. If a dog must be kept in isolation the
fee per day shall be $7.00. For a cat kept in
isolation, the fee shall be $6.00 per day.
8. The Poundkeeper shall be authorized to collect
fees for violations of animal ordinances and to
issue dog licenses for and on behalf of the City.
All fees and fines collected shall be remitted
to the City with the monthly statement described
in paragraph 12, together with any records or
certifications which may be requested by the
City of Mounds View. The issuance of all
licenses and collection of fines described in this
paragraph shall be limited to written authority of the
City of Mounds View and governed by written instructions
of the City of Mounds View. The City shall indemnify,
hold harmless, and defend the Poundkeeper from all
claims, demands, damages, costs or judgements caused by
or arising out of the negligence of the City, its
officers, agents, or employees in the performance of its
duties under this paragraph 8, and shall indemnify, hold
harmless and defend the Poundkeeper in all claims,
demands, damages, costs or judgements caused by or
arising out of the collection of fines or issuance
of licenses by Poundkeeper, provided Poundkeeper
exercises reasonable care and good faith and is
acting under the instructions of the City
providing further that the limits of the City's
liability under this paragraph 8 shall not exceed
the limits of the City's applicable liability
insurance or the limitations of liability provided
by Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04, whichever
is greater.
9. The Poundkeeper shall not release any impounded
animal until the necessary fees have been paid.
For any unlicensed dog brought into the
custody of the Poundkeeper, such dog shall not be
released until a license for the animal has been
obtained by the owner. Nor shall any dog be
released until proof of a current rabies shot is
shown or until vaccine for rabies has been
administered to the animal.
10. In addition to the per day boarding fee, and
fees paid to destroy animals, the City shall pay
to the Poundkeeper the sum of $75.00 per month
in administrative fees and expenses to the Pound -
keeper.
-3-
ll. The Poundkeeper shall keep the Pound open Hall.
S during the normal business hours
animalCdu ity
ring their
The Poundkeeper may dischargeaid and
business hours as long as the fees are p
requirements met.
12. The Poundkeeper shall, at all times, keep accurate
impounded, boarded, destroyed,
records of all animals i
and City doa licenses sold, pursuant to this Agree-
ment which at a minimum will meet the requirements o£
merit w35.71 Subd. 3 and shall furnish monthly itemized
statements to the City.
13. The Pound shall be open at all throughits
for inspection by the City triroug
employees.
esponsible for all
14. The Poundkeeper shall be rd by the animals
damages, harm or illness suffere
under its care and in its custody which may be due
to the negligence of the Poundkeeper. Said Pound -
keeper shall save the City harmless from any damages,
costs, actions or causes of action,olssr claimssmade
against the City for any from the Pound -
keeper's and property damage resulting
keeper's operation.
` procure and
C comprehensive general liability
To accomplish this, the Poundkaepr shal
keep in full force
0l000
insurance in the amount of
not less athany numberof
for any one claim and $6to occurrence be safe -
claims arising out of a sing from any of the
to
guard and indemnify the City licy
occurrences aforementioned. Such insurance Po
must be filed with the Clerk-Administrator-
15. This Agriemi990sandltake effect shall continueninneffect reitherear
January subject to termination by
to year thereafter subj 60) days written notice of its
party upon giving sixty
intent to terminate this Agreement.
19
Dated this of
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
WITNESS:
By
Sue Hankner, Mayor
By C1K.-Admin 1 sstrator
Donald Pauley,
BRIGHTON VETEP.INARY CLINIC
By
Dr. Keith Hedges
MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council 6 j
:
FROM: City Planner Hren
DATE: November 29, 1989
SUBJECT: ORGANIZED GARBAGE COLLECTION
Please find attached a copy of Resolution No. 2570 regarding the
intent of the City to pursue organized garbage collection in the
City. I would like to make it very clear that by adopting this
resolution the City is not obligated to go with orqanized
collection by April 1st or at any time. Rather, the City is
required, by law, to do this to give the haulers time to get
together and freely talk without violating anti-trust laws. This
resolution was prepared by City Attorney Karney and is based on
other resolutions that have been prepared for similar
situations.
After adopting this resolution, the City, by law, must wait 90
days before making a decision on the collection of solid waste.
This allows adequate time for the haulers to organize as well as
the City decision makers enough time to thoroughly evaluate the
service.
MMH/BAC
Attachment
RESOLUTION NO. 2570
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION REGARDING ORGANIZED SOLID WASTE
COLLECTION IN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
WHEREAS, the Ramsey County Board in its Solid Waste Master
Plan and Recycling Implementation Strategy has adopted policies
requiring municipalities to explore organized collection as a
means to fund recycling and composting programs after 1990; and
WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View held a public hearing on
December 11, 1989, as required by Minnesota Statutes 115A.94, on
the issue of whether the City should consider implementation of
organized collection as the basis of an integrated solid waste
management system; and
WHEREAS, organized collection, as defined in Minnesota
Statutes 1988, 115A.94, Subd. 1, means a system for collecting
solid waste in which a specified collector, or member of an
organization of collectors, is authorized to collect from a
defined geographic service area or areas some or all of the solid
waste that is released by generators for collection; and
WHEREAS, the primary purposes of organized collection are
to (1) prevent overlap or duplication of collection service
areas, (2) facilitate solid waste management tools such as
mandatory refuse collection, volume-basea pricing and the
impending yard waste disposal ban, (3) reduce the number of
trucks operating in a given street or alley to make the system
more efficient, (4) improve recycling convenience for the
homeowner, thereby increasing participation, and (5) reduce
litter and illegal dumping.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council
hereby intends to organize collection in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, 115A.94, and intends to study the
implementation of an integrated solid waste management system
weighing benefits and detriments of all possible systems. Based
upon the findings that residents of the City will benefit from
such a system, the City will then implement an organized system.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that for the purpose of carrying
out the above intent, the Department of Public Works is
authorized to implement the following sequence of events:
1. Begin the required minimum 90-day study by identifying
system options to be considered, including, but not
limited to:
RESOLUTION NO. 2570
PAGE TWO
a. Maintaining the status quo;
b. Implement mandatory collection of mixed waste;
c. Modifications of the present open system;
d. Implement license requirements for volume -based
fees,separate yard waste pickup, and mandatory
recycling;
e. Zoning system for same day collection;
f. Organized collection by consortium;
g. Bid contract by one hauler;
h. Bid contract by district; and
i. Municipal collection.
2. Establishment of standards and criteria of service for
an integrated solid waste management system, in a
manner consistent with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
115A, and the Solid Waste Master Plan and Recycling
Implementation Strategy adopted by Ramsey County.
3. Solicit plans or proposals from refuse haulers and
other interested parties concerning refuse collection
system configuration, and invite the assistance of
interested persons, including persons operating solid
waste collection systems, in the development of plans
or proposals for the organized collection system,
including the establishment of any such system.
4. Conduct any public meetings necessary to discuss
options, standards, criteria, and proposals with
interested citizens and encourage their response and
comments, and to invite refuse haulers or their
representatives to such meetings if deemed
appropriate.
5. Evaluate all proposals taking into account all public
comment and response, and submit to the Council for
its consideration any recommendations for an organized
solid waste management system.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon the completion of the
above process and receipt of the recommendations, the Council
will consider the adoption of the necessary ordinances or
resolutions to implement the establishment of the organized solid
waste collection system.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Adopted this llth day of December, 1989.
