HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC WORKSESSION 10292013Work Session Agenda
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
7:00 p.m.
1. Refuse. Dan Krivit, Foth Infrastructure & Environment, LLC and Jean Buckley, Ramsey
County Environmental Health Presenting
2. Met Council Population Projection. Kelsey Johnson, City Planner Presenting
3. Non - Conforming Lots. Kelsey Johnson, City Planner Presenting
4. Interim Use Permits (IUP). Kelsey Johnson, City Planner Presenting
5. Fees. Mark Casey, City Manager Presenting
6. Goal Setting. Mark Casey, City Manager Presenting
Next worksession — Monday, December 2, 2013 — 5:30 pm
City of St. Anthony
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
City Council Chambers
September 30, 2013
Present:
Mayor & Council. Jerry Faust, Mayor; Hal Gray, Councilmember, Jan Jenson, Councilmember; Jim Roth,
Councilmember; Randy Stille, Councilmember.
Absent:
None
Staff:
Mark Casey, City Manager and Jay Hartman, Public Works Director
Consultants:
Schawn Johnson, HR Advisor, Mike Music, Integrated Loss Control and Todd Hubmer, Engineer, WSB
Call to Order:
Meeting called to order by Mayor Faust at 5:30 p.m.
Safety Program Update:
Schawn Johnson and Mike Music presented information on the City's safety program including goals,
accomplishments and future areas of direction.
Policy on Flooding Response:
Hubmer presented a Drainage and Flood Assistance Policy. For reference, the 2001 Flood Relief Program was
distributed along with a map showing past improvements and identified current issues. By consensus, staff was
directed to add a per household maximum of $10,000 or 65% (whichever is greater) and not to exceed $100,000 of
City funds expended. Staff will bring back the revisions.
E- Cigarettes:
Casey presented a memo from City Planner Johnson discussing possible additions to the City Code relating to
Electronic cigarettes. No action was taken.
Birchwood:
Casey presented a proposal for expanded financial services. No action was taken.
2014 Calendar:
Casey presented the 2014 meeting calendar.
Adjourn:
The meeting adjourned at 7:58 p.m.
Minutes respectfully submitted by Mark Casey, City Manager.
(D
r+
C)
O
C
n
O
C
E
O
O
A
WSB
&Associoies, inc. Infrastructure n Engineering a Planning n Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763 -541 4800
Fax: 763- 541 -1700
CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
Mark Casey, City Manager
From: Kelsey Johnson, City Planner
Date: October 17, 2013
WSB Project No. 02170 -000
Request: Preliminary Metropolitan Council Forecasts for Thrive MSP 2040
BACKGROUND
The Metropolitan Council has developed preliminary local forecasts of population, households, and
employment through the year 2040 in preparation for next spring's adoption of the Thrive MSP 2040
planning document. Prior to adoption of Thrive MSP 2040, the Metropolitan Council wants to provide the
opportunity for local comment, particularly factors that influence where growth may occur within the City
of St. Anthony Village - e.g. future planned land use.
The City of St. Anthony's Comprehensive Plan 2008 outlines the total population, households and
employment forecasts as shown below:
2008 Comprehensive Plan Estimates
Year 2010 2020
2030
Population 9,100 11,000
11,000
Households 4,300 5,100
5,100
Employment 4,350 5,000
5,450
The Metropolitan Council projects the following for St. Anthony Village:
2013 Metropolitan Council Projections
Hennepin County 2000 2010
2040
Population 5,664 5,156
7,600
Households 2,402 2,210
3,200
Employment 1,992 1,626
1,900
Ramsey County 2000 2010
2040
Population 2,348 3,070
4,200
Households 1,295 1,638
1,900
Employment 1,390 1,357
2,050
City Total 2000 2010
2040
Population 8,012 8,226
11,800
Households 3,697 3,848
51100
Employment 3,382 2,983
3.950
October 17, 2013
Page 2
IMPLICATIONS
1. The total population is shown to increase by 800 people from the 2030 estimates made in 2008 to
the 2040 projections just released. The 2010 Census indicates that there are 8,226 people living
in St. Anthony Village. Using the 2040 projections there would be an increase of 3,574 people by
the year 2040. This is a 43% increase in population over the next 30 years. Given the existing
opportunities for development/redevelopment in the City further analysis and discussion need to
occur to determine if this is reasonable. Things to consider include, but are not limited to:
a. Potential for increase in household size, which would impact the total population; or
b. Potential for an increase in medium -to -high density development/redevelopment that
would accommodate a greater population.
2. Considering there is a projected increase in population of 3,574 over the next 30 years, the "no
net increase" in households since the 2008 estimates is noteworthy. This raises a questions about
where the 3,574 people (total; 800 new since 2030 estimates) will be living if 3,574 people are to
locate in 1,252 households. It seems that some of the increased population could be accounted for
by an increased household size, but is unlikely without an increase in the total households.
Furthermore — is it feasible to accommodate an additional 1,252 households over the next 30
years to get us to the projected numbers? This would require higher density
development/redevelopment, which is a policy discussion that should ;
3. Considering the employment dropped by roughly 400 people from 2000 to 2010, it seems
questionable an increase by roughly 1,000 by the year 2040 given the existing conditions. This is
lower than the 2008 estimates (by 1,500 people) however, which may be more reasonable.
Business expansion or significant redevelopment would need to occur within the City's existing
developed areas for this to be feasible. This warrants further discussion.
CONSIDERATIONS
Things to keep in mind include:
• Forecasts prepared by the Metropolitan Council are for the year 2040. Revised forecasts for 2020
and 2030 are forthcoming;
• Revisions to local forecasts will be made based on input from communities through December 1,
2013;
• Revised local forecasts will be incorporated into the adoption of the Thrive MSP 2040 in the
spring of 2014;
• Forecasts will be "recalibrated" with new socioeconomic data prior to the release of System
Statements in the fall of 2015;
• Communities can appeal /discuss the local forecasts following the release of the System
Statement;
• Between 2015 and 2018, communities can engage the Metropolitan Council around forecasts and
growth during the completion of the Comprehensive Plan Update process.
NEXT STEPS
The City Council should review the projections and methodology used to create them (see attached) and
discuss these with City Staff. Staff will be attending an upcoming workshop with the Metropolitan
Council on October 25th to learn more about the projections and their implications on the City. If the City
Council would like to provide or raise concerns regarding the forecasts, written comments to the
Metropolitan Council are needed by December 1, 2013.
