Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1999-11-16 CC Packet
1; n ~t +'~. i REVISED AGENDA* CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING N0.99-25 Council Chambers, 216 North Fourth Street i November 16,1999 °~Yl~~,i EXECUTIVE SESSION 1 Discussion of personnel matter REGULAR MEETING CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL 4:30 P.M. ~ 7:00 P.M. APPROVAL OF MINUTES -November 2, 1999, Regular and Recessed Meetings, and Executive Session PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 1 Troy Pearson -Stillwater Area Hockey Association 2 Don Empson -Presentation of survey 3 City of Stillwater Chamber of Commerce -request for City Assistance for hangmg of holiday lights 4 Kevin Von Riedel, Bruggeman Homes -annexation of Schmoeckel property 5 Ed Cain, Legislative Associates -Levee Wall Protect OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meetmg to address Council on subtects which are not a part of the meetmg agenda The Council may take action or reply at the tune of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed STAFF REPORTS 1 Finance'Director ~ 5 Parks & Recreation 9 Building Official • 2 Police Chief i 6 City Engineer 10 City Attorney 3 Public Works Director , 7 City Clerk 11 City Coordinator 4 Community Dev Director ~~ 8 Fire Chief CONSENT AGENDA* 1 Resolution 99-328: Payment of bills 2 Application and authorization for delayed payment of tax for special assessments on homestead property owned by person with permanent and total disability -Lot 027 Block 006, Churchill Nelson & Slaughter 3 Resolution 99-329: Renewal of gambling premises permit, American Legion Post 48 4 Set Dec 7, 1999 as date for public hearing for new On-sale liquor license -Timber Lodge Steakhouse 5 Purchase upgrades for printer - Finance 6 Resolution 99-330 Increase in permit and contractor license fees, effective Jan 1, 2000 7 Resolution 99-331 approving compensation for City Coordinator 8 Purchase of stormwater pump for Lily Lake Project PUBLIC HEARINGS 1 This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider the proposed modification of the Modified Tax Increment Financing plans relating.to Tax Increment Financing District Nos 1 through 7 located therein, pursuant to and in accordance with~~Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469 124 to 469 134 and 469 174 to 469 179, inclusive, as amended, to reflect increased protect costs, increased protected tax increments, increased amount of tax increments for repayment of bonds, both principal and interest attributable to the construction of an addition to the St Croix Valley Sports complex that is proposed for construction with the assistance of the City of Malltomedi, and to authorize the making of loans and the repayment of loans between the various tax i increment financing districts and the various funds maintained by the City Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 20, 1999 (Resolution) City Council Meeting 99-25 November 16, 1999 This is the day and time for the public hearing to consider a request for appeal of the Planning Commission's decision from the City of Stillwater for variance for the construction of a second sheet of ice with a 34 foot setback, 75 feet required at 1675 Market Drive in the BP-I, Business Park Industrial District Case No V/99-49 Notice of the hearing was published in the Stillwater Gazette on November 10, 1999 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1 Discussion of pop vending machine and newspaper stand issues in downtown area 2 Reports from Barr Engineering -Territorial Prison Wall and Storm Sewer Repairs 3 Possible second reading of ordinance authorizing Mayor and Clerk to lease City-owned property to Max Todo Marine Services, Inc 4 Accepting bids and awarding contract for the Myrtle and Greeley Street Lift Station Protect #9920 (Resolution) NEW BUSINESS 1 Possibie amendment to solid waste contract Resolution Resctndrng Res 99-193 and approving addendum to contract with Waste Management, Inc 2 Setting public hearing for Development Program for Development District No 2 and the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No 8 and the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan, Tax Increment Financing District No 8 in Development District No 2 (Resolution) e PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS. DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (continued) COMMLJNICATIONS/REOUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (continued) ADJOURNMENT Adjourn to executive session to discuss possible acquisition of land * 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 ** Items in italics are additions to the agenda • 2 t . • • CITY OF STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MEETING N0.99-24 November 2,1999 REGULAR MEETING The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble Present Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Also present City Coordinator Knesel City Attorney Magnuson Fmance Director Deblon Police Chief Dauffenbach Commumty Development Director Russell City Engineer Eckles Fire Chief Kallestad Buildmg Official Zepper City Clerk Weldon • Press Julie Kink, Courser APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4:30 P.M. Motion by Councihnember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Thole to approve the minutes of October 19, 1999, Regular Meeting and Executive Session All in favor PETITIONS. INDIVIDUALS DELEGATIONS & CO1VII~IENDATIONS 1 Paul Anderson, Lee F Murphy Insurance, Inc -proposal for insurance consultmg services Paul Anderson requested Council permission to prepare a proposal to the City He stated the camer, St Paul Compames, has several cities as clients City Coordinator Knesel expressed concerns with leaving the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) or for changing coverage to obtain lower rates The City must base a change pnmanly on retaining the present extent of coverage, the assurance the camer ~~ ould continue to provide insurance for the long term, the support of other services such as workshops, surveys, recommendations, and education; and the cost of coverage The extent of coverage and long term availability are the pnmary concems LMCIT has been contacted to ask if they would reduce premiums to match a competitor's quote They will not reduce premiums Premiums for all cities are calculated using the same formula The system is not to match the market pnce but to represent the city's fair share of total costs based on actual rsks and exposures City Attorney Magnuson stated he was concerned about the proposal in the Lee F Murphy • Insurance, Inc ,letter that the agency would be compensated with 20% of savings realized by the City Mr Anderson stated that, in view of the LMCIT position not to match competitors' pncing but do calculations stnctly by formula, that portion of the proposal has been ~~ rthdrawn } City Council Meeting No 99-24 November 2, 1999 Councilmember Zoller questioned the benefits of entenng into an agreement to have the • agency look at City policies Mr Anderson stated that initial portion of the proposal appears to no longer be worthwhile It was also noted that the City receives dividends annually from LMCIT That amount must also be considered when companng costs Motion by Councilmember Cummings, seconded by Councilmember Thole directing staff to review a proposal for insurance services from Lee F Murphy Insurance, Inc All in favor STAFF REPORTS Finance Director Deblon updated Council on the possible adjustment of rates for sanitary sewer and stone sewer charges Dunng the budget process, discussion was held regarding the possible need to increase the rates The Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Division has adopted preliminary rates for the next three years that are lower than current rates The ma~onty of the sanitary sewer fund budget is paid to the Metropolitan Council to treat the city's water These lower rates will elumnate the projected deficit in the sanitary sewer fund Stone sewer rates are slightly higher than other metro area cities, and there is a projected surplus for the year 2000 She recommended not making any changes in the sanitary sewer or stone sewer rates at this time Community Development Director Russell informed council apre-workshop will be held S Thursday, November 4, pnor to the public meeting on the proposed tree ordinance City Engineer Eckles reported the downtown decorative fights project is underway Lights should be operational wrtlun one month There are three or four fights that will not be able to be placed m then planned location Options for placement would be to continue along the same side of the road as Vittorios or to place two on each side of Main Street. However, the Bnck Alley property was not included in the assessment Council determined it would be best to continue placement within the assessed area The Bnck Alley area could be added in the future Fire Chief Kallestad reported area churches and the City of Stillwater Chamber of Commerce have requested to have a professional fireworks display in Lowell Park on December 18`h Because the size of Lowell Park is not suitable for fireworks, the organizers