Mayor
Clerk-Adminiscraeor
L
APPLICATION FOR ADVISORY GROUPS
Troup Applied For:
Second Choice (if any):
Ful Name (print or type):
Address�1'7 tLilL \ n� �w 55// z
Years At This Address:Years You Have Lived Inn Mounds View:
a rs tim0 `S �Ls5. .0
Work or Other:
Telephone: Home:zy 3 Z ZSG
QUALIFICATIONS YOU WANT TO HAVE THE COUNCIL CONSIDER
rs. O !B. a Goci 1lWr, f"i n stc, Its PrL'
Skills and Ilnte��es�s a�syverba o[;J[ iv9rK �/[ week
Y5l -fn SKrr ;
MySel�
Employment, Occupation or Other<ULj tqc'"/I-, aY�c� o It ¢�}Jdei
Pi03r.AmCacrd;natrr �'ar• -ke
` /�rt�Cics5.2 Cp[�rdi natf. 21l 5a4ety alass<tstic,-nliV nh v[r a;s Tielri<
';n4a:tii�. as •, Coe/,dxit` (c-1 !al: ou-v-�=.`p�
SuCuaii'-cr`9�i7t;c
�pJnrnuntmoCd fCeep f
Ct ,-,f9' u,f,:.1
!leall CCU roof LOIu ie /A
rear o rrcations:
Memoersn>.po, ��-`�•"r------ --
TCasTma s E-a
,tldtro„al �1;voY'�.�
A6c- e�mne, I
teG',reva"c-1 /icr ra{-Jon
please State Your Reasons For Wanting To Serf j09nt`Tuis CommiYy-
dey_,>drrblc and have
,I7 ✓Jt Gin ir,« N. til. 1 tLrJ <, Y"T�` lJ°: [1C•rna i3t0'
Lenr.r s�Th� 2 t,!✓e , n.
he bove ay
Your response to anfotheramatermalsbwhichtyouewant the Council
and you may any
to consider
Signature 1 ^vim
7mt
olic that all
The City o Mounds View is coed to the policy
persons shall have equal access to its programs, facilities, and
employment without regard to race, creed, color, sex, age,
national origin, or handicap.
� v c ✓�ao dh.�.�... c� .ate-,+. � �7r*� —7�.- .�.�-�.-�.e �•-d
MEMO T0: MAYOR AND CITY
COUNCIL
FROM• /� \'
CLERK-ADMINISTRATO
1989
DATE:
NOVEMBER 27, UEST TO USE CITY PERSONAL
FINANCE DIRECTOR'S RE
SUBJECT: COMPUTER AT HOME
Director Don
memorandum from Financeto be authorized to
lease find a memIS his desire is being replaced
Attached p, that it is stem hours.
Brager indicating computer Y business
take his currrent non -normal I would
home for business use during detail and
this matter in ersonally
and I have discussed of only batphomeeiso but also Of
Don have to agree that Ior Don haVedancomputer
assured me that he
will
has
convenient the City and that insurance Oepairs
rlat<^ homeowners „� or
benefit tO r,atc a for all da""'
agree to carrYbeppeSP
and ersonal neglect-
equipmentauthorize Don
resulting from his P Council 15th
as prODosed n his NOvtheeCity
It would be my recommendatas that the.
It the cOmpeterhomeinto an agreement witfor Possible
uter
take and responSlyour direction in
memorandum upon your
regarding use, maintenanother causes•
damage from accident appreciated•
r
this matter would
be DFP/MJS
■
TO: Don Pauley, Clerk - Administrator
FROM: Don Brager, Finance Director - Treasurer
DATE: November 15, 1989
SUBJECT: Use of City personal computer at home
I have proposed to the Council the purchase of a new personal
computer and printer for myself. Should the Council approve
these purchases I propose that I be allowed to take my present
personal computer home to work on various projects after hours.
As a single parent it is difficult, if not impossible at times,
to work on projects after normal business hours. In addtion if I
must be at home to take care of a sick child it would be very
useful to have a computer available to work on various projects.
Should you concur with this proposal I request that it be
brought to the Council's attention for consideration as to the
best of my knowledge the City does not have a policy about
bringing City equipment to an employees home to work on City
projects.
Should the Council approve this proposal I suggest that an
agreement or memorandum of understanding be developed regarding
it's use and the responsibilities of the City and myself
regarding use, maintenance, and responsibility for possible damage
from accident or other causes.
_Zg- /o
WWRANDUM
Memo To :Mayor and City Council Members
:Ric Minetor, Director of Public Works/City Engineer
,
From
:November 29, 1985
Date - South
Subject :Pay Request C 2 - Mounds View Business Park
artial pay request from Glenn
inc. in the amount of $the request
est rand
We have received the second p has
reviewed the raga
Rehbein 75. The
Excavating, royal and payment of
engineer (Merallent St ffAssoclaracommends a593_4121-705.
recommended payment
be charged to account
this request,
REQUEST FOR PAYMENT
DATE: 11/8/89 PAYMENT NO.: 2
PROJECT: Mounds View Bus Pk S CONTRACTOR: Glenn Rehbein Exc
LOCATION: Mounds View, MN ADDRESS: 7309 Lake Drive
PROJECT NO.: 88-109 Lino Lakes, MN
FOR PERIOD: 10/1 - 10/31/89 FILE: REHBNPAY
SUMMARY:
1.
Original Contract Amount
$545,903.93
2.
Change Order - ADDITION $0.00
3.
Change Order - DEDUCTION ($17,457.43)
- NET
($17,457.43)
4.
Revised Contract Amount
$528,446.50
5.
Value Completed To Date
$182,415.91
6.
Material on Hand
$0.00
7.
Amount Earned
$182,415.91
8.
Less Retainage 5%
$9,120.80
9.
Subtotal
$173,295.11
10.
Less Amount Previously Paid
$59,364.36
11.
AMOUNT DUE THIS REQUEST FOR PAYMENT
$113,930.75
It is hereby certified that all work has been completed in confor-
mance with the plans and specifications for Project No. 88-109.
Recommended for Approval By:
MERILA AND ASSO�C�IAATTES, INC.
By:
Reg. No.: 194.t4-
Date: "A'/SS
Approved By Owner:
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
By:
Date:
Payment Requested By:
GLENN REHBEIN EXCAVATING, INC.
By:�2_u/ G%ctici`i
Date: 2 E - ' 9 `/
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI
FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 30, 1989
SUBJECT: CIGARETTE VENDING MACHINES
V61pt" /i
Pursuant to your direction at the October 23, 1989 Council
Meeting, staff has conducted a survey of all public
buildings in the City of Mounds View to determine the
location and number of cigarette vending machines. The
investigation has revealed the following locations and
number of machines.
Donatelles
Perkins
Loose Ends
R. J. Riches
Mermaid Lounge
Robert's Off 10
Mounds View Inn
Pink Flower
Town's Edge Mobile Home Trailer Park
Community Building that is empty and
has not been used for one year.
As you may know, the ordinance adopted
Bear Lake and being considered by the
Minneapolis and Shoreview call for the
machines in public buildings which are
minors. In the case of the bar area at
Ends, Robert's Off 10 and the bar area
would not be the case. I hope that th
adequately responds to your request.
any additional information, please do
know.
DFP/MJS
1 machine
1 machine
3 machines
1 machine
3 machines
1 machine
1 machine
1 machine
1 machine
by the City of White
cities of St. Paul,
regulation of vending
accessible to
the Mermaid, Loose
at Donatelles, this
e above information
Should your require
not hesitate to let me
ANSR
1421 Park Ave.
Meta, MN55404
Children's access to
tobacco
A half day workshop for:
elected officials,
city attorneys,
city administrators,
law enforcement personnel
and community members interested in
Children's access
to tobacco:
What can
communities do?
Vending machines
Over- the- counter sales
A Plan for Action
Al
\• = .68799
Donald F. Pauley
Clerk. Admr- No. 10
2401 Highway
Mounds ltiewr NN 55112
Registration information: Telephone registrations may be made until December 13, by calling (612) 339-1902.
Fee: SI0.00 may be paid at the door. Attendees will receive a conference packet including sample ordinances, research data,
background information and summaries of all presentations. Those unable to attend the workshop may order packets for 55.00 each
from ANSR, 1421 Park Minneapolis, MN 55404. Packets will not be available until December 15,
Conference Sponsors:
Popham, Ilaik. Sehnobrich. & Kaufman Whire Bear Lake Rotary
Association for Nonsmokers - Minnesota (ANSR) League of Minnesota Cities
Minnesota Department of Ilealth, Section for Nonsmoking and health. Park Nicollet Medical Center
i,,. cial thanks to Jerry Fearing, St. Paul Pioneer Press and Dispatch for use of Kaboom, and to all of our conference presenters.
