The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-12-01 CC Packet . . .:'. '. ., REVISED AGENDA ** CITY OF STILLWATER I' CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 98-29,1 Council Chambers, 216 North Fourth Str~!et December 1, 1998 REGULAR MEETING RECESSED MEETING 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. 4:30 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER . 'ROLL CALL STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director 2. Police Chief 3. Public Works Director 4. Community Dev. Director 5. Parks & Recreation 6. City Engineer 7. City Clerk 8. Fire Chief 9. B~lding Official 10. Ci~ Attorney 11. city Coordinator II ~ - 3ol, -~ ~ ""o&~ ~ 1 .~_~~ . ~o ~ t;,~ ~~ul November 10,1998, Regular and Recesse<:l Meetmgs; November 24, ~~ 7:00 P.M. AGENDA ~ - CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLLCALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1998, Special Meeting PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS II OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion ofthe Council meeting to address Council on su~jects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. !I CONSENT AGENDA * 1. Resolution 98-303: Directing Payment of Bills 2. Purchase of three portable radios - Police Dept. I! 3. Resolution 98-304: Establishing hourly pay rates for part-time tiretfghters 4. Resolution 98-305: Requesting variance to Rule 8820.9936 relating lito minimum design speed for Curve Crest Blvd Extension ii PUBLIC HEARINGS' 1. This is the day and time for the Truth In Taxation Public Hearing. Notice of the hearing was placed ~ in the Stillwater Gazette on November 25, 1998. ~ ~ 'b Q...w,,\~ ,,# ~C1"\ ~ A~ 2. Case No.CP A/98-2. This is the day and time for the public hearing th consider a Comprehensive Plan amendment establishing greenways, corridors, parks and open ~pace and trails for the expansion area. City of Stillwater, applicant. Notice of the hearing )Vas published in the Stillwater Gazette on November 20, 1998. ;1 ... } ~ ~ City Council Meeting 98-29 December 1, 1998 COMMUNICA TIONS/REOUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (continued) ADJOURNMENT Possible adjournment to executive session to discuss labor relations negotiations . All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion: There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which . event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda anc,i considered separately. .. Items in italics are additions to the agenda ~/\/ "#: . . . . . '. '."" AGENDA CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 98-29 Council Chambers, 216 North Fourth Street December 1,1998 REGULAR MEETING RECESSED MEETING 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. 4:30 P.M. AGENDA ;:,.. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director 2. Police Chief 3. Public Works Director 4. Community Dev. Director 5. Parks & Recreation 6. City Engineer 7. City Clerk 8. Fire Chief 9. Building Official 10. City Attorney 11. City Coordinator 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES November 10, 1998, Regular and Recessed Meetings; November 24, 1998, Special Meeting PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. CONSENT AGENDA * 1. Resolution 98-303: Directing Payment of Bills 2. Purchase of three portable radios - Police Dept. 3. Resolution 98-304: Establishing hourly pay rates for part-time firefighters 4. Resolution 98-305: Requesting variance to Rule 8820.9936 relating to minimum design speed for Curve Crest Blvd Extension PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the Truth In Taxation Public Hearing. Notice of the hearing was placed in the Stillwater Gazette on November 25, 1998. City Council Meeting 98-29 December 1, 1998 . 2. Case No.CPA/98-2. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a Comprehensive Plan amendment establishing greenways, corridors, parks and open space and trails for the expansion area. City of Stillwater, applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on November 20, 1998. 3. Case No.ZAT/98-7. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a Zoning Ordinance text amendment amending shoreland section requiring buffers along Browns Creek, its tributaries and wetlands. City of Stillwater, applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on November 20, 1998. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Snow plowing services for St. Croix Valley Recreation Center (Resolution) 2. Possible second reading of ordinance establishing administrative hearing process for alcohol and tobacco compliance violation 3. Possible second reading of ordinance amending Chapter 43 - Liquor, by clarifying inconsistencies in ordinance NEW BUSINESS 1. Review and comments on Browns Creek Watershed District Regulations . 2. Designating Legal Newspapers for 1999 (Resolution) 3. Renewal of tobacco licenses for 1999 (Resolution) 4. Possible first reading of ordinance regulating adult entertainment businesses PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (continued) COMMUNICA TIONS/REOUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (continued) ADJOURNMENT Possible adjournment to executive session to discuss labor relations negotiations * All items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a Council Member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. . . CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 98-27 November 10, 1998 REGULAR MEETING 4:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble at 4:30 p.m. Present: Absent: Also Present: Councilmembers Bealka, Thole and Mayor Kimble CouncilmembersCummings (arrived at 4:55 p.m.), Zoller (arrived at 4:47 p.m.) City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson City Engineer Eckles Finance Director Deblon Police ChiefDauffenbach Fire Chief Kallestad Administrative Assistant Kadin City Clerk Weldon STAFF REPORTS . City Engineer Eckles reported the Phase I annexation area has added a significant additional area to the street snow plowing list. Existing city crews will plow the new areas of the annexation area. However, because the recreation center is used as a park and ride lot, it has a high priority for snow removal. Because it will be very difficult for City crews to plow this parking lot in a timely fashion, he recommended consideration of using contractual services at an approximate cost of $1 0,000 to plow the lot for the 1998-99 season. Staff will be soliciting quotes and developing a contract for presentation at the December 1 st meeting. City Coordinator Kriesel introduced Chantell Kadin, Administrative Assistant, to Council. Her first day of employment with the City was November 9th. Her appointment as Y2K Coordinator is on the consent agenda. Mr. Kriesel informed Council a request was received from the City of Stillwater Chamber of Commerce for assistance during the 12 Days of Christmas celebration downtown. The request is for police assistance during the Twinkle Parade from 7-8 p.m. on Dec. 11th and public works/parks assistance with the downtown skating rink. Staff will be providing the assistance. Mr. Kriesel also reported the Parks Board had reviewed a request to change the fee structure for open walk at the recreation center by reducing the rate for seniors. They recommended the fee for seniors be reduced and be the same as the youth rate listed on the previous fee schedule. Doug Brady, manager of the recreation center, asked if the reduced fee should also include open skating. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to amend the fee schedule for open walking and skating by establishing a youth/senior rate. All in favor. . Mr. Kriesel recommended the purchase of a "demo model" snowblower with a new mower attachment at a cost of $21,016. This equipment would be used to remove snow from the base of the recreation center dome and mow the grassy areas at the recreation center. Another option City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 the recreation center dome and mow the grassy areas at the recreation center. Another option would be to hire a contractor for snow removal or renegotiate with the management company on . an hourly basis. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to purchase a Cushman snowblower with mower attachment contingent upon the availability of funds. All in favor. Recessed at 5 :05 p.m. Attest: Mayor City Clerk CITY OF STILL WATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 98-27 November 10,1998 RECESSED MEETING 7:00 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble at 7:00 p.m. Present: Also Present: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson City Engineer Eckles Community Development Director Russell Police Chief Dauffenbach Planning Commissioner Fontaine City Clerk Weldon Press: Mark Brouwer APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to approve the minutes of the October 20, 1998, Regular Meeting and the November 4, 1998, Special Meeting. All in favor. PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 1. Petition to maintain McKusick Lake at present level- McKusick Lake townhome owners. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to accept the petition from the McKusick Lake townhome owners to maintain McKusick Lake at present level. All in favor. 2. Petition requesting traffic change to Deerpath. 2 . . . . "' City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to accept the petition from the Deerpath neighborhood residents requesting establishment of no left turn on Olive at Deerpath and directing staff to prepare a report and return with a recommendation. All in favor. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller approving the consent agenda. All in favor. 1. Resolution 98-281: Directing Payment of Bills 2. Resolution 98-282: Rescinding Res. 98-270 and amending police salaries 3. Resolution 98-283: Permanent employment of Katherine Rogness as receptionist/clerk typist 4. Hang banner Nov. 13-22: American Education Week, Ind. School District 834 5. Extended Warranty and maintenance contract - two squad cars 6. Purchase of commercial washer and dryer - Fire Department 7. Resolution 998-284: Receiving excess right-of-way from Washington County and transferring to Newman Realty 8. Contractors Licenses: Jeanetta and Sons Excavating, St. Paul; MA Mortenson Co., Minneapolis; Macks Excavating, Inver Grove Heights 9. Resolution 998-285: Accepting work and ordering final payment to Bailey Construction for 1998 Sidewalk Improvements, Project 9817 10. Resolution 998-286: Accepting work and ordering final payment to MJ. Raleigh Trucking, Inc., for Fourth Street Ravine Improvements, Project 9726 11. Hang holiday decorations on Main and Chestnut Streets Nov. 23, 1998-March 8, 1999, City of Stillwater Chamber of Commerce 12. Resolution 98-287: Appointing Chantell Kadin as Year 2000 (Y2K) Coordinator PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Case No. CP A/98-1. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider the 62nd Street Area Plan for the area north ofTH 36, west ofCR 5 and east of Long Lake. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 30, 1998, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Community Development Director Russell reviewed the history of the project. Council had approved a scope of work and directed the preparation of the plan as an element of the Comprehensive Plan. Workshops and public meetings were held June 11th, August 13th, and a public hearing on October 12, 1998, to identify area issues, review alternative plans and select the preferred plan. The Planning Commission has approved the plan and recommends Council adoption. Sherri Buss, Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates (BRA) presented an overview of the plan which addresses circulation, stormwater management, land use, parks and open space, trails and utilities. . The Mayor opened the public hearing. Tim Nolde, 775 Green Twig Way, stated he was the owner of property in the area. He was pleased with the plan. His concerns related to green space. He will be working with neighbors and staff in 3 City Council Meeting 98-27 . l November 10, 1998 the development of plans for development. The plans will be brought before Council at a later time. John King, 1221 62nd Street, felt the plan was acceptable and thanked the participants for their hard work. . Dave Harvieux, 1172 Parkwood Lane, expressed concern with improper notice to residents, access to the development, buffers to be provided, increased density, and impact on property values. Sid White, 6286 Stillwater Boulevard N., stated he invited neighbors to a meeting to discuss possible future development on his property. Only six attended; Mr. Harvieux did not come. He wants to work things out with the neighbors, but they need to attend meetings that are held to discuss the issues. Dave Krinkie, 1148 Parkwood Lane, also stated he was not part of the process because of the inaccurate description in the public notice. He questioned how the property would be accessed. Mayor Kimble explained that would be determined during the PUD process. Gary Smith, 1110 Nightengale, thanked staff, Sherri Buss, and Council for the strong work with the neighborhood. He stated he attended six of seven meetings at which time he addressed access concerns. He requests Nightengale not be put through. Richard Huelsmann, 12610 62nd St. N., approved of the plan as proposed. He requested Council adopt the resolution authorizing the feasibility study for the area improvement plan (action later in meeting). He also requested Country Lane stay as it is. . The Mayor closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to adopt Resolution 98-288 adopting the 62nd Street North Area Plan as part of the Stillwater Comprehensive Plan and referring to the Joint Board. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 2. Case No. SV/98-67. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a request for a street vacation of the south 25 feet of Oak Street, along the north side of Lot 1, Block 6, McKinstry & Seeley's Addition to Stillwater. Frank Biedny, applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 30, 1998, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Community Development Director Russell explained a portion of the Oak Street right-of-way would need to be vacated in order to have two building sites and subdivide an existing lot into two 10,000 foot lots. The City Engineer had reviewed the request and recommends that the southerly 10 feet of the right-of-way be vacated. This would maintain a 15 foot utility easement for the storm sewer line. The Mayor opened the public hearing. . 4 City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 . Frank Kurth, Kurth Surveying, questioned the location of the vacation as recommended by the City Engineer. Council determined the decision of exact location could be worked out between the applicant and staff. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt Resolution 98-289 approving street vacation of the south 25 feet of Oak Street, along the north side of Lot 1, Block 6, McKinstry & Seeley's Addition to Stillwater, subject to final location approval of City Engineer. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 3. Case No. SUBN/98-59. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a request from Russ Kurth - Kurth Surveying, representing Frank Biedny for a resubdivision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, plus a 10 foot easement area McKinstry and Seeley's Addition located at 404 South Grove Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District into two lots of 10,095 square feet. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 30, 1998, and notices mailed to affected property owners. The Mayor opened the public hearing. There were no requests to be heard. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt Resolution 98-290 approving the resubdivision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, plus a 10 foot easement area McKinstry and Seeley's Addition located at 404 South Grove Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District into . two lots of 10,095 square feet. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 4. Case No. SUB/98-60. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a request from Mainstream Development Partnership for a subdivision request to subdivide a 21,000 square foot parcel into three parcels of 2,900 square feet, 4,200 square feet and 13,900 square at 219 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 30, 1998, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Community Development Director Russell explained the subdivision of the remaining Maple Island plant site into three lots would result in partitioning of the existing building into three potentially different ownerships. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Vem Stefan, Mainstream Development Partnership, explained several options were possible. One plan would be to take down the entire building. Other options would involve bringing in a smaller grocery store and developing warehouse space. The Mayor closed the public hearing. . Council determined the subdivision should be approved subject to the conditions of approval recommended by the Community Development Director: 1) a common wall agreement shall be prepared by the applicant and approved by the City Attorney providing for common or shared wall, 5 City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 utilities, parking and grounds area, and 2) city assessments shall be paid off or split proportionately among the three new lots based on size. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt Resolution 98-291 approving the subdivision request to subdivide a 21,000 square foot parcel into three parcels of 2,900 square feet, 4,200 square feet and 13,900 square at 219 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District, as conditioned. . Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 5. Case No. V/98-61. This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a request from Jon and Deanne Stratte for a variance to bluff setback (40 ft. required, 23' 4" requested) for the construction of an addition to a garage at 114 Lakeside Drive, in the RB, Two Family Residential and Bluffland Shoreland District. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 30, 1998, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Community Development Director Russell explained the variance applieation was before Council because the site is located in the DNR Bluffland Shoreland Zoning District. The bluff area in this location turns in to form a cove and does not face the river. This item was referred to the DNR for comment; no comments have been received. The Planning Commission recommended approval with the following conditions: landscaping shall be installed per applicant; and 2) DNR certification shall be received before building permits are issued. The Mayor opened the public hearing. . Jon and Deanne Stratte exlained their request to expand in or..aer to build a main floor laundry was for medical reasons, not recreational. The Mayor closed the Public Hearing. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to approve a variance to a bluff setback (40 ft. required, 23' 4" requested) for the construction of an addition to a garage at 114 Lakeside Drive, in the RB, Two Family Residential and Bluffland Shoreland District, as conditioned. All in favor. 6. Case No. SUP/98-66. This is the day and time for the public to consider an appeal from the Planning Commission for a request from Margaret Mitchell, D.C., for a Special Use Permit request for a chiropractic practice-healing practice out a residence at 1055 West St. Croix Avenue in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 30, 1998, and notices mailed to affected property owners. Community Development Director Russell reported the Planning Commission approved the home occupation permit request at their meeting October 12, 1998. The request was different from the previous application. The Council had previously authorized a temporary permit, with no option for renewal. The previous request included one employee and temporary use. This request has no outside employees and the use is permanent. Since the previous application, the home occupation use permit regulations have been revised. This request would be TYPE II Home Occupation which requires a Special Use Permit. A letter of appeal was submitted by five residents in the area. . 6 . . . City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 The Mayor opened the public hearing. Gayle Parizino, 148 Myrtlewood Court, felt it a travesty to be doing this to Ms. Mitchell. She moved away from a filthy neighbor and would have loved a quiet neat neighbor. Dennis Nelson, 1201 Amundson Drive, felt it set a precedent by renewing a permit that was "non- renewable". Rick Kuula, 1241 Amundson Circle, stated his property abuts the driveway. The drives are unique and a difficult access and small area for turning. Ann Cummings, 1060 Amundson Drive, stated Ms. Mitchell's supporters were patients whose views may not be the same as neighbors. She stated it is not a personal situation; the problem is a business in a rental property. Chris Torma, 1814 W. Pine, stated she is a patient and Ms. Mitchell is a value to the commupity. The practice follows Type II permit requirements. Kristen Hands, 1135 Amundson Drive, expressed opposition to the permit. Bonnie Roemhildt 1001 E. St. Croix Ave., stated a foster home previously in the area created more traffic. Also, an attorney operates out of a nearby home on Amundson. Meg Carlson, a friend of Dr. Mitchell, stated her children play in the yard when she visits. She was offended that neighbors assume children in the yard are those of clients. Mark Odegard, a patient, doesn't understand the problem when it is acceptable to have hundreds of people passing by on the golf course just 200 yards away. Margaret Mitchell, applicant, in response to neighborhood concerns that the business was in a rental property, stated she has attempted to purchase the house, but the landlord would not sell. Her use fits under the ordinance passed by the City. Why should others be granted a permit and hers denied? Paula Nelson, 1201 Amundson, stated commercial use should not be in a neighborhood. The Mayor closed the public hearing. Councilmember Thole stated the approval was not barred by the previous decision because this is a different application, there are no employees, and the ordinance has been revised. Council determined the specific standards of the ordinance are met. There is a presumption of validity and it is the obligation of the city to approve the permit. If complaints are received, a public hearing must be scheduled. Cummings suggested amending the ordinance to approve permits only for resident owners. The City Attorney explained the equal protection clause would prohibit that based on being discrimination against renters. 7 City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 Council determined the approval would be subject to the Planning Commission conditions of approval: 1) no exterior signage, 2) all parking on-site with maximum two non-resident cars at one time, 3) SUP shall be reviewed by Commission upon complaint; 4) SUP is issued to Margaret . Mitchell and non-transferable, and 5) no employees other than applicant. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to uphold the Planning Commissions decision and approving a Special Use Permit request for a chiropractic practice-healing practice out a residence at 1055 West St. Croix Avenue, as conditioned by the Planning Commission. Ayes: Councilmember Bealka, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: Councilmember Cummings UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Authorizing feasibility study for drainage and street improvements implementing the 62nd Street Area Improvement Plan. This item was discussed during the public hearing earlier in the meeting. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to adopt Resolution 98-292 approving the agreement with Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Assoc., ordering preparation of a feasibility report on the 62nd Street North area and a surface water management study of the Market Place area. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None . 2. Receiving City Hall area parking study Community Development Director Russell reported the parking study approved by Council in July of 1998 has been completed. Meetings were held with area property owners and organizations on September 2nd and October 1 st. He recommended Council implement the recommendations as resources are available. Glenn Van Wormer, SEH, presented the report and presented an overview of the study data, analysis, and recommendations for improvement. He recommended improvement of the City Hall lot which would allow greater utilization for non-City Hall business, thus alleviating street parking issues. He recommended parking restrictions that limit the time a vehicle may be parked on Fourth Street. This will convert prime parking spaces to high turnover spaces, thus encouraging area employees to park in designated spaces. Also recommended was designation of employee spaces and use of signing to designate usage at the Trinity Lutheran Church lot. The Mayor opened the public hearing. Don Valsvik, business manager for Trinity Lutheran Church, suggested a parking structure be built on the church lot. Trinity could provide the land on a long-term lease. Community Development Director Russell stated there is not a significant need for the City to have . a parking structure at that location or to help pay for one. Mr. Van Wormer confirmed the parking issues for City Hall can be handled on-site. 8 City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 The Mayor closed the public hearing. . Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to accept the City Hall Area Parking Study. All in favor. 3. Review and approval of Final PUD plans for Phase I Legends cottage lots. Ryland Homes, applicant. . Community Development Director Russell submitted amended conditions of approval from the November 9, 1998, Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission recommends the approval of the Final PUD with the following conditions: 1) garage setback shall be reviewed by the planning staff to ensure the percentage of garage setbacks are met; 2) all driveways shall be 12 feet at the street right-of-way; 3) all houses shall have a sidewalk running from the front entrance to the street, except a front facing driveway; 4) if any fencing materials are used it shall be the "traditional" fence design approved for the traditional and lakeshore areas; 5) educational material shall be provided to all residents describing yard maintenance practices to minimize impact on Long Lake; 6) additional landscaping with "Theves poplar" shall be considered along rear property lines to screen and break up backs of houses; 8) the builder shall provide the city with criteria for locating various house elevations next to and across the street to provide a variety of design and color; 9) a pallet of four shingle colors shall be offered for roof color; 1 0) other similar floor plans and home elevation may be built as approved by the Community Development Director; 11) windows shall be located on a minimum of three sides and no blank walls facing streets; 12) outside mechanical equipment shall be screened or located from neighbor and public view; 13) site landscaping shall be installed before residence occupancy or escrow established to pay 125% of landscape costs; 14) all front and side yards shall be sodded; and 15) declarations of covenants, conditions, restrictions and easements for the Legends project shall apply to the Ryland Cottage Development. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to approve the Final PUD plans for Phase I Legends cottage lots, as conditioned by the Planning Commission. All in favor. NEW BUSINESS 1. Recommendation for 1999 Street Improvements, Project 9902 Ordering Preparation of Report for 1999 Street Improvements In the memo from Shawn Sanders, Civil Engineer, staff recommended Council pass a resolution authorizing the preparation of a Feasibility Study for street, sidewalk, sewer and storm improvements on Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Streets between Willard and Hancock. These recommendations are based on the pavement Management Study by SEH, conducted in 1990, as well as by visual inspection. Councilmember Zoller suggested staff could at the same time also bid for the paving of the Jaycee ballfield parking lot. . Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to adopt Resolution 98-293 ordering the Preparation of a Report for the 1999 Street Improvements, Project 9902. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 9 City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 ' 2. Accepting report: Wilkins Street Storm Sewer Feasibility Study A memo from Civil Engineer Sanders stated earlier this year a resident at 216 W. Wilkins requested the City study the drainage issues in the area. As directed by Council, a study was completed and the project is technically feasible. City Engineer Eckles requested direction regarding a higher rate of assessment for certain projects for high and low benefit properties. . Councilmember Thole stated he will abstain from the vote because he is the owner of rental property in the affected area. Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt Resolution 98- 294 receiving report and calling a hearing for January 19, 1999, for Wilkins Street Storm Sewer Improvement, Project 9808. Ayes: Nays: Abstain: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Zoller and Mayor Kimble None Counci1member Thole 3. Update: Lily Lake Storm Water Improvements City Engineer Eckles updated Council that SEH has completed the plans and specifications for the Lily Lake Stormwater Quality Improvement Project. It appears a portion of various aspects will be eligible for MSA expense. Therefore, some portions of the improvements would be tabled to a future date when the streets in the area are being reconstructed. Plans are being reformatted to reflect changes; options for capturing grant money are being explored. No action necessary at this time. . 4. Report: AUAR Audit, Project 9626 City Engineer Eckles presented the detailed audit of the status ofthe Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR). The audit found the City has or is completing the vast majority of the 58 environmental protection strategies of the AUAR mitigation plan. Staff will be using this review to discuss possible cooperative efforts with the Browns Creek Watershed District, Soil and Water Conservation District, and Department of Natural Resources. Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adopt Resolution 98-295 adopting the 1998 Audit of the AUAR Mitigation Plan. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 5. Alcohol compliance violation model - establishment of process, procedures, and penalties Police Chief Dauffenbach reported the Police Department recently completed the alcohol compliance checks of 34 business in Stillwater. Four violations for selling to minors were found and have been submitted for prosecution. He recommended Council adopt presumptive civil penalties . and approve a process for administering civil penalties and hearing process. 10 . . . City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole to have the first reading of an ordinance establishing an administrative hearing process for alcohol and tobacco compliance violations. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 6. Accepting bid and awarding contract for Aiple Lift Station Improvements Bids were received on November 5th from Braun Pump and Controls for $43,667 and Quality Flow Alarms for $45,000. Staff recommended accepting the low bid of Braun Pump and Controls. Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adopt Resolution 98-296 accepting the bid and awarding the contract to Braun Pump and Controls for the Aiple Lift Station Improvements, Project 9819. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 7. Approving renewal of on-sale and off-sale liquor licenses for 1999 Approving new on-sale wine license for Rivertown Inn, Judith Dougherty applicant Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adop~~Resolution 98-297 approving the renewal of on-sale and off-sale liquor licenses for 1999. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt Resolution 98-298 approving new on-sale wine license for Rivertown Inn for 1999. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None 8. Possible first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 43 - Liquor, by clarifying inconsistencies in ordinance. City Attorney Magnuson reported, due to a legislative change, Council must determine the minimum seating requirements to qualify as a restaurant for the purposes of liquor licensing. He recommended 25 to be consistent with state requirements for wine sales. Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to have a first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 43 - Liquor, by clarifying inconsistencies in ordinance. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None COMMUNICATIONSIREOUESTS 1. Request for annexation - Kern Center property owners 11 City Council Meeting 98-27 November 10, 1998 . City Coordinator Kriesel reported City Attorney Magnuson had received a letter from legal counsel for the owners of the Kern Center located in Oak Park Heights requesting the City consider annexation of the Kern Center properties. . Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings directing staff to prepare a report and recommendation regarding the annexation request of the Kern Center property owners. All in favor. Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adjourn at 11: 1 0 p.m. All in favor. Mayor Attest: City Clerk Resolution 98-281: Directing Payment of Bills Resolution 98-282: Rescinding Res. 98-270 and amending police salaries Resolution 98-283: Permanent employment of Katherine Rogness as receptionist/clerk typist Resolution 998-284: Receiving excess right-of-way from Washington County and transferring to Newman Realty Resolution 998-285: Accepting work and ordering final payment to Bailey Construction for 1998 Sidewalk Improvements, Project 9817 Resolution 998-286: Accepting work and ordering final payment to M.J. Raleigh Trucking, Inc., for . Fourth Street Ravine Improvements, Project 9726 Resolution 98-287: Appointing Chantell Kadin as Year 2000 (Y2K) Coordinator Resolution 98-288: adopting the 62nd Street North Area Plan as part ofthe Stillwater Comprehensive Plan and referring to the Joint Board. Resolution 98-289: approving street vacation of the south 25 feet of Oak Street, along the north side of Lot 1, Block 6, McKinstry & Seeley's Addition to Stillwater, subject to final location approval of City Engineer. Resolution 98-290: approving the resubdivision of Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, plus a 10 foot easement area McKinstry and Seeley's Addition located at 404 South Grove Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District into two lots of 10,095 square feet. Resolution 98-291: approving the subdivision request to subdivide a 21,000 square foot parcel into three parcels of 2,900 square feet, 4,200 square feet and 13,900 square at 219 Main Street North in the CBD, Central Business District, as conditioned. Resolution 98-292: approving the agreement with Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Assoc., ordering preparation of a feasibility report on the 62nd Street North area and a surface water management study of the Market Place area. Resolution 98-293: ordering the Preparation of a Report for the 1999 Street Improvements, Project 9902. Resolution 98-294: receiving report and calling a hearing for January 19, 1999, for Wilkins Street Storm Sewer Improvement, Project 9808. Resolution 98-295: adopting the 1998 Audit of the AUAR Mitigation Plan. Resolution 98-296: accepting the bid and awarding the contract to Braun Pump and Controls for the . Aiple Lift Station Improvements, Project 9819. Resolution 98-297: approving the renewal of on-sale and off-sale liquor licenses for 1999. Resolution 98-298: approving new on-sale wine license for Rivertown Inn for 1999. 12 . CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING NO. 98-28 November 24,1998 SPECIAL MEETING 4:30 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Acting Mayor Thole Present: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole and Zoller Absent: Mayor Kimble (arrived 4:40 p.m.) Also Present: City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Fire Chief Kallestad Finance Director Deblon City Clerk Weldon Press: Julie Kink, Courier CONSENT AGENDA . Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Zoller to approve the consent agenda adopting Resolution 98-301 directing Payment of Bills. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole and Zoller. Nays: None Absent: Mayor Kimble Mayor Kimble arrived at 4:40 p.m. NEW BUSINESS 1. Awarding sale of Bonds, Series 1998B and 1998C. Ron Langness, Springsted, Inc. presented information regarding the sale of bonds. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt Resolution 98-299 awarding sale, prescribing the form and details and providing for payment of $2,500,000 General Obligation Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1998B. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt Resolution . 98-300 awarding sale, prescribing the form and details and providing for payment of $665,000 City Council Meeting No. 98-28 November 24, 1998 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1998C. Ayes: Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays: None . Mr. Langness announced he will be retiring at the end of 1998 from Springsted, Inc. He introduced Dave MacGillivray, who will be assuming Mr. Langness' services for the City. OTHER BUSINESS City Coordinator Kriesel informed Council he authorized the use of the Aiple property by the Minnesota Department of Transportation to do soil borings for the proposed bridge crossmg. City Attorney Magnuson requested consideration of amending the insurance section of the management agreement with S1. Croix Catering, Inc. for the S1. Croix Valley Recreation Center. He suggested S1. Croix Catering, Inc. be named as an additional insured under the City's insurance policy. This would provide increased coverage at a reduced cost of approximately $3600. Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adopt Resolution 98-302 amending the insurance section of the management agreement with St. Croix Catering, Inc. for the S1. Croix Valley Recreation Center by naming S1. Croix Catering, Inc. as an additional insured under the City insurance policy. . Motion by Councilmember"Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole to adjourn at 5:05 p.m. All in favor. Attest: Mayor City Clerk . 2 . LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION 98-303 Accounting Research Assosiation Membership & Subscription 160.00 Ace Hardware Paint, Brushes, Supplies 385.77 Action Rental Rent Log Splitter 40.69 AT&T Wireless Services Cellular Service 11.29 Community Volunteer Service 98 Allocation 6,180.00 Desch, Mark & Gloria Parking Lease & Maintenance 1,959.30 Ear' F. Anderson Skateboard Signs 155.52 Express Photo Photo Processing 45.20 Fred's Tire Company Kubota Front Tires 123.88 Fuhr Trenching lake Drive Extension, Manhole 28,535.50 Gordon Iron & Metal Iron Angle 15.98 Kriesel, Nile Lamp, Mileage, Housing, Coffee 299.91 Lind, Gladys Principal & Interest 1,854.00 Magnuson Law Firm Prosecution & Litigation 10,642.08 Maple Island Hardware Lock, Blades, Paint, Rollers 51.18 McCollister & Co. Shop Oil 171.17 Minn Blue Digital Reduction, Archiving 3,474.56 . Natl Society of Professional Ebgineers 98 Membership Dues 218.00 Oakland Construction Grading Escrow Refunds 3,000.00 Packaging Store Return Part, Uniforms 8.00 Polfus Implement Kubota Nuts, Studs 22.35 Reliable Corporation Paper, Post-its 310.12 Saint Croix Caterers Candy, Supplies 1,175.90 Saint Croix Office Supplies Ink Cartridge, Supplies 218.98 Springsted, Inc. Negotiate Management Contract 2,198.05 Stillwater Ford Extended Warranties 6,600.00 Stillwater Landscaping Brick Sidewalk-Nelson School 400.00 Wastebusters Disposal Nelson Street Dumpster 292.00 Yocum Oil Company Furnace Work 152.00 Zee Medical Service First Aid Supplies 48.96 MANUALS United States Postal Service Newsletter Postage 780.00 ADDENDUM TO BILLS Kallestad, Kim Mail Documents 2.75 . Legislative Associates Consultant Services 4,325.00 Northern States Power Company Electric and Gas Service 1,538.75 Adopted by the City Council this 1st day of December, 1998. APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Total Due: 75,396.89 . . -1J. . ". :\ r,. . . . ", LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION 98-303 Accounting Research Assosiation Ace Hardware Action Rental AT&T Wireless Services Community Volunteer Service Desch, Mark & Gloria Earl F. Anderson Express Photo Fred's Tire Company Fuhr Trenching Gordon Iron & Metal Kriesel, Nile Lind, Gladys Magnuson Law Firm Maple Island Hardware McCollister & Co. Minn Blue Digital Natl Society of Professional Ebgineers Oakland Construction Packaging Store Polfus Implement Reliable Corporation Saint Croix Caterers Saint Croix Office Supplies Springsted, Inc. Stillwater Ford Stillwater Landscaping Wastebusters Disposal Yocum Oil Company Zee Medical Service Membership & Subscription Paint, Brushes, Supplies Rent Log Splitter Cellular Service 98 Allocation Parking Lease & Maintenance Skateboard Signs Photo Processing Kubota Front Tires lake Drive Extension, Manhole Iron Angle Lamp, Mileage, Housing, Coffee Principal & Interest Prosecution & Litigation Lock, Blades, Paint, Rollers Shop Oil Reduction, Archiving 98 Membership Dues Grading Escrow Refunds Return Part, Uniforms Kubota Nuts, Studs Paper, Post-its Candy, Supplies Ink Cartridge, Supplies Negotiate Management Contract Extended Warranties Brick Sidewalk-Nelson School Nelson Street Dumpster Furnace Work First Aid Supplies 160.00 385.77 40.69 11.29 6,180.00 1,959.30 155.52 45.20 123.88 28,535.50 15.98 299.91 1,854.00 10,642.08 51.18 171.17 3,474.56 218.00 3,000.00 8.00 22.35 310.12 1,175.90 218.98 2,198.05 6,600.00 400.00 292.00 152.00 48.96 Memorandum ---------~.__...__._-_._-_._---------------------- ----. To: Mayor Kimble and City Council Members cc: Nile Kriesel From: Larry Dauffenbach, Police Chief Date: 11/18/98 Re: Portable Radio Purchase Last week the police department received a check from the Washington County Sheriffs Dept. for $3208.91. This money is the City's share of drug forfeiture J:l1.(;j~~Yfor several cases recently settled. )~~l~ like to use $2900.00 of this money to buy three new portable radios. I 1 ~ r f . . . '\ . . . " STAFF REQUEST ITEM I Department: Fire I Date: Nov. 19,1998 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST (Briefly outline what the request is) Establish new hourly pay rates for part-time fire fighters: Position Firefighter Firefighter/Engineer (Lieutenant assignment) Captain Assistant Chief 1999 waqe $9.00 $9.50 $9.50 $10.00 $10.50 Net increase $0.50 $0.50 $0.25 $0.50 $0.50 FINANCIAL IMPACT (Briefly outline the costs, if any, that are associated with this request and the proposed source of the funds needed to fund the request) The increase in wages is expected to increase the part-time pay budget from $80,000 in 1998 to $82,500 in 1999. The money is proposed to come from general funds. This pay raise and resultant budget increase is part of the proposed and approved 1999 budget. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ATTACHED Yes No X ALL COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK A MINIMUM OF FIVE WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING IN ORDER TO BE PLACED IN THE COUNCIL MATERIAL PACKET. Date: Nov. 19, 1998 Submitted by: Kim A. Kallestad, Fire Chief RESOLUTION NO. 98- ,. ESTABLISHING HOURLY PAY RATES FOR PART-TIME FIRE FIGHTERS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the hourly pay rates for part-time fire fighters, effective January 1, 1999, are as follows: Firefighter Firefighter/Engineer (Lieutenant assignment) Captain Assistant Chief $ 9.00 $ 9.50 $ 9.50 $10.00 $10.50 Adopted by Council this 24th day of November, 1998. Jay Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Morli Weldon, City Clerk '\ ~ f . . . . . . " MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Shawn Sanders, Civil Engineer S~. FROM: DATE: November 25, 1998 RE: Resolution for Requesting Variance to Rule 8820.9936 DISCUSSION Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc. (BRA) is currently conducting the feasibility report for the extension of Curve Crest Boulevard west of Stillwater Boulevard (CSAH 5) to North 620d Street. BRA is also studying water quality issues from Market Place to Long Lake, which includes enlarging the pond just west of Stillwater Boulevard and north of 620d street. The extension of Curve Crest Boulevard has been designated as a Municipal State Aid Street and the design and the configuration must meet State Aid standards. According to Minnesota Rules, Section 8820.9936 streets shall have a minimum design speed of30 M.P.H. (50 km!hr), this is based on stopping sight distance. If a 30 M.P.H. street is to be constructed, the new street would be located over the enlarged pond, so a lower design speed is needed. Since a lower design street does not meet state standards, the City needs a variance from the Department of Transportation to construct the street at a lower design speed. The Variance Committee for the State meets quarterly, with the next meeting upcoming this December. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council considers and approves the resolution requesting variance to Rule 8820.9936. An approved City Council resolution is required for submittal to the State Variance Committee. ACTION REQUIRED If Council concurs with the recommendation they should pass a motion adapting Resolution no. 98- RESOLUTION REQUESTING VARIANCE TO RULE 8820.9936. ,. RESOLUTION NO. 98 - . RESOLUTION REQUESTING VARIANCE TO RULE 8820.9936 WHEREAS, the City is proposing the construction of MSA 169-121-010, Curve Crest Boulevard west of Stillwater Boulevard to 62nd Street, to improve access control, and WHEREAS, because of the existing parcel configuration and water quality issues, meeting a 50 km!h design speed on the horizontal curve west of Curve Crest Boulevard's intersection with Stillwater Boulevard is not feasible, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Rules Section 8820.9936 requires a minimum design speed of 50 k.m!h based on stopping sight distance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: that the City of Stillwater, County of Washington, State of Minnesota requests a variance from the Minnesota Department of Transportation for the forementioned project. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and full copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Stillwater, County of Washington, State of Minnesota, at a duly authorized meeting thereof held in the City of Stillwater, Minnesota on the 1 st day of . December, 1998, as disclosed by the records of said City on file and of record in the office. City of Stillwater By Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest: Modi Weldon, City Clerk . . . LAK E-- I\::'::~~ ~.?::.. e.;; .. 211= (------~--"~~~;;;."';:~>.-...... '. ""'4t{~n '\. ......,.....,.. -- --- --- --- STREET I I: ___ --.1 / --- -::/'-yf' 1 ~~ I .;.' & 1 <',. , " /~--~~:;~~~/ ~/ ........ -il '-'" ~cl/ ........, ~'I " i"1 """" 1 ' ",0/ ~ --- -- 62ND - --- --- --- N~f) eA$O~ENI fi;( 11f . J .t;m (;':r-is,~rt';rlr:.; ,.{';(..~1J~ 'J t,S~ ;:;.ntlo.:.r )~:~ 7f.1S1~~ ~j~~';' fx.,:.!Ann l.1K l,!i; :..~~ 4.'}c {UNS~E':lI:IED :.oo!;m~) 'f,:-,;~ :}>":. :tl::: l~r~ "'.v~ ::i~-;f.t: LGr/.T:')N~ tJ5F' rJo5r:1.~tr~T ~>{ 2~:) ~.c ....!~ \:..;\"~p!.:c;n!.:~ V)C^:IC'~<) ",S'# ~r.L::...\:t DO: '91'~2e ---- -.----- -.------.- -"'- HIGHWAY R/W EASEMENT PER BOOK 2~' DEEDS PAGE 374 -.-- --::=.'.-..........--- 36 ~!~',~'"rr2'.,~~~!~ _ __ HIGHWAY . ... OUTLOT A :;.\:!:F<'f OU::.OT J. IS 'SL;S:JE~: :~) [PAl!'.l/..:;E. f..:W ;J1':UTY CA:;~~.!PJT ~ ----~~~:~!_~";;_:!!! No SeAl..' 0, .I .< "'- . .t I .I /~. / I ,i, It 'f,'r : ..,t"'c..!s q .. " < / -J' - --- --_:.=:.~ --. . . . ~ CITY OF STILLWATER 1999 Truth-in- Taxation Budget Hearing Diane Deblon Finance Director -. . . . 1999 Budget . :.a The City of Stillwater provides 'a wide range of services including: · Police & Fire protection' · Inspection, Planning · Street Maintenance, Engineering · Signs & Lighting · Administration, Elections · Finance · Lily Lake Arena, & the new St. Croix Valley Arena and Fieldhouse · Library · Parks · Sanitary Sewer, Storm Sewer, Solid Waste . The majority of the 'revenue to support these programs comes from: ',. · Property Taxes · Intergovernmental (State) Aid · User Fees for services 2 I' . . CITY OF STILLWATER 11999 Proposed Operating Revenue*1 (18.4%) Service Fees (34.4%) Intergovernmental (2.2%) Miscellaneous (2.0%) Fines & Forfeits (4.3%) Licenses/Permits (0.6%) Interest Revenue Type Interest Licenses/Permits Fines & Forfeits Miscellaneous Intergovernmental Service Fees Property Taxes Amount $42,500 $310,690 $147,500 $159,450 $2,483,372 $1,327,352 $2,744,793 $7.215.657 Total: * Includes General Fund and budgeted Special Revenue Funds, excluding Capital Outlay and Interfund Transfers 3 I . . . BUDGET PROCESS In June, each Department head is responsible for submitting a budget request for their department for the following year. The Finance Department compiles the departments submitted budgets and makes revenue projections for next year. . Salary and benefit projections are calculated by the Finance Department and are based on the various union contracts. 1999 budgeted wage increase is 3%. . All submitted budgets are then reviewed by the City Council. . The initial expenditure requests for 1999 were reduced by $3,066,350 for the proposed 1999 budget. 4 . 5 - . . . Property Tax System (Cycle) ASSESSMENT & CLASSIFICATION · Estimation of "market values" by assessors (Le. City of Stillwater contracts with Washington County to perform this service). - Assessors determine approximate selling price of each parcel based on current market conditions - A "property class" is assigned to each parcel based on the use of the property (Le. property that is owner-occupied as a personal residence is classified as residential homestead). - The property classification system defines the "tax capacity" of each parcel as a percentage of each parcel's market value. 6 . EXAMPLE: To calculate the tax capacity of a residential homestead property with a market value of $125,000: Market Value x $75,000 x $50,000 x $125,000 Class Rate = 1.0% = 1.7% = Tax Capacity $750 $850 $1,600 = Tax Capacity 7 t . . . Property Tax System (Cycle) - Continued LOCAL TAX RATES · Determination of a "property tax levy" for each local unit of government - Tax levy is set as part of the budget process - Formula: City Budget - All Non-Property Tax Revenues = T ax Levy - General tax levy subject to State Limit - Debt Service Tax Levy (to pay for bond issue payments) 8 t . . . CITY OFSTILLWA TER PROPOSED 1999 TAX LEVY General Tax Levy (at State Mandated Levy Limit) Debt Service Tax Levy Total Tax Levy* $2,737,793 'J~".. $1,499,592 $4,237.385 * Levy amount is a $20,399 increase over 1998 For comparison purposes, the 1998 tax levy is shown belo'tl: 1998 General Tax Levy 1998 Debt Service Levy 1998 Total Tax Levy $2,557,684 $1,659,302 $4,216,986 9 t . . . Property Tax System (Cycle) - Continued LOCAL TAX RATES (Continued) · Computation of "City tax rate" by the County ~ - "Total tax capacity" is computed by adding the tax capacities from all parcels within the City. - Subtracting adjustments from total tax capacity to result in "taxable tax capacity" - Taxable tax capacity is used to determine the City tax rate - Formula: City Levy + Taxable Tax Capacity = City Tax Rate 10 I . CITY OF STILLWATER PROPOSED TAX LEVY . . General 3731 281 993 488 2 737 793 408 015 2 329 778 9 328 277 24.975% PAYABLE 1999 Debt 1 499 592 o 1 499 592 223 490 1 276 102 9399931 13.576% Total 5 230 873 993 488 4 237 385 631 505 3 605 880 11 CITY OF STILLWATER . PROPOSED 1999 CITY TAX RATES DEPENDENT ON WHERE PARCEL IS LOCATED II City of Stillwater City Urban Rural #1 @ 80% Rural #2 @ 55% Urban Phased @ 60% I General I Debt I Tax Rate . Tax Rate 24.975% 19.980% I 13.736% 14.985% 13.576% 13.576% 13.576% 13.576% Rural #2 and Urban Phased are recent annexation areas . . Total Tax Rate I 38.551% ! 33.556% I 27.312%l 28.561o/J 12 .. . . Property Tax System (Cycle) - Continued INDIVIDUAL PARCEL TAX CALCULATIONS · Property tax bill is calculated for each parcel of property by County · Formula: Parcel Tax Capacity x City Tax Rate = Property Tax Bill ('Y2 due in May and 'Y2 due in October) 13 . . . CITY OF STillWATER PAYABLE 1999 PROPERTY TAX Ii I II General Tax Lev Debt Service IT otal Tax Levy % Change 7% -10% 0% INDIVIDUAL PARCEL CALCULATION: BClYClI;:)I~1$~flIClYClJ:)J~1~$~> ..................T........M)a........a~....ra........i~.b.e..I.et............................ . ................................?... ..........HH......ii..................?? .-r;~~~,~...... .... ......................H............... .............>...pH ......... ..... ..........1\........ ........ ..Tax. .......ProposedMa..keli>'TaxH ....et9pfl~~ .............VaIOs<...... .....~~........~Ci .............................~ij..................... .....Value ...i...Caaci...... ..........maxH..... $75 000 $750 $278.61 $75 000 $750 $289.13 $100000 $1 213 $450.61 $100000 $1 175 $452.97 $125000 $1 675 $622.23 $125000 $1 600 $616.82 $150000 $2 138 $794.22 $150000 $2025 $780.66 $200000 $3063 $1 137.84 $200000 $2875 $1 108.34 EXAMPLE of property tax calculation for $125,000 residential homestead: Parcel Tax Capacity Property Tax Equals Bill City Tax Times Rate $1,600 = $616.82 x 38.551% $10.52 $2.36 $5.41 $13.56 $29.50 3.8% 0.5% -0.9% -1.7% -2.6% 14 . . . Property Tax System (Cycle) - Continued OTHER FACTORS AFFECTING THE NET TAX BILL - Usually State changes in the property tax system (cycle) · Property tax rebates (20% for 1998 ) · Circuit breaker tax refund program · Classification changes · Valuation changes 15 . . . Impact of State Property Tax Legislation on Stillwater Levy Limits have been imposed on Cities for three years. Class rates were restructured' downward for properties, which results in a shift of tax burden onto residential properties. . All else being equal, reductions in class rates will cause a tax rate increase for the City. 16 . . . Problems with Constant Spending Calculation Uses 1998 actual tax levy for 1999 without any adjustments for inflation. (wages for union contracts are budgeted at 3%) Includes increase in state aid for 1999 Growth in City tax base from 1998 to 1999 is included . Annexation area is included in the tax capacity total, without a corresponding increase in expend itu res. III The 1999 reduced class rates are used to calculate the constant spending. (the State changes the class rates, not the City). 17 ALL TAXING JURISDICTIONS I Proposed Payable 1999 Tax* Based on Residential Homestead with $125,000 Market Value $616.82 City of Stillwater $439.63 County $110.96 Other Taxing Districts $870.38 School District Total Proposed Payable 1999 T ax* Total: $616.82 $439.63 $870.38 $110.96 $2.037.79 City of Stillwater County School District Other Taxing Districts * Information provided by Washington County 18 CITY OF STILLWATER How will your Tax Bill be spent? 1999 Proposed Tax Levy (35.2%) Debt Service $1,499,592 Total Taxable Market Value of Residential Homestead 75 000 100 000 125 000 150 000 200 000 $187.31 $293.45 $399.60 $505.74 $718.03 $101.82 $159.52 $217.22 $274.92 $390.31 $289.13 $452.97 $616.82 $780.66 $1 108.34 Dollars Sent for: o erations Debt 19 CITY OF STILLWATER 11999 Proposed Operating Expenditures* I (18.5%) General Government (16.2%) Streets & Engineering (2.2%) Unallocated Mayor and City Council $162,014 City Engineer $269,491 EJections $1 ,450 Streets $573,341 Finance $366,207 Shop $120,439 Administration $462,579 Signs & Lighting $174,000 City Attorney $203,164 Middle River $4,000 Plant/City Hall $110,221 Streets & Engineering $1,141,271 General Government $1,305,635 Unallocated $90,087 Police $1,617,194 Wash Co Recycling Grant $66,000 Fire $706,223 Unallocated $156,087 Inspection $195,768 Civil Defense $3,141 Special Events $21,000 Planning $209,961 St. Croix Valley Rec Center $514,019 DARE $3,500 Library $683,312 Public Safety $2,735,787 Parks $490,086 Culture & Recreation $1,708,417 GRAND TOTAL $7.047.197 * General, Library, Parks & Middle River Funds, excluding Capital Outlay and Interfund Transfers 20 . . . CITY OF STILLWATER PAYABLE 1999 DEBT SERVICE TAX LEVIES Fund # Type of Bond Certified Levy 306 1993C Capital Outlay $ 130,279 308 1994D Capital Outlay 21 ,961 325 1996A Capital Outlay 537,482 326 1997 A Capital Outlay 134,870 328 1998 Capital Outlay 150,000 399 1998A Sports Complex 350,000 328 1999 Capital Outlay 175,000 Total $ 1,499,592 21 CITY OF STILLWATER ITax Impact on Residential Homestead Properties i Payable 1998 and Proposed Payable 1999 Taxes $1,200 , i I $400 $1,000 C $800 :J 0 III 1998 E <( x III 1999 co I- $600 $200 75,000 100,000 125,000 150,000 200,000 Taxable Market Value of Residential Homestead Pa able 1998 Taxable Market Value $75000 $100000 $125000 $150000 $200 000 Actual Tax $278.61 $450.61 $622.23 $794.22 $1 137.84 Pa able 1999 Taxable Market Value $75000 $100000 $125000 $150000 $200 000 Proposed Tax $289.13 $452.97 $616.82 $780.66 $1 108.34 $ Chan e $10.52 $2.36 $5.41 $13.56 $29.50 % Chan e 3.8% 0.5% -0.9% -1.7% -2.6% 22 CITY OF STILLWATER 1999 BUDGET NEW POSITIONS/INCREASES WAGES & BENEFITS DEPARTMENT/Position REQUESTED: RECOMMENDED: FINANCE F.T. Overtime $11,802 $9,026 POLICE (2) F.T. Patrol Officers $88,084 $22,41 7 * P.T. (1/2) Secretary/Dispatch I $16,780 $0 Sergeant Promotion for Investigator $2,573 $2,573 Increase F.T. overtime $20,052 $20,052 FIRE F.T. Overtime $14,213 $14,213 P.T. (1/2) Secretary $16,930 $0 P.T. Volunteers $2,556 $2,558 INSPECTION F.T. Building Inspector $42,674 $21,311 * PUBLIC WORKS F.T. Code Enforcement $42,674 $0 STREETS F.T. LEO $41 ,960 $0 F. T. Promotion to Lead Worker $2,347 $2,347 F.T. Laborer (split with Parks) $8,485 * LIBRARY P.T. Library Assistant $7,940 $7,940 P.T. Library Associate $5,598 $0 ** P.T. Library Associate $15,018 $0 ** F.T. Assistant Library Director $10,587 $10,587 PARKS P.T. Overtime $1,077 $0 F.T. Laborer (split with Streets) $33,939 $8,485 * F.T. Secretary $38,739 $0 Reclassify 1 F.T. laborer to LEO $11,811 $11,811 SEWER F.T. Sewer Worker $42,327 $0 P.T. Sewer Worker $10,765 $10,765 PARKING P.T. Enforcement $25,951 $7,536 F.T. Overtime $1,128 $1,128 GRAND TOTAL $507,525.00 $161,234.00 * Hires on 7/1/99 ** Recommended $ decrease. Library Board to determine which classification to increase. 23 "'Ill. CITY OF STILLWATER 1999 CAPITAL OUTLAY ADDITION PROPOSED & DEPARTMENT REQUESTED (REDUCTION) RECOMMENDED Finance Office equipment $1,200 ($1,200) $0 Software $2,500 $2,500 Total Finance $3,700 ($1,200) $2,500 Administration Printer $1,500 $1,500 Microfiche reader $2,500 $2,500 Total Administration "$4,000 $0 $4,000 Police (6) Radios for squads $22,000 $22,000 Base radio $5,000 $5,000 (2) Computers $4,800 ($4,800) $0 Fax Machine $2,600 ($2,600) $0 Cassette Copier $1 ,200 $1 ,200 Speed Wagon $11,000 $11,000 (3) Squads with graphics & changeovers $80,050 $80,050 Lights and siren on captain's squad $1,200 $1,200 Investigator auto $17,985 $17,985 Total Police $145,835 ($7,400) $138,435 Fire (5) SCBA units $13,800 $13,800 Ladder truck $600,000 ($600,000) $0 (2) Computers $5,000 $5,000 Total Fire $618,800 ($600,000) $18,800 Building Inspections 4-wheel drive truck $22,000 $22,000 Computer (new position) $3,500 ($3,500) $0 Workstation (new position) $2,000 ($2,000) $0 Software $2,000 $2,000 Total Building Inspections $29,500 ($5,500) $24,000 Engineering Storage credenza & hutch (reception area) $1,100 ($1,100) $0 Furniture-Engineer's office $2,500 ($2,500) $0 Furniture-Waiting area $2,000 ($2,000) $0 Light table $1 ,000 ($1,000) $0 Software $4,000 $4,000 Computer upgrade $2,000 $2,000 Full format copier $5,000 $5,000 Total Engineering $17,600 ($6,600) $11,000 24 CITY OF STILLWATER 1999 CAPITAL OUTLAY ADDITION PROPOSED & DEPARTMENT REQUESTED (REDUCTION) RECOMMENDED Public Works P.W. Building $1,800,000 ($1,800,000) $0 Total Public Works $1,800,000 ($1,800,000) $0 Street (1) One-ton truck with plow $35,000 $35,000 Loader $115,000 $115,000 Loader plow $25,000 $25,000 (3) Radios $3,000 $3,000 Total Street $178,000 $0 $178,000 Shop Building Remodeling $15,000 ($15,000) $0 Truck $26,000 ($26,000) $0 Wire feed welder $3,000 ($3,000) $0 Hydraulic press-50 ton $1,600 ($1,600) $0 Gear puller set $1,058 ($1,058) $0 Total Shop $46,658 ($46,658) $0 Planning Car $15,000 $15,000 (2) Desks $2,000 ($2,000) $0 Credenza $1 ,000 ($1,000) $0 (2) Chairs $2,000 ($2,000) $0 Countertop $1,000 ($1,000) $0 Countertop with cabinets $1,000 ($1,000) $0 Scanner $1,650 $1,650 Software $1,000 $1,000 Total Planning $24,650 ($7,000) $17,650 Signs & Lighting New lights $0 $30,000 $30,000 Total Signs & Lighting $0 $30,000 $30,000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND: $2,868,743 ($2,444,358) $424,385 25 CITY OF STILLWATER 1999 CAPITAL OUTLAY ADDITION PROPOSED & DEPARTMENT REQUESTED- (REDUCTION) RECOMMENDED Library - Operations L.A.N. $26,000 $26,000 (2) Computers $3,800 $3,800 File cabinet $1,070 $1,070 Literature rack $1,000 $1,000 C.D. shelving $2,000 $2,000 Total Library - Operations $33,870 $0 $33,870 Library - Facility Tile roof repair $7,000 $7,000 Signs $2,000 ($2,000) $0 Cornice repair $25,000 $25,000 Stabilize exterior planters $25,000 ($20,000) $5,000 Plaster repair $10,000 $10,000 Fire escape repairs $6,000 $6,000 Lighting improvements $2,000 $2,000 Furniture repair/replacement $5,275 $5,275 Air quality improvements $3,000 $3,000 Total Library - Facility $85,275 ($22,000) $63,275 TOTAL LIBRARY FUND: $119,145 ($22,000) $97,145 Parks Fund Mower and attachments $35,000 $35,000 Aeravator with roller $12,200 $12,200 Flower gardens on Main Street $6,000 ($6,000) $0 Territorial Prison monument $15,000 ($15,000) $0 Lowell Park sidewalk $2,000 $2,000 Storage building $22,000 $22,000 Picnic shelter at Northland Park $6,500 $6,500 Re-wire backstop & ballfield at Northland $2,000 $2,000 Picnic shelter at Washington $6,500 ($6,500) $0 Picnic shelter at Lily Lake $6,500 $6,500 Play equipment at Lily Lake $3,000 $3,000 Drinking fountain at Ramsey $1,900 $1,900 Barbecue grill at Ramsey $2,100 $2,100 Basketball court at Schulenberg $29,000 ($29,000) $0 Fence at Staples ballfield $3,200 $3,200 Replace backstop at Staples $3,000 $3,000 Meadowlark Park Improvement $130,000 ($65,000) $65,000 Boardwalk at Lily Lake $20,000 $20,000 Flagpole at Lily Lake $2,500 $2,500 Land for new Parks $335,000 $335,000 TOTAL PARKS FUND: $308,400 $213,500 $521,900 26 CITY OF STILLWATER 1999 CAPITAL OUTLAY ADDITION PROPOSED & DEPARTMENT REQUESTED (REDUCTION) RECOMMENDED Sewer Fund (2) Emergency pumps $5,000 $5,000 Sewer plugs $1 ,000 $1,000 Portable fuel tank $1,000 $1,000 Trench compactor $2,000 $2,000 Bucket for backhoe $1,500 $1,500 Ventilation blower $2,000 $2,000 Everett lift station conversion $60,000 $60,000 Myrtle lift station conversion $45,000 $45,000 Mrytle lift station building $30,000 $30,000 Mrytle lift station generator $30,000 ($30,000) $0 TOTAL SEWER FUND: $177,500 ($30,000) $147,500 Parking Fund Ticket writing system $13,500 $13,500 Scooter type vehicle $13,000 $13,000 TOTAL PARKING FUND: $26,500 $0 $26,500 GRAND TOTAL - CAPITAL OUTLAY 1999: $3,500,288 ($2,282,858) $1 ,217,430 TOTAL Bonded Capital Outlay: General Fund: $2,868,743 ($2,444,358) $424,385 Library Fund $119,145 ($22,000) $97,145 Park Fund $308,400 $213,500 $521,900 Sewer Fund $177,500 ($30,000) $147,500 Parking Fund: $26,500 $0 $26,500 TOTAL Bonded Capital Outlay: $3,500,288 ($2,282,858) $1,217,430 27 '"". I .' . MEMO To: From: Subject: Mayor and City Council V Steve Russell, Community Development Director . Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adding Greenways, Parks and Trails Plan for City Expansion Area November 25, 1998 Date: The Comprehensive Plan and ADAR implementation program calls, for the establishment of Greenway Corridors, Parks and Trails System for the expansion area. The Plan designates edges of lakes, creeks/tributaries and wetland greenways. These greenways will be protected through application ofthe City's Shoreland Ordinance, Park Dedication requirements, Forest Protection Ordinance and Wetland Preservation requirements. A trail system is located through the major corridors connecting the expansion area from 62nd Street North to TH 96. Access to parks, schools and other neighborhoods or community destinations are provided by the trails. The trails would be recreational (paved or natural woodchip) depending on trail location and purpose. . The City's Open Space Committee, Parks Board and Planning Commission recommend the plan for adoption. Again, this Comp Plan Amendment has been referred to DNR and Stillwater Township for comment. Recommendation: Approval. Attachment: Greenway, Parks and Trail Plan. . Ii" '/1 .il "'''"..''"..,....:;''.''''~.&.~~..'':::r lfJ'l ." ~:-....-..-......-........-'::I~~-~~........__ . <-- Greenbelt --> ". I , ..-....------..--------..--~~--..:~~~ ........-....""~~""..""....-..--~- -~-~--.. \ ,f ...Ji~ ,> ......i<7 I _~~~ /I N....~i,;;f:; .....j) c ~ = "'~;/ I d. ....... -- Recreation X<,j "" "'" , a er ~ Expansion Area ~ Greenways, Parks and Trails \ , I Phase III ~ 1 "1 I III 1/ II! Iii III Ii !i~ 'I '/~ i ^ : i :!::: Ii Q) .c 1/ c: Q) Q) s... (!); ~. N ural I~ ~~ -B --~ ...,. ..... ,~-; I\~r.~ US ~k ---".""-~~;.,, II jPhase ilL I I V ti " II Recrealio II I I 1 I 1 I ~ II! !t 1'1 I ~ 1 I I I I I I I I I I I.t)I ~I I >,1 ~: II I I.. I' . ' ! .., ~ -~- ~ t--- r----t I Natural \ ro .~ ,- ~;rJl I II ~,l{:;; I~LLL ;:;. -111 ~ 0 -~ r-=/~ \rf N u Recreation Reef -- '~-.' - ,,-- ._.'''''''',.,'':~'-,...,....,..'''".: I lJ~ q~: ~ -- Trails D Bikeway I] -- Existing fL.. · -- Proposed [E] - County Trails -=- - Sidewalk - - Greenway -=- 700 0 700 , 1:12383 Proposed Road N 14,00 1 WTE S Schools ~ Recreation & Natural Parks Trailhead Parking City Limits 1'1 Expansion Areas \ I ~\..~~ Prepared By: x... 1...-- I-- Stillwater ~ ConnnunityDevelopment r ~ t-- and P131U1ing ~X-~~,~ r-- ....., n ",:-'" ',' , , " . ',. .. . , ."40 /.', )-' . MEMO . . To: From: Subject: Mayor and City Council ^----- Steve Russell, Community Development Director Zoning Ordinance Requiring Protection Buffer Zone Next to Lakes, Wetlands and Brown's Creek and its Tributaries November 25, 1998 Date: Provisions for Brown's Creek, Lake and wetland buffer areas are contained in the proposed amendment to the Shoreland Ordinance. This amendment helps carry out the AUAR Implementation Plan and City Comprehensive Plan. The draft Ordinance has been reviewed by DNR, Brown's Creek Watershed District and Stillwater Township. The Planning Commission reviewed the Ordinance at their meeting of November 9, 1998, and recommends it for approval. Before the Ordinance becomes effective, if will have to be approved by the Joint Board. Recommendation: Approval of amendment to Shoreland Ordinance requiring protective buffer areas. !j- ~> >( MEMO To: Planning Commission . From: Steve Russell, Community Development Director Subject: Zoning Ordinance Amendment Requiring Buffer Areas for Brown's Creek its Tributaries and Boundaries. Case No. ZAT/98-7 Date: November 5, 1998 This amendment to the Shoreland Ordinance will required a 100 foot buffer area from Brown's Creek and its tributaries and a buffer area of 25 feet from wetlands. The ordinance provides methods of protecting the buffer area from disruption and requires marking of the area. The ordinance amendment will further the natural resources protection policy of the Comprehensive Plan and Expansion Area ADAR Mitigation Plan. A draft ordinance has been referred to the DNR, Washington County SWCD (Brown's Creek Watershed District) and Stillwater Township for review and comment. Their comments have been addressed in this final draft ordinance. Recommendation: Approval and recommendation to the City Council. . Attachment: Shoreland Ordinance Amendment ZAT/98-7 Planning Commission Action on 11-9-98: Approval . Ii' ',40 ~; . Draft Shoreland Ordinance Amendment Wetland protection natural buffer zone. (a) Scope of Application. This section shall apply to any property included within any subdivision or building permit for which an application therefore was filed on or after the effective date of this section. This section shall not apply to any of the following: (1) Structures located within a wetland buffer zone on the effective date of this section or the remodeling, reconstruction or replacement of such structures provided that it does not take up additional land within the wetland buffer zone. (2) The construction or maintenance of public drainage facilities or temporary erosion control improvements. (3) The construction or maintenance of public utilities, provided there is no other practical alternate location and measures are taken to minimize impact on the resources. (4) The construction or maintenance of public or private trails provided the trail surface is not of impervious materials and the buffer zone is expanded, where possible, in width equal to the width of the trail corridor, including disturbed areas. . (b) Wetland Buffer Zone Required. On all public and private property which abuts a wetland, a wetland buffer zone shall be preserved or established and maintained in accordance with the following requirements: (1) Wetland protective natural buffer zone shall mean the area between a line delineating the wetland edge and a line parallel to and upland one-halfthe distance of the required setback (from Natural Environmental Lakes - 75 feet, Recreational- 37.5 feet, General Development Lakes, unclassified water bodies or wetlands - 25 feet). For Brown's Creek or tributaries of Brown's Creek, the buffer zone shall be 100 feet from the middle of the creek. If a wetland is associated with the tributary, the required buffer area shall be 100 feet from the center line of the tributary or creek or 25 feet beyond the edge ofthe wetland, which ever is greater. (2) Preserved buffer zones shall be inspected if invasive species are present and shall be removed or the buffer zone should be maintained in its existing condition. (3) Any buffer zone that is disturbed, shall be reestablished with natural plantings approved by the city; (4) A silt fence shall be installed and maintained protecting the buffer zone before construction begins and not removed until all land disturbing activities are complete and . disturbed areas reestablished; ~ ~-' : \ ..~ .:~ (5) All subdivision applications shall have wetland delineated and buffer zones marked and . required wetland building setbacks mapped. (6) When platting, the plat must show the wetland edge as approved by the city; and the wetland protective buffer zone. (7) The owner or occupant of any property abutting any wetlands shall not conduct or permit any of the following activities within the wetland buffer zone: I. vegetation alteration, including moving or clear-cutting; 11. topographic alteration, including but not limited to grading, filling, excavation and extractions; 111 construction, placement or installation of any structure; IV dumping or disposing of any material foreign to the natural state ofthe wetland (9) Land disturbing activity that is proposed outside of any established wetland buffer zone which may impact the buffer zone and/or wetland, shall require approval by the City Engineer before the activity begins. (8) The buffer zone shall be placed in a conservation/open space easement or dedicated for conservation purposes. (c) Wetland Buffer Zone Identified. The wetland buffer zone shall be identified by permanent . markers, approved by the city, at each lot line, but in no case more than 300 feet apart. All markers shall be correctly installed prior to final plat or subdivision approval. . Ii:' " . Memorandum November 24, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Klayton H. Eckles City Engineer SUBJECT: Snow Plowing Services for St. Croix Valley Recreation Center Staff is in the process of soliciting proposals for snow plowing services for the St. Croix Valley Recreation Center. The information will be presented to Council on Tuesday evening. . 1 ~ '. . ". ~ . . CITY OF STILLWATER MEMORANDUM DATE: December 1, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer SUBJECT: SNOW REMOVAL FOR ST. CROIX VALLEY RECREATION CENTER DISCUSSION Attached are copies of the bids for snow removal at the St. Croix Valley Recreation Center and sidewalks and trails. Lehmicke Construction was the low bidder. . RECOMMENDATION . Staff recommends council select Lehmicke Construction as the contractor for snow removal services. ACTION REQUIRED If council concurs with the staffs recommendation, council should pass a motion adopting a resolution approving the contract with Lehmicke Construction. ~. , ~ ~ PROPOSAL FORM FOR SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES CITY OF STILL WATER , 1998 . BIDS TO BE OPEN 2:00 P.M., FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27,1998. The undersigned being familiar with your local snow removal conditions, having made all necessary investigations and being familiar with all other factors affecting the conditions for snow removal hereby proposes and agrees: A. To supply and operate in accordance with the specifications prepared by the City of Stillwater, dated November 27, 1998, a Bobcat (or equivalent) with snowblower, bucket or angle blade, a loader, heavy plow truck(s), motor grader, and/or other snow removal equipment for removal and stockpiling of snow from the designated areas within the City of Stillwater. B. That the bid price shall be as follows: 1) For removal and stockpiling of snow from St. Croix Valley Recreation Center parking lot Proposed Equipment 77:? If p ~ t" III T J.I'1J l~ d y,J dtl LI j) ~ 4)( / ( D l./ -'1'.7 r. .Ill (f c! I'JI" LA) / Jh r y 41r/ 6 tI C lIt" r I ( a) 0-4" Snow Accumulation Price - $.J -2,J'7' (l 11 b) 4-8" Snow Accumulation Price - $ I '7 J:" d tJ . c) 8+" Snow Accumulation Price - $ f{ OI, tJ'1 2) For removal of snow from designated paths/walkways eight feet (8') in width, five hundred feet (500') in length and based on a four (4") accumulation of snow of average weight and density. Proposed Equipment /J "" C '1 r Lv , 'Th 7 I /D /p /.11/ b j,/cI t' ~ Unit Price - $ 6S'-; t1 ~ per hour Estimated time - / hours. 3) For removal of snow from designated paths/walkways, five feet (5'), in width, five hundred feet (500') in length and based on a four inch (4") accumulation of snow of average weight and density. L Proposed Equipment /l ~ C 't T W" / r~ rJ p 1/ c Jr e r Unit Price - $ ~i:l()Per hour . Estimated time - I hours. ,. C. D. . E. F. That prices bid will be firm and in effect throughout the winter season of 1998 - 1999. To furnish a cashier's check or cash deposit in the amount of $1 00 payable to the City of Stillwater and the same is subject to forfeiture in the event of default or failure to execute the prescribed contract within fifteen (15) days after submittal ofthe contract to me by the City. That the undersigned is familiar with the "Start Up Time" requirements of the specifications. That it is understood that bids may not be withdrawn for a period of thirty (30) days after the date and time set for the opening of bids. It is also understood that the City Council reserves the right to retain the certified check or cash deposits ofthe three lowest bidders as determined by the City Council for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days after the date set for the opening of bids. G. That in submitting this bid it is understood that the City Council reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive irregularities and informalities therein, and to award the contract to the best interests ofthe City. Respectfully submitted, L e /'/YI / c Ie t ~""J I Corporation/Partnership By I/'o iek/n~;clrt' Title ,1/ LV n t7 r .~ --/~ Business Addresj I I /7rrO L'Incl? I<C/ P111J I TW/lrt /J7 /} Ir'TI-'.r~ City State Zip . @ (f-;l - .s III -' / l,t..<< ~ Telephone Number Date: / / ~ ., / '1 r " / PROPOSAL FORM FOR SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES CITY OF STILLWATER ~ ) \'-~7 , 1998 . BIDS TO BE OPEN 2:00 P.M., FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 27,1998. The undersigned being familiar with your local snow removal conditions, having made all necessary investigations and being familiar with all other factors affecting the conditions for snow removal hereby proposes and agrees: A. To supply and operate in accordance with the specifications prepared by the City of Stillwater, dated November 27, 1998, a Bobcat (or equivalent) with snowblower, bucket or angle blade, a loader, heavy plow truck(s), motor grader, and/or other snow removal equipment for removal and stockpiling of snow from the designated areas within the City of Stillwater. B. That the bid price shall be as follows: 1) For removal and stockpiling of snow from St. Croix Valley Recreation Center parking lot Proposed Equipment CtXtq~o l(jrlJ~1' I fl')O\Ll)<' f)DvJ-trvLk) (c.+I.;>&- &"'(,lJ~/') -\c\~L'\ tr~,,---\-c.r w tSc\d b )/.,,10( +- f> lbLU a) 0-4" Snow Accumulation Price - $ S0D,bO b) 4-8" Snow Accumulation Price - $ Be, 0 t D D c) 8+" Snow Accumulation Price - $ Sf? D. D 0 . 2) For removal of snow from designated paths/walkways eight feet (8') in width, five hundred feet (500') in length and based on a four (4") accumulation of snow of average weight and density. Proposed Equipment Unit Price - $ per hour Estimated time - hours. 3) For removal of snow from designated paths/walkways, five feet (5'), in width, five hundred feet (500') in length and based on a four inch (4") accumulation of snow of average weight and density. Proposed Equipment Unit Price - $ per hour . Estimated time - hours. .. " ,-4. \. . C. That prices bid will be firm and in effect throughout the winter season of 1998 - 1999. D. To furnish a cashier's check or cash deposit in the amount of$100 payable to the City of Stillwater and the same is subject to forfeiture in the event of default or failure to execute the prescribed contract within fifteen (15) days after submittal of the contract to me by the City. E. That the undersigned is familiar with the "Start Up Time" requirements ofthe specifications. F. That it is understood that bids may not be withdrawn for a peIj.od of thirty (30) days after the date and time set for the opening of bids. It is also understood that the City Council reserves the right to retain the certified check or cash deposits of the three lowest bidders as determined by the City Council for a period not to exceed thirty (30) days after the date set for the opening of bids. G. That in submitting this bid it is understood that the City Council reserves the right to reject any and all bids, to waive irregularities and informalities therein, and to award the contract to the best interests of the City. Respectfully submitted, I _ q~ J-n c.~ . ~O ,.BD)(~~I . Business Address S-t~ \\w~\ ,( City f<\" State 5S0~~ Zip ~ 3q . J t4l{)~ Telephone Number Date: I \ - ~ ,- tl ~ RESOLUTION NO. 98 ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT TO LEHMICKE CONSTRUCTION FOR SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES AT THE SAINT CROIX VALLEY RECREATION CENTER WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for snow removal services at the St. Croix Valley Recreation Center, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and bids were received complying with the advertisement; and WHEREAS, bid results were presented to Council, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA: The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Lehmicke Construction in the name of the City of Stillwater for Snow Removal Services at the St. Croix Valley Recreation Center, in accordance with the specifications prepared by the City of Stillwater, date November 27, 1998. Adopted by the City Council this 1 st day of December, 1998. Acting Mayor Attest: Modi Weldon, City Clerk .j.., , ~, } . . . , f\ . . . ORDINANCE NO. A.N ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING ADMINISTRATIVE CITATIONS AND CIVIL PENALTIES The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: 1. Amending. The City Code of the City ofSti11water is amended by adding Sections 22-9 Administrative Citations and Civil Penalties that shall hereafter read as follows: "Sec. 22-9. Administrative Citations and Civil Penalties. Subd. 1. Purpose. The City Council fmds that there is a need for alternative methods of enforcing the City Code. While criminal fines and penalties have been the most frequent enforcement mechanism, there are certain negative consequences for both the City and the accused. The delay inherent in that system does not ensure prompt resolution. Citizens resent being labeled as criminals for violations of administrative regulations. The higher burden of proof and the \ potential of incarceration do not appear appropriate for most administrative violations. The criminal process does not always regard City Code violations as being important. Accordingly, the City Council finds that the use of administrative citations and the imposition of civil penalties is a legitimate and necessary alternative method of enforcement. This method of enforcement shall be in addition to any other legal remedy which may be pursued for City Code violations. Subd. 2. General Provisions. (1) A violation of Chapter 43 of the City Code (Liquor) or Chapter 41, Sec.41-2. Tobacco. or the acts prohibited in those sections are an administrative offense, which may be subject to an administrative citation and civil penalties pursuant to this chapter. Each day a violation exists constitutes a separate offense. (2) An administrative offense may be subject to civil penalty not exceeding two thousand and nolI 00 dollars ($2,000.00). . , (3) The City Council must adopt by Resolution a schedule of fines for offenses initiated by administration citation. The City Council is not bound by that schedule when a matter is appealed to it for administrative review. The City Council may adopt a schedule of fees to be paid to administrative hearing officers. '. (4) The City Coordinator must adopt procedures for administering the administrative citation program. Subd. 3. Administrative Citation. (1) The Chief of Police of his designee may issue an administrative citation upon belief that a violation has occurred. The citation must be issued in person or by mail to the person responsible for the violation or attached to the motor vehicle in the case of a vehicular offense. The citation must state the date, time and nature of the offense, the name ofthe issuing officer, the amount of the scheduled fme, and the manner for paying the fine or appealing the citation. (2) The person responsible for the violation must either pay the scheduled fine or request a hearing within seven (7) days after issuance. Payment of the fine constitutes admission of the violation. A late payment fee often percent (10%) of the scheduled fine amount shall be imposed in accordance with Subd. 7. . Subd. 4. Administrative Hearing. (I) The City Council shall periodically approve a list of hearing officers from which the City Coordinator will randomly select a hearing officer to hear and determine a matter for which a hearing is requested. The accused shall hav~ the right to request no later than five (5) days before the date of the hearing that the assigned hearing officer be removed from the case. One request for removal for each case will be granted automatically by the City Coordinator. A subsequent request must be directed to the assigned hearing officer who will decide whether he or she cannot fairly and objectively review the case. The City may remove a hearing officer only by requesting that the assigned hearing officer find that he or she cannot fairly and objectively review the case. If a finding is made, the officer must remove himself or herself from the case, and the City Coordinator must assign another hearing 2 . :, . officer. The hearing officer is not a judicial officer but is a public officer as defined by Minnesota Statute 9609.415. The hearing officer must not be a City employee. The City Coordinator must establish a procedure for evaluating the competency of the hearing officers, including comments from accused violators and City Staff. These reports must be provided to the City COlll1cil. . (2) Upon the hearing officer's own initiative or upon written request of an interested party demonstrating the need, the officer may issue a subpoena for the attendance of a witness or the production of books, papers, records or other documents that are material to the matter being heard. The party requesting the subpoena shall be responsible for serving the subpoena in the manner provided for civil actions and for paying the fees and expenses of any witness. A person served with a subpoena may file and objection with the hearing officer promptly but no later than the time specified in the subpoena for compliance. The officer may cancel or modify the subpoena if it si unreasonable or oppressive. Any person who, without just cause, fails or refuses to attend and testify or to produce the required documents in obedience to a subpoena shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Alternatively, the party requesting the subpoena may seek an order from District Court directing compliance. (3) Notice of the hearing must be served in person or by mail on the person responsible for the violation at least ten (10) days in advance, unless a shorter time is accepted by all parties. At the hearing, the parties will have the opportunity to present testimony and question any witnesses, but strict rules of evidence shall not apply. The hearing officer must tape record the hearing and receive testimony and exhibits. The officer must receive and give weight to evidence, including hearsay evidence, which possesses probative value commonly accepted by reasonable and prudent people in the conduct oftheir affairs. (4) The hearing officer has the authority to determine that a violation occurred, to dismiss a citation, to impose the scheduled fine, and to reduce, stay or waive a scheduled fine either unconditionally or upon compliance with appropriate conditions. When imposing a penalty for a violation, the hearing officer may consider any or all of the following factors: . .., .J a. b. The duration of the violation; The frequency or reoccurrence ofthe violation; The seriousness of the violation; The history of the violation; The violator's conduct after issuance of the notice of hearing; The good faith effort by the violator to comply; The economic impact of the penalty on the violator; The impact of the violation upon the community; and Any other factors appropriate to a just result. c. d. e. f. g. h. 1. (5) The decision of the hearing officer is final, however, the hearing officer's decision may be appealed to the City Council by submitting a request in writing to the City Clerk within ten (10) days after the hearing officer's decision. The failure to pay the fine or request an appeal within thirty (30) days after the citation of the failure to attend the hearing constitutes a waiver of the violator's rights to an administrative hearing and an admission of the violation. A hearing officer may waive this result upon good cause shown. Examples of "good cause" are: death or incapacitating illness of the accused; a court order requiring the accused to appear for another hearing at the time; and lack of proper service of the citation or notice of the hearing. "Good cause" shall not include: forgetfulness and intentional delay. (6) Subd.5. Administrative Review. (1) The appeal must be heard by the City Council after notice served in person or by registered mail at least ten (10) days in advance. The parties to the hearing shall have an opportunity to present oral or written arguments regarding the hearing officer's decision. (2) The City Council must consider the record, the hearing officer's decision, and any additional arguments before making a determination. The Council is not bound by the hearing officer's decision, but may adopt all or part of the officer's decision. The Council's decision must be in writing. 4 . , . . . '~ , . (3) If the Council makes a finding of a violation, if may impose a civil penalty not exceeding two thousand and nollOO dollars ($2,000.00) per day per violation, and may consider any or all of the factors contained in Subd. 4(4). The Council may also reduce, stay or waive a fine unconditionally or based on reasonable and appropriate conditions. ( 4) In addition to imposing a civil penalty, the,Council may suspend or revoke any City issued license, permit, or other approval associated with the violation. Subd.6. Judicial Review. An aggrieved party may obtain judicial review of the decision of the hearing officer or the City Council in accordance with State law. Subd.7. Recovery of Civil Penalties. (1) If a civil penalty is not paid within the time specified, it shall constitute: a. A lien upon the real property upon which the violation occurred if the property or improvements on the property \ was the subject of the violation and the property owner was found responsible for that violation; or A personal obligation of the violator in all other situations. . b. (2) A lien may be assessed against the property and collected in the same manner as taxes. (3) A personal obligation may be collected by any appropriate legal means. (4) A late payment fee often percent (10%) of the fine must be assessed for each thirty (30) day period, or part thereof, that the fine remains unpaid after the due date. (5) Failure to pay a fine is grounds for suspending or revoking a license associated with the violation. Subd. 8. Criminal Penalties. The following are misdemeanors, punishable in accordance with State law: (1) Failure, without good cause, to pay a fine or request a hearing within thirty (30) days after issuance of an administrative citation. . 5 (2) Failure, without good cause, to appear at a hearing which was scheduled under Subd. 4. (3) Failure to pay a fine imposed by a hearing officer within thirty (30) days after it was imposed, or such other time as may be established by the hearing officer, unless the matter is appealed under Subd. 5. (4) Failure to pay a fine imposed by the City Council within thirty (30) days after it was imposed, or such other time as may be established by the City CounciL" 2. Savings. Except for this change, the City Code of the City of Stillwater will remain in full force and effect.. 3. Effective Date. This ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its publication according to law. 1998. Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this _ day of CITY OF STILLWATER Jay 1. Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Modi Weldon, Clerk 6 , . .; ., - ~, RESOLUTION NO. A. Purpose. The purpose of this Resolution is to establish a standard by which the City Council determines the amount of civil fmes, length of license suspensions and the property of revocations, and shall apply to all premises licensed and individuals charged under the administrative citation ordinance. These penalties are presumed to be appropriate for every case; however, the Hearing Examiner or City Council may deviate in an individual case where the Hearing Examiner or City Council fmds that there exists substantial reasons making it more appropriate to deviate, such as, but not limited to, a licensees's efforts in combination with the State or City to prevent the sale of alcohol and tobacco to minors. When deviating from these standards, the Council will provide written findings that support the penalty selected. Presumptive Penalties for Violations. The minimum penalties for convictions or violations must be presumed as follows (unless specified, numbers below indicate consecutive day's suspension).: . B. . \.ppearance - co 0 Type of Violation 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1. Commission of a felony Revocation NA NA NA related to the licensed activity. 2. Sale of alcoholic beverages Revocation NA NA NA while license is under suspension. 3. Sale/purchase of alcoholic $250.00 $500.00 & $750.00 & Revocation beverages to/be under-age- 3-day 18-day person. suspension suspension 4. Sales of alcoholic beverages to $250.00 $500.00 & $750.00 & Revocation obviously intoxicated person. 3-day 18-day suspension suspension 5. After hours sales of alcoholic 3 6 18 Revocation beverages. 6. After hours display or 3 6 18 Revocation consumption of alcoholic beverages. 7. Refusal to allow City 5 15 Revocation NA inspectors or Police admission to inspect premises 8. Illegal gambling on premises. 