understand the launch site will have to be Kolliner Park Council must determine if an insurance nder for fireworks will be required in addition to insurance provided by the pyrotechnic company For large displays such as Lumber)ack Days and 4`h of July, the City purchased a nder on its own insurance policy and passed the cost to event sponsors The cost is $500 for any size display and is secondary to the policy prodded by the pyrotechnic company This display will be relatively small in companson. Factors limiting City liability are the expectation ice will cover the ever • and snow will reduce the nsk of grass fires All fireworks present nsks or hazards regardless of display size or season He requested Council direction 2 City Council Meeting No 99-24 November 2, 1999 Council determined there was mammal nsk and, because the City was fisted as an • additional insured on the policy of the pyrotechmc company, a nder will not be required Building Official Zepper presented a monthly inspection report CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Thole to approve the Consent Agenda All in favor 1 Resolution 99- 311: Directing Payment of Bills 2 Resolution 99-312 Employment of Jeffrey Roettger as part-time on-call firefighter 3 Temporary on-sale liquor license, City of Stillwater Chamber of Commerce, for Blue Moon Fundraiser at Washington County Histonc Courthouse, February 29, 2000 4 Resolution 99-313 Contract with Larson Allen Weishair & Co for 1999 auditing services 5 Resolution 99-314 Extended warranties and maintenance agreements for new squad cars - Police Dept 6 Resolution 99-315: Calling for public heanng on the proposed creation by the City of Development Distnct No 2 and of the Development Program for Development District No 2 and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Financing Distnct No 8 and the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan relating thereto, all located within Development Distnct No 2 7 Resolution 99-316 Permanent employment of Chantell Kadin as Admimstrative Assistant • 8 Resolution 99-317: Liquor license renewals for the Year 2000 9 Resolution 99-318: Tobacco license renewals for the Year 2000 10 Resolution 99-319 Consent to assignment of Legends of Stillwater Phase III Development Agreement to D R. Horton, Inc -Minnesota 11 Resolution 99-320: Renewal of contract with Select Account 12 Resolution 99-321: Application for Minnesota Stream Protection and Improvement Loan Program 13 Resolution 99-322: Agreement with Don Empson for architectural survey consultant services for Hersey Staples Addition 14 Hang banner on Chestnut Street, Tnnity Church Yule Fest, Nov 5-22, 1999 15 Resolution 99-323: Approve Y2k Staffing and Contingency Plans UNFINISHED BUSINESS Construction of second ice sheet at St Croix Valley Recreation Center a) Award of bids for foundation construction City Coordinator Knesel presented a summary of the bids and costs to construct the foundation for the second ice sheet The low bid for excavation work was Miller Excavatm~, Inc , at $24,750 The low bid for concrete work was Northland Concrete and Masonry Company at a cost of $37,300 • Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to adopt Resolution 99- 324 accepting bid and awarding contract for construction of foundation for second ice sheet at St Croix Valley Recreation Center to Miller Excavating, Inc ,for excavation work at a cost of $24,70, and to Northland Concrete and Masonry Company, for concrete work at a cost of 3 r I~ City Council Meeting No 99-24 November 2, 1999 S37,300, contingent upon Planning Commission approval of city application for a sideyard vanance Ayes Councilmember Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kunble Nays None b) Agreement with Mahtomedi to partner in construction A draft arena use agreement was presented City Coordinator Knesel explained the issues discussed at the previous meeting with Mahtomedi have been resolved The agreement covers the construction of walls and floonng but not items such as lockers Mahtomedi will need to provide for their own lockers, etc Stillwater will own the Lily Lake Ice Arena and the St Croix Valley Recreation Center In return for obtaimng certain penods of exclusive use of an area arena for Mahtomedi residents, Mahtomedi will deposit a contribution of $700,000 to the fund dedicated to the construction of the new ice sheet The opening date for the new ice sheet is on or before October 1, 2000 The agreement cites responsibilities of each City in the pre-opeming phase and the operations phase The primary term is ZO winter seasons after the opening date. A phase out term after the primary term is also included Buyout provisions aze included in the event Still~.vater is not able to sell ice time or Mahtomedt is not able to buy ice time City Attorney 1~Iagnuson stated the agreement is favorable to the Ctty from a legal point of view Motion by Councihnember Thole, seconded by Councihnember Bealka to adopt Resolution 99- 325 approving the agreement with the City of Mahtomedi for hockey arena use Ayes Councilmember Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays None c) Agreement with Ankeny Kell Architects, PA to provide architectural services for a second ice sheet City Coordinator Knesel explained the agreement is similar to the agreement for the construction of the dome City Attorney Magnuson stated it is essentially the same language and consistent with the first agreement Viotion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councihnember Bealka to adopt Resolution 99- 326 approving the agreement with Ankeny Kell Architects, PA to provide architectural services for a second ice sheet, contingent upon Planning Commission approval of the city application for a sidevard vanance Ayes Councilmember Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays None • • • 4 City Council Meeting No 99-24 • NEW BUSINESS November 2, 1999 1 Status Report on McKusick Lake Downstream Conveyance System study - Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik & Assoc (BRA) Rich Brasch, BRA, presented an update on the status of the study A cornerstone of the AUAR Mitigation Plan is the diversion of stormwater flowing from Long Lake and other portions of the annexation area away from Brown's Creek and through McKusick Lake to the St Croix River In Apnl , 1999, the City directed BRA to evaluate the conveyance system improvement alternatives For discussion, alternatives for the project were reviewed separately for the ravine (upper section) of the conveyance system between McKusick Lake and Mulberry Street and for the lower (downstream) section of the system between Mulberry Street and the St Croix River Alternative 1 for the ravine section is to use the existing ravine channel to convey a sustained base flow and route the remainder through a pipe installed along the channel Alternative 2 is to convey all discharges from McKusick Lake and adjacent neighborhoods through the ravine within the pipe There are three general alternatives for the downstream section• 1) Mulberry Street route, 2) existing conveyance/Commercial Street route, and 3) the West Myrtle StreedCommercial Street route The Mulberry Street route is recommended A public meeting will be held. An overnew of the alternatives will be presented and public • input solicited The final project feasibility reports will then be prepared. It will form the basis for the application for financial assistance from the Minnesota Stream Protection and Improvement Loan Program, listed on the consent agenda for this meeting. Councilmember Cummings questioned the possibility of enhancing the area as a walkway He felt an increase of water flow would create more of a stream environment rather than a storm sewer line environment Sherry Buss, BRA, offered to bung pictures of a recreated stream in Battle Creek Park to illustrate how much flow is created Councilmember Zoller requested a cost differential be determined for piping the flow and also for vanous size streams No action was necessary at this time 2 Ordenng preparation of report for 2000 Street Improvements, Project 2002 City Engineer Eckles presented the proposed areas to be included in the 2000 Street Improvements He requested authorization to proceed with the feasibility study for street, sidewalk, sanitary and storm sewer improvements for Forest Hills Additions I and II, South Fifth and South Sixth Streets between Hancock and Orleans, West Marsh Street between • Third and Sixth Street, West Orleans from Fourth Street to Everett Street, and Everett Street from Orleans to Anderson 5 City Council Meeting No 99-24 November 2, 1999 ' .' Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councihnember Zoller to adopt Resolution 99- 327 ordenng the preparation of a report for the 2000 Street Improvements, Project 2002 O Ayes Councilmember Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Nays None COUNCIL REQUESTS Councihnember Bealka presented Council with a shovel from Kellison Company used at the Ace Hardware groundbreaking Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to adjourn at 5 40 p m to Executive Session to discuss possible acquisition of land All in favor RECESSED ivIEETI`G 8:00 P.NI The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kimble Present Councilmembers Bealka, Cummings, Thole, Zoller and Mayor Kimble Also present City Coordinator Knesel City Attorney Magnuson PUBLIC HEARING 1 This is the day and time for the public heanng to consider the lease of property where • currently achy-owned barge entitled the "Frank E" is moored along with achy-owned vessel known as the "Cayuga", to Max Todo Manne Services, Inc , for an initial three year penod and two one-year extension penods to use as the Manne Service facility Notice of the heanng was published in the Stillwater Gazette on October 5, 11, 18, and 25, 1999 City Attorney Magnuson explained the lease agreement with Max Todo The agreement was approved by Resolution 99-272 on September 21, 1999, contingent upon Council action to proceed with the lease after the holding of a public heanng as required by the City Charter The property with frontage on the St Croix River was formerly rented to the Aiple Towing Company for the operation of a barge terminal facility from the site As rent, Max Todo will perfonn repairs to the Cayuga as detailed in the agreement The work must be completed dunng the initial three year term of the agreement Any use of the barge by Max Todo or others will require approval of the City Coordinator Provisions are included for the maintenance of the premises, moonng use, landscaping, the construction of a lock out gate, and insurance City Coordinator Knesel noted this is a good use of the property There is currently no funding available to make improvements to the property In addition, the City must wait for a Mn/DOT decision on the construction of the interstate budge in order to determine the impact on the Aiple property The lease and use of the property provides a source of secunty for the property in the intenm • The iVlayor opened the public heanng There were no requests to be heard The vfayor closed the public hearing 6 ` . City Council Meetmg No 99-24 November 2, 1999 • Motion by Councilmember Bealka, seconded by Councilmember Thole to have a first readmg of an ordinance authonzmg the Mayor and Council to lease city owned property to Max Todo Manne Services, Inc All m favor ADJOURNNIENT Motion by Councilmember Thole, seconded by Councilmember Bealka to adjourn at 8 1~ p m to execute session All in favor Mayor Attest City Clerk • 7 City Council Meeting No 99-24 November 2, 1999 ~ ' Resolution 99- 311: Directing Payment of Bills Resolution 99-312• Employment of Jeffrey Roettger as part-time on-call firefighter Resolution 99-313. Contract with Lazson Allen Weishair & Co for 1999 auditing services Resolution 99-314 Extended warranties and mamtenance agreements for new squad cars - Police Dept Resolution 99-315: Calling for public heanng on the proposed creation by the City of Development District No 2 and of the Development Program for Development Ihstnct No 2 and the proposed establishment of Tax Increment Fuiancmg District No. 8 and the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan relatmg thereto, all located within Development District No 2 Resolution 99-316. Permanent employment of Chantell Kadm as Administrative Assistant Resolution 99-317: Liquor license renewals for the Yeaz 2000 Resolution 99-318: Tobacco license renewals for the Yeaz 2000 Resolution 99-319 Consent to assignment of Legends of Stillwater Phase III Development Agreement to D R Horton, Inc -Minnesota Resolution 99-320: Renewal of contract with Select Account Resolution 99-321: Application for Minnesota Stream Protection and Improvement Loan Program Resolution 99-322: Agreement with Don Empson for azclitectural survey consultant services for Hersey Staples Addition Resolution 99-323: Approve Y2k Staffing and Contmgency Plans Resolution 99-324: acceptmg bid and awazding contract for construction of foundarion for second ice sheet at St Croix Valley Recreation Center to Miller Excavating, Inc., for excavation work at a cost of $24,750, and to Northland Concrete and masonry Company, for concrete work at a cost of $37,300, contmgent upon Planning Commission approval of city application for • sideyazd variance Resolution 99-325: approving agreement with the City of Mahtomedi for hockey arena use Resolution 99-326: approving agreement with Ankeny Kell Architects, PA to provide azchitectural services for second ice sheet, contingent upon Planning Commission approval of the city application for sideyazd vanance. Resolution 99- 327: ordering Preparation of report for 2000 Street Improvements, Project 2002 8 ~ ~ --------1 =- --------J---------1--------•1--------1--------~ CITY of STII,L~~AT~R CH~~IBER of CO~IERCE Morli Weldon 214 No 4th St Stillwater,ll~i 55082 Dear iVls Weldon, 11-8-99 Since the City of Stillwater acqursed new Christmas lighting a few years ago the City of Stillwater Chamber of Commerce has happily participated in the installation, removal and maintenance of the fights Each year we have supplied volunteers who check over the lights -testing and changing bulbs and freshening the paint if needed We have also paid for the u~stallation/removal of the fights by one of our Chamber members, Hi-Tech Sims. In 1996 the cost for installation and removal by Hi-Tech Sians was $625 00, uz 1997 the cost for the same was $1,250 00; and in 1998 the total was $1,250 00 However, in 1998 a snag was hit Hi-Tech had gotten so busy it was unable to put the lights up at this reduced cost until after Thanksgiving and the street swags did not go up until Dec 23rd. Iii-Tech, with their increased business load can no lonser afford to do this work at a discounted rate • v The quote from Hi-Tech for the installation and removal of the Christmas lighting this year is $3,600 00 In the interest of fairness we also asked for and received a bid from Suburban Lighting, their bid is $2,984 00 This does not include the re-installation of the Christmas light brackets, which were removed when NSP painted the light poles a few weeks ago The additional bid on that is 52,650 00 from Hi-Tech and $2,184 00 from Suburban. {See enclosures ) Needless to say, the City Chamber does not have this land of money With the holiday's only a couple of weeks away we are looking for solutions to this problem. Is it possible that this work can be done by volunteers We realize we would need the loan of a cherry picker and an electrician from the city Volunteers have always been the backbone of our organization, we can have 10 to 12 people out there to help put these lights up with just a few phone calls, more if needed We are very anxious to solve this problem with the City's help The lights the City purchased are beautiful, the srrules they produce on the faces of her citizens are pnceIess I would hate to see a holiday season without them Sincerely, • Loann Stokes, Pres CoSCC Owner, Stokes Jewelry Owner, Katydids PO BOAC X16 STILLVVaTE2 ~i\ ~=U3~ ~'ti0\E 6~1--1:9--tU01 • Ft1 6~;-~;9--~~i; • E-~1~iL C1i~~tBER~iSTLL1VTRC0~1 •VtEBSITE HTTP ~VtVtt ST~~'.tTR Cn~1 CHa~iB~-R 10/:9/99 OS 49 TEL tiS14~97521 SUBLTRBA,Y LIGSTIN ~O1 ~ 19/27/1999 1I: 15 612439687H LF~QLTD PACe -;- :i~. K `~ ~ a a e11~~s~, r.~ ~'~'~,-. Heieehtl~l~ a.s ~Ot..61laseier, t~ti~ebes .~- ._- ~ ~° l~ ~ r a ~ ~ pewees up ~d tiiciai daMa ~ ughn sad de;arsaons 90~ s>~ !~^9 ~ ~ia~ do+ra ~ over Maya Street Smes r!~ rMe have bad s ~ ~snr lir0 eteil~lwet:hwa the ttesclrsat thsr3oid the lights. We.~ =~,,"'~ ~~ tilt Ie i sft m have the btacbeta mod. 'I3essfo:c, I'd luxe to teriid the ~~ 3'[ gate ttte~slt fiis beef m ~ todsp, it 1Yaa1d be be~EaL W+ lzne s Board ~~ w~ ~efriiii ltittrioe a decsiod ;~_ - Ease ~: bwsiefi ~stt~i ~ Imo: M ea Q!~ ~7tettHt b s sae r4 ~vesa ~ ttt~ee~ ~ ~ poles. tiie ~eesa 3 *it~i1~ eweys, ttstepe fte tefA11[ ?~ t~ttid bs sn bes s htesMe ~ ~stit M 2 wettay 4i~is~ a t Aec Rir i3yleaitrs Amara sate v a~R. s?~ ~i~G ~ ~1~g~ • ,s3 ~ t~Ic - Z~ ! 8't 800 ~ l Jr~swct- TsJCa ~sM+s~ 00 :-~+:~ - ~eers tttesi f.~~~~ 1~ bne3e y~ ~ tine ns,a ~ ~ sne Ssbsit~sa a S+ee alnai~ewh~ is ~e C3.mba, ~irh t+POa}d ~f bcsetu ~yQar .~ ~ ~! ~leemae, ! affhesaSf~istt 139-3990 TJuatt y~oa Nor 7~:ss:~er, =~ a ,- . ~- Y r" ~,, ~ ~r .'~ '~' ,- s y3 9-- ~ y yo SUb~~h~„~ ~,~~~( • October 27, 1999 To. Duane Downey, Suburban Lighting From: Leo Neuman, Treasure:, City Chamber Duane: Several months ago you gave us a quote for putting up anti taking down Chastsnas lights and decorations on City light poles and putting up and taking down baaacrs over lviam Street Since thew, we have had a change. The light poles were paid and NSP took down the brackets that hold the lights. We were informed rich to our disappointment, that it IS our nxponsibility to have the brackets remounted. Therefore, I'd h7ce to have you r~e-bid the work. If you can get this bac3c to me today, it would be helpful We have a Board meeting tonight which we would ]i7ce io make a decision. Items to bid on: Reinstall hanging brackets removed by NSP; 84 brackets mounted on 42 poles; this would be a one • time task Put up and take down 84 snowflakes on 42 poles. This would be an annual task Pit up and take down 325-inch holi4day swags, which hang across the street. This would be as annual task. Put up and take down a banner acaoss Main Street. We c:irrently have 2 events, Taste of Sti7hvater m June and the Fall Art Fair in September. Again this would be as annual task. Duane: We are a small Orgam~atzon, so any pence break you can give us is greatly appreciated We would be happy to give Suburban a free membership in the Chamber, which would be of beae~r to your Company If you have any questions, I can be reached at 439-5990. Thank you for your aeS7~*+ce. ~~ r~ LJ 1~!11~95 _~:lc T;,•Pa:ti Fro~:tiran: S<aeg 12"a4 Pale 2!c Fii-Tccl: Sins. Inc. • 22Z Commercial Stmt Snlhvatar. ~1~1 5582 ?Bone 61Z X39-Q664 Fas 6 I 2 X39-= 0 ~-~ ~1-~'eC~ S1~.S; I13C Quotation o~wi,~-1 ~. ~-~~ (' ~• o15e:.hest~z e'IsatnLY: c; '~~mmere F~ Eac;lt• e~itt7if\• ~?t LY ~~ ~ 1l(t~ ~ (~ 1~3~~~Xt1 F;:~,y :tt_ ~ ;fit: Dear S:r of : !saa.:l '_'~ui .3 a qu ~t.