CONFERENCE AGENDA
1:00 Welcome, /ames,N. Muellner, Whltc Bear Lake Rotay
1:10 Nicotine: An addictive Drug Harry Lando, Ph.D. Assoc. Professor, Div. of Epidemiology, School of Public Health
1:30 Status report: What is happening in Minnesota and nationally Sandra D. Sandell, Executive Director, ANSR'
1:45 Where do children really get cigarettes? Research results from Minnesota communities.
lean Forster, Ph.D. Assist. Professor, Div. of Epidemiology, School of Public Health
2:45 'creak
3:00 Panel Discussion: Community Strategies: winning community support, identifying allies, overcoming inertia
Chair, Mary Hourigan, Project Coordinator bIN Tobacco Free Youth Project lames M. Muellner, White Bear Lake Rotary
Ursula Dimler, Shoreview City Council Lyle Hanks, Mayor, St. Louis Park ?dark Sather, City Manager, White Bear Lake
3:30 Model Legislation: Avoiding legal pitfalls, Doing it right.
Suesan Pace -Shapiro, Anorney at l_,v: , Popham, Haik, Schnobdch & Kaufman.
4:00
4:20
4:30
Opposition strategies and tactics: be prpared!
Question & Answer:
Adjourn, informal discussion 5:00 Facility closes
leannc O'tiglun, ANSF,
Don Slater, teewiive Director, fugue of Minnesota Cities
December 15,1989
1:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Naegele Auditorium
60 Floor N. Park Nicollet Center
5000 West 391h Street
St. Louis Park, MN
Directions to Naegele Auditorium
Hwy 100 to Excelsior Blvd. Fast to Quentin Ave. North one block to 39th street, osm left and
drive 112 block to Park Nicollet Medical center. Park on the west side of the building.
For further information about the conference or the issue of children's access to tobacco. call (612) 339.1902
IMPORTANTFACTS
e In 1989 selling tobacco to children was changed from a
potty misdemeanor to a gross misdemeanor. This had an affect
on over-the-counter sales but had virtually no affect on
vending machine sales.
e The earlier a person starts smoking, the harder it is to quit
and the more likely it is that person will suffer from life
threatening illnesses later. Tobacco has no established safe
level of use. Once tobacco use is initiated, most users become
addicts; very few are able to remain "social smokers".
e The average first smoke is at age 13. 57T0 of high school
seniors who smoke regularly report they started before 14.
e The Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council reports
that most cigarette vending machines are unattended.
e In a U. of M. survey, only 29%of teen-age girls and 42%of
boys who had attempted to purchase cigarettes reported ever
being asked for proof of age. A young appearing 14-year old
boy could purchase cigarettes over the counter only 22% of
the time. He had little difficulty making purchases from
vending machines (74%success).
a In a "decoy" operation conducted in three suburban
communities in July, a 15-year old girl was 86% successful
in 105 attempts to purchase cigarettes.
e Several Minnesota communities are considering programs to
restrict children's access to tobacco including prohibition of
sales from vending machines.
J
Coalition For Responsible Vending Sales
• 5101 Vernon Avenue South
Suite 400
Minneapoli4 Minnesota 554M
November 16, 1989 NOVIM
0 WMED
0 �0i
Mr. Donald Pauley
City of Mounds View
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, Minnesota 55112
Re: Proposed Cigarette Vending Machine Ordinance
Dear Mr. Pauley:
This letter will confirm our telephone conversation on
November 15, 1989. I am writing to you on behalf of the Coalition
for Responsible Vending Sales. The Coalition is a group of
organizations involved in and interested in vending machine sales
• throughout the State of Minnesota. it is our understanding that the
City of Mounds View may consider drafting an ordinance that would
restrict the sale of cigarettes through vending machines.
•
In the past month, you have no doubt read articles or heard
news programs regarding the cigarette vending machine issue.
However, the newspaper articles and the news programs do not provide
the whole story behind the issue of minors and cigarette smoking.
During June and July of 1989, a nationwide study was conducted by an
independent research company to determine the cigarette smoking and
purchasing behavior of teenagers. I have enclosed copies of the
study findings and request that you distribute these copies to the
city council. Overall, the study found that vending machines are
not a primary source of cigarettes for minors. Rather, most minors
rely on over-the-counter locations such as convenience stores and
gas stations as their main source of cigarettes.
The member organizations of the Coalition for Responsible
Vending Sales wholeheartedly support the idea that minors should not
be purchasing or smoking cigarettes. At the present time, certain
Minnesota Legislators have expressed an interest in sponsoring
legislation that would resolve the issue of minors purchasing
cigarettes from vending machines on a statewide basis. Further
information regarding this legislation should be available in
several weeks.
Member Organizations
• Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council • Minnesota Operators of Music & Amusement
• Minnesota Candy & Tobacco Distributors Association • Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association, Inc.
• Greeter Minneapolis Hospitality Council
Coalition For Responsible Vending Sales
5101 YernonAvenue South
Suite 400
Minneapolis) Minnesota 56436
November 16, 1989 O NOV1989
rn RECEA/Ep
:IWWW
NMr. Donald PauleyCity of Mounds View L1ia��z
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, Minnesota 55112
Re: Proposed Cigarette Vending Machine Ordinance
Dear Mr. Pauley:
This letter will confirm our telephone conversation on
November 15, 1989. I am writing to you on behalf of the Coalition
for Responsible Vending sales. The Coalition is a group of
organizations involved in and interested in vending machine sales
throughout the State of Minnesota. It is our understanding that the
1 City of Mounds View may consider drafting an ordinance that would
restrict the sale of cigarettes through vending machines.
In the past month, you have no doubt read articles or heard
news programs regarding the cigarette vending machine issue.
However, the newspaper articles and the news programs do not provide
the whole story behind the issue of minors and cigarette smoking.
During June and July of 1989, a nationwide study was conducted by an
independent research company to determine the cigarette smoking and
purchasing behavior of teenagers. I have enclosed copies of the
study findings and request that you distribute these copies to the
city council. Overall, the study found that vending machines are
not a primary source of cigarettes for minors. Rather, most minors
rely on over-the-counter locations such as convenience stores and
gas stations as their main source of cigarettes.
The member organizations of the Coalition for Responsible
Vending Sales wholeheartedly support the idea that minors should not
be purchasing or smoking cigarettes. At the present time, certain
Minnesota Legislators have expressed an interest in sponsoring
legislation that would resolve the issue of minors purchasing
cigarettes from vending machines on a statewide basis. Further
information regarding this legislation should be available in
several weeks.
Member Organizations
• Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council • Minnesota Operators of Music & Amusement
• Minnesota Candy & Tobacco Distributors Association • Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association, Inc.
0 Greater Minneapolis Iiospitality Council
Mr. Donald Pauley
November 16, 1989
Page 2
in addition, a new law went into effect this past summer that
increases the penalty for selling cigarettes to minors. The new
penalty makes the sale of cigarettes to minors a gross misdemeanor
which requires a jail term of up to one year and/or a fine of up to
$3,000.00. The Coalition believes that this increased penalty in
addition to requiring supervision of cigarette vending machines
should minimize the possibility that minors purchase cigarettes
through vending machines.
Also, it is a common misconception that it is unlawful for a
minor to purchase cigarettes in Minnesota. To clarify this issue,
it is unlawful for minors to smoke cigarettes and illegal to sell
cigarettes to minors. However, it is not unlawful for a person
under the age of 18 to buy cigarettes. If it proceeds with an
ordinance, the city council may want to consider establishing a
penalty in the form of a fine for minors that purchase cigarettes.
This kind of penalty should deter minors from purchasing cigarettes
by making them accountable for their own actions.
A representative of the Coalition may appear at the council
meeting scheduled for Monday, November 20, 1989. Please feel free
to contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
OLSEN, SNELLING 8 CHRISTENSrN, P.A.
Thomas A. Briant
Attorney at Law
TAB/dm
Enclosures
cc: Coalition for Responsible Vending Sales
•
RESPONSE RESEARCH STUDY
of
TEENAGE CIGARETTE SMOKING AND PURCHASING
BEHAVIOR
The 1980's have witnessed a substantial change in the American Public's
attitude toward smoking cigarettes. Along with this attitude switch have
come new laws regulating smoking. This has had an impact on the
companies and organizations which are associated with the selling of
cigarettes. N A M A, which is the national trade association of the
merchandise vending machine industry, is one such organization which has
been affected by this attitude change. It is specifically concerned about
proposals to ban the sale of cigarettes through vending machines. The
rationale for such a ban is the allegation that many teenagers purchase
cigarettes from vending machines. As a result, N A M A commissioned
Response Research, an outside, independent marketing firm located at 500
North Michigan Avenue in Chicago, Illinois 60611, to conduct a survey to
determine how and where teenagers ages 13 through 17 who smoke
currently obtain cigarettes. The study also makes findings about what
influences teenagers to begin smoking.