NY�bOmN COJ IONN $OiO YtN+Im�� 10m �ONh(00_N OOi � Sm00
P n O N O
N r O
m b W N O b 0 W W f� V I INN b N 0 0 t° .0 O N!2 ap - M h b M O W ry
W V O W N b b M Q^ M h P W M N M P m n M ybj W W a q
M d P W Oi '
f0 yQ NO�Di N.r -Obi bbb�bN nlpbNNlbO WW Ori tO�abn NCO'f N�N�NNN QA
b
(Ob Q �� b bb p bMNbbvl� Y� P bNCf O PN(ON NIA MOB
^ o C b
W O�bO VW) <O�bOn V N0r0nO�n N Pn am V b rb ONmIfIN OMfN
N VI NNh b ONN MI�YbMP M M Y"N I� b� �- .-Y �b
a n n
b N �I6N Y bN NCN9 �O NfOOM
f0 b N
N N P tO � �2 Y P a0
b
OOO b1�00
0t0 NVf
NON m-NS O o N
^
N N N
O •S,�Qb gN bf0 Qip QOM W mN0 Y Mb W NN OFb W �O P Y O- W NNO
H p O M to � r• N Y P O b b W �- b W ep � � O .- � W .- P b m b Q b y �' Q b
.-
J= H W
D
a
I�Ob MfO bMOOi ebp M�00bNNbT tnM �bb ��U m W bOtN'1 p�0
N' N
6
N O
Al L-
75 CZ^ L L
L = 3 y L ; —
oo°
1- 0 00$
i 8 a w Q= 9 9
c c v `v aEi 5$ K' u N
CE b o m O o E° m m m m a
CIUUp W W W LLG7 �J_l�F�� 22 ZKD:KK °rRm» ��i
S S O O b Ob O VOi b S O V S O N P W O
NON�l� �N W O �NObfON N
O�MN• -� SON Y p
b fONNM vi
O W � b W NNmn bNeb- q���yp
0000 W W (O f� YNN �b p
Y Q N M r
aONyy W Nml� b�mbNh
W W tin W mbNOgNN' N(p byn
bMF W t� W 00p W (O y) M� W
M
S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
OOOYf 000Y O�M00
WmbWrn�oPmemrvM.mmMPM
MM
!O W O'! h M W 1� ONb1° btOpbb
tO�IMN mbbQn�nO Oi OWi pWp ~N1°� h
0000 OOOOOOSA00(00�0
10yb M m M P f M O W O I M 0
SCIO W eJ l� t7NOC1 b P n
W N
� N N N r• N N
O a0 W n b � y Ny W y' bb P F n b O W
!�O M�b(p r, W -AMC -b b Yl
O b C I V f N Y M O F N N ry
Ml�N N bP
lz
N M M O M M m b M N P W N A
N W M W W b O N W b yy N m b
N�pN bN PMYPI Y N NN .n-
F
c
Ec o9c nom —^in �i8i c
Q Pcc o�roo ��f o$�' m o°
aoODUUUAOW W Ku.O (9==
F' OO yOOnNOO N0001$$O$ONNYOI O$$b n y$$ C200. CO. Y NtOOOOOi 000
NNtOp W Yq YO W Nbdn OM(ONOb V7 W Mr M�Nb M.- N � NCO r n N MNM r
�O^ n �Y Nb�WY W �nNMO rp' N �W
Ftl �{ yy �p ((pp ttpp
Y (W(pp y0y�fC10000i apn bNtM�IM�eM1pMgM d nM(7� n VI Nn QN�OO�OOi �' yb<On q b ONi m�
a fON �OPnC � N� MqM QMNMn h NqM N h � NN � � N �O NM.-tl
O C
4
E �{Wpp {Wyy��MppNNppn Nbn NA�ntf Mn Vf MNO d ON NM � SCI Ob1NN � NNCbbj ONi NON boon yNOO V
CN�,PN ^O)N�N�C)N�NbN �MMp'YO' N WO � p (ON�a
r N
000000p00800000008800 00 0000000000 pOpp0p0000_O
bbb� NOCn'f NOWiNOObi. tOA 0W �mNCOJ ��O OW Y0�8$O mMq lYnhNN Ybf C66.gW_d$T h 0W W
�Nt7Y ClM'.- M M Nt0 N �Mtln�'
jyCII� R`El M r r b r
Y 5 mo�onom a vMi_OO�CM')n ��d �O VNf NN NM�M W �M(1 f N� M tbpNPlb+1Nf Td b Y NM
R$ � WW tp eepM
Ob YNrNMN NO Ntq+10�NnNOON my O�N �bgMn ONnmOWiP_n NtnO�NAn(nOb
8 �mr ���'W �IVM'Y P��Nh�N(O bW 'CI'NY OYNM
N W ! N
°o °p °W $$ °p °o$ °o$$ °o i°n °o °oa °$$$000 p00000000o a00000 0000
f
11 11 p �p tp p yy p
o •- Oi Yb Nb ONi � W � NN OOI YON r YOtbONN� NN NNN�M� Pg Nn MN W MAN NNnS
N.-Y�n g P W f (O NN n ngl�gn QOM W M
On nM YO Mr r nvi N O W Y a1Mn(p0 MNM � � � N � M 1�0. -P�
�n MPOtpN N Oa^a PW OIbO f gN�00�� fO pJ CWf NIbOry O�omoo MNy O W N. W N�OWj
100 YON W b W b0� Pl�n� -nip �f1 W N W W O W gNM(pOP Y�M�MIOM W O W NO Y W
N m P OI Y DD Oi � O N N N W Q Ci b W
N
i7
r
N x
V,1
we
a�+
ul $ d,
a
8�
d
LL. 2�
q E s
_C E $
�e _i 9� a
V fi n+- ym o3,
y n n n n'c n o. 'c ;
•`� X8 c ucS XF ycLF$n palm- y eFl
-ij a3 C n ; FF O e T j 3 $ 1Q
OY5C �O CJ(i O C
.. 3C7@ ,co,og
_
0� tO�._m 2 -aON Eyf KO YE4" O CE Cm IYL�C` T m.Ymrymm
.2 g m._ m e c m m m« n e m m c L o m m -1
d���u�ou�u�LLxx «��zorcv�rn< a$�uuu�oxx-9szzm>3333ii
000000a0000000000a
M1 � NMn Pm PmNP l0 NN W qe-
�
N N
f
'm Mme- NNM .r NnmM
O
f
w
'q M1Oe- NmMNe -brvNNN W m(O
N n W man W Nnbmn d Y �(eln
a NN a (7Q NNOI�N W �
r e' Nfh N m
BCnln a100NrtNO tOa ON NO�(1n SSN
N e-NM m e-(h Y YO
N O N W N W g m N b g n p g N n
m m M b N d g r N Y yy m N n b
mm� W mNN Pgae -q Ce' Nr-nN
M N�nNN Yd� YOm1m� � Q 0q Y]N
e-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
m m000 Pmd NOOm ltll O Yf0
m m N 0 0 N
e- p Wd
F0 mgano�.$aarv�Nra�nmom
J, p N 1V M
0 1
a