- i~~I L^^.]t.7,.:It~ L1C 1'1Qlldal ~e.s;~t+,-rs for ; Lt:n Stte.:..:o~~ ntc•:T S-~llt~ a_e: Ro-in-trl[ ixir.~mg br.~ckeL~. rento~ rd b}- \SP to re-pnutt poles. This n a one time p:lcr 8~- I3rrelets mounted on -f2 -poles SZ.6c0 AO Put up and wle down holidati decorations rf hich includes A-t - snuw•tlalats on 1_ -pails snd 3 - • 2S holldai seas to hand o. er street. Pncr would be the same Tor pumng up Js tsel! a, tal.in~ dotsa • Put up or tal.p do~sn 3, -snow flakes on ~Z -poles. ji.2 DU 00 Put up or +al.e dossn 3 - ZS' ltohda; asags 5btnt OU Thr~E prtee~ reflect our true casts far doing the aori ~fttr our dt~ca~.ta1 last ~ ear ~sltlt tIr \euatsn we felt tse had to re-rs.aluate our pnetn8 to adjust aceordin~i. '~}t.itlS • C L f`~: 3!t.'L H'-TZCI. JtS~ tilt. CF~,:Jtt?". ~~ }7I1\'l.:t' \ Uu t.:l) ~Il..t 11EC~ 2~. t.r3:1' ~C.aa Pea ~iZ•1t :'~~--t:L Slsn ~^.C r~e~~ ........................... ,r u MEMORANDUM • TO Mayor and Council FR Crty Coordinator RE Memorandum of Understanding for Stillwater Area Hockey Association DA November 12, 1999 Discussion Attached is a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Stillwater and the Stillwater Area Hockey Association The Association is requesting the memorandum in order to receive some assurance that they will be provided with the same consideration for ice tune distribution that Mahtomech will receive for their monetary contribution In regards to the contribution by the Association, the contribution is less than the origuial pledge ($325,000 vs $350,000) However, the Association is proposing to contribute $100,000 in 1999 and given the tune value of money, the payments (and interest earnings) should approximate the original pledge Recommendation Council consider Memorandum of Understanding between the City and The Stillwater Area • Hockey Association ~~~~ • MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND THE STILLWATER AREA HOCKEY ASSOCIATION 1 It is recognized that the Stillwater Area Hockey Association (`'Association") is a significant contributor toward the financing of the St Croix Valley Recreation Center ("Center") ice arena facilities constructed in 1998 The Association is also recognized as a significant purchaser of ice time hours 2 It is anticipated that the construction and operation of the proposed second sheet of ice at the Center will provide a minimum of 1600 ice time hours during the wmter season (October to April of each year) for use by the Association at the three ice arena facilities 3 The City of Stillwater will work with the Association and all other user groups to fairly distribute ice time rental hours between all user groups and to provide a reasonable schedule of prime time as well as non-prime time rental hours to the Association at the three facilities 4 The following ice time distribution schedule will generally be followed I Ice Time Distribution for Stillwater Area Hockey Association The City of i Stillwater will provide up to 1600 hours of ice time annually beginning the first week of October and ending the 2"d week of March in accordance with the distribution schedule generally set forth as follows 1 Weekday Hours 800 weekday hours will be reserved for the Association A These hours will consist of 200-4 hour blocks of time scheduled between 5 00 P M and 10 30 P M B The 200-4 hour blocks of time will be scheduled at all three sheet of ice as available week to week C The City will try to provide these blocks of time in 10-4 hour blocks per week 2 Weekend hours 800 weekend hours will be reserved for the Association A 200-4 hour blocks of time will be provided The City will attempt to provide the blocks of time equally Saturdays and Sundays B The blocks of time will be distributed as available at the 3 sheets of ice C The City will attempt to provide the time in 5-4 hour blocks of time on Saturdays and Sundays • f Page 2. II. It is understood that the ice time disdeln~ ensure the fair distributi nt of~ e above is intended to be used as gut time among the users of the facilities and to avoid front end, back or holiday loading of ice time rental hours. Strict adherence to the schedule radical and may be subject to change. The City of may not always be p eII~ between the Stillwater will attempt to fairly distribute rental adjustor user groups and will work with the Association and other users to arrange mutually agreeable alternatives. III. It is also understood ted hherein, and that upon approval of the ice tune purchase the hours sta schedule by the City for the Association each season. o ~~ seasnon. will use its best efforts to utilize all of the hours purchased r~ U • Mayor Date 1999 Association President Date 1999 1~ .~ tale a • THE RIRTNFLRRE OF IIINNESGT~ Ivovei*iber 12, 1999 Mr Tray Pea-son 2171 Oak Glea Trail Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Troy: and myself to discuss the proposed ice Thank your for taking the time to meet with Dougo ~ second sheet of ice in partnership with time distribution schedule related to the building sal ou made in regards to the the City of Mahtomedi. I was very pled about the pro H~key Association {`'Association") payment schedule for the pledge that the Stillwater Area ro s~, as I made for the construction of the St. Croix Valley Recreation Centez ice 9~a d then make understand it, is that the Association would contribute~$100,Og ~ ~ ear 2000 (for a total payments of $15,000 per year for the next 15 Years, gin contribution of $325,400). Bards to the distribution of ice time hours for the Assaciaof Unde Land ng ~ e~~ ses the • In re_ City ar_d the Association consider the attached Memoran um ice time distribution policy for the Association. of November 16, 1999 for Council This matter will be placed on the agenda for the meeting t ou will be at the mewing to discuss this matter review and consideration and I understand tha y uestions further with the Council. Please feel free to call me at 430-8801 if you have any q Sincerely, ~~~~ Nile L. Knesei City Coordinator cc: Mayor a+id City Co'ancil GIN HA~~ 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLW4TER, P~IIN"JES07A 5:.G82 PHCNE 651-430-Sgnr B~UGG~M~N ~ME~ Building Quahtp Since 1909 November 8, 1999 The Honorable Jay Kimble, Mayor City of Stillwater 216 No Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082-4898 Dear Mayor Kimble As you know, Bruggeman Homes has been actively pursuing annexation of the Schmoeckei property since Apnl of this year The subject property is located on the northeast comer of Manning Avenue and 75n' Street (Myrtle) in a future annexation area of Stillwater Township Earlier conversations with the City of Stillwater, pnor to the Pemtom property dispute settlement, skated that we may need to wait until the Pemtom issue resolved itself until we could proceed with our application Initial meetings with Stillwater Township told us that they liked our proposal in terms of the product and site layout However, because of the dispute with the Pemtom property and because of the newness of their Comprehensnre Plan, they were hesitant to go ahead with an approval of a comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning until issues with the City regarding the Pemtixn property were resolved Subsequent ti, the Pemtom decision, we had a telephone conversation regarding our proposal to development the Schmoeckel property In that conversation you suggested that d the Township would go along with our proposal that the Cdy would be open to our request for early annexation, rezoning and site plan approval Recently we met with the Township and stated the case for our proposal Again, the Board gave comments that approved of the overall plan and, in light of the Pemtom deasion, said that we should make application with the City to get into the Joint Planning process Therefore, we are requesting to be on the agenda for the November 16, 1999 City Council meeting to revisit our proposal for the Schmoeckel properly Our wncept plan shows 44 units of attached housing on 13 acres The properly is adjacent to the City, has sewer and water available in close proximdy to the site and is being petitioned by 100% of the affected property owners Bruggeman Homes is synonymous with qualriy home budding and customer satisfaction in the Stillwater area The demand for our style of housing in the Stillwater increases daily, poirrting out the need for a dnrersrty of housing