It is hoped that the findings presented here will assist interested
organizations and lawmakers in getting factual and current data regarding
the involvement of vending machines in the smoking habits of teenagers.
FINDINGS
STUDY OF TEENAGE CIGARETTE, SMOKING AND
PURCHASING BEHAVIOR
June/July 1989
introduction
This study was conducted to determine how and where teenagers who smoke
currently obtain their cigarettes. More specifically, this study was done to
measure the following:
the extent to which teenagers obtain cigarettes by purchasing them, and
the portion of the cigarette purchasing that is done through vending
machines.
Methodology
This was a mall intercept study which surveyed 1015 males and females between
the ages of 13 and 17 who smoke cigarettes. The number of teens interviewed
from each age group mirrored the 1987 Census Data of the teenage population.
Additionally, half of the interviews were conducted with females and half were
conducted with males.
In order to obtain a geographically dispersed sample of teens, the study was
conducted in twenty cities throughout the U.S. Two different mall locations were
used in each city. One mall was located in an average to above average income
area and the other was in an average to below average area. This was done to get
the best possible representation of different socioeconomic areas.
Overall Findings
This study found that vending machines are not a primary source of cigarettes for
teenagers. When teens first start smoking, they rely heavily on their friends for
cigarettes. After this initial phase, the main source of cigarettes for teens is an
over-the-counter location.
Detailed Findings
Initial Smoking Behavior
On average, the teens included in this study started smoking at the age of
thirteen. There was not a lot of difference between the males and females
as to when they started smoking.
The teens were asked to express in their own words the reasons why they
started smoking. They indicated that the primary motivator was knowing
someone else who smoked (58%). This other person was usually a friend
(42%). Social pressure also played a role in the teens' trial of cigarettes
(30%).
Friends who smoked were both the main reasons why others started and
the main source of cigarettes for these new initiates. Almost three in five of
the teens (57%) said that their main source of cigarettes when they first
started smoking was their friends. Unlike the others, the teens who started
smoking before they were ten years old were equally Iikely to rely on their
friends and on family members for cigarettes.
Most of the teens who primarily got their cigarettes by purchasing them
when they first started smoking bought them over-the-counter (84%) and
not from a vending machine (only 16%).
Current Cigarette Consumption
The teens were asked about their daily and weekly cigarette consumption.
On average, these teens smoked half a pack of cigarettes the day before the
interview. Additionally, the average male smoked more (11 cigarettes)
than the average female (9 cigarettes).
As can be expected, the younger teens smoked less than the older teens. In
fact, the 17 year olds smoked twice as many cigarettes as the 13 year olds
(14 cigarettes vs. 7 cigarettes on average).
The number of cigarettes that the teens reported smoking in the week
before the interview was slightly less than seven times their reported daily
consumption. On average, the males smoked just over 3 and a half packs
(73 cigarettes) and the females had smoked just over two and a half packs
(56 cigarettes); while the youngest teens smoked about half as much as the
oldest teens (13 year olds-45 cigarettes and 17 year olds--88 cigarettes).
N
Current Source Of Cigarettes •
While friends were initially the primary source of cigarettes, this is not the
case beyond the first phase of smoking. The most frequently used source of
cigarettes is to purchase them. Nearly three-quarters of
reported that they bought cigarettes more often than tthe teens (72%)
hey used other
methods of obtaining cigarettes. Furthermore, there was little variation on
this measure between males and females. However, the older teens were
more likely than the younger ones to buy cigarettes frequently (60% of 13
Year olds vs.c cigarettes.
s. 17 year olds). And, very few of the 17 year olds (5%)
never buy cigarettes.
While friends are not the primarily source of cigarettes once teens have
established their smoking habit, they are an important secondary source.
Almost half of the teens (45%) rely on friends occasionally for cigarettes.
Friends are of particular importance to the younger teens. Almost four out
Of five 13 year olds (79%) go to their friends often or occasionally for
cigarettes,
• Family members are not a significant source of cigarettes for teens
regardless of their age.
Cigarette Purchasing Behavior
• Frequent Purchasers, those who buy cigarettes often or occasionally, rely
much more on over-the-counter sources than on vending machines. Almost
two-thirds of the Frequent Purchasers (64%) buy over-the-counter often
whereas only one in eleven (9%) buys from a vending machine often.
Over-the-counter sources are used more by the older teens than by the
younger teens. Over three-quarters of the 17 year olds (78%) buy over-
the-counter frequently whereas only half (46%) of the 13 year olds do.
• Those who purchase over-the-counter often or occasionally cited four
locations as the ones they go to most frequently: convenience stores (43%),
gas stations (29%), grocery stores (11%) and drug stores (6%).
As mentioned, less than one in eleven Frequent Purchaser uses a vending
machine often. In fact, over three-quarters of the Frequent Purchasers
(78%) seldom or never buy from a vending machine. Of course, this varies
by age. The 13 year olds are the most likely to use vending machines (22%
do so often) and the 17 year olds are the least likely (2% do so often).
The primary location of the vending machines used by teens is a restaurant
or other eating establishment. Almost half (47%) of those who buy from a
3
en or
lly
to a restaurant most
Bowling machine eys(11%)tand gasostations aooften.
vending (11%)are also popular locations.
Those who use over-the-counter locations often or occasionally gave their
reasons for this usage. There were three main reasons:
they are convenient (31%),
they will sell them to the teens (18%), and
they prefer these locations because they dislike +ending machines.
Those who seldom or never bought over-the-counter did not buy from this
source more frequently primarily because they were underage and felt
they would be asked for an 1D or hassled in some other way (59r%).
Teens who bought from vending machines often or occasionally found this
source to be attractive because no one will stop them from buying cigarettes
this way (56%).
The teens who seldom or never bought from vending machines did not buy
there because they felt that these machines were not conveniently located
(48%) and cigarettes in machines were more expensive than those sold in
stores (35%).
Difficulties Encountered When Trying To Buy Cigarettes
The teens who buy cigarettes (often, occasionally or seldom) were asked if
they had ever been prevented from buying cigarettes. Three in five of
them had, with more 13 year olds having been refused (71%) than 17 year
Olds (50%).
Those who had been refused were asked if they had been refused when
buying over-the-counter and/or from a vending machine. Virtually all of
these teens (9890) had been refused when buying over-the-counter, while
about one in nine (11%) had been prevented from buying from a vending
machine for a reason other than that the vending machine was broken.
Teen Awareness of Cigarette Purchasing Laws
Three-quarters of the teens (76i'o) were aware of a state law which
prohibited certain kinds of people from buying cigarettes. When asked
what the law said almost everyone (95%1 indicated that it required the
residents to be a certain age in order to buy cigarettes.
4
Parental Awareness and Approval Of Their Teenager's Smoking
• The teens were asked who else in their family smoked. Only 15% said that
no one else did. Almost half of the teens had a father and/or mother who
smoked (49% and 45%, respectively).
As a way of determining whether or not their parents were aware of their
smoking and approved of it, the teens were asked if they were permitted to
smoke at home. Almost two in five teens (38%) were allowed to. The
portion of teens who could smoke at home varied by age. Less than a
quarter of the 13 year olds (22%) were able to while over half of the 17
year olds (54%) could.
• Additionally, almost half (45%) of the teens were permitted by their parents
to purchase cigarettes. This too, varied by the age of the teen. Almost two-
thirds (64%) of the 17 year olds were permitted to while only a quarter of
the youngest teens could.
When asked where they got the money for their cigarettes, three main
sources came up: a job (63%), from parents/mom/dad (26%), and from
one's allowance (26%). Since the older teens are the most likely to hold jobs,
this was their primary source of cigarette money, wheras the younger teens
relied more on their allowance and their parents.
The complete study including the questionnaire and methodology used and a
description of the pretest is available upon request at a price of $20 from the
National Automatic Merchandising Association. 20 North Wacker Drive, Chicago,
Illinois 60606.
G
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATO
DATE: OCTOBER 2, 1989
SUBJECT: REDEVELOPMENT
During the time that I have been with the City, the issue of
redevelopment has frequently been raised but never discussed
in depth nor has specific direction been given by the
Council to staff. The purpose of this memo is to first
review the various redevelopment options available to the
City and then to seek direction on how the Council wishes
staff to address this issue, if that is your desire.