m �dmimmo� nrono�m auNi,� vbi_�
nma�wm^
333X .m NM e- me-mm� e-NNm
N
n
.6 6
p N w Q 1 w C NCy N
3
MUg le V @ Y C
IUM IM oz z w WWe mr n
aD tODU W Z �-» 22aNV)N NUI
0000000000000000000000000000000
N NMNN m NOd NN.-Nn d e- m n dNd N
Q1�bN QN� V a O� W OImNN NO Nb100 (OMnNN Nb �Ne-� Q
W e' NNmmn N W mM NN aqh mNF�M r-r-q
Ote1S S�WSOi N SONSSnS10nOSS 0m 0qS dOOS100S
M W Y P N W d m - m OM e-NN W abN W ne-r- Q N Y O g N m Y
e-N
m
YNfn Nmn r r 0� W rm er-e0 NNOm VYl �mOf O Prrp��N00mim OYi
N
n Q m W M d Q M e- C'1 b � P N N N O Y N N r• g N n q e- e- N 1p
00.000000 ( Opppp O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
m O(pp OSaNN0o oo Nl�mO (WelNm Oq O�N W MP OSd�NO ybj (mp (0y
dN Od e-1V N d ry e'N e- qe-m Ntab n Pm Nm m
n n m m N n W C
dlombonmoN�monMObbbrYP
L6 m m N Y
n�mmrolmn a 3 o1°n mmmmwmi °O �i °mm�rNU.n a lbomnvmi�n �i a
M d
C
L
c u
O N _
6 ~ Up a0 G
O y
L L5 _ _ q
n g U $ G w a a y m r
Eoa 0 3 'L`'c
EyO�A
L y N .• 9 i F- g d N@ a@@ n y
e 6yy y Cy P1 G N O YYp Yqq Y C 1yLy1 L T 3 Y Y W b .LN•' m 8
m (O:JOOLLCi(7i2 �JJJ2��dzlo "oainv`iv,ini°n3��3
e p
co Fns NMN r W hnmmp NON W ON �� �MObi (Fpb
O M W h MM1 N 10�O YI F � Nbp b h qb p Q h Nh
N d
(p�b OONI �hNn On'ro��gb OaD�q�+bf qMN 1W0 (G N
h W C)1� t`4�N NMeJh�MQn � Mdq pbM1O NN
N Ole m0N �M�NYM1� F N � O r eG
m P
8!hl ONN $�N Q $O� +NN��S$N� 1�Y$ tMUO W
N
N M1 N M M1 � F
N F
10 (hy {rN�Oq pqp Nn hmN�YpI (ObOm M1 n NN � rMr qO P W M
M1 N Yf n�MMNNY01 Oml fpM1 O NNOOh W PbI�INiI OM)b ONI�
� N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
(On W Mh W n n h�O�b� -nMYhti W 1p d N Y Q� d
O O F M � N b Q rn Y N g n O b M M 1p M1 b M O M1 g h M n
f0h bfpn qF MMMhmMMFN hNq' M hO�pFMM
F W YInMMYI F hMOt7 Q QhN qQ NN m� PfOQ
M
lh yN�bOmOY O �Y�th+l � MCf �i�NYN�nb � OIL N^ yry
N GhMOMOF r fpM ONhOIOM� -�-O �
m.- 'ON dNMN Q gNM1IV � d' bhp Y n.-. -Q b
H
�pyJOU�ac��o o' °'t- °'xtlXa
C C fC_ C
f 2`i 2 2 0 0 Roc K Kw Nr� N y N F��_
M00 p00 p00 000000000000 pp0
O(00_lC0(+fN W MONO V.q It
N
M N
qq N� fOMM pp C Ck bNYfM1 Qlw.—q, -MWb (p M0
h b N eC Ol r (y ,6 I n f fp Nj
n Otp00 W On per O dbNd
F W O b b h M1 0 W W q' M O b
N m M
h m q m
a NMOOn bQ
�Mh W mr:u ro�ooa grvn
W M g O h M W M O M M h q h 1p y O q
h O Mhnh. -�OOgq O^ d(O 1p
N N'�-Q CEN pig d Y-NO N V m
' OY1N OIn�AN �o09N O�$N�M$
Y-N Q MM M
M
N M W M l0 h W W O O O b M h ry W Q
h N g M1 n V f h (O b tt pp F f p yy F O Q q
UI ' � MMnO� Y d Pt0000�MO�M
W h Ngt+b1�N Q �fM+lmmN r �N
N
' hYt7 FN�NgONI�bONObgnM
�i�q�orvrno
Vf Nq hNNM' -lh NfOh '
M�N
N h
G «
Z � '= a
►' m m c tWmag� o pyaa�0i
> q v 01
d
$$I PPY C$ E$'3� 3r'L tt'roiad O C v Y'O
Ia m LL U Z Z Z K h N N O i 3
z
O
-h
O
1
3
arcs
r
O
r+
ul
A
Wa7B
& Assoeiales. Inc.
Infrastructure . Engineering . Planning . Construction
CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE MEMORANDUM
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Mark Casey, City Manager
From: Kelsey Johnson, AICP, City Planner
Date: October 20, 2013
WSB Project No. 02170 -000
Request: Nonconforming Lots
OVERVIEW
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763 -541 -4800
Fax: 763 - 541 -1700
The City Code defines "Nonconforming use" in § 152.003. § 152.003 states that "The use of all property
in the city must comply with the zoning code. Any building, structure, or use lawfully existing on 8 -2-
1976 and continuing to lawfully exist to the date of adoption of this zoning code, but not in conforming
with this zoning code, will be regarded as nonconforming. The nonconforming uses and structures may
be continued subject to the provisions of § 152.225 and § 152.226 ".
§ 152.225 INTENT
It is the intent of this subchapter to permit nonconforming uses and structures, as defined in
§152.003, to continue until they are removed, but it not the intent of this subchapter to encourage their
survival, or to permit them to be enlarged, expanded, or extended.