3 6 18 Revocation 9. Failure to take reasonable 3 6 18 Revocation steps to stop person from leaving premises with alcoholic beverages. A Al h I . ~ . . . Appearance - Tobacco Type of Violation 1st 2nd 3rd 1. Sale/purchase to/by underage person. $75.00 $200.00 $250.00 and Revocation 2. Unlawful Vending Machine $75.00 $200.00 $250.00 and Revocation 3. Unlawful Self Service Sale $75.00 $200.00 $250.00 and Revocation 4. Refusal to allow City inspectors or Police $75.00 $200.00 admission to inspect premises. $250.00 and Revocation 5. All other tobacco violations $75.00 $200.00 $250.00 and Revocation . . . ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE CHAPTER 43 LIQUOR THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: I. AMENDING. The City Code of the City of Stillwater is amended as follows: ; Section 43-74, Subd. 2, Change 30 guests to "25 guests". Section 43-70, Subd. 1 (2), Change to read as follows: a. b. "Restaurants as defined by Minn. Stat. ~340 A.I0 1 Subd. 25, having a minimum seating capacity of 25 guests". II. SAVINGS: In all other ways the City Code will remain in full force and effect. III. This ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 1st day of December, 1998. By: Acting City Mayor ATTEST: Acting City Clerk , 'l CITY OF STILLWATER . RESOLUTION. IT IS RESOLVED that the City of Stillwater enter into MnlDOT Agreement No. 77535 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes: To provide for a lump sum,payment in the amount of$267,719.25 by the State to the City as the State's full and complete share of the costs of the design, construction and construction engineering forthe park and ride lot constructed in connection with the construction of the Stillwater Community Center/Sports Facility at Curve Crest Boulevard and Market Drive near Trunk Highway No. 36 within the corporate City limits un?er State Project No. 8214-135 (T.H. 36=045). IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and the authorized to execute the Agreement. are (Title) CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota . County of Washington I certify that the above Resolution is an accurate copy of the Resolution adopted by the Council of the City of Stillwater at an authorized meeting held on the day of , 1998, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. (Signature) Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1998 (Type or Print Name) (Title) Notary Public My Commission Expires . ~ ~ ., '\- * .0 .:s ~ ."<:'" ...... . PRELETTING AND ESTIMATING SECTION STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COOPERATIVE CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT Mn/DOT AGREEMENT NO. . 77535 S.P. 8214-135 (T.H. 36=045) State Funds The State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, and The City of Stillwater Re: State lump sum payment for park and ride lot design and construction by the City at Curve Crest Boulevard and Market Drive near T.H. 36 AMOUNT ENCUMBERED S267,719.25 AMOUNT RECEIVABLE (None) . MnlDOT Accounting Information: Fund: Org/Sub: Amount: Vendor Number: Fiscal Year: Agency: T - 7 9 Contract: Order: NumberlDate/Entry Initials N umberlDate/S ignatures {Individual signing certifies Illalfunds have been encumbered as required by Minn. Stal. S IM.I5.! Budget Office: (Authorized Signature) THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, hereinafter referred to as the "State" and the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, acting by and through its City Council, hereinafter referred to as the "City". e 1 .~ . . e 77535 WHEREAS, the City performed park and ride lot construction in connection with the construction of the Stillwater Community Center/Sports Facility at Curve Crest Boulevard and Market Drive near Trunk Highway No. 36 within the corporate City limits in accordance with City-prepared plans, specifications and/or special provisions under State Project No. 8214-135 (T.H. 36=045); and WHEREAS, the City has requested reimbursement by the State for the costs of the design ($16,649.25), and construction and construction engineering ($251,070.00) of the park and ride lot in a lump sum amount equal to $267,719.25; and WHEREAS, because the park and ride lot will contribute to the overall efficiency of the State's trunk highway system, the State is willing to pay the City the lump sum amount of $267,719.25 as hereinafter set forth; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Section 161.20, subdivision 2 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to make arrangements with and cooperate with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and improving the trunk highway system. IT IS, THEREFORE, MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I - CONSTRUCTION BY THE CITY The City performed the Stillwater Community Center/Sports Facility construction and State-requested park and ride lot construction under City plans, specifications and/or special provisions, which are on file in the office of the city's Engineer, and are made a part hereof by reference with the same force and effect as though fully set forth herein. ARTICLE II _ CITY'S CERTIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION PERFORMED The City hereby certifies and attests to the satisfactory performance and completion of all State cost park and ride lot construction in accordance with City plans, specifications and/or special provisions. 2 77535 ARTICLE III - PAYMENT BY THE STATE The State shall pay to the City, as the State's full and complete share of the costs of the park and ride lot design, construction and construction engineering performed in connection with the construction of the Stillwater Community Center/Sports Facility at Curve Crest Boulevard and Market Drive near Trunk Highway No. 36 within the corporate City limits under State Project No. 8214-135 (T.H. 36=045), a lump sum in the amount of $267,719.25. Payment by the State to the City shall be made only after all of the following conditions have been met: A. Execution and approval of this Agreement and the State's transmittal of same to the City. B. Encumbrance of State funds in the amount of $267,719.25. C. Receipt by the State from the City of certified documentation for all of the right-of-way and easement acquisition required for State cost park and ride lot construction, and the approval of that documentation by the State's Land Management Director at St. Paul. D. Receipt by the State of a formal invoice (original and signed) in the amount of $267,719.25. ARTICLE IV - GENERAL PROVISIONS Section A. Maintenance by the City Upon satisfactory completion of the park and ride lot construction performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper maintenance of the lot and all of the facilities a part thereof, without cost or expense to the State. Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, snow, ice and debris removal, resurfacing and/or seal coating and any other maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the lot in a safe and usable condition. 3 . . . 77535 . Upon satisfactory completion of the storm sewer facilities construction performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper maintenance of those facilities, without cost or expense to the State. Upon satisfactory completion of the walkways construction performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper maintenance of the walkways, without cost or expense to the State. Maintenance shall include, but not be limited to, snow, ice and debris removal and any other maintenance activities necessary to perpetuate the walkways in a safe and usable condition. . Upon satisfactory completion of the lighting facilities construction performed within the corporate City limits under the construction contract, the City shall provide for the proper maintenance of and keep in repair those facilities, without cost or expense to the State. The.City shall also provide the necessary electrical energy for their operation, without cost or expense to the ~tate. Section B. Additional Drainage Neither party to this Agreement shall drain any additional drainage into the storm sewer facilities constructed under the construction contract, that was not included in the drainage for which the storm sewer facilities were designed, without first obtaining permission to do so from the other party. The drainage areas served by the storm sewer facilities constructed under the construction contract are shown in a drainage area map, EXHIBIT "Drainage Area", which is on file in the office of the State's Division Hydraulics Engineer at Oakdale and is made a part hereof by reference with the same force and effect as though fully set forth herein. . Section C. Future Responsibilities Upon satisfactory completion of the park and ride lot construction performed within the corporate City limits under the construction 4 77535 contract, the City shall accept ownership of the park and ride lot . and shall accept full and total responsibility and all obligations and liabilities arising out of or by reason of the use, operation, maintenance, repair and/or reconstruction of the park and ride lot and all of the facilities a part thereof constructed hereunder, without cost or expense to the State. Section D. Examination of Books. Records, Etc. As provided by Minnesota Statutes Section 16C.05, subdivision 5, the books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the State and the City relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the State and the City, and either the legislative auditor or the state auditor as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from final payment. Section E. Claims All employees of the City and all other persons employed by the City in the perf?rmance of contract construction, construction engineering . and/or maintenance covered under this Agreement shall not be considered employees of the State. All claims that arise under the Worker's Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of the employees while so engaged and all claims made by any third parties as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of the employees while so engaged on contract construction, construction engineering and/or maintenance covered under this Agreement shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the State. Section F. Nondiscrimination The provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59 and of any applicable law relating to civil rights and discrimination shall be considered part of this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. Section G. Agreement Approval Before this Agreement shall become binding and effective, it shall be approved by a City Council resolution and receive approval of State 4It 5 . . . 77535 and City officers as the law may provide in addition to the Commissioner of Transportation or his authorized representative. ARTICLE V - AUTHORIZED AGENTS The State's Authorized Agent for the purpose of the administration of this Agreement is Maryanne Kelly-Sonnek, Municipal/Utility Agreements Engineer, or her successor. Her current address and phone number are 395 John Ireland Boulevard, Mailstop 682, St. Paul, MN 55155, (651) 296-0969. The City's Authorized Agent for the purpose of the administration of this Agreement is Klayton Eckles, City Engineer, or his successor. His current address and phone number are 216 North 4th Street, Stillwater, MN 55082, (651) 439-6121. 6 77535 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement by their authorized officers. . DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CITY OF STILLWATER Recommended for approval: By Mayor By Division Engineer Date Approved: By By State Design Engineer Date (Title and Date) OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION Approved as to form and execution: . By By Assistant Attorney General Date ooooooooo~oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo State of Minnesota County of Washington This Agreement was acknowledged before me this day of , 1998, by and (Name) , the Mayor and (Name) (Title) of the City of Stillwater, and they executed this Agreement on behalf of the municipality intending to be bound thereby. My Commission Expires ~ '~ ~~-~. ~o ..;s' , " c.:," . . Notary Public 7 ~'J(./7 ,j.~" .:P- . Memorandum November 25, 1998 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Klayton H. Eckles ILt City Engineer SUBJECT: Request for Comments on Proposed Browns Creek Watershed District Rules DISCUSSION: . Attached is a Statement of Need and Reasonableness for Proposed Rules for the Watershed District as well as a copy of the proposed rules. These rules, in current form, could have significant impact and ramifications on the City's procedures and process for Planning and Land Use Control. Also, the District has not yet "endorsed" the AUAR Mitigation Plan, which would avoid the need for Stillwater to implement many of the restrictions in the rules. The district is asking for comments; from affected agencies and the public. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council review these rules and direct staff to prepare a response for the December 15th meeting. ACTION REQUIRED: If Council concurs with the recommendation, they should pass a motion directing staff to prepare a response to the Browns Creek Watershed District for Council review at their December 15, 1998 meeting. 1 . . t ' . BROWN'S CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS PROPOSED RULES OF THE WATERSHED DISTRICT November 6, 1998 The purpose of this document is to summarize the proposed Rules of the Brown's Creek Watershed District ("BCWD"), and to set forth the need for and reasonableness of these rules. The BCWD was established by order of the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources on October 22, 1997. The total area within the Brown's Creek Watershed is 28.3 square miles, which includes all or part ofthe municipalities of the City of Stillwater, Stillwater Township, May Township, the City of Hugo, the City of Grant, the City of Oak Park Heights, the City of Lake Elmo, and Baytown Township. The BCWD was granted all of the powers, authority, and duties provided by law. The Minnesota Watershed District Act generally provides for the creation of watershed districts "to conserve the natural resources of the State by land use planning, flood control, and other conservation projects by using sound scientific principles for the protection of the public health and welfare and the provident use of the natural resources." Minn. Stat. ~ 103D.201, subd. 1. All watershed districts in Minnesota must adopt rules to accomplish the purposes of the Watershed District Act and to implement the powers of the watershed district managers. Minn. Stat. ~ 103D.341. The proposed BCWD Rules are intended to implement the basic policies established in the District's first generation Watershed Management Plan. The proposed Rules regulate land use and water resource activities through a permitting program, and are intended to provide notice and general guidance to the public about the substantive criteria that the Board of Managers will utilize in determining whether and under what terms. to grant a permit for these regulated activities. The proposed Rules also provide guidance on the procedures to be used for permit applicants and the enforcement of permit terms and conditions: The BCWD has developed these revisions in a process that has included regular meetings of a technical advisory committee consisting of BCWD managers and staff, representatives of municipalities within the district, the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources, the Department of Natural Resources, the Metropolitan Council, development interests, trout protection interests and consulting hydrological engineers. A more detailed explanation of the proposed Rules follows. 1.0 Procedural Requirements. Proposed Rule 1.0 sets forth the general procedures which persons must follow in applying for a permit to the District. All permit applications must be signed by the property owner. Permit application forms are available at the District Office. The BCWD affirms that the fundamental land use and zoning policies are established by municipalities. Accordingly, the BCWD Managers will only review permit applications BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 1 , ~ involving land development after the municipality has provided preliminary approval of the proposed project. In this way, the District will not undertake the evaluation of the water . resources impacts from the proposed project until it is detennined by the municipality that the proposed project is consistent with the municipality's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinances. The District seeks to obtain all necessary public input concerning pennit applications. Accordingly, the pennit applicant must assist the District in notifying all property owners who reside within 600 feet of a proposed project. In order to allow adequate time for proper staff and technical review of penn it applications, the Board of Managers will only consider pennit applications which have been received at least 28 full days prior to the scheduled meeting date. The managers will act on pennit applications within 60 days of receiving a complete application. 2.0 Stormwater Manaeement. Background Stonnwater runoff from land development projects presents significant concern to the BCWD with respect to flood control, water quality protection, and thennal impacts. Roadway construction, increased pavement and other hard surfaces associated with land development, as well as agricultural practices, have meant increased problems from stonnwater runoff which must be managed and controlled to prevent downstream flooding. Stonnwater runoff also collects phosphorus-laden sediments that drain into the lakes, wetlands, and streams of the watershed, rather than filter through the ground. This "non-point" source of pollution, stonnwater, is the leading source of water pollution in the United States. . The BCWD Water Resources Plan identifies flooding and surface water quality as two main existing and potential problems within the watershed. Regarding flooding, the Plan states: "The potential for flooding does exist in all portions of the watershed, with the most significant threat existing in the morainic topography ofthe western and northern areas. The potential threat exists because the current system. of planning does not fully take into account the fluctuating water levels of lakes, ponds, and wetlands (which have no existing outlets) with respect to localized development and road construction." BCWD Plan at pp. 29-30. The Plan also notes that non-point sources of stonnwater runoff from agricultural and urban lands are major contributors to pollution of area lakes and streams. Id. at p. 30. While many of the municipalities have adopted some fonn of flood control or stonnwater management ordinances, none of the municipalities have the local water management planning process mandated by Minnesota Statutes S I03.B.235. Rule 2.0 imposes requirements on the development of land within the watershed for the purpose of limiting the potential negative impact of development on stann water flow rate and quality. In developing these revisions, the BCWD has reviewed the stann water management ordinances of a number of cities, counties and watershed districts in other states. . BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 2 . . . f ~ Legal Authority The legal authority for watershed district adoption of storm water management rules derives from Minnesota Statutes chapters 103B and 103D. Under Minn. Stat !l03D.341, subd. 1, watershed districts must adopt rules "to accomplish the purposes of [the watershed act] and to implement the powers of the managers." These purposes include flood control, regulation of surface water flows, water quality protection, control of erosion and siltation of water courses, and groundwater protection. Id. at 1103D201, subd. 2. District managers further are authorized to regulate and control the use of water within the watershed district and the use of streams, ditches and water courses to prevent pollution. Id. at S 103D.335, subds. 10 and 16. Finally, watershed districts in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area are authorized to regulate the water resources impacts of land use and development where local government units have not adopted district-approved local water management plans. Minn. Stat. S 103D.335, subd. 23; S 103B.211, subd. 1. The Proposed Rule The purpose of the rule is to minimize the extent to which land development alters the pre-development runoff characteristics of the land, namely the peak flow rate, flow volume and runoff water quality. Under the rule, any person proposing to engage in "land-altering activity" above a specified threshold must submit, obtain BCWD approval of, and implement a storm water management plan. Applicability of the Rule "Land-altering activity" is defined as the creation of impervious surface. In determining the thresholds at which the creation of impervious surface becomes subject to the rule, the BCWD has considered both the amount and density of impervious surface that a particular activity would create and the engineering and cost burdens that the rule would impose in conjunction with that activity. Thus, residential subdivision and development are subject to the rule only when four or more lots are being created by subdivision or built on. Non-residential development on an undeveloped site is regulated if more than one acre or more than five percent of the site area is to be rendered impervious; if a site already is developed, any increase of 5,000 or more square feet of impervious surface requires compliance with the rule. If a site is undergoing substantial change so as to constitute "redevelopment" under the rule, and if the site is five acres or more, the BCWD presumes that site redesign opportunities and site area allow for the institution of measures to meet the requirements of the rule. Finally, any road, bikeway, sidewalk or other impervious linear surface of one acre or more is subject to these rules. These thresholds are comparable to those in the stormwater ordinances of some thirty other jurisdictions that the BCWD has reviewed. Standards: Peak Flow, Volume and Water Quality The development of land for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional or other uses, by altering stormwater flow patterns and degrading storm water quality, can result in injury to downgradient land; to the stability of the bed and banks of downstream watercourses; to the quality of downstream waters and to the habitat they provide. Terrain alteration and the replacement of natural, vegetated cover with impervious surface such as roadway, rooftop, parking area or BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6. 1998 3 fl sidewalk has several effects of concern. It increases storm water flow velocity; reduces the proportion of storm water flow that infiltrates into the ground on site; and increases the transport of . both sediments and man-made pollutants-- oil and grease, antifreeze, deicing materials, metal and rubber particles from motor vehicles, fertilizers and herbicides-- into downgradient surface waters. For those activities subject to the rule, stormwater management must be controlled in three respects to prevent harm from a change in surface flows: peak flow rate from the site, flow volume from the site and runoff quality. Control of peak flow is the most important means to prevent downstream flooding, limit sedimentation and protect the physical integrity of downstream watercourses. Fundamental to nearly all of the storm water management ordinances the BCWD has reviewed is the requirement that development not increase peak flow from a site. Under the proposed rule, development may not cause an increase in the peak flow rate from the site during a 1.5-, 10- or 100-year storm of 24- hour duration. Further, the rule requires specific attention to the impact of peak stormwater flow from a developed site on downstream lakes and wetlands. To ensure that short-term, storm-induced change in lake or wetland water level does not adversely affect the banks, vegetation or habitat of the water body, peak flow "bounce" for 1.5-, 10- and 100-year storms is required to be limited to an amount ranging from zero to no limit, depending on the vulnerability of the lake or wetland class. Lake and wetland vulnerability classes are listed in an Appendix to the rule. Research has led to the generalized conclusion that coverage of ten percent or more impervious surface within a watershed degrades receiving waters, their beds, their banks and the habitat within them. Allowing for a margin of scientific uncertainty and the greater sensitivity of particular areas, the proposed rule permits flow volume increases associated with five percent impervious coverage of a site before flow volume management is required. The increase in flow volume associated with five percent impervious coverage is calculated on the assumption that the permeability of the soil underlying the impervious surface is average for the site. Beyond this "five-percent" allowance, on-site infiltration must be used so that there is, as compared with the pre-development state, no increase in off-site flow volume for up to a 1.5-year storm of 24-hour duration. A limited exception to the rule is granted where on-site infiltration is used to the degree feasible but still does not secure compliance with the flow volume standard. In this case, off-site infiltration must be used to meet the flow volume standard, to the degree off-site treatment is feasible. . Regulation of flow volume serves somewhat different purposes in landlocked and non- landlocked areas of the watershed. In landlocked areas, an increase in off-site flow caused by land alteration will create impacts on down-gradient water tables and land already experiencing problematically high water. In non-landlocked areas, flow volume is regulated as well to prevent injury to downstream owners. In addition, allowing stormwater that, in the pre-development state, infiltrated to groundwater to flow to Brown's Creek overland and by way of wetland, lake or other surface water increases the temperature of the storm water as it discharges into the creek. Preserving the pre-development rate of on-site stonnwater infiltration (excepting the five-percent impermeability allowance), and thereby maintaining the pre-development proportion of ground- to surface water discharge to Brown's Creek and its tributaries, is critical to avoiding thermal impacts to the trout habitat of the creek. Storm water contains a variety of constituents deleterious to recelvmg waters. Phosphorus and nitrogen accelerate eutrophication of surface waters and increase surface algal . scums, algal blooms, water discoloration and depressed oxygen levels. Stonnwater carries heavy BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6. 1998 4 i ' . metals, oils and grease from roads and parking lots and toxic organic compounds from herbicides, pesticides and wood preservatives. It carries fecal coliform that may impair recreational and harvesting uses of receiving waters and sediments that degrade aquatic habitats. Development of a site increases the pollution threat to downgradient waters by: increasing the intensity of use, and thus in most cases the generation of pollutants, on the site; increasing the flow volume and thus overall pollutant loading from the site; and increasing peak flow rates, with a corresponding reduction in effectiveness of natural pollutant control mechanisms such as on-site infiltration to groundwater and vegetative filtering. The proposed rule relies largely on control of peak flows and flow volume as a means to prevent an increase in storm water pollutant concentrations from the pre-development state. In addition, the rule contemplates that certain site design practices that may have only a minor impact on peak flow or flow volume-such as the use of filter strips along receiving waters and drainage swales -- will be used to achieve compliance with the water quality standard of the rule. Phosphorus loading at the downgradient property boundary is restricted to the phosphorus concentration limit of the first receiving water (lake, stream or wetland) encountered, as that limit is specified in North American Lake Management Society. Total suspended solids, total nitrogen and heavy metals loadings must not increase from the pre-development state. Stormwater Management Preferences . The rule specifies an order of preference for the use of storm water management techniques. In accordance with the requirement to limit total flow volume from the site, an applicant first must apply site design practices and on-site infiltration to the degree feasible. Site design practices, which are enumerated in an Appendix to the rule and for which the BCWD intends to develop further guidance, are largely non-engineering approaches to the design and placement of development on a site in ways that preserve as much as possible the pre- development storm water flow patterns and on-site rates of infiltration. Practices range from preserving drainage swales and filter strips and building on least-pervious soils to minimizing impervious surface by limiting driveway lengths, road widths and turnaround areas. Where existing zoning or subdivision ordinances do not allow for particular practices, an applicant must provide evidence that permission to implement those practices was reasonably sought. An applicant need not pursue an obviously futile special approval or variance process to its conclusion, but must at least submit documentation from the local government that the granting of an approval or variance would be substantially unlikely. The literature suggests that site design practices are the least expensive and can be the most effective stormwater management methods. By imposing a regulatory preference for these practices, the rule intends both to foster their use and to encourage further development and innovation by both applicants and local governments. . To the degree that feasible site design practices do not alone suffice for compliance with peak flow, flow volume and stormwater quality standards, engineered on-site infiltration such as infiltration trenches and dry wells and off-site infiltration are specified. Only once all feasible means of preserving pre-development ground- to surface water proportions are exhausted may an applicant turn to above-ground means of detaining and treating stormwater. Of these, wet detention in accordance with NURP (Nationwide Urban Runoff Program) design standards is preferred for its demonstrated effectiveness in both controlling peak flow and securing relatively substantial removal of phosphorus, suspended sediments and other pollutants from runoff. Nonetheless, the rule permits use of another method without first demonstrating the infeasibility BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6. 