Over the last two decades redevelopment has changed
dramatically in the United States, both in the level of
national commitment and the manner in which it occurs. The
loss of the massive infusion of federal dollars has required
that cities be more selective and less aggressive in their
redevelopment efforts.
Currently, redevelopment takes three basic forms. The first
is redevelopment where monies are made available through
grants or loans to fix up buildings and make them more
habitable or return them to a habitable state after being
C abandoned. In Ramsey County there are seven different grant
or loan programs available to single family residential
homeowners to assist in the rehabilitation of their homes.
The number of grants or loans for multi -family or rental
property owners is limited, however, aggressive enforcement
of our housing code has helped us to avoid some of the
horror stories reported in the center cities.
Rehabilitation of commercial or industrial buildings,
although not unheard of, is something government has gotten
into only recently and then only on a limited basis and at
the local level.
The second form of redevelopment is selective or site
specific clearance. In this case, properties are acquired
and buildings cleared to allow for new construction. The
new construction is usually for an already approved project
or in the case of housing, to allow for the construction of
new homes to spur the revitalizaiton of a deteriorating
neighborhood. Except for a small amount of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds available through
Ramsey County, the sole source of funds for this type of
activity is tax increment (TIF) money either issued directly
for the project or surplus increments from a previously
funded project in the same district.
The third form of redevelopment, and one that has become
less popular over the years, is what I would call "scorch
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
OCTOBER 2, 1989
PAGE TWO
the earth" or non -selective clearance. This type of
clearance is usually speculative in nature in that the
property is acquired and buildings cleared without having a
project waiting to begin construction. Currently, no state
or federal funds are available for this type of clearance
nor can TIF monies be used for it. Any city ir. Minnesota
wishing to perform this type of clearance at this time must
do so with purely local funds.
Once a city has decided they wish to undertake redevelopment
in their community, they must not only decide what type, but
also the level of government involvement. Government
involvement in redevelopment can be indirect or direct.
Indirect involvement can take the form of identifying
Properties or areas eligible for redevelopment assistance
from public or private agencies, usually limited to single
family housing or prime for private redevelopment and market
programs or property in the hope of spurring redevelopment.
Direct involvement in redevelopment can take various forms
including acquisition and clearance, aggressive housing code
enforcement, direct marketing of loans and grants to
eligible property owners, acquisitor, rehabilitation, and
resale of properties, or funding of the effort using CDBG or
TIF funds.
Finally, a City designed to undertake redevelopment must
also determine whether they wish to limit their efforts
to residential (single or multi family), commercial, or
industrial properties and focus on areas or neighborhoods or
the entire city. Now that Mounds View is nearly 100E
developed, the issue of redevelopment moves to the
forefront. Prior to commencing a redevelopment program, if
that is your desire, I would like to suggest that the
Council and staff go through a three -step process with the
first step being determining whether or not you wish to
undertake such a program, type, level of involvement, and
area(s) of the City. Once that direction is given, staff
will identify the program options and funding sources
available and request Council direction as the second step.
The third step would be to recommend a specific implementa-
tion plan or plans for the programs selected by the Council.
If it is the desire of this Council to direct the establish-
ment of a redevelopment program for Mounds View, I would
request your concensus direction on the following questions.
1. What type of redevelopment do you wish to undertake?
Rehabilitation, selective clearance, or
non -selective clearance?
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
t"N OCTOBER 2, 1989
PAGE THREE
2. Do you wish to have direct or indirect involvement
in the redevelopment process?
3. What area(s) of the City do you wish to target for
redevelopment?
After receiving your direction in response to these three
questions staff will begin to develop program and funding
options for your consi.derdtion.
DFP/MJS
f
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
M: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR PAULEY
DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 1989
SUBJECT: CITY SURVEY QUESTIONS
To aid in the discussion scheduled for the November 20tn Agenda Session
on the referenced subject matter, staff has taken the liberty to
a list of pussible survey questions for your consideration. These
questions are in Prepare
Decision Resources for basic form and will need to be formatted by
or the survey.
I have broken down the questions into the four areas wnich I understand
to be the Council's current direction. Your direction on these
questions and any others you might wish to have asked will be forwarded
to Decision Resources for preparation of a draft survey. document for
Your consideration.
A. BASIC DEMOGRAPHIC AND GENERAL INFORMATION
I. Approximately how long have you lived in Mounds View?
2. City or State of prior residence?
I. 3. Two reasons for moving to Mounds View.
4. How long do you expect to live in Mounds View?
5. How would you rate the quality of life in Mounds View?
6. Over the next 5 years, do you expect the quality of life in
Mounds View to decline, remain the same, or improve?
7. What do you like most and least about living in Mounds View?
e. How much pride do you take in Mounds View as a place to live?
9. If it were needed to maintain City services at the current
level, would you favor or oppose an increase in property taxes?
10. How do you feel about Mounds View property taxes?
11. For each dollar of property tax you pay, what percentage goes
to Mounds View?
12. Should the City preserve wetlands or allow development?
a• Wthe ould you favor or oppeseose a property tax increase to permit
purchase and preservation of we
tlands?
13. What is your principal source of information about the City?
14. Are you satisfied with the level of information
15, Do you currently receive the Bulletin?
16. Do you currently receive the Focus?
17. Do you receive the City Newsletter?
°w1
a, Do you read it? re reference?
would
b. Do You kemat or, coverage you ep it for futu
c, Are there any changes in the for
like to see?
18. Do you own or rent?
19. Any persons over 65; school age children; pre-school children?
20. What is your age'•
21. What is your marital status?
22. Occupation of head of hcusehold?
23. Do both spouses work?
24. Level of income?
25. Sex (by observation)
26. Would you say the City has changed for the better or worse in
recent years.
27. How much do you know about the work of the Mayor and Council?
28. Do you approve or disapprove of the Job the Mayor and Council
are doing? staff during
29. Have You or a family member had contact with City
the past year?
te the Job Performance of City staff?
30. Hew would you ra
B. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT what kind would
1 If the City were to attract more development,
you prefer?
2. What do you think Of the Pace or commercial and industrial
development?
the City where you would favor
3. Are there any areas of
redevelopment? Hi hway
p. What type($) of development would You must favor along 9
10 between Co. Rd. I and Spring Lake Par0
e west of Co. Rd. l is almost single lot
spur quality development in this area, the
The Highway 10 frontage
In order to p larger sites might be necessary. In order i be
nership. into the City
combining of lots
sure that the development meets urchaselo s theseh individualy lots.
may need to be involved in the p
5. Would you support the active involvement of the City, both
financially and in the expenditure of staff time, in putting
together large development sites?
• 6. Would you support the City's use of their condemnation authority
to accomplish the purchase of single parcels in order to create
larger development sites?
7. What is the location of your principal retail shopping area?
a. How much of your retail purchases do you make in Mounds View?
9, Were you aware that the City has a community land use plan
called the ,Comprehensive Plan"?
10. Do you approve or disapprove of the zoning and land use
decisions made by the City?
11. Do you feel that Mounds View residents ahaveaan adequate ion
opportunity for input into the
making process?
12. How important is it that Mounds View expands its employment
base?
13. How important is it that Mounds View provide more shopping
opportunities?
14. Should the City's first priority in attracting economic
the property tax
development be increasing jobs or expanding
base?
15. Do you favor or oppose providing development incentives such as
tax breaks and zoning exceptions to attract new industrial or
commercial developments?
16. Do you tend to shop closer to where you live or where you work?
17. Should the City implement design and landscaping standards for
businesses in the community.
a. Should such standards be adopted and maintained even if some
businesses would not move to Mounds View because of the
higher cost to conform?
18. Do you think that the pace of development has been too rapid or
not fast enough?
19. Does the development across the City seem well planned for the
future of Mounds View,
C. PARKS DEVELOPMENT
te the parks and recreation facilities in Mounds
1, now would you ra
View?
2. How do you spend your leisure time in indoor or outdoor
activities?
3. Do you participate in organized or unoroanized recreation
activities? What ones?
i#"%% 4. Have you or a household member participated in a City sponsored
recreational program in the past year? Please name some.
a. How do you feel about registration fees?
b• Would you pay more to help pay for higher costs'?
5. How often did you use Mounds View parks and recreation
facilities in the last year?
6• Would you favor or oppose a bond issue to upgrade and complete
the park system?