§ 152.226 LIMITED CONTINUATION
Except as otherwise provided by law, any nonconformity, including a nonconforming use or
occupation of land or premises, may be continued, including through repair, replacement, restoration,
maintenance or improvement, but not including expansion, unless:
(A) Change to conforming use. The property used for a nonconforming use is subsequently
used for a conforming use.
(B) Discontinued use. The nonconformity or occupancy is discontinued for a period of more
than I year.
(C) Destruction of building. Any nonconforming use is destroyed by fire or other peril to the
extent of greater than 50% of the estimated market value, as indicated by the records of the County
Assessor at the time of damage, and no building permit has been applied for within 180 days of when
the property is damaged.
These provisions are in line with MN Stat. §462.357, Subd. le. However, if you read through this MN
Stat. you will see that like the City's Code, neither code nor statute regulate "nonconforming lots" other
than MN Stat. §462.357, Subd. le, e. which relates to nonconforming lots of record within a shoreland
area.
Majority of the City is zoned "RI Single Family District ". §152.039 (B) regulates the "Area and width"
of the RI District and states that "no dwelling may be constructed or placed on an interior lot of less then
9,000 square feet, or less than 75 feet in width at the building setback line, or a corner of less than 11,000
square feet or less than 90 feet in width at the building setback line ". An initial study of single family
residential lots (with in the R1 and RI-A Districts) within the City indicates that several hundred lots are
considered "non- conforming lots ", meaning they have a total lot area under 9,000 square feet. An
analysis was not conducted to date to determine nonconforming lots due to lot width.
With the provision that "no dwelling may be constructed or placed....... of less than 9,000 square feet ",
virtually any addition, expansion, or complete reconstruction of a home that is on a "nonconforming lot"
would not be allowed without the issuance of a variance. With the City's desire to continue the
encouragement of reinvestment and improvements to properties within the City, it may be
counterintuitive to have restrictions or barriers to allow these improvements by requiring variances to all
of these properties that don't meet the minimum standards of the zoning district.
Further analysis is needed, but one thought would be have a statement in the Zoning Code that states
something like the following:
e. Legal Non - Conforming Lots
Vacant or Redeveloped Residential Lots.
a) A lot of record existing as of the effective date of this Ordinance in a residential
district, which does not meet the requirements of this Ordinance as to area or
width, may be utilized for single family detached dwelling purposes provided
that in all residential districts, the measurements of such lot's area and frontage
width are within sixty (60) percent of the requirements of the respective district,
as established by this Ordinance.
b) The preceding subsection a) is not intended to permit a reduction in setbacks or
required yards.
c) In the event that the measurements of such lot's area and width do not comply
with subsection a) above, then approval for the construction of a single family
dwelling may be requested as a conditional use permit, subject as regulated by
Section 1003 of this Ordinance.
2. Developed Lots. An existing conforming use on a lot of substandard size may be
expanded or enlarged if such expansion or enlargement meets all other provisions of this
Ordinance.
Staff is seeking direction from the City Council as it pertains to nonconforming lots of record.
r-r
CD
C
CD
-v
fD
L =�
& nssocrnres. tnc.
Infrastructure . Engineering ■ Planning . Construction
701 Xenia Avenue South
Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
Tel: 763 -541 -4800
Fax: 763 - 541 -1700
CITY OF SAINT ANTHONY VILLAGE MEMORANDUM
To:
Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Mark Casey, City Manager
From:
Kelsey Johnson, AICP, City Planner
Date:
October 29, 2013
WSB Project No.
02170 -000
Request:
Interim Use Permit (IUP) Discussion
OVERVIEW
Cities have the authority to allow interim uses under MN Stat. §462.3597. It defines an interim use as a
"temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a particular event, or until
zoning regulations no longer permit it ". When such circumstances exists, an interim use permit may be
granted by the City Council. The permit may be issued for a certain period of time, with automatic
cancellation at the end of the time unless it is renewed, or conditions may be applied to the issuance of a
permit and/or periodic review may be required.
An interim use permit can be granted if. (1) it conforms to the zoning regulations; (2) the termination date
or event can be identified with certainty; (3) the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is
necessary for the public to take over the property in the future; and (4) the user agrees to any conditions.
IUP's are useful tools where a proposed use fits within the current zoning plan, but may not fit with future
plans as development/redevelopment occurs or the use of the property changes. Unlike a Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) which is recorded against the property and runs with the land, and Interim Use Permit
(IUP) has the ability to set an expiration date for which the interim use must cease.
While the Interim Use Permit (IUP) process will (initially) be a hassle for applicants, the City Council can
grant reoccurring IUP's until a particular date (one year; any 90 day period for the next three years; every
June, July and August for 5 years, etc.) and /or until a particular event (the property is
developed/redeveloped, rezoned, the County wants more right -of -way, etc.), or the City can change the
zoning ordinance and do away with some or all the interim uses in the various zoning districts.
Just like "Permitted Uses ", "Conditional Uses ", or "Accessory Uses" listed in each Zoning District,
"Interim Uses" could also be listed. However, often times interim uses are difficult to describe or
unknown at the time of Ordinance adoption. Examples of interim uses include, but are not limited to,
farmer's (or seasonal) markets, tree sales lots, storage of equipment for a pond dredging project (of which
the project may take several years to finish), conversion of a gas station into a seasonal coffee shop
(where the City has long term vision for what the site may develop /redevelop into).
DRAFT LANGUAGE FOR DISCUSSION
INTERIM USE PERMIT. A temporary use of property until a particular date, until the occurrence of a
particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it.
152.246 Interim Use Permit (IUP)
(A) Applicability. An interim use is intended as a temporary use of property until a particular date,
until the occurrence of a particular event, or until zoning regulations no longer permit it. When such
circumstances exist, an Interim Use Permit (IUP) may be granted by the City Council. The permit may be
issued for a certain period or time, with automatic cancellation at the end of the time unless it is renewed,
or conditions may be applied to the issuance of a permit and/or periodic review may be required.
(B) Application. An application for an interim use permit is to be made on forms available from the
Zoning Officer and must be signed by the owner of the property in question. The application must be
accompanied by a fee in the amount set forth in Chapter 33. The applicant may be required to provide a
site plan, any special studies requested (e.g. traffic, environmental, wetland, or utility studies) and written
documentation that includes:
(1) A complete description of the use;
(2) Schedule for commencement of the use;
(3) Hours and dates of operation; and
(4) Evidence that the applicant has sufficient control over the lot to effectuate the proposed plan,
or evidence that the property owner has given the operator permission to use the premises.