1998 5 . I of NURP-specified wet detention where the applicant can demonstrate to the BCWD that the performance and reliability of the method are equivalent to that of a NURP facility. . In every case, an applicant must provide evidence that the legal rights have been or, before land-altering activity is commenced, will be secured for construction, operation and maintenance of the proposed facilities. For off-site facilities, this may include flowage or access easements; for on-site facilities, it may include the conveyance of easements to another party or the imposition of restrictive covenants on the property to ensure that the storm water management facilities, whether engineered or as features of the natural topography, continue to function as designed. The applicant also must submit for BCWD approval, and must record, a maintenance agreement establishing responsibility for maintenance of the storm water management facilities. Treatment in a Regional Facility Finally, the rule allows for stormwater management in a regional facility in place of site- specific on- or off-site treatment. To qualify for regional treatment, one of two conditions must be met. First, the regional facility and its use for treatment of stormwater from the site in question are pursuant to and in accordance with a local water management plan approved by the BCWD. Or, second, the applicant demonstrates that on-site and off-site infiltration, used to the extent feasible, do not suffice to meet the flow volume standard of the rule and the BCWD finds in writing that the proposed method of management would meet peak flow, water quality and bounce standards. 3.0 Erosion Control. Sediments smother fish larvae and eggs and clog fish gills; turbidity reduces light penetration of water, hinders sight-feeding fish and increases the cost of providing drinking water. Sedimentation reduces water quality for recreational uses, lowers the value of adjoining lands, and increases public costs to maintain waterways and stormwater conveyances. Soil particles carry nutrients, trace metals and hydrocarbons into receiving waters and foster algae and weed growth. Runoff from construction sites is the largest source of sediments in urban areas undergoing development such as the watershed. Uncontrolled runoff from agricultural crop production also can contribute greatly to sedimentation problems. . In addition to the statutory authority to regulate storm water management, regulation of erosion and sedimentation is authorized by the specific watershed district purpose "to control or elevate soil erosion and siltation of water courses or water basins." Minn. Stat. S 103D.201, subd. 2(10). Proposed Rule 3.0 requires all developers of land moving more than 50 cubic yards of earth or removing more than 1,000 square feet of vegetative cover to obtain an erosion control permit. The permit is issued on an applicant's submission of an erosion control plan setting forth measures to control erosion and sedimentation that conform to the practices and specifications contained in "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas," the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's 1989 manual setting forth best practices for managing non-point source pollution in the urban environment. The plan must include measures to permanently restabilize disturbed soils and a schedule by which the work will be accomplished. In addition, given the importance of groundwater recharge within the Brown's Creek Watershed and the potential impact of land . alterations to the waters of Brown's Creek, land-altering activities within the ordinary high-water BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 6 . ' . . . boundaries of a groundwater recharge area are not permitted unless the applicant can demonstrate that the alterations will not adversely affect the recharge area. Agricultural activity is excepted from the requirements of the rule, provided that a natural vegetation buffer of 16 feet or the width of the shore impact zone, whichever is wider, is maintained along each watercourse. 4.0 Lake. Stream and Wetland Buffers Background A vegetative buffer adjacent to a stream, lake or wetland serves a number of purposes critical to the protection of that water resource and, indeed, properly is considered an integral part of it. Buffers moderate flow rates of storm water runoff into receiving waters, stabilize banks and shorelines, filter nutrients and sediments from runoff, provide habitat and visually screen aesthetically unappealing uses. A critically important function of vegetative buffer, particularly with respect to Brown's creek and its tributaries, is its role in regulating stream temperatures and, therefore, maintaining the resource as a trout habitat. Buffer width is the most important determinant of buffer effectiveness; soils, slope and the types and condition of plant communities within the buffer also are relevant to buffer function. Rule 4.0 requires the maintenance of vegetated buffer strips along streams, recreational development and natural environment lakes, and public waters wetlands (as that term is defined at Minn. Stat. 103G.005) within the watershed for the purpose of protecting the function and integrity of these water resources. Legal Authority The legal authority for watershed district adoption of stream, lake and wetland buffer rules derives from Minnesota Statutes chapters 103B and 103D. Under Minn. Stat. SI03D.341, subd. 1, watershed districts must adopt rules "to accomplish the purposes of [the watershed act] and to implement the powers of the managers." These purposes include conservation of water for public uses, controlling erosion and siltation of lakes, streams and wetlands; protecting water quality in these bodies; and other related purposes. Id. at 5 103D201, subd. 2. District managers further are authorized to regulate and control the use of water within the watershed district and regulate the use of streams, ditches and water courses to prevent pollution. Id. at 5 103D.335, subds. 10 and 16. Finally, watershed districts in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area are authorized to regulate the water resources impacts of land use and development where local government units have not adopted district-approved local water management plans. Minn. Stat. S 103D.335, subd. 23; S 103B.211, subd. 1. The Proposed Rule The purpose of the rule is to preserve natural vegetation bordering the bed and banks of streams, recreational development and natural environment lakes, and public waters wetlands in order to maintain the ecological functions of and societal benefits deriving from these water resources. Vegetated buffer zones of specified widths are established and disturbance of the vegetation within those zones is restricted. The District has sought to develop a rule that protects BOVD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 7 , j the valuable water resources of the watershed without placing undue burdens on affected . landowners. Addressing Gaps in Water Resource Protection Under Minnesota Statutes IS 103F.201 to 103F.221, Washington County and the City of Stillwater, pursuant to a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources model ordinance, have adopted DNR-approved shoreland ordinances that regulate building lot sizes, the placement of structures and sewage disposal systems, and other land uses within the shorelands of public waters-defined as within 1000 feet of the ordinary high water mark of a lake, pond or flowage and within 300 feet of the ordinary high water of a river, stream or floodplain. While these ordinances have the effect of securing certain protections for riparian and littoral areas, they are not explicitly directed toward protection of vegetative buffers for the benefits those buffers provide. The District has examined these local ordinances carefully for two purposes. First, the District wishes to avoid duplication of local shoreland ordinances. Thus, the proposed rule does not expressly restrict the placement of structures, decks and sewage treatment systems, subjects that are the focus of local ordinances. Similarly, local ordinances regulate agricultural and silvicultural activities within buffer areas in a manner that does not necessitate further express treatment by the District. Secondly, the District seeks to address gaps in the protection of buffer vegetation resulting from the fact that shore land ordinances are not specifically directed to buffer protection. Most broadly, although the County ordinance applies to lakes, streams and wetlands, the Stillwater ordinance does not expressly apply to public waters wetlands. The District's ... proposed rule applies to streams, to recreational development and natural environment lakes, and ... to all public waters wetlands within the watershed. Further, in contrast to the County and municipal ordinances, the District's rules extend the specified protected area to include steep slopes, the lOa-year floodplain, and DNR-mapped natural communities associated with a water resource. With regard to restrictions on activities within buffer zones, the rule regulates specifically to protect vegetative cover. Thus, it places restrictions on impervious cover, excavation, the placement of fill or other materials, vegetative alteration, and the use of pesticides or phosphorus-containing fertilizers within designated zones. As well, although it recognizes the necessity for roads, paths and utilities to intrude into buffer zones--either in crossing the associated water resource or to give access to water-related uses- it places reasonable bounds on the scope of these exceptions from the general rule. Buffer Zone Framework The rule rests on a framework consisting of the designated protected zones. With respect to Brown's Creek and its tributaries, the buffer has three elements: a streamside, a middle and an outer zone. The streamside zone, extending 25 feet from the ordinary high water mark of the water body, protects the physical and ecological integrity of the stream ecosystem. The middle zone, 50 feet in width, protects key stream components and provides a further separation between upland development and the stream. Activities are highly restricted in these zones to protect mature riparian forest and vegetation that can provide shade, .: leaf litter, woody debris and erosion protection for the stream. No impervious cover is permitted; BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 8 . ' . pesticides and phosphorus-containing fertilizers may not be used; and neither terrain nor vegetation may be altered except to remove invasive or diseased species or, in the middle zone, to remove trees less than six inches in diameter at a point two feet above the ground. Revegetation with native species is encouraged and is not within the prohibition of the rule. Roads and utilities, whether crossing the stream or providing access to a lawful water-related use, are restricted to the minimal necessary disturbance of the vegetative buffer and subject to Rule 3.0 of these rules with respect to temporary erosion control during construction. All roads and paths within these zones providing access to water-related uses must be pervious. The outer zone extends from the middle zone to the upland edge of the structure setback under the applicable local shoreland ordinance. The District believes that the setbacks provided for under local ordinances are adequate for stream protection and that consistency between the District rule and the local ordinance is beneficial to those subject to regulation. This zone is, in essence, a buffer of the buffer. Impervious surface is not permitted within the outer zone; including impervious roads and utility-related structures, except pursuant to a stream crossing. The District contemplates that residential backyard will comprise much of the outer zone of Brown's Creek and tributaries; turf, lawn and similar cultivation is permitted, as is the typical use of fertilizers, herbicides and other preparations. Although maintenance and restoration of native cover are encouraged, no restrictions on vegetative disturbance within this zone are imposed by the rule. Excavation and filling activity may occur within the zone, provided there is compliance with the erosion control requirements of Rule 3.0 of these rules. . Wetland buffer widths recommended by the Natural Resource Conservation Service are from 100 to 200 feet for high quality wetlands (Interim Conservation Practice Standard for CRP, Code 393, NRCS, 1996). A review of requirements in other states suggests 100 feet to be a minimum for high-quality, sensitive wetlands. While the appropriate buffer width depends on site-specific conditions such as slope, soils, vegetative composition and adjacent land uses, it is clearly infeasible to determine width on a site-by-site basis. As a reasonable means of differentiation, however, the rule groups lakes and wetlands by susceptibility class on the basis of plant community type, resource sensitivity and quality. Lakes and wetlands are protected by a single buffer zone of a width that ranges from 25 to 100 feet, depending on the susceptibility class (these same classifications are used in Rule 2.0 of these rules for regulating stormwater peak flows). Restrictions within a wetland or lake buffer zone are the same as those within a streamside zone. Exceptions Several general exceptions to these prohibitions are specified. Most significantly, the buffer zone requirements apply only to property that is subject to a use for which subdivision, landowner-initiated rezoning, a special use permit or a variance was required on or after the date of adoption of this rule. (The fact that a property lies within an area that has been subject to general rezoning by the local government unit would not trigger the application of the requirements.) The purpose of this limitation is two-fold. . o First, it seeks to avoid inordinate injury to the settled uses and expectations of numerous residential landowners located along the banks and shorelines subject to the rule. By imposing these requirements in conjunction with property development and the public processes that accompany it, the MCWD will allow for landowners to become BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 9 1 .' ;' -,. fully aware of the requirements and incorporate them into their plans for use of their properties. . o Secondly, broad application of the requirement to the many residential and other properties within the watershed that border on streams, lakes and wetlands would raise substantial practical issues with respect to enforcement, including potentially substantial issues of entry onto residential lands for compliance monitoring and violation inspections; problems in documenting the pre-existing condition of properties and the occurrence of acts in violation of the rule; and the sheer number of properties that would become subject to the rule. The rule is drafted with the intent of directing limited District resources to the most important threats to the ecological health of the watershed. Also importantly, any impervious surface, road or utility in existence on the date of the rule's adoption, and its maintenance within existing dimensions, are excepted from the operation of the rule. Other exceptions are as follows: o As indicated, a road or utility may be located within a buffer zone in conjunction with a water crossing. Impervious surface and vegetative cover disturbance shall be limited to that necessary for the crossing. Structures associated with the road or utility shall not be located within the zone unless no feasible alternative exists. o Access to a lawful private or public use of the water resource may be created and maintained. Access surfaces must be pervious and vegetative disturbance must be .' limited to that needed in light of the nature and extent of the permitted use. o Subject to specified conditions, fill or debris may be placed within a streamside, middle or lake or wetland buffer zone pursuant to lawful work in the associated water resource. o Pervious footpaths are permitted within all buffer zones. o Outlet, flood control and storm water treatment facilities may be located within any buffer zone when approved under section 2.0 of the rules. o A project to stabilize a shoreline or bank regulated under section 4.0 of the rules is required to comply with erosion control requirements of the rule (sections 3.0 and 4.9.7.1) but otherwise is excepted from the rule's prohibitions. 5.0 Shoreline and Stream Bank Alterations. Another source of erosion is the improper installation of shoreline and stream bank improvements. Watershed districts are authorized to "regulate improvements by riparian property owners of the beds, banks, and shores of lakes, streams, and wetlands for preservation and beneficial public use." Minn. Stat. S 103 D.20 1, subd. 2(11). Proposed Rule 5.0 requires that shoreline riprap installation conforms with generally accepted engineering principles to assure that the shoreline installation has the proper slope, . BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6. 1998 10 .,./'" . . . . . variable gradation of material, and minimizes encroachment into the lake bed. Proposed Rule 5.0 also provides that the applicant for a shoreline or stream bank improvement must post a bond or letter of credit to guarantee that the work is constructed in accordance with District requirements. 6.0 Stream and Lake Crossines. In conjunction with the flood control and erosion protection concerns identified in the BCWD Water Management Plan, proposed Rule 6.0 reflects a policy of discouraging the placing of roads, highways or utilities within lake or stream beds. To obtain a permit to do so, an applicant must demonstrate that the project will provide a public benefit; that hydraulic and navigational capacities will be maintained; that water quality will not be adversely affected; and that the proposed crossing is the minimal-impact alternative. 7.0 Floodulain and Drainaee Alterations. Proposed Rule 7.0 addresses the flood control and drainage concerns reflected in the BCWD Water Management Plan by requiring a permit for any alteration or filling of land below the 100-year floodplain elevation of any wetland, any public water, or any water body within a landlocked subwatershed. As well, a permit is required before obstructing the natural flow of any surface water or artificially diverting that flow across downgradient land. To obtain a permit for floodplain fill or alteration, an applicant must demonstrate that the proposed activity will not decrease flood storage capacity within the floodplain. Installation of culverts or drainage tiles, as well as other surface water diversions and obstructions, will be permitted only on a finding that downstream landowners will not be adversely affected. 8.0 Fees. Proposed Rule 8.0 provides pursuant to Minn. Stat. S 1030.345, subd. 2, that the District's cost for inspection and analysis of project sites in conjunction with permit applications are assessed to the permit applicant. Pursuant to a statutory exemption, government agencies are exempt from these fees. 9.0 Performance Bonds or Letters of Credit. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. S 103D.345, subd. 4, the Board of Managers may require a permit applicant to post a bond or other surety to assure performance by the applicant of the activities authorized by the terms of the penn it. Proposed Rule 9.0 provides the form, conditions, and procedures for the posting of the surety bond. 10.0 Variances. Proposed Rule 10.0 authorizes the Board of Managers to grant variances from its rules according to standard land use variance criteria. An applicant for a variance must demonstrate that because of circumstances unique to the property, the rule strictly applied would create a hardship and that granting of the variance would not violate the spirit or intent of the rules. The hardship may not be the result of the landowner's own actions and may not be merely economic in nature. BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 11 11.0 Enforcement. Proposed Rule 11.0 sets forth the enforcement powers of the BCWD pursuant to Minn. Stat. S 103D.545. The district is empowered to issue cease and desist orders for threats to water resources from flooding, soil erosion, sedimentation, water pollution or any other cause. Any violation of the BCWD rules, or of a permit, order or agreement under these rules, may be prosecuted as a misdemeanor. Finally, the BCWD may seek an order compelling abatement, restoration or other appropriate action. BCWD Proposed Rules SONAR November 6, 1998 12 II 4. '" n....... , . e . ,,'" BROWN'S CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT . RECEIVED PROPOSED RULES NOV 1 2 1998 November 6, 1998 Definitions 2 1.0 Procedural Requirements 5 2.0 Stormwater Management 7 Appendix 2.1 12 2.2 13 2.3 13 2.4 14 2.5 14 3.0 Erosion Control 15 4.0 Lake, Stream, and Wetland Buffers 16 . 5.0 Shoreline and Streambank Alterations 22 6.0 Stream and Lake Crossings 26 7.0 Floodplain and Drainage Alterations 27 8.0 Fees 28 9.0 Performance Bonds or Letters of Credit 30 10.0 Variances 31 11.0 Enforcement 32 . BCWD Proposed Rules November 6, 1998 DEFINITIONS . "Development" means the placement of one or more structures or surfaces on a single parcel or contiguous parcels pursuant to a common scheme. "Expansion" means a repair, alteration or addition of a structure, surface or facility that would intrude within a buffer zone or disturb vegetation within the zone. "F acility" means any part of a natural or constructed system contributing under the stormwater management plan to meeting a standard of subsection 2.5. "Feasible" means technically achievable at a cost, in the District's determination, not substantially disproportionate to the stormwater management benefit to be gained. "Highly susceptible wetland type" means a wetland characterized as a sedge meadow; open or coniferous bog; calcareous fen; low prairie; coniferous or hardwood swamp; or seasonally flooded wetland. "Hundred-year floodplain" means the area adjoining a watercourse or water basin . that has been or would be covered by a flood expected to occur on an average frequency of the 100- year recurrence interval. "Impervious surface" means a surface that has been compacted or covered with a layer of material so that it is highly resistant to infiltration by water. "Land-altering activity" means an activity subject to section 2.2. "Least-susceptible wetland type" means a wetland characterized as a gravel pit; cultivated hydric soil; dredged material or fill; or material disposal site. "Mapped natural community" means a natural community identified in "Natural Communities and Rare Species Map for Washington County" (Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, Natural Heritage Program, 1990), as amended. "Middle zone" is a vegetative buffer zone that extends from the upland edge of the streamside zone to the interior edge of the outer zone. "Moderately susceptible wetland type" means a wetland characterized as shrub- carr; alder thicket; fresh wet meadow not dominated by reed canary grass; or . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 2 . shallow or deep marsh not dominated by reed canary grass, cattail, giant reed or purple loosestrife. "Natural environment lake" means a lake so designated by the Minnesota DNR pursuant to Minn. Rules 6120.3000. "NURP standard" means the design criteria developed pursuant to the Na~ionwide Urban Runoff Program (U.S. EPA, 1983) and published by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency in "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas 1991" (sections 4.1-4 through 4.1-5), as may be amended. "Ordinary high-water level" means the boundary of a public water or wetland, and is an elevation indicating the highest water level that has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence on the landscape, commonly indicated by a change from predominantly aquatic to predominantly terrestrial vegetation. F or watercourses, the ordinary high-water level is the elevation of the top of bank of the channel. For reservoirs and flowages, it is the operating elevation of the summer pool. "Outer zone" is a vegetative buffer zone that extends from the upland edge of the middle zone to a point specified in these rules. . "Pre-development" means at the time preceding creation of impervious surface or substantial change in site hydrology or infiltration by alteration of site vegetation or contour. "Receiving water" means the first of the following encountered by stormwater flow from the site: Brown's Creek; a tributary of Brown's Creek designated as a public water pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sl03G.005, subd. 15, as amended; a lake designated as a public water pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sl03G.005, subd. 15, as amended; or ll;'Yetland. "Reconstruction" means the rebuilding, repair or alteration of a structure, surface, or facility for which the cost would equal or exceed 50 percent of the replacement cost. "Recreational development lake" means a lake so designated by the Minnesota DNR pursuant to Minn. Rules 6120.3000. "Redevelopment" means modification of an existing development that has a cost, including labor, of one-half or more of the market value of the existing development. . "Revegetation" means the planting of native indigenous species. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 3 "Site design practice" means a method of managing stormwater peak flow, flow volume or quality listed in Appendix 2.1 to this rule. . "Slightly susceptible wetland type" means a wetland characterized as a floodplain forest; fresh wet meadow dominated by reed canary grass; or a shallow or deep marsh dominated by reed canary grass, cattail, giant reed or purple loosestrife. "Steep slope" means land with an average slope exceeding 12 percent over a distance of 50 feet or more or land defined as steep slope in the Washington County Soil Survey, as amended. "Stream" means Brown's Creek or any tributary to Brown's Creek designated as a public water pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sl03G.005, subd. 15. "Stream buffer zone" means a streamside zone, middle zone or outer zone. "Streamside zone" is a vegetative buffer zone that extends from the ordinary high- water mark of a stream, lake or wetland to the interior edge of the middle zone. "Subwatershed" means the drainage area of the receiving water for the site. "Utility" means a facility for transmitting water, wastewater, steam, gas, electricity or similar commodities [private transport?]. . "Water resource" means a stream, lake or wetland described in section 4.9.2. "Wetland" means land transitional between terrestrial and aquatic systems where the water table is usually at or near the surface or the land is covered by shallow water. A wetland (a) is predominated by hydric soils; (b) is inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions; and (c) under normal circumstances, supports a prevalence of hydrophytic vegetation. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 4 . 1.0 PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS , 1.1 Application Required. Any person undertaking any activity for which a permit is required by these rules shall first submit for review a permit application, engineering design data and such other information to the District as may be required by these rules to determine whether the improvements are in compliance with the criteria established by these rules. All permit applications must bear the original signature of the landowner. 1.2 Forms. Permit applications shall be submitted using forms provided by the District. Forms are available from the District Office located at District, 1825 Curve Crest Boulevard, Suite 101, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082. Permit applications shall be addressed to: Brown's Creek Watershed District 1825 Curve Crest Boulevard, Suite 101 Stillwater, MN 55082 1.3 Action by Board of Managers. The managers shall act within 60 days of receipt of a completed application and complete set of required exhibits, and the District . will provide at least ten (10) days notice to permit applicants of missing items. 1.4 Conformity with Municipal Plan. The managers will review applications for permits involving land development only after the applicant demonstrates that the plan has received preliminary approval from the municipality indicating compliance with the municipal plans. 1.5 Notification Process. Persons applying for a District permit must supply a certified list of property owners obtained from Washington County who reside adjacent to the subject property, and all property owners within 600 feet of the property boundary of a proposed project. District staff will send notice of the proposed project to the individuals on the mailing list for the applicant at the applicant's expense. A copy of the list will be retained with the application at the District office. The application will not be processed until the list has been submitted to the District. 1.6 Time for Submittal. A complete permit application which includes all required exhibits shall be received by the District at least 28 full days prior to the scheduled meeting date of the Board of Managers. Late submittals or submittals with incomplete exhibits will be scheduled to a subsequent meeting date. . 1.7 Tabled Permits. Permit applications tabled at a board meeting due to revisions needed for compliance with District rules will be addressed at the next board meeting if the revisions are submitted within three (3) working days of being tabled. Otherwise, BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 5 permit applications will be treated pursuant to section 1.6 of this rule. Permit applications tabled due to substantial non-compliance with District rules are subject to a . three month waiting period before they can be resubmitted to ensure that the application is correct and complete. 1.8 Permit Renewals. Permits are valid for a one year period from the date of issuance unless otherwise suspended or revoked. To renew a permit, the permitee must notify the District in writing, prior to the permit expiration date, of ' the reason for the renewal request. The request will be reviewed by the managers at the next available board meeting provided all information has been submitted to the District and is current. 1.9 Regular Meetings. Regular Board meetings of the Board of Managers are held at the Washington County Soil and Water Conservation District Office at 182S'Curve Crest Boulevard, Stillwater, MN., unless otherwise noticed. Meeting schedUles may be obtained by contacting the District office. . . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 6 . . . 2.0 STORMW ATER MANAGEMENT 2.1 Purposes and Policy. It is the policy of the District to: 2.1.1 Promote on-site infiltration of stormwater; 2.1.2 Limit peak off-site stormwater flow to pre-development rates; 2.1.3 Limit off-site stormwater flow volume to prevent down-gradient flooding and thermal impacts to Brown's Creek and its tributaries; and 2.1.4 Require management of stormwater flow to limit sediment, nutrient and metals concentrations conveyed to ground and surface waters and promote water quality . 