7. Rate the components of each City park separately.
8. How would you rate the maintenance and upkeep of City parks?
9• Would you support an increase in parks maintenance?
10. Would you be willing to pay additional property taxes to
provide for additional parks maintenance.
11. What is the park of your choice? Why?
12. How do you use parks now?
13. What would make you use them more?
14. Should the City build a trail system to connect the parks?
15. Would you prefer a walking trail or a combination bike and
walking trail?
16. What do you think is most important to have in the parks?
17. Did you attend last September's "Festival fn The Park"?
18. What do you like or dislike about the Festival?
19, How do you like the date and time of the Festival?
20. Do you use City picnic areas?
21. Do you think that more picnic areas are needed?
22. What do you think is the greatest need in Mounds View parks
right now?
23. Are you familiar with Silver View Park?
24. Do you use it and in what way?
25. What would you like to see as improvements to Silver View park?
26. Silver View Park currently has a pathway that does not extend
around one of the 3 legs of the pond. Would you prefer to leave
the trail as is or have it encompass the entire pond area?
27. Would you prefer the path be constructed of woodchips or
asphalt?
('ON 28. Would you prefer the path be restricted to walking only or a
combination bike and walking path?
29. What kind of outdoor winter recreational activities do you
enjoy?
30. What kind of outdoor summer recreational activities do you
enjoy?
31. What kind of indoor recreational activities do you enjoy?
32. What time is best for you to particioate in recreation
activities?
a. Evening, morning, afternoon, weekdays or weekends?
33. Do you prefer one time programs or activities meeting 6 to 10
weeks?
34. Do you or members of your household belong to a private health
club, athletic club, or country club?
a. What activities do you participate n?
35. Approximately how many hours per week do you or members of your
household spend involved in leisure recreation interests.
36. Compared to 5 years ago, are you spending more or less time
using Mounds View recreation facilities? Why?
37. During the next 5 years do you expect to spend more or less time
using Mounds View recreation facilities? Why?
38. To what extent do the following considerations limit your
use of or participation in Mounds View facilities and programs?
a. Amount of time available for leisure.
b. Availability of transportation.
c. Travel distance.
d. Cost of the activity.
e. Cost of the equipment.
f. Availability of the facilities.
g. Personal health.
h. Having the skills to participate.
i. Dislike of organized activities.
j. Safety of facilities/personal safety.
k. Supervision of the activity.
1. Availability of daycare.
M. School boundaries.
n. Hours that facilities are open.
o. Maintenance of facilities.
P. Ease of access to facilities.
q. Availability of information about facilities and programs.
39. How likely would you use each of the listed facilities if it
were made available in Mounds View?
a. Community fitness center
b. Senior citizen center
C. Golf course
d. Wildlife preserve
e. Community band shell
f. Community -wide trail system
40. How important to you are the following improvements or additions
to the park system?
a. Additional athletic fields
b. Improved athletic fields
c. Improved and/or enlarged trail system.
d. Park supervision and police survaillance
e. Golf course
f, Community fitness center
41. How much would you be willing to pay in additional property
taxes to support the facilties and programs listed?
a. Developing existing parks
b. Trail system
c. Golf course
e. Fitness center
42. What recreation programs should the City be adding or expanding?
a. Adult athletic leagues
b. After school programs
C. pre-school programs
d. Junior/senior high school programs
e. Senior citizen programs
43. Do you enjoy being a spectator or player of recreational sports?
44. What would you like to do at Silver View Park that you currently
cannot do because of lack of facilities?
E. COMMUNITY CENTER
There would be an opening narrative to this series of questions
reminding the party of the closing of Edgewood as a community center and
the possible relocation of programs and services outside if the City.
1. Do you or anyone in your household partcipate in any sponsored
or organized senior citizen programs?
2. Do you feel that daycare and latchkey needs are being met by
current providers in the City?
3. If Mounds View were to build a community center, what types
of facilities do you think are most important to include?
4. Are there any particular activities or programs and services
a community center should offer to serve your needs and those
of members of your household?
5. Do you favor or oppose the construction of a community center
in Mounds View?
6. Do you favor or oppose the inclusion of the following facilities
in a community center?
a. Arts and crafts room for class and instructional programs.
b. Gymnasium
C. Sauna and whirlpool
d. Senior Citizen Center for drop -in and organized activities.
e. Teen Center for drop -in, and organized activities.
f. Nursery school/daycare area
g. Large community room for banquets, parties and other rental
purposes.
h. Small community rooms for organization meetings.
7. If a community center contained the features you r.ost favcred,
how much more likely would you be tc support its construction?
Narrative relating that no decisi.cns have been made and that only
discussions are occurring at this time. A bond issue requiring voter
approval would be necessary to fund construction of a community cneter
with the bonds being paid for by increased property taxes. If a
community center cost s3 million it would result in an increase in
property taxes on an average $80,000 home by about $_ her year for
years.
6. Would you favor or oppose that bond referendum?
9. The City might be able to identify other funds to reduce the
cost to the taxpayers. How much would you be willing to pay in
additional property taxes?
If a community center were built, the City could subsidize its operation
with tax revenue and keep user fees low or increase fees to make the
facility more self-sufficient.
10. Should the City subsidize the cost of Operations to keep fees
low or increase fees?
11. How likely would you be to use a nursery school program if
provided?
12. Should the City priority be the building of a community
center, improvement and expansion of existing parks and
recreational facilities, or both?
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR DON 9AU"b*
DATE: OCTOBER 18, 1989
SUBJECT: MODIFIED CITY HALL OFFICE HOURS
asevent Head Team has been discussing the idea
Over the last several months on an extremely infrequent
basis the Dep Hall office hours for summer months to
cf modifying the City and/or later in the evening
the morning
be open earlier in i
to provide greater
service to the inconvenient asdthey
w
residents Of o
office
hour
who currently hours. In September, Ric
conflict with their workingas options
Minetor submitted a memo tome
wdiscussiWgdsome top
ed
Department Head Team, copy ed rsgarding the
that he and his staff had develop
possibility of alternative office hours. The Departmenis t
Head Team discussed this
ememo
and
ed toelt a
referitthe to theuCity of
ance
at
enough import
Council for further direction. he ement Team to
Essentially, it is the desire of tcouncilgwishes to consider
determine whether or not the City the Management Team needs
alternative office hours* If so,
ivmeetingtoto
to
authorization to discuss the matter a City Hall with our individual
staffs well having Hall ststaff aff are recep
determinene whether
or not City
our idea.
I would like to re-emphasize that the purpose for discussing
this issue on the part of the staff is to determine whether
or not it is feasible to extend our office hours in a manner
convenient
stinthis
ucurrent
area andrare
that would be more s. he
are open to any ideas and at this time.
seeking Council direction at
DFP/MJS
MEMORANDUM
Memo To :Don Pauley, Clerk -Administrator
From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer/Director of Public Works
Date :September 6, 1989
Subject :Summer Work Hours
I have discussed the concept of extended hours/•variable starting
time with Barb, Jim, and Michelle. The various strategies
considered included a 4 - to hour day week with City Hall being
closed Friday; 4 - 30 hour day week with half the staff having
Monday off and the other half having Friday off; and 4 - 9 hour
days plus an 8 hour day every other Friday. If half the staff has
Monday off and half the staff has Friday off, we will only have 3
days a week with a full staff. There was concern expressed that
this would severely hamper efficiency and could cause great
inconvenience when someone was sick on Mondays or Fridays. The
preference was to have City Hall closed on Fridays; however, it
was recognized that this option may not be popular with Council.
The next best scheme was felt to be the 4 - 9 hour days with
rotating Fridays off.
Under this concept, City Hall would be open either from 8:00 a.m.
to 5:30 p.m. or from 7:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. On Fridays City Hall
would close an Lour earlier than the rest of the week. Half the
staff would be off every other Friday. A variation would be to
have City Hall open only half days on Friday. This would allow
the entire staff to be here at all times, allow for later hours
Monday thru Thursday, and allow the staff to have every Friday
afternoon off.
I favor the 9 hour days with every other Friday off. The Fridays
worked would be 8 hour days. The only problem I foresee is the
receptionist would be off every other Friday; the balance of the
office staff would have to handle phones on her Fridays off. I
really do not believe this is a major detriment to this concept.