(C) Planning Commission action. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing and make a
recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or denial to the City Council. In the event the
Planning Commission recommends denial of any application for an interim use permit, the reasons for
such denial shall be provided identifying the ways in which the proposed request fails to meet the
standards and intent of this Ordinance and is otherwise injurious to the public health, safety, and welfare.
(D) City Council action. An interim use permit may be granted only by a majority vote of all
members of the City Council after determining that:
(1) The proposed use will not delay permanent development of the site;
(2) The proposed use will not adversely impact implementation of the Comprehensive Plan;
(3) The proposed use will not be in conflict with any provisions of the City Code on an ongoing
basis;
(4) The proposed use will not be injurious to the surrounding neighborhood or otherwise harm
the public health, safety, and welfare; and
(5) The date or event that will terminate the use has been identified with certainty.
(E) Standards.
(1) The term of an interim use permit must not exceed 5, 10, 15, etc. years.
(2) Because of the temporary nature, an interim use permit is not subject to renewal, but upon re-
application for a time extension of the same use on the same site beyond the date of expiration of its
interim use permit, succeeding interim use permits may be approved for up to 5, 10, 15, etc. years
each if the City Council makes the findings set forth in Subprovision D hereof in the affirmative and also
finds that all previous conditions of approval have been satisfied and that the use meets all Code
requirements or has received appropriate variances from those requirements.
(F) Expiration and Termination.
(1) An interim use permit expires and the interim use must terminate at the earlier of the
following:
(a) The expiration date established by the City Council at the time of approval, but in no
event more than (five, ten, fifteen, etc.) years from the date of approval;
(b) The occurrence of any event identified in the interim use permit for the termination to
the use; or
(c) Upon an amendment of the City Code that no longer allows the interim use.
(2) Unused interim use permits expire 6 months after approval if the proposed use has not
commenced. A land owner may apply to the Zoning Administrator for no more than 1 time extension
of up to 6 months for an unused interim use permit.
(3) Interim use permits expire if the interim use ceases operation for a continuous period of 1
year or longer.
Page 2
CD
rD
cn
10/16/2013
Trend and Estimated Results
Wioo00
U870,o00
$S,mo,"
s>.2ao.000
$1.2so.oao
oo
$LG70. 1,e3o.000
$1.@30,000
s1.5s0.000
$1,550.000
2010 2011 2013 2013 201G wM 2015
N.I...e .01... F 1.
Utility Rates
Tier Level
Distribution
Cost
Percent Increase
Utility Rates
29.4% 46.2%
67.12 119.67
(64.27)
(114.29)
2.83
5.38
11.30
21.50
4.44%
4.73%
2014 2013
21.55
29.93
14.05
20.63
28.35
13.70
22,500
30,000
37,500
18.6%
4,1%
1.7%
174.49
233.02
298.76
66.49)
(222.22)
(284.84)
8.00
10.81
13.92
32.00
43.23
55.70
4.84%
4.89%
4.91%
0.93
1.58
0.35
10/16/2013
The impact of the recommended rates on the Tier II average
usage of 11,038 gallons quarterly would be as follows
(4.62 %):
5o The impact of the recommended rates on the Tier IV
average usage of 25,252 gallons quarterly would be as
follows (4.86 %):
Questions ? /Comments
2014
TO: MARK CASEY, CITY MANAGER
FROM: SHELLY RUECKERT, FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: 2014 UTILITY RATES
DATE: OCTOBER 14, 2013
2014 Utility Rate Synopsis:
The utility rates recommended herein for 2014 reflects a multi -year approach towards
rate adjustments that began in 2012. The concept will allow for reasonable rate
adjustments that maintain an equitable sharing of costs, encourages conservation, and
retires debt. The approach and rates will be evaluated annually.
The overall impact of the recommended rates for a residential customer at each of the
five tier level ranges from 4.44% to 4.91 % as detailed below:
Tier Level 1-t-7,500 2nd- 15,000 3rd- 22,500 4th- 30,000 5th- 37,500
Distribution 29.4% 46.2% 18.6% 4.1% 1.7%
2014 Cost 67.12 119.67 174.49 233.02 298.76
2013 Cost (64.27) (114.29) (166.49) (222.22) (284.84)
Quarterly
2.83
5.38
8.00
10.81
13.92
Annual
11.30
21.50
32.00
43.23
55.70
Percent Increase 4.44% 4.73'% 4.84% 4.89% 4.91%
Resolutions XXXX contain the rate adjustments recommended above.
The remainder of this document discusses the rate increases by service type
Water Rates:
The April 2012 water rate discussion resulted in the multi- year approach cited
previously. Consistent with this approach, the elimination of annual transfer from the
water operations to the general fund is carried forward to 2014. The recommended 2014
rate per 1,000 gallons is $2.87, or a twelve cent increase. This represents a 4.5% increase
in rate and would be expected to generate $39,001 in additional revenues (assuming
water usage is similar to 2013). The impact on a 7,500 gallon per quarter user would be
as follows:
Sewer Rates:
The approach to sewer rates in 2012 was the same as used for the water. Consistent
with this approach, the elimination of annual transfer from the water operations to the
general fund is carried forward to 2014. The recommended 2014 rate per 1,000 gallons is
$3.99, or a twenty-one cent increase. This represents a 5.44% increase in rate. This
increase is commensurate with the increase in 2014 treatment costs provided by
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The MCES 2014 rate notification
also alluded to future rate increases in treatment costs of 6 -7 %. The revision in rates
would be expected to generate $46,416 in additional revenues (assuming 2014 first
quarter water usage was similar to the first quarter in 2013). The impact on a 7,500
gallon per quarter user would be as follows:
Quarterly Bill
Usage Rate
% Change
2011
$19.50
$2.60
-
2012
$20.03
$2.67
2.69
2013
$20.63
$2.75
3.00
2014
$21.53
$2.87
4.50
Sewer Rates:
The approach to sewer rates in 2012 was the same as used for the water. Consistent
with this approach, the elimination of annual transfer from the water operations to the
general fund is carried forward to 2014. The recommended 2014 rate per 1,000 gallons is
$3.99, or a twenty-one cent increase. This represents a 5.44% increase in rate. This
increase is commensurate with the increase in 2014 treatment costs provided by
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). The MCES 2014 rate notification
also alluded to future rate increases in treatment costs of 6 -7 %. The revision in rates
would be expected to generate $46,416 in additional revenues (assuming 2014 first
quarter water usage was similar to the first quarter in 2013). The impact on a 7,500
gallon per quarter user would be as follows:
Quarterly Bill
Usage Rate
% Change
2011
$26.25
$3.50
-
2012
$27.75
$3.70
5.71
2013
$28.35
$3.78
2.16
2014
$29.93
$3.99
5.44
Stormwater Rates:
The approach to Stormwater rates in 2012 was the same as used for the water and
sewer. The recommended 2013 rate per Quarter is $14.05 or a thirty-five cent increase.