opportunities in the annexation area Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of our request Loolang forward to seeing you soon Sincerely, y ~---~~" Paul Bruggeman, Vice President ~ CC Mr Gene Bealka, Mr Enc Thole, Mr Richard Cummings, Mr Terrence Zoller 3564 Rollingview Drive ~ White Bear Lake ~ Minnesota 55110 ~ 651-770-2981 ~ Fay 651-770-9273 MBL4 X06? • MEMO To: Mayor and City Council From: Steve Russell, Commumty Development Duector Subject: Comments on Cooperative Management Plan Date: November 12, 1999 Comments on the Draft St Croix River Management Plan will be presented at meetmg time. Attached are comments received from John Hoeschler representing Elayne Aiple Our local legislator has indicated interest in comments the City may have on the plan Attachment• Letter of comments from John Hoeschler - 11-3-99 • c: HOESCHLER & BEISEL LLP ATTORNEYS John G. Hoeschler 1400 ATBcT Tower (612) 305-1466 901 Marquette Avenue Fax (612) 305-1419 Mumeapolis, MN 55402-2859 JGHceschler~msn coin November 3, 1999 Mayor Jay Kimble Members of the Stillwater City Council City Hall 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor Kunble and City Council Members; I write on behalf of Elayne Aiple to request your help. The Lower St. Croix River Management Group is made up of the Wisconsin and Minnesota Departments of Natural Resources and the National Pazk Service. The Management Group is trying to prevent any change in use of Mrs Aiple's property north of the Stillwater Marina. The problem • surfaced when we applied for a dock perrtut We think this is both unwise, unfair and without legal basis We aze trying to negotiate a solution without going to litigation but things do not look good. Worse, the Management Group is preparing a Management Plan with a new set of development guidelines that they hope will strengthen their hand. Specifically, they propose to change the shoreline use designation of that part of Stillwater from River Town (urban) to Small Town to prevent finther development. If this change is made, they will insist that Stillwater change its ordinances accordingly to enforce this down zoning. The proposed new Management Plan is open for public comment until November 30, 1999. We request that you object to this down-zoning of property within Stillwater and demand that the designation of Mrs Aiple's property be left River Town like the rest of Stillwater Frankly, wg feaz that our individual complaints will be ignored and only strong resistance from the City will be affective. Our request is based on our time consuming, costly and so faz unsuccessful effort to get a dock permit for Randy Boler's Lady Chateau in accordance with the special use permit you approved last January. The Pazk Service has vetoed our dock request because they disagree with any such development along that shore. We feel that this position is unreasonable and without legal basis because the land lies within Stillwater and between two existing marinas. The Management Group is nevertheless trying to bootstrap itself v -• Mayor and City Council Members November 3, 1999 • Page 2 into a stronger position of enforcement regarding this land and its riparian rights even though its veto power only extends to "water resources protects." They are taking the position that any dock and any rip rap is a water resources project which they can control. We believe they have no legal authority for this very aggressive position and them if it is allowed to prevail, it will present other problems for the City of Stillwater. We feel it is important for the City to assert its proper authority as regulator of land uses within its boundaries lest significant parts of that authonty be nibbled away by over- zealous, but unrepresentative bureaucrats. I would be pleased to come before you to discuss this further should you wish. In the meantime, to help frame the issue, I have also drafted a possible version of a letter of objection for your review and consideration. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to call. In the meantune, thank you for your help. Yours very truly, • r John G. Hoeschler Enclosure cc: Steve Russell David Magnuson Elayne Eiple CITY OF STILLWATER November 3, 1999 Lower Riverview Planning Coordinator 117 Mam Street S. Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Draft Cooperative Management Plan Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway Dear Sir, This letter is to record the objection of the City of Stillwater to the proposed change of any part of the land within Stillwater from River Town to anything else. We note that your "preferred plan" would change the area of Stillwater that lies north of the depot and Mulberry Point Marina to Small Town. We feel that this area, located between two important marinas should remain managed, like the rest of Stillwater, as River Town. Yours very truly, • LEGISLATIVE ASSOCIATES, INC. WASHINGTON OFFICE• MINNESOTA OFFICE 1101 30th Street, Suite 500 P.O Box 2131 Waslunggttoon, D C 20007 Stillwater, NIlV 55082 (202) 62~a~356 (651) 439-7681 FaY l7fY)1(~7,~.'if,~ Fax ( i) d~9-7'19 _ November 12, 1999 To Mayor and Council Members City of Stillwater From. Ed Cain. LAI Subject. Discussion of Stage 3 Flood Control for the Levee Project Background Information: When Congress increased the authorization on our project from $3.2 million to $11 6 in the 1996 Water Resources Development Act that was ultimately passed in 1997, the Corps of Engineers Headquarters in Washington insisted on the inclusion of language that Included a feasibility study to justify the federal expenditures for Stage 3 of the project. • The second blow came when they allocated the study to the Corps' St. Louis District Office rather than St. Paul. The St. Paul Office had a full plate- - -St. Louis was struggling to find something to do • The study was a farce! No one from St.Louis has been to Stillwater to look at the project and to talk with Federal, State, or local officials. One telephone call was made to Klayton, and questions only centered around costs to the community for preparing for anticipated flooding in 1997 and before, and what damages were the result of those floods. • No consideration was given to the historic nature of downtown Stillwater, the loss of business resulting from flooding, the potential danger of a busted or damaged trunk sewer line, the costs incurred by residents and businesses in the flood zone that would have to move their businesses, and many other issues • Consequently, the result of the first draft was that potential damage to construction costs was a .33:1 ratio. A 1:1 ratio is needed to justify the construction of the prolect by the Corps. Next Steps: • • The St. Paul Corps Office has the authority to conduct an internal review of the Feasibility Study conducted by St. Louis and to recommend changes. (1) The Corps is doing an economic analysis of the project to increase the ratio. This will include what is called an "Invisible Flood Wall" that will increase flood protection from 50 to 100 years. It's put into place only when a potential flood is approaching, and removed and stored all other times. This process alone would double the ratio from a .33.1 to a ratio of .68:1. • I have ask that we be included in the internal review of the St. Louis Study, and have been assured we will be. Other Options Being Explored: There are several other options I have worked on the past few months with some encouragement. I will discuss these more fully Tuesday evening. They include legislative changes in the WRDA bill to be acted on by Congress this coming Session, work with the State, and the utilization of a little know provision in the 1986 WRDA legislation that provides fora "buy down" on the project. No decision wdl need to be made at this meeting of the Council but it is important that you are aware of the circumstances surrounding this project. We received sufficient funds m this year's Appropriation Bill to complete the extension of the levee wall system. This will increase the length of the wall by about 1,100 feet, more than doubling the length of the protected water front. This work is scheduled to be completed in the Fall of 2000. • • RESOLUTION NO 99-328 DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF BILLS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the bills set forth and itemized on Exhibit "A" totaling $184,754 02 are hereby approved for payment, and that checks be issued for the payment thereof The complete list of bills (Exhibit "A") is on file in the office of the City Clerk and may be inspected upon request Adopted by the Council this 16th day of November, 1999 Jay Kimble, Mayor ATTEST Morli Weldon, City Clerk ~~ ~J a LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION 99-328 Ace Hardware Supplies Lily Lk/St Croix Rec Arena 479 90 Airtouch Cellular Telephone 161 05 Aluminum Ladder Co Ladder hooks 58 75 Aspen Mills Undorms 176 18 At and T Telephone 93 98 Audio Visual Inc Repair sound mixer 137 66 Barley Construction Repair sidewalks/payers Pioneer Pk 700 00 Battery Products Inc Flashlight 6 83 BearCom Radio parts 367 69 Blorkman, Todd Communications training expenses 24 24 Buberl, Larry Oct animal