This 5/4 work week could possibly be extended to all year, not
just during summer. City Hall would be open later in the day and
be more accessible to residents, I think staff would like the
extra day off, and there would be a saving of break time. Each
employee would work 80 hours, but breaks would amount to 4 1/2
hours in a two week period versus the 5 hours per two week period
currently.
I suggest that the management team review this proposal.
V
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL/ice/vv /S
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATO* �'f{
DATE: NOVEMBER 6, 1989
SUBJECT: WORK PROGRAM AND REPORT ON EXTERNAL CONTACTS
At my October 2, 1989 Performance Review I was instructed to
provide to the City Council by December 1, 1969 a proposed
Work Plan based upon the current Long Term Financial Plan
and proposed 1990 Budget. The Work Plan was to be laid out
in a calendar format using bar graphs.
After receiving this direction, I involved the Department
Heads and City Planner in coming up with a framework for a
Work Plan. We looked at both manual and computer -generated
systems and selected the computer -generated option due to
the fact that it can be easily updated, can be transferred
between departments with computer ability, and provides for
greater flexibility. Based upon that decision, Ric Minetor
and Don Brager assisted me in searching the various software
options available to us and we selected a software program
known as "Quick Schedule" available to the City through
Sailor Software at a cost of 559.00. Staff is still
learning this software program and our initial proposal for
a work plan could be modified over lime as we become more
skilled with the program.
Attached for your information is a copy of the Proposed 1990
Work Schedule for all departments broken down by departments
based upon the Long Term Financial Plan, 1990 Budget and
Budget Goals as well as those work areas staff knows must be
undertaken during 1990 which would require a significant
expenditure of staff time.
I would appreciate your comment on this Work Plan which has
been reviewed and approved by all Department Heads and the
City Planner.
The Council also directed at my October 2, 1989 Performance
Review that by December 1, 1989 I submit a proposal for
improving the manner in which I report my external contacts
to the City Council. As I am not exactly certain what
particular contacts the Council is concerned about, I have
addressed this matter in the broad fashion of all external
contacts I have. Based upon that consideration, I have
identified three options for your consideration.
The first would be to expand my biweekly Adminstrative
Newsletter. The advantage of this is that it is a current
practice not requiring any additional work on my part. The
disadvantage is that the report via Newsletter is done every
two weeks thus information will be dated.
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE TWO
NOVEMBER 6, 1989
The second option is a separate report which could take
whatever form the Council desires and be submitted as often
as the Council desired. The advantage to this would be that
the information could be more current and issue specific.
The disadvantage is that it would be an additional work task
for me and my office.
The final option I have identified is that the Council meet
with me and any interested 'Department heads in My offica 1/2
hour before each Agenda Session and Council Meeting on an
informal basis to receive a verbal update on any issues that
have come before us and are not included in that meeting's
agenda. The advantages of this would be that the
information would be up-to-date and convenient as it would
not require any additional effort on the part of myself or
City staff. The disadvantage could be that the information
would not be provided in written form thus having no
documentation.
Your direction on these two items is requested.
DFP/MJS
/
/� -----�
—�
— —]-
!
/
---���-
/-
,
7
IF
�
/
/
t
k
�
h
1
-----�--{
ƒ----
— ƒ/--
1
|
ram:
( E§£
■§
| kj
2$|
ar
$
!®�E�2�l;
§|E1!§}2
)
�k(
-`��|§§r§2
§§/|
!
§k�
�!
E�
w-a�|k\�/
z
(2k§EK§)
2|/
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 1989
SUBJECT: SERVICE AWARDS
'J'a/(:�P
As you know, the City currently provides a pin to each
employee after having worked for the City 5, 10, 15 and 25
years. Although these pins are appreciated by staff and
worn by many with great pride, I have continued to look for
other fuims of reccgnition or appreciation for employees hod
continuing service with the City. Recently I was approa_..-
by a salesman handling what is known as the "Amagift gifts
Atbums'. These albums are essentially a catalog of g
that can be ordered by an individemployedwho ualhin theas eprivatived ae gift
certificate from someone. a of a system to recognize
sector my employers used this type
employees for service as well as for Christmas gifts and it
is my understanding that several cities in the Metropolitan
Area, including Richfield, provide these gifts to leng9th of
employees as awards Ceoeificatesanniversandealbums9rangefrom a
service. The g gift item.
price of $9.99 to $500 per 9
suqgesting
Although I am not that this be the system the
by our
City uses to recognizelngthofthatvice the Council ewouldees be
besides the City pinl
,thought
interested in looking at it and considering the possibility
o some-
ttof suh an awar.hingclike thisdand8place ahvalue noflsay c$1ie to d hould 0.00,$15 00,
$20.00, $25.00, $30.00 and $40.00 for 5, 10, 15, 20, 25 and
30 years of service respectively between now and the year
2000 the cost to the City would average $150.00 per year
with the highest year being 1997 at $285.00.
I will bring the Amagift Album to the October 16 Agenda
Session and simply request that we discuss the philosophy of
providing an award to employees for length of service
besides the current practice of providing service pins and,
if it is your desire to look intothifts4you wodirertion
regarding dollar value and typeof
uld be
interested in providing.
DFP/MJS
7
0
4
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATO
DATE: NOVEMBER 17, 1989
SUBJECT: TRUCK TRAFFIC
Recently I received a telephone call. from
Mr- Spencer
Swanson, 2505 County Road H, regarding
the ngestion
created by semi trucks using the Highway 10/County Road H
/Old Highway 8 intersection. Mr. Swanson indicated to me
that he felt the presence of these trucks, particularly
during the morning and evening rush hours, were creating a
significant traffic hazard and that through the cooperative
use of alternate routes such as Highway 96, the trucking
operators in the Mounds View Industrial Park could alleviate
intersection, while at the same time
congestion at this
ent access to 35W and Trunk Highway 10.
still having conveni
I discussed Mr. Swanson's phone call with Mr. Dan Solar,
Ramsey County Traffic Engineer, and Ric Minetor and both
agreed that there is little or nothing that the City or.
County can do to prevent
ordiscour
trucksage the use of h
due the fact that
intersection by sr
these are all public highways and roads. Both agreed,
however, that a viable option would
firms, namely1t the
Century
cooperation of the three truck Motor Freight, Tyson Trucking and Churchill Trucking, by
asking that they help us alleviate this potential traffic
hazard by requesting that their operators access 35W by
using the Highway 96 ramps and Highway 10 offof
b5W This
could be accomplished by a letter signed jointly Y
County and the City which outlines the
officials of Ramsey
current problems, the t the situation cann
fact that or will
not be addressed by the County within the foreseeable themre
sking
through a�9nment of to dothe whatntheyection, and can to helpaus. We
in a neighborlyway
sful in our efforts if all three
might not be succes
organizations choose to ingnore our requests, however, we
will have made an attempt to address the matter as best we
can at this time.
Your direction in this matter is requested.
DFP/MJS
e
.t 4
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 1989 \
SUBJECT: 1990 ANNUAL MEETING
Pursuant to the requirements of the Charter, the Council
will need to schedule an annual meeting to occur on the
evening of your Agenda Session scheduled for January 2,
1990. With your consent, I would Like to place that item on
the next Consent Agenda for scheduling an annual meeting for
7:00 p.m. on the evening of ,;anuary 2, 1990.
At the time of the annual meeting you will be considering
several resolutions and other items to begin the new year.
The first of these resolutions would be to appoint the
official newspaper, acting mayor, and official depository
for 1990. Attached to this memorandum is a draft resolution
leaving blank the names of the official newspaper and acting
mayor but listing our primary and secondary depositories as
provided to me by Finance Director Brager. Staff hopes to
have a final report on our surveying of residents regarding
receipt of the New Brighton Bulletin and FOCUS as well as a
staff analysis of the level of coverage provided by the two
newspapers for the annual meeting.
The second resolution, copy attached, reschedules City
Council Meetings falling on legal holidays. The third
resolution, copy of the 1989 resolution attached, appoints
councilmembers and the Clerk -Administrator as repre-
sentatives for City commissions and other organizations.
The final item is the appointment of 1990 Department
Liaisons. A copy of the 1989 Department Liaison appoint-
ments is attached for your information.
Staff would request Council direction with respect to these
resolutions and liaison appointments in order that resolu-
tions might be prepared for your consideration at the annual
meeting recognizing that you might net have specific
direction with respect to the names of individuals filling
certain positions or serving on various committees or
commissions.