This represents a 2.55% increase in rate and would be expected to generate $4,672 in
additional revenues (assuming no new construction). The impact on a residential single
family user would be as follows:
The rate increases for other land use categories are comparable to increase in single
family residential (classifications 2 & 3)
Classification-Land Use
Quarterly Bill
Usage Rate
% Change
2011
$13.00
$58.30 per acre
2.55%
2012
$13.35
$0.35
2.69
2013
$13.70
$0.35
2.62
2014
$14.05
$0.35
2.55
The rate increases for other land use categories are comparable to increase in single
family residential (classifications 2 & 3)
Classification-Land Use
2013 Charge
Proposed 2014 Charge
% Chan e
1- Cemeteries, parks, golf
courses, railroads, vacant land
$56.85 per acre
$58.30 per acre
2.55%
2- R -1, R -la, and R -2
residential
$54.80 per unit
$56.20 per unit
2.55%
3- R -3 residential
$54.80 per unit
$56.20 per unit
2.55%
4- Schools and institutional
uses
$130.90 per acre
$134.24 per acre
2.55%
5- R -4 Residential, churches
and manufactured home parks
$166.96 per acre
$171.22 per acre
2.55%
6- Commercial and industrial
$208.58 per acre
$213.90 per acre
2.55%
2014
Fee Schedule
(Proposed)
Table of Contents
General Construction
Building..................................................................... ............................... 1
Electrical.................................................................... ............................... 2
Mechanical................................................................. ............................... 3
Miscellaneous............................................................. ............................... 3
Plumbing................................................................... ..............................3
LandUse Applications ....................................................... ............................... 4
Licenses............................................................................... ............................... 5
MiscellaneousFees .............................................................. ............................... 6
ParkContributions .................................................... ............................... 6
Rightof Way .............................................................. ............................... 7
Utilities
FireControl Devices .................................................. ............................... 7
IrrigationRates .......................................................... ............................... 7
SewerRates ................................................................ ............................... 7
Storm water Facilities Rates ...................................... ............................... 7
WaterMeters ............................................................. ............................... 8
WaterRates ................................................................ ............................... 8
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION
BUILDING PERMIT FEES:
Total Valuation
$1 to $500
Amount
$29.50
$501 to $2,000
$28 for the first $500 plus $3.70/ additional $100 or fraction thereof, to
including $2,000
$2,001 to $25,000
$83.50 for the first $2,000 plus $16.55/ additional $1,000 or fraction
thereof, to including $25,000
$25,001 to $50,000
$464.15 for the first $25,000 plus $12.00/ additional $1,000 or fraction
thereof, to including $50,000
$50,001 to $100,000
$764.15 for the first $50,000 plus $8.45/ additional $1,000 or fraction
thereof, to including $100,000
$100,001 to $500,000
$1,186.65 for the first $100,000 plus $6.75/ additional $1,000 or fraction
thereof, to including $500,000
$500,001 to $1,000,000
$3,886.65 for the first $500,000 plus $5.50/ additional $1,000 or fraction thereof, to
including $1,000,000
$1,000,001 and up
$6,636.65 for the first $1,000,000 plus $4.50 /additional $1,000 or fraction thereof
Inspections outside of normal business hours
$63.25 per hour
(minimum charge, 2 hours)
(or the total hourly cost to the jurisdiction, which is the greatest.
This cost shall include supervision, overhead, equipment, hourly
wages, and fringe benefits of the employees involved.)
Re- inspection; fees assessed under provisions
$63.25 per hour
of §32.08
Inspections for which no fee is specifically
$63.25 per hour
indicated (minimum charge, 1/2 hour)
Additional plan review required by changes,
additions, or revisions to plans (minimum
$63.25 per hour
charge, 1/2 hour)
For use of outside consultants for plan
Actual costs
checking and inspections, or both
(including administrative and overhead costs)
Notes to Table:
A plan review fee of 65% of the permit fee will be charged for building permits which requires the submittal of
plans.
Fees for similar plans will be charged in accordance with provisions of MN Rules, Chapter 1300.0160, subd. 5.
Page 1
2014 Fee Schedule
ELECTRICAL PERMITS FEES:
Purpose of Fee:
Description
Anio=nt
Residential or Commercial
Up to 300 amps
$50.00
Building or Garage
Electrical panel change out, repair or service
400 amps
$58.00
upgrade
For each additional 100 amps add
$14.00
Reconnected circuits
Charge for each
$3.00
Residential or Commercial
Building or Garage
New circuits or reconnected circuits spliced
Charge for each up to 30 amps
$8.00
Charge for each up to 100 amps
$10.00
For each additional 100 amps add
$5.00
outside of electric panel are at full fee
New Single Family Residence or Building Remodel
up to 200 amps and 30 circuits used or less -
includes a maximum of 3 inspection trips
New Home
$150.00
(There is no maximum fee if the service is larger than 200
amps)
Single Family Residence or Building Remodel
Total costs equals required number of inspections trips
$35 each or the total cost of the circuits being used whichever
but not both.
multiplied by
is greater,
Multi- Family Dwelling with 3 or more Units
Each housing unit - up to 200 amps with a
All Remodel Projects
$70.00
meter bank application and 20 circuits or less.
Additional inspection trip
$35.00
House Wiring and service is separate. Above
fees apply.