transports 285 00 Camas Aggregate Division Sand 1,055 56 Cargill Salt Road salt 1,531 56 Car Quest Auto parts 230 73 Catco Parts Service Repair parts dump truck 625 66 Chaves, Jeff Engine for water tanker truck 200 00 Chemsearch Lrft station degreaser 1,742 71 City Wide Radio Replace siren and wire unit 209 422 82 Coca Cola Concession supplies 985 95 Cole Papers Janitor supplies 92 55 • Coordinated Business Systems Copier supplies 197 16 Courier Publications/employment ad 119 70 Creative Art Supplies Foamboard/markers 50 30 Cys Urnforms Undorms 692 62 DAC Industries Cleaning supplies 151 60 Dakota County Tech College Use of Force training-Feisch 425 00 Dels Outdoor Equipment Egwpment parts 23 38 DW Web Service Update/Maint City web site 325 00 Egwpment Supply Inc Boiler maint 253 63 First Line Beverage Concession supplies 463 50 Four AA Hockey Program Advertising 250 00 Franklin Covey Planner supplies 44 94 Fritz Company Inc Concession supplies 503 24 Freds Tire Co Tires mobile sweeper 684 35 Furgala Basil 99 Annexation property tax rebate 140 71 Gateway Companies Inc Computer/monitor/speakers 1,215 17 George Olson Construction Budding Inspection Dept expansion 6,550 00 Gerrard and Co Sign banding 84 55 G and K Services Undorm cleaning/rugs/mops/towels 2,550 70 Golish, Lucy /Robert 99 Annexation property tax rebate 168 39 Goodwill/Easter Seals Oct 99 ADC expenses 343 00 Greeder Electric Lift station pump/parking lot light 610 00 Huebscher, Betty /Leonard 99 Annexation property tax rebate 96 60 Huelsmann, Richard 99 Annexation property tax rebate 805 42 LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION 99-328 Page 3 Sysco Minnesota TA Schifsky & Sons Inc THT Inc US Postal Service Viking Office Products Washington County Recorder Waste Management Whalen, Daniel /Susan Weldon, Mork Yocum Oil Zee Medical ADDENDUM TO BILLS Courier News Cub Foods Jay, Sara D Esq Magnuson Law Firm Maple Island Hardware Northern States Power Stillwater Area Chamber of Commerce Tomten Environmental Design US West Concession Supplies Asphait/tack Zamboni maint Postage Office supplies Recording charge Garbage bags sold/garbage service 99 Annexation property tax rebate Mileage Fuel MedicaUfirst aid supplies CI proceedings Concession supplies Police Arbitration Legal services General supplies Electncdy/gas Government Action meeting Services Legends/Liberty Telephone TOTAL Adopted by the City Council this 16th day of November, 1999 246 72 469 60 259 01 4,000 00 219 26 66 00 296 29 237 50 42 78 96 82 156 05 49 40 35 56 1,157 57 9,010 83 339 06 14,892 99 15 00 950 00 1,361 32 184,754 02 • l~ u • • RESOLUTION NO 99- APPROVING A MINNESOTA PREMISES PERMIT FOR GAMBLING FOR STILLWATER WRESTLING BOOSTER CLUB AT STILLWATER AMERICAN LEGION, 103 S. THIRD STREET WHEREAS, the Stillwater Wrestling Booster Club has submitted an application to the Cary of Stillwater requesting City approval of a pending Minnesota Gambling Premises application permit, and WHEREAS, it has been demonstrated that the organization is collecting gambling monies for lawful purposes, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Stillwater approves of the gambling license requested by the Stillwater Wrestling Booster Club at the Stillwater American Legion, 103 S Third Street, Stillwater, Minnesota The Mayor and City Clerk are directed to sign the acknowledgement on the permit application, and are to attach a copy of this Resolution to the application to be submitted to the Department of Gaming. • Adopted by the City Council for the City of Stillwater this 16th day of November, 1999 Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest Morli Weldon, City Clerk West STATE OF MINNESOTA FOR BOARD USE ONLY GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AMT PAID PREMISES PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION CXECR NO. LG214PPR PRINTED: DATE ~ LICENSE NUMBER: 8-00903-002 EFFECTIVE DATE: 02/01/98 EXPIRATION DATE: 01/31/00 NAME OF ORGANIZATION: American Legion Post 48 Stillwater GALLING PREMIISSS INFORMATION NAME OF ESTABLISHMENT WHERE GAMBLING WILL BE CONDUCTED Am Legion Poat 48 103 3 3rd Stillwater 55082 COUNTY Washington IS THE PREMISES LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS?: Y LESSOR INFORMATION DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION OWN THIS SITE?: Yes IF NO, LIST THE LESSOR: NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER (WHEN NOT LESSOR): SQUARE FEET PER MONTH: 0 AMOUNT PAID FOR RENT PER MONTH: SQUARE FEET PER OCCASION: 0 AMOUNT PAID PER OCCASION: BINGO ACTIVITY BINGO IS CONDUCTED ON THIS PREMISES: No IF YES, REFER TO INSTRUCTIONS FOR REQUIRED ATTACHMENT //y1~~ TORAGS ADDRESS SaCUi'2 /~~~lliS U/uge. ~~:,,-- - ~50Q~ Sic /~emoY,a 1 ~~P. /~/,~~~ llcvu-~~r~ M ~ ,S'.s"~~~. BANK INFORMATION Firstar Box 198 Stillwater MN 55082 GAMBLING BANK ACCOUNT NUMBER: 5126577 ON THE LINES PROVIDED BELOW LIST THE NAME, ADDRESS AND TITLE OF AT LEAST TWO PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO SIGN CHECKS AND MA KE DEPOSITS AND WITHDRAWALS FOR THE GAMBLING ACCOUNT. THE ORGANIZATION'S TREASURER MAY MBLING FUND S. G NOT HANDLE ~';,~~ I ~~ ~ ,~ _ N1 ~ ~ ~ I~ F -A - c L y 1 ~ (~- - r e. i Y'e ~ ~ -2~. i ~ ~T~II~-I-PrMf~ C~~,,~ Iv I~,.~ ~1 ~..Qr-~~~ ~(~-~bC~ 1351 Greenw~c;~ 1r.~`I ~~i~~~~ei'/~(rl ~1ew~~e,r' ,/ ~ ' K~nn~~f~... L ~~'~fsc~e.,~r a~r~ MCt~n,~~ rtU~S .~~+an.~9h1 - ~5-~ ~C~ l.mG~r' (BE SURE TO COMPLETE THE REVERSE SIDE OF THIS APPLICATION) THIS FORM WILL BE MADE AVAILABLE IN ALTERNATIVE FORMAT (I.E. LARGE PRINT, BRAILLE) UPON REQUEST GAMBLING PREMISES AUTHORIZATION I HEREBY GIVE CONSENT TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS, THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD, OR AGENTS O BOARD, OR THE COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE OR PUBLIC SAFETY, OR AGENTS OF THE COMMISSIONERS, T ER THE PREMISES TO ENFORCE THE LAW. BANS RECORDS INFORMATION THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD IS AUTHORIZED TO INSPECT THE BANK RECORDS OF THE GAMBLING ACCOUNT WHENEVER NECESSARY TO FULFILL REQUIREMENTS OF CURRENT GAMBLING RULES AND STATUTES. I DECLARE THAT: • I HAVE READ THIS APPLICATION AND ALL INFORMATION SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD; • ALL INFORMATION IS TRUE, ACCURATE AND COMPLETE;; • ALL OTHER REQUIRED INFORMATION HAS BEEN FULLY DISCLOSED; • I AM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE ORGANIZATION; • Z ASSUME FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FAIR AND LAWFUL OPERATION OF ALL GAMBLING ACTIVITIES TO BE CONDUCTED; • I WILL FAMILIARIZE MYSELF WITH THE LAWS OF MINNESOTA GOVERNING LAWFUL GAMBLING AND RULES OF THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND AGREE, ZF ISSUED A PREMISES PERMIT, TO ABIDE THOSE LAWS AND RULES, INCLUDING AMENDMENTS TO THEM; • ANY CHANGES IN APPLICATION INFORMATION WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD AND LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT WITHIN TEN DAYS OF THE CHANGE; • I UNDERSTAND THAT FAILURE TO PROVIDE REQUIRED INFORMATION OR PROVIDING FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION MAY RESULT IN THE DENIAL OR REVOCATION OF THE PREMISES PERMIT. SIGNATURE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER DATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACRNOWLEDGI-ffi~1T 1 ~HE CITY* MUST SIGN THIS APPLICATION IF THE GAMBLING PREMISES IS LOCATED WITHIN CITY IMITS. 2. THE COUNTY** AND TOWNSHIP** MUST SIGN THIS APPLICATION IF THE GAMBLING PREMISES IS LOCATED WITHIN A TOWNSHIP. 3. FOR TOWNSHIPS THAT ARE UNORGANIZED OR UNINCORPORATED, THE COUNTY** ZS REQUIRED TO ATTACH A LETTER TO THIS APPLICATION INDICATING THE TOWNSHIPS STATUS. 4. THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT (CITY OR COUNTY) MUST PASS A RESOLUTION SPECIFICALLY APPROVING OR DENYING THIS APPLICATION. 5. A COPY OF THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT'S RESOLUTION APPROVING THIS APPLICATION MUST BE ATTACHED TO THIS APPLICATION. 6. ZF THIS APPLICATION ZS DENIED BY THE LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT, IT SHOULD NOT BE SUBMITTED TO THE GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD. TOWNSHIP: BY SIGNATURE BELOW, THE TOWNSHIP ACKNOWLEDGES THAT THE ORGANIZATION IS APPLYING FOR A PREMISES PERMIT WITHIN TOWNSHIP LIMITS. CITY* OR COUNTY** CITY OR COUNTY NAME C ~ ~i~ D~. ~i //i~7dL~ e TOWNSHIP** TOWNSHIP NAME SIGNATURE OF PERSON RECEIVING APPLICATION SIGNATURE OF PERSON RECEIVING APPLICATION M A i n /l I DATE RECEIVED ~ TITLE DATE RECEIVED TO THE CHECKLIST FOR REQIIIRED ATTA MAIL TO: GAMBLING CONTROL BOARD 1711 W COUNTY RD B - SUITE 300 S ROSEVIId.E, MN 55113 REPORT OF Lawful Purpose AMERICAN LEGION POST 48 PAGE 2 FROM 0 1/01/199 8 TO 11/01/1999 FOR AL L SITES • DATE CHECK PAYFE DES ----------------------------------------------- CRIPTION ---------------------- AMOUN'!' --------- 05/15/1998 4597 Explorer Post 4 refurbish radios 300.00 07/09/1998 4665 Pepsi Cola Company School patrol picnic 254.80 07/16/1998 4683 John Heselton, C/O parents donation toward an a 500.00 09/11/1998 4743 SAHS Tennis Booster Club general support 300.00 11/03/1998 4793 Young Life gen support 200.00 11/12/1998 4816 American Legion Boys State support of program 100.00 12/10/1998 4854 Mary Clark, Reimbursement Community Kids Xmas 328.20 12/10/1998 4862 Stillwater Hockey Boosters C1 general support 300.00 01/07/1999 4911 Spinoza's Buddy Bear Project bear for local child 276.00 04/20/1999 5099 Stillwater Sr. Class Party, I anual grad party 300.00 06/14/1999 5156 Ken Fritsche, Reimbursement Caligraphy for schoo 30.59 06/25/1999 5168 Cub Foods candy for kids parad 600.00 07/15/1999 5189 Voiture 791 pop for school patro 269.71 08/12/1999 5223 Spinoza's Buddy Bear 2 bears for children 287.26 09/09/1999 5250 Special Olympics, Minnesota sponsorship of athle 500.00 TOTAL OF C & Y 7959.71 FOR GIRL SC 03/19/1998 4519 Girl Scout Council of SCV general support 400.00 01/07/1999 4907 Eder Flag flag for girl scout 34.47 01/07/1999 4907 Eder Flag flag for Girl scout 34. 