2.2 Applicability. Subject to an exception in section 2.8, the requirements of this section apply to: (a) (b) Residential subdivision or development of four or more lots; Non-residential development creating impervious surface that, in the aggregate, exceeds one acre or five percent of a site; Redevelopment on a site of five acres or more, where final impervious surface, in the aggregate, exceeds one acre or five percent of a site. The creation of 5,000 square feet or more of additional impervious surface appurtenant to existing non-residential development. The creation of road, bikeway, sidewalk or other linear impervious surface of one acre or more. (c) (d) (e) 2.3 Regulation. Before commencing any land-altering activity, a developer of land for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, or public use shall submit.a stormwater management plan to the District in conformity with the requirements of this rule, and secure a permit from the District approving the plan. The managers will review a stormwater management plan only after the applicant demonstrates that the project has received preliminary municipal approval indicating compliance with existing municipal plans. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6,1998 7 2.4 Standards. . An applicant for a stormwater management permit must demonstrate to the District that the proposed land-altering activity will not: . (a) Increase peak stormwater flow from the site for a 24-hour precipitation event with a return frequency of 1.5, 10, or 100 years in the subwatershed drainage area in which the site is located. (b) Increase stormwater flow volume from the site for a 24-hour precipitation event with a return frequency of 1.5 years, excepting the increased flow resulting from impervious cover on five percent of the site possessing average site permeability, as calculated in accordance with section 2.5.3. (c) At the downgradient property boundary, increase site loading of total suspended solids, total nitrogen or heavy metals, or contribute to a stormwater phosphorus concentration that exceeds the inflow concentration indicated in Appendix 2.2 for the site receiving water. (d) Increase the bounce in water level, during a precipitation event of critical duration with a return frequency of 1.5, 10, or 100 years in the subwatershed drainage area in which the site is located, for any downstream lake or wetland beyond the limit specified in Appendix 2.3 for the lake or wetland susceptibility . class. 2.5 Management. 2.5.1 Sequence of Management Methods. To meet the standards of section 2.4, site-based stormwater management methods shall be used in the following sequence. A preferred method shall be used to the degree feasible before a less- preferred method is used. Treatment in a regional facility shall be governed not by this subsection, but by subsection 2.7.4. (a) Site design practices. (b) On-site infiltration. (c) Off-site infiltration. (d) Wet detention in accordance with NURP standards. (e) Other methods. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 8 . 2.5.2 Site Design Practice Infeasibility. If a claim that a site design practice is infeasible rests on its inconsistency with a local ordinance, reasonable attempts to gain local permission to incorporate the practice into site design must be documented. Satisfactory documentation includes denial of an exception or variance or a written statement by the local authority that an exception or variance would be unlikely to be granted. 2.5.3 Calculating Off-Site Stormwater Flow. To demonstrate off-site flow under pre-development condition and under the stormwater management scenarIO proposed for approval, two methodologies may be used: (a) Soil Conservation Service TR-20 method. All assumptions for pre- and post-development CN-values and all pre- and post-development impervious surface area estimates must be clearly stated. (b) Direct estimate using soil permeability classes. The soil permeability classes shall be delineated on a site plan; the square footage, by class, of soil whose permeability will be permanently altered by site activity shall be estimated; and the infiltration rate for each permeability class, as set forth in Appendix 2.4 to these rules, shall be applied. . 2.5.4 Desilln and Ooeration Standards. All methods proposed for meeting the standards of section 2.4 shall comply with the design and operation standards set forth at Appendix 2.5. 2.5.5 Acquisition of Pro pert v or Contract Rillhts. An applicant relying on on- or off-site facilities for complying with the standards of section 2.4 must possess all rights necessary for design, construction, and long-term operation and maintenance of the facilities. 2.5.6 Stormwater Manallement Facility Maintenance Allreements. If a developer proposes to construct a wet detention basin, outlet structure, culvert, outfall structure, or other storm water management facility in order to meet the requirements of this rule, the developer must submit with the permit application a maintenance agreement. The maintenance agreement shall specify the methods, schedule, and responsible parties for maintenance, and must contain the minimum requirements contained in the District's Maintenance Agreement Form. The Agreement must provide that the required maintenance activities will be performed by either the property owner or the municipality. The executed maintenance agreement must be recorded with the county within 10 days of the issuance date of the permit. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 9 2.5.7 Conformance to Floodplain and Drainage Alteration Requirements. In addition to all other legal requirements that may apply, all land-altering and related stormwater management activity pursuant to Rcle 2.0 shall comply with structure elevation requirements ofRcle 7.0. . 2.6 Required Exhibits. The following items, submitted in duplicate and certified by a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota, registered land surveyors, or other appropriate professional shall accompany all permit applications submitted to the District pursuant to Rule 2.0: 2.6.1 Property lines and delineation of lands under applicant's ownership; 2.6.2 Delineation of the subwatershed contributing runoff from off-site and proposed and existing subwatersheds on site; 2.6.3 The location, alignment and elevation of proposed and existing stormwater facilities; 2.6.4 Delineation of eXIstmg on-site wetland, shoreland, drain tiling and floodplain areas as defined in the 1982 FEMA study; 2.6.5 Existing and proposed normal and laO-year water elevations on site; . 2.6.6 Existing and proposed site contour elevations at two-foot intervals, related to NGVD, 1929 datum; 2.6.7 Construction plans and specifications of all proposed facilities; 2.6.8 Stormwater runoff volume and rate analyses for the 1.5, 10, and 100 year critical events under existing and proposed conditions; 2.6.9 All hydrologic, water quality, and hydraulic computations completed to design the proposed facilities; 2.6.10 Documentation of conformance with an existing municipal stormwater management plan, or in cases where such a plan does not exist, documentation that the municipality has reviewed the project; 2.6.11 Delineation of any flowage easements or other property interests dedicated to stormwater management purposes, including, but not limited to, county or judicial ditches; . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 10 . . . 2.6.12 Documentation that the project has received a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Storm water Permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, if required by the MPCA and as available; and 2.6.13 Geotechnical soil boring results if available. 2.7 Exceptions. 2.7.1 Infeasibility of On-Site Infiltration. If the District finds that site design practices and on-site infiltration, applied to the extent feasible, do not suffice to maintain stormwater flow volume off-site at the level specified in paragraph 2.4(b), the applicant will be excepted from strict compliance with that subparagraph. The use of site design practices, on-site infiltration and off-site infiltration shall be required to the extent feasible to reduce flow volume to the level specified in paragraph 2.4(b) before discharge into a receiving water. 2.7.2 Performance Standard. The District may grant an exception to the sequencing requirements of paragraphs 2.5.1(d) and (e) on an applicant's demonstration that an alternative management technology or method would achieve the same levels of performance and reliability as the method specified at paragraph 2.5.1 (d). 2.7.3 Variance. The District may grant a variance to any requirement of Rule 2.0 under Rule 10.0. An exception shall be limited to the extent necessary to put the property to a reasonable or economically viable use. 2.7.4 Regional Treatment. Management of site stormwater in a regional facility constitutes compliance with Rule 2.0 in either of the following circumstances: (a) Management is pursuant to and in accordance with a local water management plan approved by the District. (b) An applicant has demonstrated infeasibility of on-site and off-site infiltration under subsection 2.7.1 and the District, in writing, finds that the proposed method of management would meet the standards of paragraphs 2.4(b ), (c) and (d). BCWD Proposed Rues November 6.1998 11 APPENDICES APPENDIX 2.1 . Inventory of Site Design Practices and Guidance On Their Use for Stormwater Management. o o o o Avoid conversion of high-permeability soils. Avoid soil compaction. Target high-permeability soils for infiltration. Use natural depressions and swales for runoff storage and infiltration, with overflow to vegetated areas. Crown roads and driveways to encourage runoff to swales. Increase stormwater flow path to receiving water. Use filter strips at edges of impervious surfaces and receiving waters. Avoid curbs and gutters on roadways. Direct rain gutter downspouts to pervious surfaces or below-grade tiles. Use pervious surfaces for roads, driveways, parking areas and walkways. Design street widths less than 26 feet and appropriate for projected traffic load. Design streets for parking on one side only. Design streets with sidewalk on one side only. Limit road and driveway lengths. Design smaller (e.g., 9' x 18') parking stalls. Design for shared parking stalls and driveways. Reduce cuI de sac radius and use pervious center; use T or V turnaround. Design with reduced structure setback and frontage. . o o o o o o o o o o o o o o . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 12 . . . APPENDIX 2.2 Phosphorus Concentration Limitation Class Receiving Water! Inflow Limitation (parts per billion) I Brown's Creek and tributaries All designated trout waters St. Croix River II Lakes with TSI rating of "good" Highly susceptible wetlands III Lakes with TSI rating of "acceptable" Moderately susceptible wetlands IV Lakes with TSI rating of "poor" Slightly susceptible wetlands V Lakes with TSI rating of "very poor" Least susceptible wetlands APPENDIX 2.3 LakeIWetland Susceptibility Classes and Permitted Bounce Susceptibility Class Permitted Bounce Highly susceptible wetland Pre-development Moderately susceptible Pre-development + 0.5 feet Slightly susceptible wetland Pre-development + 1.0 feet Least-susceptible wetland Lake No limit 150 150 180 220 250 1 Trophic State Index (TSI) is a composite measurement of transparency, chlorophyll-a and total phosphorus measured within the lake. Sources: North American Lake Management Society. Metropolitan Council-1997 Study of the Water Quality in 71 Metropolitan Area Lakes. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 13 APPENDIX 2.4 . Soil Permeability Classes and Infiltration Rates SCS Soil Infiltration Class Rate (inches/hour) Very slow 0.06 Slow 0.13 Moderately slow 0.40 Moderate 1.30 Moderately rapid 4.0 Rapid 10.3 Very Rapid 20.0 Source: Washington County Soil Survey (SCS, 1980) . APPENDIX 2.5 Design and Operation Standards [forthcoming] . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 14 . . . 3.0 EROSION CONTROL 3.1 Policy. It is the policy of the Board of Managers to require erosion control for land development activities to prevent the siltation and sedimentation of streams, lakes, wetlands, and groundwater recharge areas in the District. 3.2 Regulation. All developers of land undertaking any grading, filling, or other land alteration activities which involve movement of more than fifty (50) cubic yards of earth or removal of vegetative cover on one thousand (1,000) square feet or more of land shall submit an erosion control plan to the District, and secure a permit from the- District approving the erosion control plan, which meets the following requirements: 3.2.1 An erosion control plan must be prepared by a qualified individual showing proposed methods of retaining waterborne sediments on site during the period of construction and showing how the site will be restored, covered, or revegetated after construction, including a timetable for completion; 3.2.2 The erosion control plan shall be consistent with the specifications of the MPCA manual "Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas" and its current reVlSlons; 3.2.3 Permanent wet detention basins used as temporary sedimentation basins during construction must be cleaned out after construction is complete; 3.2.4 Erosion control measures such as silt fences and hay/straw bales shall be removed after the project is complete and all disturbed areas have been fully stabilized; 3.2.5 Sites with high erosion potential characterized by steep slopes or erodible soils may require the permit applicant to post a performance bond pursuant to Rule 9.0. 3.2.6 Land alteration activities at sites within the ordinary high water boundaries of a groundwater recharge area, as delineated by the District, are not permitted unless the applicant can demonstrate that the alterations, together with any mitigative best management practices, will not adversely impact the effectiveness of the area's recharge capacity or recharge rates. 3.3 Agricultural practices. The erosion control measures described in section 3.2 of this rule are. not required for land that is regularly used for agricultural purposes, provided that a grass or natural vegetation buffer zone extending sixteen (16) feet or the width of the shore impact zone, whichever wider, is maintained along any watercourse and no fertilizer is used in the zone. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 15 4.0 LAKE, STREAM, AND WETLAND BUFFER REQillREMENTS 4.1 Purposes and Policy. Natural vegetation bordering the bed and banks of lakes, streams and wetlands serves a critical role in maintaining the ecological function of and societal benefits deriving from those water resources. Purposes served by vegetative buffers include bank and shoreline stabilization; erosion prevention; filtration of nutrients, sediments and other pollutants from storm flows; protection of stream beds and banks and mitigation of downstream flooding through moderation of peak flows both into and within the resource; regulation of in-stream temperatures; preservation of aquatic and terrestrial habitat; protection of scenic resources; and maintenance of property values. The purpose of this section is to afford the greatest possible protection to these buffers, and to the water quality, flow regime and habitat of Brown's Creek and its tributaries, consistent with the interest in avoiding undue disturbance to established public and private activities in littoral and riparian zones. . 4.2 Applicability. 4.2.1 Rule 4.0 applies to land: (a) adjacent to Brown's Creek; to a tributary of Brown's Creek designated as a public water pursuant to Minn. Stat. SI03G.005, subd. 15, as amended; or to a recreational development or natural environment lake or wetland within the watershed designated as a public water under Minn. . Stat. S103G.005, subd. 15, as amended; and (b) subject to a use for which subdivision, landowner-initiated rezoning, a special use permit or a variance was required on or after [the date of rule adoption] . 4.2.2 Rule 4.0 applies in addition to, and not in place of, any local shoreland ordinance. .. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6.1998 16 . . . 4.3 Zone Widths. 4.3.1 Subject to the special provisions in subsections 4.3.2 through 4.3.5, stream, wetland and lake buffer zones are as follows: (a) Stream (1) Streamside zone 25 feet (2) Middle zone 50 feet from upland edge of streamside zone (3) Outer zone from upland edge of middle zone to structure setback line under applicable shoreland ordinance (b) Highly susceptible wetland type 100 feet ( c) Moderately susceptible wetland type 75 feet (d) Slightly susceptible wetland type 50 feet (e) Least-susceptible wetland type 25 feet (f) Natural environment lake 75 feet (g) Recreational development lake 50 feet 4.3.2 Where a mapped natural community is associated with a water resource, the upland edge of the middle zone shall be as specified in subsection 4.3.1 or contiguous with the upland edge of the natural community area, whichever is greater. 4.3.3 Where a streamside or middle zone, a lake buffer or a wetland buffer encompasses all or part of a steep slope, the zone or buffer shall extend to the distance specified in subsection 4.3.1 or to the top of the slope, whichever is greater. 4.3.4 Where the IOO-year floodplain extends further than the upland edge of the middle zone, the lake buffer or the wetland buffer as specified in subsection 4.3.1, the zone or buffer shall extend to the upland edge of the floodplain. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 17 4.3.5 Where a lake or wetland is encompassed within or contiguous to a stream to which Rule 4.0 applies, the lake or wetland buffer shall apply in addition to, and . not in place of, the applicable stream buffer. 4.4 Limitations in Buffer Zones. 4.4.1 Streamside Zone. The following activities are prohibited in the streamside zone: (a) Creating impervious cover. (b) Excavating fill or placing fill or debris, except for temporary placement of fill or debris pursuant to duly-permitted work in the associated waters, in compliance with all conditions of the permit, and in compliance with section 4.6. (c) Alterating vegetation, except for the removal of invasive exotic species or of trees for disease control or revegetation. Tree removal shall be pursuant to written authorization from the district. (d) Applying pesticides or phosphorus-containing fertilizers. (e) Locating roads or utilities, except pursuant to a crossing of the . associated water resource in accordance with section 4.7. Structures and appurtenances associated with the road or utility shall not be located within the streamside zone unless no feasible alternative exists. Outlet, flood control and storm water treatment facilities may be located within the zone if so approved under Rule 2.0. 4.4.2 Middle Zone. The following are prohibited in the middle zone: (a) Creating impervious cover. (b) Excavating fill or placing fill or debris, except temporary placement of fill or debris pursuant to duly-permitted work in the associated waters, in compliance with all conditions of the permit, and in compliance with section 4.6. (c) Altering vegetation, except for the removal of invasive exotic species or of trees for disease control; removal of dead trees, limbs or branches; removal of trees less than six inches in diameter as measured at a point two feet above the ground; or revegetation. Tree removal shall be pursuant to written authorization from the district. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 18 . (d) Applying pesticides or phosphorus-containing fertilizers. ( e) Locating roads or utilities, except pursuant to a crossing of the associated water resource in accordance with section 4.7. Structures and appurtenances associated with the road or utility shall not be located within the middle zone unless no feasible alternative exists. Outlet, flood control and stormwater treatment facilities may be located within the zone if so approved under Rule 2.0 ofthese rules. 4.4.3 Outer Zone. The following are prohibited in the outer zone: (a) Creating impervious cover. (b) Placing fill or excavation, except in accordance with section 4.6 and other applicable law. (c) Locating roads or utilities that involve the creation of impervious surface within the outer zone, except pursuant to a crossing of the water resource and in accordance with section 4.7. Outlet, flood control and stormwater treatment facilities may be located within the zone if so approved under Rule 2.0. . 4.4.4 Lake or Wetland Buffer. The following are prohibited in a lake or wetland buffer: (a) Creating impervious cover. (b) Excavating fill or placing fill or debris, except temporary placement of fill or debris pursuant to duly-permitted work in the associated lake or wetland, in compliance with all conditions of the permit, and in compliance with section 4.6. (c) Altering vegetation, except for the removal of invasive exotic species or of trees for disease control or revegetation. Tree removal shall be pursuant to written authorization from the district. (d) Applying pesticides or phosphorus-containing fertilizers. . ( e) Locating roads or utilities, except pursuant to a crossing of the lake or wetland in accordance with section 4.7. Structures and appurtenances associated with the road or utility shall not be located within the buffer unless no feasible alternative exists. Outlet, flood control and stormwater treatment facilities may be located within the buffer if so approved under Rule 2.0. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 19 4.5 Shoreline and Bank Stabilization. A measure to stabilize a shoreline or bank . otherwise regulated under Rule 5.0 must comply with subsection 4.6 1 but otherwise is excepted from the prohibitions of section 4.4. 4.6 Temporary Alterations. 4.6.1 Compliance with Rule 3.0 is required, irrespective of the area or volume of earth to be disturbed. 4.6.2 Buffer zones and the location and extent of vegetation disturbance shall be delineated on the erosion control plan. 4.6.3 Alterations must be designed and conducted to ensure only the smallest amount of disturbed ground is exposed for the shortest time possible. Mulches or similar materials must be used for temporary soil coverage and permanent natural vegetation established as soon as possible. 4.6.4 Fill or excavated material shall not be placed to create an unstable slope. 4.6.5 When construction, land disturbance, fill or excavation activity occurs within the outer zone, the boundary between the outer and middle zones shall be demarcated with siltation or other fencing to prevent disturbance of vegetation within the middle zone. When construction, land disturbance, fill or excavation activity occurs within the middle zone, the boundary between the middle and streamside zones shall be demarcated with siltation or other fencing to prevent disturbance of vegetation within the streamside zone. . 4.7 Roads and Utilities. 4.7.1 A structure, impervious cover or right-of-way maintained permanently in conjunction with a crossing of the. water resource shall minimize the area of permanent vegetative disturbance to the degree feasible. Minimization includes, but is not limited to, approach roads and rights-of-way that are perpendicular to the crossing and of a minimum width consistent with use and maintenance access needs. 4.7.2 All work shall be in accordance with section 4.6. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 20 . . . 4.8 Exceptions. 4.8.1 An impervious surface, road or utility in existence on [the date of adoption of this rule], its maintenance, and maintenance of its existing right-of-way are excepted from the operation of this. rule. Any expansion or reconstruction of an excepted facility is subject to the rule. 4.8.2 Access to a water resource for a lawful private or public use of the resource may be created and maintained. All access surfaces within the buffer zone -must be pervious and permanent vegetative disturbance shall be limited to that necessary for access in light of the nature and extent of the permitted use. No facility, other than a footpath or a facility accessory to a permitted use of the water resource and required by its nature to be adjacent to the water, may be located within the streamside zone. 4.8.3 The District may grant a variance from any requirement of this rule1'ursuant to Rule 10.0 of these rules. In determining the appropriateness of a variance, the District shall consider, among other factors, the" parcel or lot of record as of the date this rule was adopted; the common ownership of the property in question and adjacent property; and the availability of clustering, density compensation, variances and other means under applicable land use law that would allow desired uses to be located on portions of the parcel or lot not within buffer zones. An exception shall be limited to the extent necessary to put the property to a reasonable or economically viable use. i! BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 21 5.0 SHORELINE & STREAMBANK ALTERATIONS . 5.1 Policy. It is the policy of the District to: 5.1.1 Assure that improvements or alterations of shoreline and streambank areas comply with accepted engineering principles to prevent erosion, and 5.1.2 Preserve the natural appearance of shoreline and streambank areas. 5.2 Regulation. No person shall construct or install a shoreline or streambank improvement partially or wholly below the ordinary high water mark of a waterbody, without first securing a permit from the District and posting a bond or letter of credit. Construction or installation of a shoreline or streambank improvement wholly above the ordinary high water mark of a waterbody may require a permit under Rule 7.0. 5.3 Criteria for Rip Rap Replacement. Rip rap placement shall comply with the following criteria: 5.3.1 Rip rap material should be durable, natural stone and of a gradation that will result in a stable shoreline embankment able to withstand ice and wave action. . 5.3.2 The finished slope of the rock fragments, boulders and/or cobbles should not be steeper than a ratio of 3 feet horizontal to 1 foot vertical (3: 1) under normal conditions. Steeper slopes will generally require larger sized rip rap. The minimum finished slope shall be no steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical). Any rocklboulder stabilization project with a proposed finished slope steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) shall be evaluated in accordance with the conditions for retaining walls. 5.3.3 No rip rap or filter materials should be placed more than 5 feet waterward of the shoreline measured from the ordinary high water level (OHW) elevation under normal conditions. The encroachment into the water is the minimum amount necessary to provide protection and does not unduly interfere with the flow of water. The ma.ximum encroachment waterward of the OHW is 10 feet. ~, 5.3.4 A transitional layer consisting of graded gravel, at least 6 inches deep, and an appropriate geotextile filter fabric shall be placed between the soil material of the existing shoreline and the rip rap to prevent erosion of the embankment and to prevent settlement. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 22 . . . 5.3.5 Rip rap placement should not be attempted when underlying soils are not capable of supporting resulting loads. In these cases, a qualified soils specialist should be consulted. 5.3.6 The thickness of the rip rap layers should be at least 1.25 times the maximum stone diameter. 5.3.7 The rip rap shall conform with the natural alignment of the shoreline (i.e., maintaining an undulating or meandering shoreline). 5.4 Required Exhibits. The following exhibits shall accompany the rip rap permit application (one full-size; one set-reduced to maximum size of 11" x 17"): 5.4.1 Site plan showing property lines, delineation of lands under ownership of the applicant, delineation of the existing shoreline, existing contour elevations (if available) and locations and lineal footage of the proposed rip rap treatment; 5.4.2 Cross section detailing the proposed rip rap, drawn to scale, with the horizontal and vertical scales noted on the drawing. The detail should show the finished rip rap slope, transitional layer design and placement, distance lakeward of the rip rap placement, ordinary high water level elevation and material specifications; 5.4.3 Description of the underlying soil materials which will support the rip rap; 5.4.4 Gradation, average diameter, quality and type of rip rap material to be used (normally, a Class III gradation is sufficient); 5.4.5 Gradation, quality and type of filter blanket material to be used (normally, Type I gradation is sufficient); 5.4.6 Manufacturer's material specifications for proposed geotextile fabric(s); and 5.4.7 Materials used shall be non-polluting. 5.5 Guidelines. The engineer shall publish or make available to interested persons a typical cross-section for shoreline protection in compliance with this rule. 5.6 Criteria for Laying Sandblankets. All permitted sandblanketing shall comply with the following standards. 5.6.1 The sand or gravel used must be clean prior to being spread. The sand must contain no toxins or heavy metal, as defined by the MDNR, and must contain no weed infestations such as, but not limited to, water hyacinth, alligator weed, and BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 23 Eurasian watermilfoil, or animal life infestations such as, but not limited to, zebra mussels or their larva. . 5.6.2 The sand layer must not exceed six inches in thickness, 50 feet in width along the shoreline, or one-half the width of the lot, whichever is less, and may not extend more than ten (10) feet waterward of the ordinary high water mark. 5.6.3 Only one installation of sand or gravel to the same location may be made during a four year period. After the four years have passed since the last blanketing, the location may receive another sandblanket. 5.6.4 Exception. Beaches which are operated by governmental entities, and available to the public, shall be exempted from the following restrictions: (i) that sandblankets be no more than 50 feet in width and (ii) that sandblankets be installed no more frequently than once every four years. Permits shall be required for all public beach sandblankets. 5.7 Sandblanket Required Exhibits. The following exhibits shall accompany the sandblanket permit application: 5.7.1 Site plan showing property lines, delineation of the work area, existing . elevation contours of the adjacent upland area, ordinary high water elevation, and regional flood elevation (if available). All elevations must be reduced toNGVD (1929 datum); . 5.7.2 Profile, cross sections and/or topographic contours showing existing and proposed elevations and proposed side slopes in the work area. (Topographic contours should be at intervals not greater than 1.0 foot); and 5.7.3 A completed Sandblanket Permit Application form, available from the District. 