0 -10 kilovolt- amperes
$10.00
11- 76 kilovolt- amperes
$40.00
Transformers
over 76 kilovolt - amperes
$80.00
Retro fit lighting
(ballast & lamps only; new fixture is per
for the first 10 fixtures
$10.00
each additional fixture
$0.65
circuit fee)
Sign Transformer
$8.00
Swimming Pools
per trip plus circuit fees
$35.00
Street Lights and lot lights
per pole
$4.00
Traffic Signals
per standard
$7.00
Remote Control, Signal,
fire alarm & energy management
for the first 10 devices
$10.00
for each additional device
$0.65
Page 2
2014 Fee Schedule
MECHANICAL PERMIT:
MISCELLANEOUS PERMIT:
Antennas, disk antennas and towers
Per Building Permit Fee Schedule
Demolition Permit
$50 Residential
$75 Commercial
Driven /Sidewalk
$30
Fence
$30
Public Safe
$20
Solar
$50 lus 1.25% o total valuation
PLUMBING PERMIT:
Page 3
2014 Fee Schede(e
First bath
$100
Each additional bath
$35
3/4 bath
$35
1/2 bath
$20
Laundry
$20
Water softener
$20
Other
$30
All
3% of contract rice
Lawns rinklers, residential
$20
Lawnsprinklers, commercial
$30
Add $20 administrative fee and $5.00 surcharge to all permits
Page 3
2014 Fee Schede(e
LAND USE APPLICATION:
Purpose of Fee (Code #)
Appef4
Amount
$geese
Comprehensive Plan
$750 and an Escrow deposit of $1,500 for Residential
and $3,500 for Commercial
Conditional Use Permit ( §152.243)
$200 and an Escrow deposit of $450 for Residential
and $850 for Commercial
Easement Vacation (§151.11)
$200
Final Plat ( §151.04)
$500 with an Escrow deposit of $500
Garage Setback permit ( §152176)
$60
Planned Unit Development ( §152.176)
$750 with a $2,500 Escrow deposit
Preliminary Plat ( §151.03)
$500 with a $500 Escrow deposit
Rezoning ( §152.242)
$500 with a $750 Escrow deposit
Sign Permit ( §155)
$75 for cost of $1 to $500, plus $5 each $100 over
$500
Sign Plan review ( §155)
$75
Site Plan ( §152.241)
$250 with an Escrow deposit of $450
Subdivision /Lot Split
$250 with a $1,250 Escrow deposit
Variance (§152.245)
$200 and an Escrow deposit of $450 for Residential
and $850 Commercial
Page 4
2014 Fee Schedule
LICENSES & PERTN rT•c:
(Ord. ,
Alarm Permits: ( §111.152)
Commercial $25
Residential $10
Am .............• Devkes (t . .._y ..
Christmas Tree Lots:
Non - Profit
No fee
Other Applicants
$50
Contractors ( §111.231)
$35 or $5 if licensed by state
Courtesy Ad Bench
$830 per bench New
$10- per bench renewal
Fireworks: ( §111.371)
$100 Existing
$350 Stand Alone
Dog ( §91.011)
$15 every two years unspayed or unneutered; $12
Duplicate license or to
every two years spayed or neutered
$1.50
Fir-eiver-ks Di5p —ey
Gasoline service stations
(stations with multiple products dispensed through
1 hose)
$30 for station and 1 production line, plus $8.50
for each product line dispensed.
Haulers of Garbage or Recyclables ( §111.216)
$150
HVA[ rl umbftib gas pira s airen-se
- $35- CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE
, 16 ...1.... Q
liiSpectian Fee
-
Jukeboxes
$W per- lecatieff
Kennel ( §91.20)
$90
Laundromats (coin - operated not in multiple family
building)
$10 per machine, up to a maximum of $190 per
location
Liquor: (March 15th renewal date; annually) ( §112.03)
Beer: off -sale; 3.2% malt liquor license
$100
Beer: on -sale; 3.2% malt liquor license
$350
Beer: Temporary on -sale 3.2% malt liquor
None
license
Liquor: on -sale intoxicating liquor
$8,000
Liquor: Sunday on -sale
$200
Wine: only
Wine: with strong beer endorsement
Wine: temporary
$400 license fee & $100 processing fee
$1,500 license fee & a 100 processing fee
None
Page 5
2014 Fee Schedule
Multiple Dwellings ( §111.188)
$150 base fee plus $10 per unit for 3 or more
Newspaper vending maeh-'
- $5-per- �
Townhouse development
$199
Pawnbroker ( §111.287)
$5 999 8,000 license fee; $750 investigation fee
Peddler ( §113.01)
$50
Physical culture and health service or club,
reducing club or salon, sauna parlor, therapeutic
massage studio ( §111.341)
$500 investigation fee depesiE
$250 Therapist
e dance
$50
$28 -MOVED TO PERMITS
Secondhand good dealer ( §111.252)
$5,000 license fee; $750 investigation fee
Tobacco or tobacco related products (§III.oq
$300
Towing/ Motor Vehicle Starting ( §111.111)
$30 for first vehicle and $20 for each additional
vehicle
Transient Merchant ( §113.01)
$50
Vending machines bag
$2 per- maehime
(knetHding gum and
Vending Maehines (all other- eein operated
$25 first " > :_ ". Q, eae-h as
maehines not ethenv4se covered in fl-As subehap
MISCELLANEOUS FEES:
Security False Alarm ( §111.155 0)
Vehicle Impounding Fee ( §72.33)
PARK CONTRIBUTION: ( 051.12)
First 2 are free, 3rd is $75 and each
additional is an additional $25
Per current inspeetien fpp
$85 for tow:
$25 per day storage (applied the first day)
$25 Tow Company Administration
$15 SAPD Administration
Single Family lot
$1,500 /unit
Duplex lot
$1,800 /unit
Townhouse development
$2,000 /unit
Mobile Home
$1,000 /unit
Multi-family, apartment or condominium
$1,500 /unit
Commercial /Industrial
$4,000 per acre
Page 6
2014 Fee Schedule
RIGHT OF WAY:
Registration Fee
Excavation Permit Fee:
Hole
Trench
Obstruction permit base fee
Permit Extension fee
Street Excavation (6150.031)
UTILITIES:
$40
$125
$70/100 lineal foot (plus hole fee)
$50 plus $.05 /lineal foot
$55
$50
FIRE CONTROL DEVICES: (billed quarterly)
Siu
.\nuxml
R
,... tt
IRRIGATION RATES: $3:H5 3.81 per 1,000 gallons
SEWER RATES: $3.99 per 1,000 gallons
STORM WATER FACILITIES: (billed quarterly)
Classificat on
C 110 (2 (per acre)
R
Page 7
2014 Fee Schedule
WATER METERS: (billed quarterly)
SIZE
METER PRICE
�� Ill
••.��
RADIO
• •• Ill
TOTAL COST
"'• MOO
11 111
•l 11
� �� Ill
• •� 111
®
m '/ 11
m m I /l
V• Ill
®
rl fwo MONSIMMUTIT531mm
$4-.P 4.78
• •• 11
®
- �� .'I 11
� �� Ill
�� • •� Ill
WATER RATES: (billed quarterly)
RESIDENTIAL
Consumption (gallons)
1 11
Rate/ per 1,000 gallons
TIER II
11 111
:' I
D'
111 11
$-318 3.32
TIER IV
22,500-30,000
•:
TIER V
Over 1 111 _
$4-.P 4.78
TIER 1
0 -7,500
$2-.752.87
TIER II
7,500- 53,500
$2.$9 3.02
TIER III
53,500 - 175,000
$-318 3.32
TIER IV
175,000 - 300,000
$3:653.81
TIER V
Over 300,000
$4-.P 4.78
TIER 1
0 -7,500
$2-.752.87
TIER II
7,500510,000
" 3.02
TIER III
510,000 - 610,000
$319 3.32
TIER IV
610,000 - 710,000
$3-.653.81
TIER V
Over 710,000
$4�7 4.78
SAVHS
TIER 1
Consumption
0 -7,500
1,000
$751.87
TIER II
7,500 - 850,000
$2-.89 3.02
TIER III
850,000 - 1,150,000
"3.32
TIER IV
1,150,000 - 1,450,000
$3-.653.81
TIER V
Over 1,450,000
$4.P 4.78
HAPPY'S
TIER 1
Consumption (gallons)
0 -7,500
Rate/per 1,000 gallons
$2.752.87
TIER II
7,500 - 3,650,000
$2-.893.02
TIER III
3,650,000 - 4,650,000
$3493.32
TIER IV
4,650,000 - 5,650,000
$3.653.81
TIER V
Over 5,650,000
$4,7 4.78
Page 8
2014 Fee Schedule
fD
0'U
Em
Pre - Planning Questionnaire
October 2013
On Thursday, January 16 and Friday, January 17 our annual City of St. Anthony Strategic Planning retreat
is scheduled. On the first day the Mayor, City Council, City Manager, Department Heads, City Clerk and
consultants will meet to review 2013 and discuss our vision and priorities. The second day the Mayor,
Council, City Manager and Department Heads will build the "Pyramid" (2013 on back).