07/15/1999 5192 Girl Scout Council of St. Cro camp scholarships ~ 100. TOTAL OF GIRL SC 568.94 FOR GOV 03/19/1998 4513 Washington County Veterans Se Vets Hospital transp 1000.00 09/11/1998 4740 City of Stillwater (Fire Dept toward diving equipm 3600.00 05/14/1999 5130 Washington County Vets Servic transportation fund 500.00 TOTAL OF GOV 5100.00 FOR ISD834 02/24/1998 4495 03/19/1998 4521 05/28/1998 4616 06/11/1998 4633 07/09/1998 4663 12/10/1998 4864 12/10/1998 4863 12/10/1998 4865 12/10/1998 4866 01/22/1999 4937 02/16/1999 4971 03/17/1999 5051 TOTAL OF ISD834 Ind School Dist 834 SANS "Stylus" Magazine Stillwater Area High School Early Childhood and Family Ed Eder Flag SANS Concert Orchestra SANS Boys/Girls Downhill Ski SAHS Girls Hockey SANS Boys Basketball SAHS Pep Band SASH-Boys Tennis Team SANS Synchronized Swimming Boys & Girls Slalom General support Music & Inst for Pep new learning site at Flags for Oakland Jr general support general support general support general support general support general; support general support 600.00 100.00 200.00 100.00 199.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 300.00 3299.00 FOR LOC MIC 01/23/1998 4441 Children's Home Crisis Nurser support for programs 100. 01/23/1998 4442 St. Croix Catholic School donation toward styl 100.0 REPORT OF Lawful Purpose AMERICAN LEGION POST 48 FROM 01/01/1998 TO 11/01/1999 FOR ALL SITES DATE CHECK PAYEE DESCRIPTION PAGE 4 AMOUNT 01/23/1998 4439 Norwest Bank Family in distress 500.00 01/23/1998 4440 Jeffrey Ous-reimbursement Michael Butler Famil 200.00 01/23/1998 4444 U of M Foundation donation toward flag 100.00 05/15/1998 4596 MN Nat'l Guard Foundation Assist with cost of 500.00 75/15/1998 4599 Leukemia Society of Am, MN Ch patient aid program 100.00 11/03/1998 4794 Special Olympics, Minnesota sponsor athlete 150.00 07/15/1999 5191 March of Dimes gen support 25.00 TOTAL OF MISC 1575.00 FOR UNWAY 02/07/1998 4465 ST Coix Area United Way Phil Eastwood memori 25.00 12/10/1998 4857 St. Croix Area UNITED wAY GENERAL SUPPORT 1000.00 TOTAL OF UNWAY 1025.00 FOR VET 02/24/1998 4493 Minnesota StandDown, Inc. Homeless & in need V 500.00 02/24/1998 4496 MN Chapter Paralyzed Vets Nat'l Veterans Wheel 300.00 03/03/1998 4497 Nat'l Treasurer-Am Leg Life dues paid as Ve 955.97 03/19/1998 4520 Disabled Veterans Recreation, upkeep & repair of r 400.00 05/07/1998 4588 Cub Foods expense for food for 206.17 9/1998 4589 Rose Floral expense for Vets Rec 102.24 0 0 8/1998 4615 Mary Clark-reimb reimbursement for Me 19.01 06/17/1998 4638 St. Croix Area United Way Glenn Johnston Memor 25.00 06/25/1998 4648 Health Span Hospice Vern Gedatus Memoria 25.00 08/01/1998 4698 St Croix Area United Way memorial for decease 25.00 08/27/1998 4727 MN American Legion Foundation Vets in need 1200.00 11/03/1998 4791 Minnesota Veterans Home, purchase telephones 100.00 11/11/1998 4809 Sam's Club food and supplies fo 179.85 11/12/1998 4810 Ginny Evans, reimbursement Veterans day lunch 72.73 11/12/1998 4811 American Legion Dept of MN dues for needy vets 141.00 11/12/1998 4813 Fund for Hospitalized Vets gereral support 100.00 11/12/1998 4814 Hospitalized Vets Pheasant Di annual dinner for ho 200.00 11/12/1998 4815 American Legion Dept of MN dues for vets in nur 187.50 12/10/1998 4856 V.A. Medical Center, Minneapo general support 200.00 12/10/1998 4855 Minnesota Veterans Home, Minn Xmas gifts for resid 200.00 02/16/1999 4967 Fund for Hospitalized Vets general support 300.00 04/20/1999 5095 Nat'l Emblem Sales-American L Veterans Recognition 95.45 04/20/1999 5098 Valley Trophy Veterans Recognition 78.30 04/20/1999 5100 Armed Forces Service Center, Veterans Memorial: 100.00 05/12/1999 5127 Irene Stewart-Reimbursement Mem Day Vets Dinner- 100.00 05/12/1999 5126 Ma Ma Frattalone & Dave Nelso dinners for Vets Mem 376.00 05/20/1999 5142 Heritage Printing programs for Vets di 73.50 07/26/1999 5196 Armed Forces Servicemen's Cen memorial, Dr. Bunce 25.00 08/12/1999 5222 Minnesota Stand Down, Inc general support 100.00 09/09/1999 5249 DISABLED VETERANS RECREATION, maintain & Repair "V 100.00 .TOTAL OF VET 6487.72 *** TOTAL OF ALL SITES 36911.74 REPORT OF Lawful Purpose AMERICAN LEGION POST 48 PAGE 4 FROM 0 1/01/1998 TO 11/01/1999 FOR AL L SITES DATE CHECK PAYEE DESCRIPTION --------------------------------------------------------------------- AMOUNT --------- 01/23/1998 4439 Norwest Bank Family in distress 500.00 01/23/1998 4440 Jeffrey Ous-reimbursement Michael Butler Famil 200.00 01/23/1998 4444 U of M Foundation donation toward flag 100.00 05/15/1998 4596 MN Nat'l Guard Foundation Assist with cost of 500.00 05/15/1998 4599 Leukemia Society of Am, MN Ch patient aid program 100.00 11/03/1998 4794 Special Olympics, Minnesota sponsor athlete 150.00 07/15/1999 5191 March of Dimes gen support 25.00 TOTAL OF MISC 1575.00 FOR UNWAY 02/07/1998 4465 ST Coix Area United Way Phil Eastwood memori 25.00 12/10/1998 4857 St. Croix Area uNITED wAY GENERAL SUPPORT 1000.00 TOTAL OF UNWAY 1025.00 FOR VET 02/24/1998 4493 Minnesota StandDown, Inc. Homeless & in need V 500.00 02/24/1998 4496 MN Chapter Paralyzed Vets Nat'l Veterans Wheel 300.00 03/03/1998 4497 Nat'l Treasurer-Am Leg Life dues paid as Ve 955.97 03/19/1998 4520 Disabled Veterans Recreation, upkeep & repair of r 400.00 05/07/1998 4588 Cub Foods expense for food for 206.17 05/09/1998 4589 Rose Floral expense for Vets Rec 102. 05/28/1998 4615 Mary Clark-reimb reimbursement for Me 19. 06/17/1998 4638 St. Croix Area United Way Glenn Johnston Memor 25.00 06/25/1998 4648 Health Span Hospice Vern Gedatus Memoria 25.00 08/01/1998 4698 St Croix Area United Way memorial for decease 25.00 08/27/1998 4727 MN American Legion Foundation Vets in need 1200.00 11/03/1998 4791 Minnesota Veterans Home, purchase telephones 100.00 11/11/1998 4809 Sam's Club food and supplies fo 179.85 11/12/1998 4810 Ginny Evans, reimbursement Veterans day lunch 72.73 11/12/1998 4811 American Legion Dept of MN dues for needy vets 141.00 11/12/1998 4813 Fund for Hospitalized Vets gereral support 100.00 11/12/1998 4814 Hospitalized Vets Pheasant Di annual dinner for ho 200.00 11/12/1998 4815 American Legion Dept of MN dues for vets in r~ur 187.50 12/10/1998 4856 V.A. Medical Center, Minneapo general support 200.00 12/10/1998 4855 Minnesota Veterans Home, Minn Xmas gifts for resid 200.00 02/16/1999 4967 Fund for Hospitalized Vets general support 300.00 04/20/1999 5095 Nat'l Emblem Sales-American L Veterans Recognition 95.45 04/20/1999 5098 Valley Trophy Veterans Recognition 78.30 04/20/1999 5100 Armed Forces Service Center, Veterans Memorial: 100.00 05/12/1999 5127 Irene Stewart-Reimbursement Mem Day Vets Dinner- 100.00 05/12/1999 5126 Ma Ma Frattalone & Dave Nelso dinners for Vets Mem 376.00 05/20/1999 5142 Heritage Printing programs for Vets di 73.50 07/26/1999 5196 Armed Forces Servicemen's Cen memorial, Dr. Bunce 25.00 08/12/1999 5222 Minnesota Stand Down, Inc general support 100.00 09/09/1999 5249 DISABLED VETERANS RECREATION, maintain & Repair "V 100.00 TOTAL OF VET 6487.7 *** TOTAL OF ALL SITES 36911.74 MEMORANDUM To Mayor and Council From Morh Weldon, City Clerk Date November 10, 1999 Subject New On-Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses Timber Lodge Steakhouse, Inc. is proposing to open a restaurant at 1820 Market Dnve in Stillwater and is applying for On-Sale and Sunday Liquor Licenses The public hearing is scheduled for December 7, 1999 as requued by the city code • STAFF REQUEST ITEM DEPARTMENT Finance MEETING DATE November 16. 1999 DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST (Bnefly outline what the request is) IPDS Sunnort-Printer Upsrade Baz Coding): $1,295.00 Laser Reader & Wedge (Baz Code Readerl: $695 00 Sales Tax: $129.35 Total: $2.119.35 FINANCIAL IMPACT (Briefly outline the costs, if any, that aze associated with this request and • the proposed source of the funds needed to fund the request) Financial Impact: $2.119 35 Source of Funds: Finance Department 1999 Capital Outlay 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 MEETING PACKET. SUBMITTED BY DATE November 16. 