5.8. Criteria for Streambank Stabilization. The physical characteristics of creeks and streams create site specific erosion control issues. There are a number of erosion and sediment control practices designed for use along channels. Emphasis should be placed on the structural stability of the project rather than secondary factors such as aesthetics, convenience or cost. The engineer shall make available to interested persons recommended criteria for streambank stabilization projects. In addition to an application, required exhibits include: 5.8.1 site plan prepared by an engineer or registered land surveyor showing property lines; the ordinary high water (OHW) elevation and floodplain elevation; existing streambank and contour elevations; . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 24 . ' . . . 5.8.2 cross section detailing the proposed erosion control practice; including slope dimensions (length, width, height) of proposed project and distance waterward; 5.8.3 material specifications; and 5.8.4 documentation of structural stability (design calculations by a professional engineer). BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 25 6.0 STREAM AND LAKE CROSSINGS 6.1 Policy. It is the policy of the District to discourage the use of lake beds and beds of waterbodies for the placement of roads, highways, and utilities. 6.2 Regulation. No person shall use the beds of any waterbody within the District for the placement of roads, highways and utilities without first securing a permit from the District. 6.3 Criteria. Use of the bed: 6.3.1 Shall meet a demonstrated public benefit; 6.3.2 Shall retain adequate hydraulic capacity; 6.3.3 Shall retain adequate navigational capacity; 6.3.4 Shall not adversely affect water quality; and 6.3.5 Shall represent the "minimal impact" solution to a specific need with respect to all other reasonable alternatives. 6.4 Required Exhibits. The following exhibits shall accompany the permit application (one set - full size; one set - reduced to maximum size of 11"x17"): 6.4.1 Construction plans and specifications; 6.4.2 Analysis prepared by a professional engineer or qualified hydrologist showing the effect of the project on hydraulic capacity and water quality; and 6.4.3 An erosion control and restoration plan. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 26 . ' . . . , . . . . 7.0 FLOODPLAIN AND DRAINAGE ALTERATIONS. 7.1 Policy. It is the policy of the District to: 7.1.1 promote the reasonable use of water-resources, such that a landowner may dispose of surface water only in a manner which does not unreasonably burden downstream landowners; 7.1.2 preserve existing water storage capacity below 100 year flood elevations on all waterbodies in the watershed to minimize the frequency and severity-of high water; and 7.1.3 prohibit development in the 100 year floodplain which will unduly restrict flood flows or aggravate known high water problems. 7.2 Regulation. No person shall alter or fill land below the 100 year flood elevation of any wetland, public water, or landlocked subwatershed without first obtaining a permit from the District. No person shall artificially remove surface water from the upper land to and across lower land, nor obstruct the natural flow of surface water, without first obtaining a permit from the District. 7.3 Criteria for Floodplain or Drainage Alterations. 7.3.1 Floodplain filling shall not cause a net decrease in flood storage capacity below the projected 100 year flood elevation. The allowable fill area shall be calculated by a professional engineer registered in the State of Minnesota or by a qualified hydrologist. All new residential, commercial, industrial, and institutional structures shall be constructed such that the lowest basement floor elevations are at a minimum of two (2) feet above the 100 year high water elevation. 7.3.2 No person shall install a culvert, drainage tile, or other artificial means to remove or drain surface water without demonstrating to the District that they have provided for adequate passage and no adverse impact on downstream landowners. 7.3.3 No person shall create an obstruction to the natural flow of surface water without demonstrating to the District that the obstruction will not create an adverse impact on downstream landowners. BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 27 8.0 FEES 8.1 Policy Findings. The Board of Managers finds that: . 8.1.1 public awareness of and compliance with the permitting process will be served by a policy of not charging a permit application fee. By encouraging applicants to seek permits for potential projects, the public benefits by reduced inspection and enforcement costs; 8.1.2 it is in the public interest that certain projects, involving larger scale development or development in sensitive locations, be inspected and analyzed by District staff to provide the Board of Managers sufficient information to evaluate compliance with District rules and applicable law. The District's annual tax levy should not be used to pay such costs for these development projects; and 8.1.3 from time to time persons perform work requiring a permit from the District without a permit, and persons perform work in violation of an issued District permit. The costs of engineering inspection and analysis in such cases exceeds those costs where the applicant has complied with District requirements. The District's annual tax levy should not be used to pay such costs which are incurred because of a failure to meet District requirements. 8. 2. Site Inspections. A site inspection by District staff shall be performed in the . following cases: 8.2.1 commercial, industrial, or multi-family residential developments; 8.2.2 single family residential developments greater than five (5) acres; 8.2.3 any alterations of a floodplain; 8.2.4 where any person performs any work for which a permit is required under these rules without having first obtained a permit from the District, or, performs any work in violation of any terms or conditions of a permit issued by the District under these rules; or 8.2.5 any project which, due to its location, scope, or construction techniques, requires inspection in order to detennine compliance within District rules and applicable law. 8.3 Calculation of Fees. In all cases described in section 8.2, the applicant, or person responsible for the violation, shall pay to the District a fee equal to the District's actual costs of field inspection of the work, including investigation of the area affected by the work, analysis of the work, services of a consultant, including engineering and legal consultants, and any subsequent monitoring of the work, which in the case of a violation . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6, 1998 28 . are incurred after notice of violation from the District. Inspection fees shall be at least $35. 8.4. Violation Procedures and Payment of Fees. 8.4.1 The District shall notify any person performing such work described in subsection 8.2.4 of this rule of the violation. If a permit has not been issued for the work, the person performing the work shall promptly apply for a permit. If a permit has previously been issued, the Board shall rescind the permit if it finds violations of permit terms. 8.4.2 Upon receipt of a permit application exhibits and completion of any necessary inspection and analysis showing that the work is to be performed is in accordance with District requirements, the Board may issue a permit. Upon permit approval, the Board shall notify the permit applicant of the fee due. The fee shall be paid to the District within thirty (30) days from the date of permit approval and shall be received by the District prior to actual issuance of the permit. . 8.4.3 In cases where the permit approved by the Board requires further monitoring of the project by District staff or consultants, the District shall notify the applicant of the monitoring fee due. The fee shall be paid to the District within thirty (30) days from the date of notice and failure to pay the fee shall constitute a violation of the permit terms and the Board may rescind the permit. 8.5 Recovery of Fee. The fee provided for in this rule may be recovered by the District by any legal action authorized by law. 8.6 Governmental Agencies Exempt. The fee provided for in this rule shall not be charged to any agency of the United States or any governmental unit in the State of Minnesota. '... . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6.1998 29 9.0 PERFORMANCE BONDS OR LETTERS OF CREDIT 9.1 Policy. It is the policy of the District to protect and conserve the water resources of the District by ,assuring compliance with the District's Rules in the performance of land development activities within the District, and to assure compliance where necessary by requiring a bond or other surety with a permit application that is conditioned on adequate performance of the authorized activities and compliance with District Rilles. . 9.2. Form and Conditions of a Performance Bond or Letter of Credit. 9.2.1 The performance bond or letter of credit shall be in a form acceptable to the District and from a surety licensed and doing business in Minnesota. 9.2.2 The performance bond or letter of credit must be in favor of the District and conditioned upon the performance of the party obtaining the performance bond or letter of credit of the activities authorized in the permit in compliance with all applicable laws, including the District's Rules, the terms and conditions of the permit and payment when due of any fees or other charges required by law, including the District's Rules. The performance bond or letter of credit shall state that in the event the conditions of the performance bond are not met, the District may make a claim against the performance bond or letter of credit. 9.2.3 The performance bond or letter of credit must be valid and in force for at least a one-year period and shall contain a provision that the bond or letter of . credit may not be canceled or released except pursuant to the terms of Paragraph 9.3 of these Rules. 9.3 Release of a Performance Bond or Letter of Credit. Upon written notification of completion of a project, the District will inspect the project to determine if the project is constructed in accordance with the terms of the permit and District Rules. If the project is completed in accordance with the terms of the permit and District Rules and the party obtaining the performance bond or letter of credit does not have an outstanding balance for unpaid inspection fees, the District will release the performance bond or letter of credit. If the District has not inspected the project and made a determination about the project's compliance with the above criteria within 45 days of District receipt of written notification of project completion, the performance bond or letter of credit is deemed released. . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 30 . . . 10.0 VARIANCES 10.1 Variances Authorized. The Board of Managers may hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of these rules in instances where their strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the property under consideration. The Board of Managers may grant variances where it is demonstrated that such action will be keeping with the spirit and intent of these rules. 10.2 Standard. In order to grant a variance, the Board of Managers shall determine that the special conditions which apply to the structure or land in question do not apply generally to other land or structures in the District, that the granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, and that the variance will not impair or be contrary to the intent of these rules. A hardship cannot be created by the landowner, the landowner's agent or representative, or a contractor, and must be unique to the property. Economic hardship alone is not grounds for issuing a variance. 10.3 Term. A variance shall become void after one year after it is granted if not used. lOA Violation. A violation of any condition set forth in a variance shall be a violation of the District rules and shall automatically terminate the variance. ~'" 31 BCWD Proposed Rues November 6,1998 . 11.0 ENFORCEMENT 11.1 Violation of Rules a Misdemeanor. Violation of these rules, a stipulation . agreement made, an order or permit issued by the Board of Managers pursuant to these rules, is a misdemeanor. 11.2 District Court Action. The Board of Managers may exercise all powers conferred upon it by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 103D in enforcing these rules, including criminal prosecution, injunction, or action to compel performance, restoration, abatement, or other appropriate action. 11.3 Administrative Order. The District may issue a cease and desist order when it finds that a proposed or initiated project presents a serious threat of flooding, soil erosion, sedimentation, or an adverse effect upon water quality or otherwise violates any rule of the District. Bcwd/rulemaking/draft rules. . . BCWD Proposed Rues November 6. 1998 32 MEMORANDUM '. TO: Mayor and Council FR: City Coordinator RE: Legal Publications DA: November 25, 1998 Discussion: We have received the enclosed proposals from the Gazette and the Courier to continue providing legal publications services on a shared based for the City of Stillwater. The City has maintained a sharing relationship with the Gazette and the Courier for about 5 years now. The Gazette publishes our legal notices and the Courier publishes the minutes of meetings. \, The Courier is proposing to charge $3.80 per column inch, which is about a 3% increase. The Gazette is proposing to charge $3.85 per column inch (and $3.03 for repeat publications). I would recommend that the Council approve a rate of$3.80 (and $3.00 for repeat publications). This is the lower of the rates and I believe it would be acceptable to both parties. Recommendation: Council approve publication sharing between Gazette and Courier at $3.80 per column inch and $3.00 for repeat publications. /)1~ --. ,-.- .----_.~-_._-_....----- RESOLUTION NO. 98- .i '--.---" AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONTRACTS FOR 1999 LEGAL NEWSPAPERS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with the Courier News for the publication of Proceedings in Summary Form for 1999, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", and the Stillwater Gazette for the publication of Legal Notices for 1999, attached hereto as Exhibit "B". Adopted by the City Council this 1st day of December, 1998. Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest: , Morli Weldon, City Clerk . '," . . . EXHIBIT" A" AGREEMENT FOR OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER - CITY OF STILLWATER OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS IN SUMMARY FORM FOR THE YEAR 1999 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of December, 1998, by and between THE COURIER NEWS, hereinafter called the "Contractor", and the CITY OF STILL WATER, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Minnesota, hereinafter called the "City". WITNESSETH, that the Contractor and the City, for the consideration hereinafter specified, agree as follows: 1. The Contractor agrees that The Courier News is, and for the term of this contract shall continue to be, a Qualified Newspaper in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, 331A.0l, having general circulation in the City of Stillwater. 2. That for and during the calendar year ending December 31, 1999, the Contractor will publish all Official Proceedings in Summary Form of the City in The Courier News. 3. The publications to be in accordance with instructions provided by the City Clerk as to date and frequency. 4. That all of the publications shall generally conform with established standards of quality previously provided the City. 5. In accordance with the Specifications for City of Stillwater publications for 1999 Legal Advertising on file with the Office of the City Clerk and using 7 point - 8 leading - Helvetica type and a standard advertising unit width, the cost per column inch for official City publications shall be: $3.80 per Column Inch IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. In presence of: COURIER NEWS In presence of: CITY OF STILLWATER City Clerk Mayor ~ EXHffilT "B" AGREEMENT FOR OFFICIAL NEWSPAPER - CITY OF STILLWATER LEGAL NOTICES FOR THE YEAR 1999 . THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 1st day of December, 1998, by and between THE STILLWATER EVENING GAZETTE, hereinafter called the "Contractor", and the CITY OF STILLWATER, a municipal corporation of Washington County, Minnesota, hereinafter called the "City". WITNESSETH, that the Contractor and the City, for the consideration hereinafter specified, agree as follows: 1. The Contractor agrees that The Stillwater Evening Gazette is, and for the term of this contract shall continue to be, a Qualified Newspaper in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota, 331A.Ol, having general circulation in the City of Stillwater. 2. That for and during the calendar year ending December 31, 1999, the Contractor will publish all official notices of the City in The Stillwater Evening Gazette. 3. The publications to be in accordance with instructions provided by the City Clerk as to date and frequency. 4. That all of the publications shall generally conform with established standards of quality previously provided the City. . 5. In accordance with the Specifications for City of Stillwater publications for 1999 Legal Advertising on file with the Office of the City Clerk and using 7 point - 8 leading - Helvetica type and a standard advertising unit width, the cost per colurrm inch for official City publications shall be: First Insertion: Second, and Each Subsequent Insertion: $3.80 per Column Inch $3.00 per Column Inch IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. In presence of: STILL WATER EVENING GAZETTE In presence of: CITY OF STILLWATER City Clerk . Mayor . . . MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MORLI WELDON, CITY CLERK RENEWAL OF TOBACCO LICENSES 11/25/98 Applications for renewal of tobacco licenses have been received and are being reviewed. A listing of applicants will be provided at the Tuesday, December 1 meeting. Approval should be contingent upon receipt of all required documentation, completion of background investigations, and the fulfillment of all requirements for eligibility to hold a tobacco license in the City of Stillwater. Action requested: Resolution approving renewal of tobacco licenses for 1999, contingent upon the fulfillment of all requirements for eligibility to hold a tobacco license in the City of Stillwater. '.. '~ . Memorandmn To: Mayor Kimble and City Council Members cc: Nile Kriesel From: Larry Dauffenbach, Police Chief Date: 12/01/98 Re: Tobacco License . In compliance with the City Code, Ordinance 41-2, I have been rwming background checks on people that have applied for licenses to sell tobacco. I have found one individual that currently holds a license that has a felony conviction. The conviction is for theft of public assistance. The conviction date is 2-11-94. The sentence was 10 years probation, until year 2004. The conviction is a " stay of imposition". The person filling out the city application did not indicate on the application that they had a felony conviction, they checked the appropriate box "no". The conviction does not automatically preclude the renewal of the license, nor does the false statement in the application. Both, however, could be grounds for denying the license. The decision to issue the license or not to issue the license is a council decision. . :. " LICENSES, PERMITS AND PROHIBITIONS . priate federal, state, or local laws and regulations relating to tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related devices. (Ord. No. 841, 3-17-98) . Subd.3. License. No person may sell or offer to sell any tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related device without first having obtained a license to do so from the city. (1) Application. An application fOiAl-license to sell tobacco, tobacco products, or to- bacco related devices must be made on a form provided by the city. The application must contain the full name of the appli- cant, the applicant's residential and busi- ness addresses and telephone numbers, the name of the business for which the license is sought, and any additional in- formation the city deems necessary. The city clerk, with the assistance oCthe police chief or the chieCs designee, is responsible to see that background checks are done on all applicants. Upon receipt of a com- pleted application, the city clerk must forward the application to city council for action at its next regularly scheduled coun- cil meeting. If the city clerk determines that an application is incomplete, he or she must return the application to the applicant with notice of the information necessary to make the application com- plete. (2) Action. The city council may either ap- prove or deny the license, or it may delay action for such reasonable period of time as necessary to complete any investiga- tion of the application or the applicant it deems necessary. (3) Term. All licenses issued under this sec- tion are valid until Decelilber 31 of each calendar year. (4) Revocation or suspension. Any license is- sued under this section may be revoked or suspended as provided in the violations and penalties subdivision of this section. (5) Transfers. All licenses issued under this section are valid only on the premises for which the license was issued and only for .. Supp. No.1 ~ 41-2 the person to whom the license was is- sued. No transfer of any license to another location or person is valid without the prior approval of the city counciL (6) Moveable place of business. No license may be issued to a moveable place of business. Only fixed location businesses are eligible to be licensed under this sec- tion. (7) Display. All licenses must'be posted and displayeq. in plain view of the general public on the licensed premise. (8) Renewals. The renewal of a license issued under this section must be handled in the '.same manner as the original application. The request for a renewal must be made at least 60 days before the expiration of the current license. (Ord. No. 841, 3-17-98) Subd.4. Fees. No license may be issued under this section until the appropriate license fee is paid in full. The fee is set by the city council by resolution duly enacted from time to time. (Ord. No. 841, 3-17-98) Subd.5.Basis for denial of license. Anyone of the following are grounds for denying the issu- ance or renewal of a license under this section; however, except as may otherwise be provided by law, the existence of any particular ground for denial does not mean that the city must deny the license. If a license is mistakenly issued or re- newed to a person, it will be revoked upon the discovery that the person was ineligible for the license under this subdivision. (1) The applicant is under the age of eighteen years. The applicant has been convicted within the past five years of any violation of ~"'" federal, state or local law, ordinance pro- vision, or other regulation relating to to- bacco or tobacco products, or tobacco re- lated devices, or any felony within the last ten years. ,.The applicant has had a license to sell tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco re- lated devices revoked within the preced- ing 12 months of the date of application. (2,>', (3) CD41:5 ~ 41-2 STILLWATEH CODE . (4) The applicant fails to provide any infor- mation required on the application, or provides false or misleading information. (5) The applicant is prohibited by federal, state or other local law, ordinance or other regulation, from holding such a license. (6) The location proposed is or has been main- tained as a public nuisance, place of un- lawful assembly, disrepute or criminal activity. (Ord. No. 841, 3-17-98) Subd. 6. Prohibited sales. It shall be a viola- tion of this section for any person to sell or ofTer to sell any tobacco, tobacco product or tobacco re- lated device: (1) To any person under the age of 18 years. (2) By means of any type of vending machine, except as may otherwise be provided in this section. . By means of self-service methods whereby the customer does not need to make a verbal or written request to an employee of the licensed premise in order to receive the tobacco, tobacco product, or tobacco related device and whereby there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco produ~t or tobacco related device between the licensee or the licensee's employee, and the customer. (4) By means ofloosies as defined in Subd. 2 of this section. (3) (5) Containing opium, morphine,jimson weed, bella donna, strychnos, cocaine, mari- juana, or other deleterious, hallucino- genic, toxic, or controlled substances ex- cept nicotine and other substances found naturally in tobacco or added as part of an otherwise lawful manufacturing process. (6) By any other means, to any other person, or in any other manner or form prohibited by federal, state, or other local law, ordi- nance provision or other regulation. (Ord. No. 841, 3-17-98) SUl.Hl. 7. Vending machines. It is unlawful for any person licensed under this section to allow the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco e ~upp. Nil. 1 relaled devices by lhe means of a vending ma- chine unless minors are at all times prohibited from entering the licensed establishment. (Ord. No. 841, 3-17-98) , Subd. 8. Self-service sales. It is unlawful for a licensee under this section to allow the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related de- vices by any means where by the customer may have access to the items without having to re- quest the item from the licensee or the licensee's employee and there is not a physical exchange of the tobacco, tobacco product or the tobacco related device between the licensee, clerk and the cus- tomer. All tobacco, tobacco products, and tobacco related devices must either be stored behind a counter or other area not freely accessible to customers, or in a case or other storage unit not left open and accessible to the general public. (Ord. No. 841,3-17-98) Subd. 9. Responsibility. All licensees under this section are responsible for the actions of their employees in regard to the sale of tobacco, tobacco products or tobacco related devices on the li- censed premises, and the sale of an item by an employee is considered a sale by the license holder. Nothing in this section may be construed as prohibiting the city from also subjecting the clerk to whatever penalties are appropriate under this section, state or federal law, or other applica- ble law or regulation. (Ord. No. 841, 3~17-98) Subd. 10. Compliance checks and inspections. All licensed premises must be open to inspection by the local law enforcement or other authorized ."'. city official during regular business hours. From time to time, but at least once per year, the city must conduct compliance checks by engaging, with the written consent of their parents or guard- ians, minors over the age of fifteen years but less than eighteen years, to enter the licensed premise to attempt to purchase tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices. Minors used for the purpose of compliance checks must be supervised by designated law enforcement officers or other designated city personnel. Minors used for com- pliance checks arc nol guilty of the unlawful purchase or attempted purchase, nor the unlaw- ful possession of tobacco, tobacco products, or CD41:6 . . . MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Council From: Modi Weldon Date: 12/01/98 Subject: Tobacco Licenses for 1999 The City has received requests for tobacco license renewals from the below listed businesses. All required documentation and fees have been received. Information related to background checks will be provided by Police Chief Dauffenbach. American Legion Brine's Inc. dba Brine's Bar & Restaurant EKS, Inc. dba Harbor Bar Erickson Post Acquistion, Inc. dba Stillwater Texaco FTL Corporation dba MGM Liquor Warehouse Food N Fuel, Inc. dba Food N Fuel Freighthouse, Inc. dba Freighthouse Jazzy's House of Blues and Cigar Parlor JLH, Inc. dba John's Bar Kawther, Inc. dba Stillwater Tobacco Kinsel's Inc. dba Kinsel's Liquor Store Lens Family Foods Loggers, Inc. dba Loggers Mad Capper Saloon & Eatery, Inc. dba Mad Capper Meister, Eileen V. dba Meister's Bar and Grill Meister, Eileen V. dba South Hill Liquor St. Croix Catering dba Cat Ballou's Stillwater Country Club, Inc. dba Stillwater Country Club SupeIValu Holdings, Inc. dba Cub Foods Sutlers, Inc. dba Sutler's Wines and Spirits Tom Thumb Food Markets, Inc. dba Tom Thumb Store No. 219 Twin Cities Store, Inc. dba Oasis Market (Croixwood) Twin Cities Store, Inc. dba Oasis Market (Greeley St.) Twin Cities Store, Inc. dba Oasis Market (Main Street) Vittorio's Inc. dba Vittorio's Yang, Pao V. dba R & R Liquors Zahren Enterprises, Inc. dba Trumps Deluxe Bar and Grill '6' . . . CITY OF STILLWATER MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council ~ FROM: Diane Deblon, Finance Director DATE: December 1, 1998 SUBJECT: RE-APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR ABS CO. It will be necessary for the City Council to approve the re-apportionment of special assessments in order to complete the recording of the subdivision for the ABS parcel downtown. This is a parcel receiving TIF assistance and the split is necessary for valuation calculations pursuant to the TIF Agreement. RESOLUTION NO. 98- RESOLUTION APPROVING RE-APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR SUBDIVISION OF PARCEL NO. 28.030.20.13.0086 . WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has previously adopted the special assessments for L.I. 257-2, the Downtown Plan, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has previously approved the minor subdivision of the said parcel with Resolution #96-196 on August 6, 1996, and WHEREAS, there are outstanding special assessments on parcel #28.030.20.13.0086, and WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City Council to re-apportion levied special assessments to effectuate a subdivision of property, and WHEREAS, the principal balance of special assessments outstanding for parcel #28.030.20.13.0086 as of December 31, 1998 is $20,000, and WHEREAS, the 52,894 square foot parcel #28.030.20.13.0086 is to be split into two parcels, one of which will be 15,666 square feet and the other will be 37,265 square feet. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater that the special assessments shall be re-apportioned as follows: Parcel B-1 with 15.666 square feet Parcel B-2 with 37.265 square feet . $5,919.00 $14,081.00 Adopted by City Council this 1st day of December, 1998. Mayor Attest: City Clerk . . . . DISTRICT MANAGER CUSTOMER SERVICE AND SALES NORTHLAND DISTRICT Cc- /;2. - /-1 ~ FYI ifiiii?!!!!!I UNITED STJ.1TES IIiifII POSTJ.1L SERVICE f2----- November 24, 1998 Jay Kimble Mayor of Stillwater 412 Elm Street Stillwater, MN 55082-4415 Dear Mayor Kimble: The Postal Service has determined the present postal facility located on 102 North 3rd Street is inadequate to serve Stillwater's future postal needs. We wish to establish a new carrier facility to house the carriers from Stillwater and Lake Elmo which will enhance both the quality of postal services we provide to your community and our employees' working conditions. Plans are to leave all retail operation at the existing location and relocate carriers and mail processing operation to a new location. After consultation with the Postmaster of Stillwater we have determined the new building should contain, ideally, approximately 21,543 square feet of net interior space on a site of between 121,000 and 134,000 square feet. The Postal Service desires to work closely with your community to achieve a mutually beneficial postal facility. We are requesting your input and concurrence with our plans, prior to the public advertising which will generate alternatives for our final facility location. We welcome your timely suggestions and comments both as we initiate this project and as it proceeds. Please address any questions, suggestions, or concerns to: Steve Muyskens Real Estate Specialist 6800 West 64th Street, Suite 100 Overland Park, KS 66202-4171 Telephone No. (913)831-1855 ext. 436 Thank you for your valuable participation in this process. ~~ Michele Purton EB/bm 100 S 1 ST STREET RM 409 MINNEAPOLIS MN 55401-9990 TEL: (612) 349-3500 FAX: (612) 349-6377 .,. v . . . MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and City Council Fr: Sue Fitzgerald, Planner Da: November 20,1998 Subject: F.Y.I. - Annual Report to the State Historic Preservation Office Attached is the 1997 - 1998 Annual Report to the State Historic Preservation Office. The report recapitulates the activities of the Heritage Preservation Commission for the fiscal year. -w ~ '... r illwater ~ ~~ TH:-:-IRTHPlACE OF MINNESOTA J . November 20, 1998 Michael Koop Minnesota Historical Society 345 Kellogg Blvd W. St. Paul,:MN 55102-1906 Dear Mike: Enclosed is the 1997-1998 Annual Report to the State Historic Preservation Office from the Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission for you review. . If you have any questions, please contact me at (651) 430-8822 Thank you for all your help, Sue Fitzgerald Planner . CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 >fjf ;;. . STILLWATER HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION Annual Report to Minnesota Historical Society State historic 'Preservation Office Federal Fiscal Year October 1997 to September 1998 Design Review Permits: The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed 70 design review permits from 10/97 to 9/98. The permits were reviewed according to the Preservation Or~inance, the Downtown Design Guidelines and the Sign Ordinance. A summary of the cases and the fmdings of each case are as follows: 1. Case No. DR/97-22. Design review of exterior sign for "Jeepers" at 304 North Main Street. Pamela Powell, applicant. Denied 6-0. 2. Case No. SUPIDR/97-57. Design review of proposed bed and breakfast at 1117 North Fourth Street - The Rose Cottage Inn. Mark Balay representing applicant, Aldine West. Approved 6-0. . 3. Case No. DR/97-23. Design review of storage building at 1951 Northwestern Avenue. W. Ross Buchman, for applicant IncStar. Approved 6-0. 4. Case No. DR/97-24. Design review of exterior signage for Acapulco Restaurant at 1240 Frontage Road West - River Heights Mall. Terry Semo, DeMars Signs, Inc. representing applicant. Tabled. 5. Case No. DR/97-25. Design review of building documents and signage for Vide,o Update at Curve Crest Blvd and Stillwater Blvd. Peter Johnson, representing applicant. Approved 6 --0 w/amended condition. 6. Case No. DR/97-26. Design review of a 340+ parking spaces parking ramp at South 2nd Street and East Olive Street. John Roettger, applicant. Approved 6-0. 7. Case No. DR/97;.27. Design review ofa 76 unit condominium at 304 South 2nd Street. John Roettger. applicant. Approved 6-0 w/motion to include Bluff City Site comments. 8. Case No. DEM/97-1. Public Hearing on demolition of residence at 1010 Third Street South. Orwin L. Carter, applicant. Approved 4-1. . 9. Case No. DR/97-28. Design review of exterior sign at 129 South Main Street. Bob and Connie Lotspeich, applicant. Approved 4-1. 10. Case No. DR/97-29. Design review of exterior walk-up window at 131 South Main Street. Sandy Hudson, applicant. Approved 4-1. 1 ~ " 11. Case No. DR/97-30. Design review of exterior signage at 1732 Market Drive. Jack Krongard, applicant. Approved 4-1. 12. Case No. DEM/98-1. Public Hearing - demolition of residence at 1817 N. Second St. Richard Edstrom, applicant. Allowed to remove outbuilding and deck. . 13. Case No. DR/97-4. Continuation of design review of Maple Island Renovation Phase II. Tim Stefan representing Mainstream Development Part. Approved 6-1. 14. Case No DR/98-1. Design review of exterior bed and breakfast sign at 303 North Fourth Street. Carol Hendrickson, applicant. Approved 7-0. 15. Case No. DR/98-2. Design review of exterior materials and colors of a proposed 50,280 square foot retail building and sign review in the Stillwater Market Place. David Reimer, applicant. Approved 6-1. 16. Case No. DR/98-3. Design review of exterior sign at 312 South Main Street. Annacles Restaurant Group. Tim McZee, applicant. Tabled. 17. Case No SUP/DR/98-17. Design review of the modification ofan existing bed and breakfast (Sauntry Bed and Breakfast) to increase the number of bedrooms from five to six. 626 North Fourth Street. Arthur and Elaine Halbardier, applicants. Denied 6-1. 18. Case No. DR/98-4. Design review of a proposed gazebo at220 East Myrtle Street. David and Carol Hurley, applicants. Approved 7-0. 19. Case No. DEM/98-2. Demolition request for residence at 910 Seventh St. Deborah and Jerald Lawson, applicants. Tabled - need to submit demolition plan. . 20. Case No. DR/98-5. Design review of exterior signage and exterior modifications. Sandy Hudson, applicant. Approved 7-0. J 21. Case No. DR/98-6. Design review of exterior signage for Eagle Valley Bank at 1946 Washington Ave. S. Iver Kammerud, applicant. Approved 7-0. 22. Case No. DR/98-7. Design review of exterior signage at 1725 Tower Drive West. Bob Bankers, applicant. Approved 7-0. 23. Case No. DR/98-8. Design review of exterior signage for Firstar Bank at 6001 Stillwater Blvd. Scott Nelson, applicant. Approved 7-0. 24. Case No. DR/98-9. Design review of exterior kiosk at Firstar Bank at 213 E. Chestnut Street. Cynthia Gustafson, applicant. Approved 7-0. 25. Case No. SUP/DR/98-22. Design review of proposed parking lot at Lakeview Hospital at 1105 and 1112 South Everett Street. BWBR Architects, applicant. . Tabled. 2 ~ " . 26. Case No. V /DR/98-23. Design review of exterior signage for Famous Daves at 14200 60th Street North. Doug Lanham. representing Famous Daves, applicant. Approved 5-2 w/modifications. 27. Case No. DR/98-1 O.Designreview of office building at 6750Stillwater Blvd. Bruce Fokken, applicant. Approved 7-0 wi 1 new condition. 28. Case No. V /DR/98-15. Design Review of a two-car garage with an efficiency studio apartment above at 1215 5th Ave. So. Karl Ranum, applicant. Approved 7-0. 29. Case No. DR/98-11. Design Review of exterior signage at 200 East Chestnut St. Loren Lorenzen, representingU.S Bank, applicant. Amended/Approved 7-0. . 30. Case No. DR/98-12. Design Review of exterior signage at 312 North Main Street. Keri Beyer, applicant. Approved 7-0. 31. Case No. DR/98-13. Design Review of exterior signage at 308 South Main Street. Robert Lillyblad,applicant. Approved 7-0. 32. Case No. DR/98-14. Design Review of exterior signage at 1901-1931 Curve Crest Blvd. Susan Baker, applicant. Tabled. 33. Case No. DR/97-5. Design Review of signage and lighting plan for St. Paul Lutheran Church. Pastor Bill Schonebaum, applicant. Approved 7-0. Landscape Plan subject to approval. 34. Case No. DR/98-15. Design Review of exterior sign at 2600 Wildpines Lane. Shawn and Lessa Geary, applicants. Tabled. 35. Case No. DR/98-16. Design Review if exterior sign at 423 South Main Street, Esteban's. Bob Tanner, applicant. Approved 5-0. 36. Case No. DR/98-17. Design Review of one directional sign and one instant cash sign at 6001 Stillwater Blvd., Firstar Bank, Suburban Lighting representing applicant. Tabled. . 37. Case No. DR/98-18. Design Review of sign change on canopy and freestanding sign at 1750 South Greeley Street, Oasis Market. Suburban Lighting representing applicant. Tabled. 38. Case No. DR/98-19. Design Review of sign change on canopy and freestanding sign at 103 North Main Street, Fina. Suburban Lighting representing applicant. Tabled. 39. Case No. DR/98-20. Design Review of sign change of canopy and freestanding sign at 2289 Croixwood Blvd., Oasis Market. Suburban Lighting representing applicant. . Approved 5-0. 3 'W 40. Case SUP/DR/98-32. Design review of renovation of existing commercialretail . facility, 219 North Main Street. Mark Balay representing applicant. Approved 5-0. .' 41. Case DR/98-21. Design Review of exterior sign at 229 East Chestnut Street. David Christen, applicant. Approved 5-0. 42. Case No. DR/98-22. Design review of exterior renovation at 125 North Main Street. Janet Sawyer, applicant. Approved 5-0. 43. Case No. DR/98-18. Design review of freestanding sign face change at Oasis Market Service Station at 1750 Greeley Street South. Ray Roemmich, applicant. Approved 5-0. 44. Case No. DR/98-19. Design review of sign changes and painting of parapet , and gas pump canopies at the Oasis Market Service Station at 103 North Main Street. Ray Roemmich, applicant. Tabled (7-6-98). Approved 8-3-98 - 5-0. 45. Case No. DR/98-23. Design review of exterior sign for Hudson Flooring at 1500 Frontage Road (River Heights Mall). Rick Whitmire of Trick Communications, applicant. Approved 5-0. 46. Case No. DR/98-24. Design review of replacement exterior signage for new identity ofINCSTAR at 1990 Industrial Blvd. Laura Yon Holtum, applicant. Tabled (7-6- 98). Approved 6-0 (8-3-98). . 47. Case No. DR/98-25. Design review of sign face replacement for Burnet Realty at 2020 Washington Street. Phil Eastwood, applicant. Approved 5-0. 48. Case No. DR/98-26. Design review of ATM installation at Norwest Bank, 12000 Northwestern Avenue. Stephen Madson - BKPV representing Norwest Bank, applicant. Approved 5-0. 49. Case No. SUPNIDR/98-49. Design review of new constructionlbuilding fa~ade at 110 East Chestnut Street (comer of Chestnut and Water Streets). Tim Stefan, applicant. Approved 5-0. 50. Case No. DR/98-20. Design review of exterior modifications and sign changes at the Oasis Service Station at 2289 Croixwood Blvd. Ray Roemmich of Suburban Lighting, representing Amoco Service Station. Approved 6-0. 51. Case No. DR/98-27. Design review of exterior signage at 220 North Main Street. Mark Balay, representing Lake Elmo Bank. Approved 6-0. 52. Case No. DR/98-28. Design review of exterior signage for Heritage Embroidery at 1400 Frontage Road West (River Heights Plaza). Debroah Pierre, applicant. Approved 6-0. . 4 'W . 53. Case No. SUP/DR/98-53. Design review ofan commercial building at 2510 Curve Crest Drive. Chad Bouley, Kellison Company representing St. Croix Bicycle & SkatelKennedy Transmission. Approved 6-0. 54. Case No. DR/98-29. Design review of exterior modifications and signage at 208 South Main Street. Ed Hawksford, representing Chelsea Rose Antiques. Approved 6-0. 55. Case No. DR/98-30. Design review of remodel and addition to Valley Dental Arts at 1745 Northwestern Avenue. Michael Hoefler, Archnet, representing Valley Dental Arts. Approved 6-0. 56. Case No. DR/98-31. Design review of exterior modifications and signage at 2500 West Orleans Avenue. Dick Zimmerman, applicant. Approved 6-0. 57. Case No. DR/98-32. Design review ofan exterior sign at 209 South Main Street. Rod Langerin/Susan Thielen, representing True North Furnishings, applicant. Approved 6-0. . 58. Case No. DR/98-33. Design review of exterior modifications at 2050 West Frontage Road - Perkins Restaurant. Gregory Daigle, applicant. Amended! Approved 6-0. 59. Case No. DR/98-34. Design review of exterior modifications at 102 South Main Street. Mark Balay, applicant. Approved 6-0. 60. Case No. DR/98-35. Design review of an exterior sign at 102 South Main Street - All About Horses. Kaj Reiter of LeRoy Signs, applicant. Amended! Approved 6-0. 61. Case No. DEM/98-3. Demolition request for a residence at 1817 North Second Street. Richard Edstrom, applicant. Approved 5-0. 62. Case No. V /DR/98-58. Design review of the modification of an existing bed and breakfast to increase the number of bedrooms from five to six at 319 West Pine Street - The Ann Bean House. Ken and Kim Jadwin, applicants. Amended! Approved 6-0. 63. Case No. SUB/DR/98-59. Demolition request for a residence at 404 South Grove Street. Russ Kurth - Kurth Surveying, representing Frank Biedny, applicant. Approved 5-0. 64. Case No. DR/98-36. Design review of exterior sign for The Grand Banquet at 301 South Second Street. Dick Anderson, applicant. Approved 5-0. 65. Case. No. DR/98-37. Design review of exterior signage at 113 South Main Street. Susan Smith, applicant. Approved 5-0. . 66. Case No. DR/97-25. Design review of exterior signage change at Video Update at 1798 Market Drive. Kevin Gillette, All-Brite Sign, Inc. representing Update Video. Tabled (10-5-98). 5 i# 67. Case No. DR/98-38. Design review of exterior signage and canopy at 421 South Main Street. Gerri Larson, applicant. Approved 5-0. .. 68. Case No. DR/98-39. Design review of exterior signage and canopy at 1570 Frontage Road West. Vincent Lin, applicant. Approved 5-0. 69. Case No. V /DR/98-18. Design review of building addition to Ascension Episcopal Church at 214 North Third Street. James Whipkey and Bob Ayres representing Ascension Episcopal Church. Approved Elevation Plan 5-0/LA Plan /Lighting Plan etc. to be approved. 70. Case No. DR/98-40. Design review of exterior signage and landscape plan for Heartland Office Village at Tower Road and Northwestern Avenue. John Low, applicant. Approved 5-0. Heritage Preservation Commission Members Roger Tomten, Chairperson Brent Peterson, Representative of the Washington County Historical Society Katherine Francis Jeff Johnson Bob Kimbrel Frank Langer Howard Lieberman Annual Preservation Awards The HPC awards were presented at the May 1 st City Council meeting, the week before Preservation Week. The awards included: Reuse of an Existing Building - Maple Island Hardware New Development - Washington County Historical Society Carriage House Fayade of a Building - Sammies Womens Casual Attire Signage - Tie - Tasteful Thymes & Grandma's House in Stillwater Dutchtown District National Register Identification and Evaluation Study 6 " . .. . ~ . . . . . The HPC was involved with surveying, photographing and recording the architectural styles of homes in the study area. Each member of the committee was responsible to survey and photograph about 25 homes. See Exhibit A. Historic Preservation Workshop The Historical Society Conference was held in May in Fairbault. The HPC Chairperson, Roger Tomten presented Design Review Process in Stillwater at one of the workshops. Aip1eIKollinerProperty Master Plan Two members of the HPC were on a committee to help contribute ideas to a consultant to develop a master plan for the 25 acres - Kolliner and 27 acre - Aiple pr.9perties along the river in downtown Stillwater. Pioneer Park Master Plan Two HPC members are on a committee working to implement the Master Plan for Pioneer Park, which is where at one time stood the lumber baron Issac Staples mansion. Design Guidelines Revisions HPC has started the process of updating the Design Guidelines booklet that is given to businesses in the downtown area when they are requesting exterior changes. Enclosed is the draft being worked on - The Awning section. See Exhibit B. Demolition Ordinance In 1997 a Demolition Ordinance was established to preserve the City's architectural history. It is administered through the HPC. There were three demolition requests this year. Demolition Ordinance is attached. Exhibit C. Footnote The HPC achieved two major triumphs in the historic district of the downtown area. Two "60's" type buildings that were in the middle of the district have been remodeled to become not a historic building, but a contributing building to the area. One, an auto supply business that was converted into a photo shop. The other, was a gas station that had red, white and blue stripes on it. The HPC worked with Oasis Market and Amoco Oil Company to recreate a "50's" style gas station complete with an authentic Standard Oil pylon sign. Photos attached. Exhibit D. 7 ~ ~. From: At<AM To: Nile Kriesel . AMM FAX NEWS November 23-27, 1998 Date: 11/24/98 Time: 5:37:34 PM F Page 2 of 2 I' - Aisociation of Metropolitan Municipalities TIF task force reviews first draft . The legislative TIF Recodifi- cation Commission met on Monday, Nov. 23,1998 to review the initial raft of the recodification. AMM and the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) have coordinated a review of the draft oy city officials, bond counsels, fiscal consult- ants and legislative staff. AMM and LMC staff testified that the initial draft is generally a technical docu- ment, but there are several policy issues that need to be resolved. Among them are the calculation of duration limits, the definition of TIF original value and tourism facilities and the rewritten TI F bond provi- sions A major overriding issue related to the recodification is its effective date and impact on existing dis- . A/'IIf fyI/eM iJ/dJd pffiPlifilytl ill AIfII dly /RJ6d!etf ilDi atfminiftrat,,! !he iR/Jrmiitidn if intlollt! tl it rl/JIlllJlitll //la/IIi, (/lvndlmemlJelf inl ftd/fin P11f1 II itrp plidas Ibteiift Ifil8ll1liIDl/Rlffl dty if lit!. @ (Ipyrif/lt l??JAlfIl 14J IIniYHfity AYM! !lfft Jt. Pie/, 111/ JJlOj-lfl44 PlJont fOp) 1'J-4(J()() fo: (bJl) lJl-J2?? (-Dlaif d/!J/Il@d/!J/IlJ4J.1I! tricts. Since many of the provisions of the current law were adopted with prospective effective dates, a recodification will need to recognize the various o time frames for ~., e existing districts. The commission II .. was aware of the effective date issue and the potential policy issues The commission members instructed the legislative staff to develop a list of the policy issues identified by the AMM and the LMC, as well as those ~H,"I //& ., of the Office of St~te .Auditor ~) (OSA~. The OSA list Includes ;.;;~ techmcal concerns, as well as several suggested policy changes. The commission discussed not only the effective date issue, but also the direction of the codification. SLue to discuss metro governance The Sensible Land Use Coali- tion (SLUG) is hosting a lun- cheon featuring Curt Johnson, chair of the Met Council The meeting will be held at the Radisson South Hotel in Bloomington on Dec. 2, 1998 at 1130 a.m. Johnson will discuss several metro issues, including metro governance, and will assess the future of the region. To register call (612) 474-3993, Being aware of the complexity of the statute, the commission debated without resolution if another tool - TIF light - could be developed The new tool would be less burdensome than the current law but could have less authority, The commission requested that the OSA, which suggested the concept, and other interested parties study the idea. Other commission members asked if the staff could draft a memorandum that succinctly states the legislative TIF policy. The commission will meet on Dec. 18, 1998 to review policy issues related to the codification and infcrmation requested at the Novem- ber meeting. If you have any ideas regarding an additional TI F tool or the state's TIF policy please contact Gene Ranieri at (651) 215- 4001. Metro city requests fee methodology The city of Robbinsdale is studying city-imposed fees, licenses and permits. The city is interested if any other city has reviewed its proced.Jres and developed a methodology to determine what fees, licenses or permits should be imposed or eliminated. If you have conducted such a review, please contact Marcia Glick at (612) 537-4534. ,~ I I I I I I ! I i IQLebTlONS ~..qAe-Dr 4 : I i I STI\_l...A.0 C:I\"~ po. 'l1::;l:l I ~~~~ i i t)A,u.> "" ~ ,,~\US........ , II 4-3Q.. t;>000 I II II II II II II 1/ I I, II II rl II II II II , i 1 I. i I ! i f , f 1:: ~ r , , , L ! ;. 'f- f' i? f ~.'. Ol.,' i f t i ~ .' r f ;: i [ ; r. . . \ \ ~ . . . NDV-25-1998 11:51 CITY OF OFH P.02/04 CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS ACTION AGENDA FOR CIlY COUNCIL MEETING OF TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1998 7:00 P.M. AGENDA I. call to Order/Apl'roval of Agendll 1. Add Nile Kriesel of the City of Stillwater to Visitors to di.cu., the grand opening of the St. Croix Valley Recreational Facility 2. AdJ the authorUittioD for thc ptll'ch..se of. poliC:i: vehicle <J.S Item D. of New Bu,.inese 3. AcId d.i~sion of the extension of the City Hall roaJ to Oakgreen Avenue itS Item B. of Ola Bu.ines. 4. Add update of Perro Pond. as Item C. of old. Business 5. Ad.d upcl~te of MnDot as Item D. of Olel Busincss Agena. approved ag amended, 5.0 II. Deparl:ment/Council Liaison Reports A. Pa:1s Commi$sion Upd.,.te pr:oviJed B. Cable Commission Update provicleJ C. Water Management Organizations Upckte provicled D. Recycling AWiU'd Steve Casperson of 5421 Ojib War North E. Planning Commission Update provicled F. Councll Committee Updates Visitors Nile Kriesel of City of Stillwitter - grand op~ning of St. Croix Valley Recreational Facility on Sunday/ Dec.m.her 13 from 12:00 noon to 6:00 p,m. III. John Michael of Brown7s Creek WMO - update provided This is an opportunity {or the publi~ tQ address tbe Cou.'1cil with tIUestions Or Concerns on iSllue, net p~rl of the regular agenck. (PJe.lSe limit commentil to 3 minutes in leng~h.) NOU-25-1998 11:52 CITY OF OFH , P.03/04 IV. Consent Aeencla (Roll Call Vote) Items B. Cd C. pulled from Consent, Remaining agenda ilpproved as presented.. v. A. B. Approve Billj & Investmenb Approve City Council Minutes - Novem1eJ: 10, 1998 Cha11g'e$ tt1~ - approveelS-O Set a pu1lic hearing fo.r: December 15, 1998 to discuss changing utility billing to monthly and to diJCUll8 water rate increase approved with dilrification 5.0 Set a. public hearing for Deeem1el' 15, 1998 to discuss the establishment of an ordinance dealing with fly ash Appl'owl of sta.f! to create an internal committee to discuss City insurance benefits Interim construclion fund transfers Approval of 1999llcenses - tobacco, bingo, lunusement, on & off.sale intoxicating liquor, non-intoxioating liquor Appl'owl of new 1998 tobacco licell5e Approve Resolution Authorizing the Acceptance of an Automated External Defibrillator Pursuant to the La'\\' Enforcement Defibrilla.tor Grant Program . c. D. E. F. G. H. 1. Public Hearin~s A. Public Hearing to discuss poasihle suspension/revocation of a liquor license for Holiday St~tionstores, Inc. affecting olf-sale of 3.2 beer and/or non. intoxicating liquor Continued to December 15 Co\m~ meeting B. Public Hearing to discuss possible suspension/revocation of a liquor license for Snllwatex Aerie 94 affecling on-sale of liquor a.nd/OJ: wine $500.00 ci'ril penalty anel two day mlllpension of license with one of thole clay. being either Ii Friday Or S...huday; next violation will be comiJereJ. a.ll third and fined according to gwdelines esbbli,h.d by City Council1:'osolution C. Public Hearing for issuance of 601.C3 "n~r Valley Senior Services Alliance facility (continued from November 10 Councll meeting as set at October 20 Council meeting) Continued again to il Special Hearing on DecembaJ: 8, 1998 at '1 :30 p.m. . VI. New Business A. Presentation of election certificates horn 1998 election Presented B. PJ:esentation to Charlie Schwub, Bayport: Fire Chiefl of plaque in recogni'tion of 30 yea.rs with the Bayport Fire Deparlment Postponed. to December 15 meeting' to allow ChArlie Schwal,"b: to be present C. Review of application by Presbyterian Church, 6201 Osgood Avenue . I . . . NOV-25-1998 11:52 CITY OF OFH D. North, for a Conditional Use Pennit, with Pla:nn.ing Commission recommendations Approved 'With Planning' Conunillsion and. City plilnner's recommendations Request authori2:a.uon forPokce Department to purchase a vehicle in 1999 Pun:hillle 1999 Ford. Expedition with fund, allocilted. for vehidc purchase anel k1mc:e to come from sale of marked squad car being routed out; urrieJ 3-2 T umquid & Swensou. voting against VII. Olel Business A. Kern Center Repor!: - set a public hearing for Decem1er 15 Countlil meeting to discu81i1 rezoning with Planning Commission recottunencktions Set a public hearing and. refer the issue bac1 to the PIamUng Commis.ion for rezoning rec:ommendation B, City HJl extension to Oakgreen Avenue To Le discussed. at December 15 meeting to determine financing of pt'Oject C. Pel.TO Creek updilte furthcr elillcul/sion on the lilyout of the project D. MnDot borroW' pit excavation update Clarification aud reiterAtion of Councll'lIstand on the issu~ VIn. Adjournment P.04/04 TOTAL P.04 1. 2. 3. 4:30 4:30 4. 4:35 5. 6. 7. 4:55 8. 5:00 to 5:30 WASHINGTON COUNTY Den)nis C. Hegberg District 1/Chair Mary Hauser District 2 Wally Abrahamson District 3 Myra Peterson District 4 Dick Stafford District 5 ****NOTICE CHANGE IN MEETING DATE*** COUNTY BOARD AGENDA DECEMBER 3, 1998,4:30 P.Mt Roll Call Consent Calendar General Administration - J. Schug, County Administrator County Organizational Structure Discussion from the Audience Visitors may share their concerns with the County Board of Commissioners on any item not on the agenda. The Chair will direct the County Administrator to prepare responses to your concerns. You are encouraged not to be repetitious of previous speakers and to limit your address to five minutes. Commissioner Reports - Comments - Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities. make comments on matters of interest and information. or raise questions to the staff. This action is not intended to result in substantive board action during this time. Any action necessary because of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. Board Correspondence Adjourn Board Workshop with Office of Administration Preview of Truth in Taxation Information *********************************************************** Date November 30 through ecember 2 ecember 2 December 2 December 3 MEETING NOTICES Committee Time Location Association of Minnesota Counties Annual Conference St. Cloud Civic Center - St. Could, Minnesota 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 9:30 a.m. 11 :30 a.m. 1 :00 p.m. Plat Commission Resource Recovery Executive Committee Internal Audit Advisory Committee Washington County Government Center 1670 Beam Avenue - Maplewood Washington County Government Center Assistive listening devices are available for use in the Count't. Board Room " 'tou need assistance due to disabilit't. or la[1gu8.u.e barrier.(please call 430-6000 (TOD 439-3220) EuUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY I AFF HMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER '6' W ASIDNGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR * DECEMBER 3,1998 . The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY ITEM Administration A. Approval of the November 17, 1998 Board meeting minutes. B. Approval of staff comments on Dakota County Draft Comprehensive Plan. C. Approval of resolution, authorize the Auditor-Treasurer to offer parcel 20.030.21.31.0045 to adjoining owner at a private sale and withdraw such parcel from 1998 tax forfeited land auction. Auditor-Treasurer Community Services D. Approval of an agreement with On-Belay of Minnesota to provide chemical dependency treatment services. E. Approval to execute the contract with Elness Swenson Graham Architects, Inc. for the schematic design phase of the Washington County Library/Woodbury Community Center construction project. Public Works . *Consent Calendar items are generally defmed as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote.. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. '6' . . . U) ~~~ ~;"/ Stillwater Public Library 223 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Board of Trustees Minutes November 10, 1998 Members: Fredell*, Gorski, Hickey, Lockyear, Maybanks, McFayden, Myers, Nelson*, Ruch. Director: Bertalmio, Assistant Director: Blocher. * absent. 1. Call to order: President Ruch called the meeting to order at 6:38 p.m. 2. Adoption of the Agenda: Maybanks moved/Hickey seconded adoption of the agenda. 3. Various Public Communications: The Board received a communication of concern about the periodical Thrasher and a suggestion of materials for people for whom English is a second language. Gazette coverage of City board/commissions will be discontinued. Ruch will contact them to express our appreciation of coverage and our concerns about its discontinuance. 4. Consent Calendar: McFayden movedlHickey seconded adoption of the consent calendar including payment of bills in the amount of $18,105.47. 5 . The 1999 budget was adopted as presented - McFayden moved/Maybanks seconded. 6. Board terms - Myers and Lockyear indicated their willingness to serve another term. Maybanks will not continue as a Board member but will serve the library's interests in other capacities. 7. 1999 Board meeting calendar - passed. 8. 1999 holiday closings calendar - passed Hickey moved/Myers seconded 9. Expansion feasibility - The feasibility study not included in the 1999 budget as adopted by the City Council. We will continue to lobby for the funds for completing the study. , In response to suggestions from various City officials about using TIF funding to build a BOARD of TRUSTEES MINUTES 11-10-98 page 2 . facility in the Market Square area, the Board reiterated its desired kiosk approach. A library task force will meet with City officials to discuss possibilities. 10. Myers Briggs presentation: Ken did a stellar job, and no one had a crisis on the spot. We will be considering the Myers-Briggs test closely as Board education continues. This was more a mini workshop as opposed to a simple agenda item. 11. Work plan trees - sent to executive committee to assess and evaluate. 1 2. Committee Reports: Alternative Funding - This committee is at a crucial conceptual juncture. This is no longer an adjunct issue. Fund-raising will be an ongoing, permanent process/entity. Executive Committee - No report. Facilities Committee - The cornice work has been completed. Insulation and lighting work is in progress. Inspections are in progress. Improved signage will be developed shortly. School/Library - No report. . ~ Services/Collections - job description offered and passed. Technology Task Force - No report. 1 3. 1999 Union Negotiations - At this point the Board went into closed session to discuss negotiation strategy. The Board representatives on the negotiation team will be Hickey, Nelson and Bertalmio. 1 4. The meeting adjourned at approximately 8:50 p.m. .