DFP/MJS
I
RESOLUTION No. 2433
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPOINTING CITY COUNCILMEM.BERS AND CLERK -
ADMINISTRATOR AS REPRESENTATIVES FOR CITY COMMISSIONS
AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS
WHEREAS, members of the City council act as repre-
sentatives to City Commissions and other organizations; and
WHEREAS, the following members of the City Council
Ve' have been named to act as representatives to the following
City commissions for the year 1989:
1. Planning Commission - Diane Wuori
2. Parks and Recreation Commission - Gary Quick
WHEREAS, the following members of the City Council
and the Clerk -Administrator have been named to act as repre-
a'": sentatives of the City to the following organizations for
the year 1989:
1. Northwest Suburban Youth Service Bureau - Diane
Wuori
2. Arden Hills/Shoreview/Mounds View/North Oaks
Chapter of the Suburban Area Chamber of Commerce
- Clerk -Administrator Pauley
3. Ramsey County League of Local Government - Sue
Hankner, Alernate - Gary Quick
4. Association of Metropolitan Municipalities -
Gary Quick, Alternate - Phyllis Blanchard
V.
5. Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View Firemen's
Relief Association - Phyllis Blanchard
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Mounds View that the aforementioned appointments
are hereby approved.
Adopted this 3rd day of January, 1989.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
V
C
RESOLUTION No. 2567
CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION APPOINTING OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER, ACTING MAYOR
AND OFFICIAL DEPOSITORY FOR 1990
WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of Mounds
View to appoint the official newspaper, acting Mayor and
Official Depository at its Annual Meeting each year; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Mounds View City
Council to confirm these appointments for 1990.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council
of the City of Mounds View hereby appoints the following:
Official Newspaper -
Acting Mayor -
- Primary depository for checking accounts, savings
accounts, and investments:
Firstar Bank New Brighton
- Secondary depositories
Firstar Bank New Brighton
First Bank Minneapolis
First Bank Saint Paul
Norwest Bank Minnesota
American National Bank & Trust Company
Marquette Bank; Minneapolis
Offerman and Company, Inc.
Merrill, Lynch, Fenner and Smith, Inc.
Dain, Bosworth, Inc.
TCF Banking and Savings
Shearson, Lehman, Hutton, Inc.
Piper, Jaffray and Hopwood, Inc.
First Minnesota Savings Bank
Investors Savings Bank
Metrobank
National City Bank
RESOLUTION NO. 2567
PAGE TWO OF TWO
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
r
C:
Paine, Webber and Company, Inc.
Prudential-Bache Securities
Smith, Barney, Harris, Upham and Company, Inc.
John G. Kinard
Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1990.
Mayor
er -A ministrator
•
1990 DEPARTMENT LIAISON
1st Quarter
Admi�lstration
Finance
Parks, Recreation and Forestry
Police
Public Works/Community Development
2nd Quarter
Adman— i�tion
Finance
Parks, Recreation and Forestry
Police
Public Works/Community Development
Diane Wuori
Sue Hankner
John Paone
Phyllis Blanchard
Gary Quick
Gary Quick
Sue Hankner
Phyllis Blanchard
Diane Wuori
John Paone
3rd Quarter
• Administration
Finance Sue Hankner
Parks, Recreation and Forestry Diane Wuori
Police Gary Quick
Public Works/Community Development orn Paone
Phyllis Blanchard
4th Quarter
Admin� Lion Finance Phyllis Blanchard
John Paone
Parks, Recreation and Forestry Police Sue Hankner
Gary Quick
Public Works/CommunityDevelopment Pment Diane Wuori
•
RESOLUTION NO. 2568
f ; CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW
COUNTY OF RAMSEY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION RESCHEDULING CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
FALLING ON LEGAL HOLIDAYS
WHEREAS, Chapter 2.01 of the Municipal Code calls for
regular meetings of the Mounds View City Council to occur on
the second and fourth Mondays of each month; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 2.03 of the Municipal Code calls for
agenda meetings of the Mounds View City Council to occur on
the first and third Mondays of each month; and
WHEREAS, certain Mondays in 1990 are dates recognized
as legal holidays, thus prohibiting an official meeting of
the Mounds View City Council; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Mounds View City
Council to reschedule those meetings in conflict with legal
holidays.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of
the City of Mounds View that the following meeting dates are
rescheduled as shown:
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
Original Date Rescheduled Date
January
1, 1990
January
2, 1990
January
15,
1990
January
16,
1990
February
19,
1990
February
20,.1990
May 28,
1990
May 29,
1990
September
3,
1990
September
4,
1990
November
12,
1990
November
13,
1990
December
24,
1990
December
26,
1990
Adopted this 2nd day of January, 1990.
Mayor
Clerk -Administrator
MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCI
FROM: CLERK-ADMINISTRATO
DATE: NOVEMBER 27, 1989
SUBJECT: HILLVIEW ROAD APARTMENTS
At the November 14th Council Meeting residents appeared
complaining about the condition of the apartments on the
north side of Hillview Road between Quincy and Interastate
35W. At the end of those discussions the Council directed
that staff evaluate the current situation and prepare a
report for your consideration outlining our current
authority and any recommendations for modifying authorizing
legislation.
Attached for your information is a memorandum from Building
Official Jim Tobias listing the current status of housing
inspections on those apartment buildings. You will note
that Jim commenced inspections in May and has reinspected
each building with corrections pending or having been
completed. As you may know, under our housing code we are
required to reinspect the building and notify the owner of
any violations allowing a period of time for corrections to
be made before we can commence any legal action against them
for violations of our housing code. In the case of 2101
Hillview Road Jim has issued Administrative Offenses and the
City Attorney is currently reviewing this matter to
determine the advisabilty of commencing criminal proceedings
against the owner.
Also attached is a memorandum from City Attorney Mark Kerney
which I received by FAX on November 15th outlining his
thoughts with respect to these items. I would like to
correct Mark's statement in his second paragraph regarding
our housing code. The housing code does address the
condition of the building, not just dimensional aspects as
covered under our zoning code but limits our authority to
issues which would protect the public health, safety a^d
welfare. Should you like, I would be happy to provide you
with a copy of Chapter 93 of the code, however, you should
hae a copy of it in your individual code books where you
will note the issues that are regulated with respect to a
building. As it relates to the concerns of the residents,
the housing code does not address the aesthetics of a
building, i.e. paint, landscaping or yard maintenance but
does address the condition of the building as it relates to
the livability of the building and the individual units.
Mark suggests in his memorandum that the City has greater
authority to address the concerns of the residents with
respect to junk, debris, or yard maintenance through the
City's nuisance code and encourages residents to file
complaints with the Police Department so that proper
4V
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
PAGE TWO
. NOVEMBER 27, 1989
investigations can be conducted for the purpose of
commencing misdemeanor proceedings.
As it relates to juvenile items, Mark addresses that matter
by indicating that all police investigations regarding
ng has
juvenile neglect issues are referred to the County
complete jurisdiction over the child and the prosecution of
any cases relating thereto.
At this time neither [dark, Jim Tcbias or I have any
recul;,cnaations regarding modifications to the City housing
code. Should you require any additional information Mark,
regarding this matter, please
do not hesitate to letJim or I know.
DFP/MJS
t.
MEMO TO: Clerk-Administrtor Pauley
FROM: Building Official Tobias
DATE: November 22, 1989
SUBJECT: HOUSING INSPECTIONS - HILLVIEW ROAD MULTIPLE DWELLINGS
DATE OF
DATE OF
ADDRESS
INSPECTION
REINSPECTION
STATUS
2065
Hillview
Rd.
11/01/89
12/12/89
Pending
2071
Hillview
Rd.
11/03/89
No Corrections
Complete
2075
Hillview
Rd.
11/01/89
12/05/89
Pending
2081
Hillview
Rd.
07/26/89
09/25/89
Not Complete
(owner pending)
2085
Hillview
Rd.
07/26/89
No Corrections
Complete
2091
Hillview
Rd.
06/20/89
07/24/89
Not Complete
2101
Hillview
Rd.
05/12/89
06/20/89
Not Complete,
Administrative
Offense Issued
2105
Hillview
Rd.
07/26/89
11/28/89
Pending
2109
Hillview
Rd.
07/26/89
09/25/89
Not Complete
JT/BAC
t