On Tuesday, October 29, the City Manager, Department Heads, #2's, City Clerk and consultants will
meet to do pre - planning work. Prior to this meeting, we need to hear from you. Your input is valuable
and important for us to be successful in creating the short & long term vision. This strategic planning will
provide a road map for our future direction. Please direct your questions to your department head.
Please respond to the follow questions (feel free to use a separate sheet of paper):
1) What do we do well (as your department and /or overall as a City):
2) What can we do better (same as above):
3) What are we missing in order to be better:
Please return to your Department Head no later than Friday, October 25, 2013.
EM
TO: Department Heads, #2s and Consultants
FROM: Mark Casey, City Manager
RE: Getting Smarter With Technology
DATE: October 21, 2013
On Tuesday, October 29, 2013 from 11:30 am to 1:00 pm, we will be meeting with Dave Unmacht as
part of the pre - planning for the annual Strategic Planning Retreat with the mayor and city council. We
will be in at the New Brighton Community Center - Room 220. Attached are several discussion
questions. We may not get to all of them, but please review and be prepared to discuss.
We will be particularly concentrating on technology in this discussion. I believe we have the capacity to
get smarter with technology, which will translate to greater efficiencies and effectiveness as we
accomplish our tasks.
To achieve this goal, we will utilize a multi -prong approach as we did when we, as a city, desired to
become a safer workplace: we developed a safety committee, researched best practices, invested in
training, educated employees, purchased various tools /aids, and utilized outside resources such as
League of MN Cities, Integrated Loss Control, etc. A critical key to our success has been creating a
culture of safety throughout city staff. As a result, employees at all levels are moving toward being able
to identify and remedy safety issues as they arise.
In order to become technologically smarter we need to leverage the maximum capacity of our current
resources and explore further investment. To date, we have made significant investments in web -based
software such as:
• ADP (payroll /HR)
• City Link (GIS)
• Civic (financial)
• eModule (safety)
• Laserfiche Rio (records management /workflow automation)
• SharePoint (Intranet)
• Plus Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, PowerPoint), Outlook (email /calendar /contacts) and various
department proprietary software such as Firehouse (Fire), PermitWorks (Building), Counterpoint
(Liquor), LETG (Police), etc.
A major goal, therefore, will be to make sure we are utilizing this software to its fullest capacity. In
addition, we can consider both additional software and hardware investments.
As a member of the leadership team, I am asking you to:
• Embrace the process and lead by example
• Analyze current practices and begin to identify areas where technology can be better utilized to
improve process and /or product
• Invest in outside training and /or create in -house trainers
• Allocate time for the process including training sessions for staff
• Develop measurements for ongoing self- assessment
• Create a cross - departmental technology committee to shepherd this effort
Thank you in advance for your thoughtful dialogue.
Attachment: Discussion Questions
a,-
City of St. Anthony Village
Staff Work Session
October 29, 2013
Discussion
I. Our staff has excellent experience and skill sets; what are our strengths and in what
areas do we need to develop?
II. How can we better use technology in our workplace?
III. How can the leadership team encourage and empower staff to evaluate current
procedures and look for smarter ways to implement technology?
IV. How can the leadership team ensure that all of our staff prioritize technological
improvements?
V. What interesting technology use have you seen elsewhere?
VI. How do we ensure we are investing in the right technology?
VII. Based on your knowledge and experience, how will the delivery of city services be
different in the year 2025?
2014 Goal Setting Session
Agenda
Thursday, January 23, 2014
Invitees:
Mayor & Council (5)
City Manager, Department Heads & City Clerk (7)
Planning Commission (1) & Park's Commission (1)
Consultants (6) — Engineer (Hubmer), Financial (Kvilvang), HR (Johnson), Planning (Johnson) and Legal
(Lindgren & Gilligan)
LMC - Walker & Reeder (2)
Facilitator (Unmacht) (1)
10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
11:30 a.m. to Noon
Noon to 1:00 p.m.
1:00 p.m. to 3:45 p.m.
3:45 p.m. to 4:00 p.m
4:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
6:30 p.m.
Friday, January 24, 2014
Opening & introductions
Welcome — Mayor
Expectations and session guidelines
Overview of 2013 Strategic Plan
2013 Goals Presentation — Mayor & City Manager
Moving Forward
Lunch
St. Anthony's long term vision /priorities
Break
Consultant's Reports
Engineer
Financial
Dinner
HR
Planning
Legal
Invitees:
Mayor & Council (5) & City Manager & Department Heads (6)
7:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.
9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
11:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m
11:30 a.m.
Open /breakfast on your own
Setting the stage — recap Thursday
Building the Pyramid for 2014
Prioritizing goals and action steps
Connect loose ends and debrief the session
Lunch