1999 • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Allen Zepper, Building Official DATE: November 10, 1999 SUBJECT: Increase in Permit and Contractor's License Fees for 2000 Attached are the proposed permit and contractor's license fees to be unplemented January 1, 2000 Building perirut fees have not been increased since 1995, and although the plumbing and mechamcal perrrut minimum of $35 50 was set approximately 3 years ago, the actual perrrut fees and contractor's license fees have not been increased in at least 10 • years The proposed increases have akeady been included in the 2000 budget, therefore, the increases need to be approved by Council • • Current Plumbing Permit Fees: Commercial perrYUts 1% of bid plus 50 state surchazge with a muumum $35 50 ($35 00 plus 50) Residential penruts $5 00 per opening plus 50 state surcharge with a minimum of $35 50 ($35 00 plus 50) Proposed Plumbing Permit Fees: Commercial permits 1 % of bid plus 50 state surcharge with a minimum of $50 00 ($49 50 plus 50) Residential permits • $7 00 per openmg plus 50 state surcharge with a rmmmum of $50 00 ($49 50 plus 54) • Current Mechanical Permit Fees: Commercial permits 1% of bid plus 50 state surcharge with a minimum of $35 50 Residential permits Heat & Air Conditioning on same permit -Heating plant $40 00, A/C $15 00 plus 50 state surcharge Total $55 50 Heat OR Air Condirioning -Heat only $40 00 plus 50 state surcharge, A/C only $35 00 plus .50 state surcharge ($35 50 minimum applies as above) • Proposed Mechanical Permit Fees: Commercial permits: 1% of bid plus 50 state surchazge with a minunum of $50 00 ($49 50 plus .50 state surchazge) Residential permits• Heat & Air Conditioning on same permit -Heating plant $49 50, A/C $25 00 plus 50 state surcharge Total $75 00 Heat OR Air Conditioning -Heat only $49 50 plus 50 state surchazge, A/C only $49 50 plus .50 state surcharge ($50 00 minimum applies as above) BUILDING PERMIT FEES: We currently charge building permit fees according to the 1994 Uniform Building Code fee schedule We have adopted the 1997 Uniform Building Code, except for the fee schedule. We are requestmg to adopt the 1997 UBC fee schedule which is approximately a 9% increase from the 1994 fee schedule (see attached) Contractor's Licenses: Master Installer Current Fee $30 00 per yeaz Proposed Fee $50.00 per yeaz GeneraUSpecialty Contractor $40 00 per yeaz $75 00 per yeaz C] 108.8 -109 6 TABLE 1-A reinspection fee in accordance with Table 1-A or as set forth m the fee schedule adopted by the jurisdiction In instances where remspection fees have bees assessed, no additional inspection of the work vnll be performed until the re- quired fees have been paid SECTION 109 -CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY 109.1 Use and Occupancy. No building or structure shall be used or occupied, and no change in the existing occupancy classy fication of a building or structure or portion thereof shall be made until the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy therefor as provided herein EXCEPTION Group R, Divisron 3 and Group U Occupancies Issuance of a certificate of occupancy shall not be construed as an approval of a violation of the provisions of this code or of other ordinances of the jurisdiction Certificates presuming to give au- thority to violate or cancel the provisions of this code or other ordi- nances of the jurisdiction shall not be valid. 1091 Change in Use. Changes in the character or use of a build- ing shall not be made except as specified in Section 3405 of this code 1093 Certificate Issued. After the building official inspects the budding or structure and finds no violations of the provisions of this code or other laws that are enforced by the code enforcement agency, the building official shall issue a certificate of occupancy that shall contain the following 1997 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE 1. The building permit number 2. The address of the building 3 The name and address of the owner 4 A description of that portion of the building for which the certificate is issued. 5 A statement that the desrnbed portion of the building has been inspected for compliance with the requirements of this code for the group and division of occupancy and the use for which the proposed occupancy is classified 6. The name of the building official 109.4 Temporary Certificate. If the building official finds that no substantial hazard will result from occupancy of any building or portion thereof before the same is completed, a temporary cer- tificate of occupancy may be issued for the use of a portion or por- tions of a building or structure prior to the completion of the entire building or structure 1095 Posting. The certificate of occupancy shall be posted in a conspicuous place oa the premises and shall not be removed ex- cept by the building official 109.6 Revocation. The building official may, in writing, sus- pend or revoke a certificate of occupancy issued under the provi- sions of this code whenever the certificate is issued in error, or on the basis of incorrect information supplied, or when it is deter- mined that the building or structure or portion thereof is in viola- tion of any ordinance or regulation or any of the provisions of this code r X99 ~ r~e.~ TABLE 1-A-BUILDING PEAMIT FEES TOTAL VALUATION FEE 510o ro Ssoo 00 523so 550100 to SZ,000 00 S23 50 for the first 5500 00 plus 53 OS far each additional 510000, or fraction thereof, to and mclnding 52,00000 52,00100 to S25,000 00 569 25 for the first 52,000.00 plus S14 00 for each addraonal 53,00000, or fraction thereof to and including 525,000 00 525,001 00 to S50,000 00 539175 for the first 525,000 00 plus 51010 far each additional 51,000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including 550,00000 550,00100 to 3100,000 00 5643 75 far the first 550,000 QO plus 3700 for each addraonal S1,000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including 5100,00000 5100,00100 to 5500,000 00 3993.75 for the first S100,000 00 plus SS 60 for each additional SI,000 00, or fraction thereof, , to and including 5500,00000 5500,00100 to 51,000,000 00 53,233 75 for the first 5500,000 00 plus 54 75 for each addraonal 51,000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including 51,000,00000 51,000,00100 and up 55,608 75 for the first S1,000,000 00 plus S3 65 for each addraonal 51,000 00, or fraction thereof Other Inspections and Fees. 1 Inspections outside of normal business hours 547 00 per hours (rmnimum charge-two hours) 2 Reuispection fees assessed under provisions of Section 305 8 . .54700 per hours 3 Inspections for which no fee is spe~cally indicated .. .. . S47 00 per hours (muumum charge-one-half hour) 4 Additional plan review requurod by changes, addraons or revisions to plans S47 00 per hours (mrnimum charge-one-half hour) 5 For use of outside consultants for plan checlung and inspections, ar both Actual cos iOr the total hourly cost to the Iutudiction, whichever is the greatest This cost shall include supervision hourly wages and fringe benefits of overhead equipment , , , the e.n..t.. ,.i..-~ --- --r•-~--., ........... ZActual rnsts include administrative and overhead costs 0 C~ CI 1-6 1 i 1q~,~ ~-•~ ,.A ~` 994 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE ~~~ j TABLE 1-A-BUILDING PERMIT FEES FEE TOTAL VALUATION S 100 to 550000 3?2 ~ 0 al ~ 0 ~ of pto and including 32,000 0 te the 550100 to 52,00000 S 100 ~p o ~f cuon 32.00100 to 325.000-00 56300 for the fusaon ~reof, ~ and including S X000 00 al 31.00000. or ftac 5352 pOrtor the fast 325.000 00 plus 39 00 for each 325,00100 to 350,00000 additional 31,00000, or fraction thereof, to and including 550,00000 350.00100 to 3100,00000 3580 00•for the first 350,000 00 plus 36 25 for each addttiona131000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including 3100.000.00 - 3895 00 for the first 3100,00000 Plus SS 00 for each or fraction thereof 5100,00100 to 3500,00000 OQO 00 l SI , , additiona 32.855 00 for the first 3500,00000 Plus 34 25 for each 3500,00100 to 31,000.00000 addttiona151,000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including 31,00000 34,955 00• for the first 31,000,000 00 Plus 32 75 for each 00000, or fraction thereof 00100 and up 000 31 000 l 31 • , . . . additiona S•12 00 per hour* Other Inspections and Fees: 1 Inspections outside of normal business hours . (minunum charge-two hours) 2 Retnspectton fees assessed under prop tstons of 3.}2 00 per hour* * Section 108 8 • • • • 34200 per hour 3 Inspections for which no fee is specifically tndtcaoed ..... • - - T (mtntmum charge~tto-half hour) 4 Additional plan renew required by changes, addmons • • • • 5a,2 00 per hour* or revisions to plans • • • (minunum charge--onehalf hour) Actual cosu** 5 For use of outside consultants for plan checking and • inspections, or both ' ' whichever is the greatest Thts cost shall include supervision, ow erhead, unsdution th , e~ *Or the total hourly cwt to hourly wages and fnnge benefits of the employees involved ment ui , p eq **Actual casts include administrative and overhead cosu 4 1-~~ MEMORANDUM TO Mayor and Council FR. City Coordinator RE Coordinator's salary for 1999 DA November 12, 1999 Discussion• I am hereby requesting that the annual salary for the City Coordinator position be set at $72,120 00 effective January 1, 1999. This is a 3% increase. Recommendation. Council adopt resolution establishing annual salary of $72,120.00, effective January 1, 1999, for City Coordinator • ~~` • • RESOLUTION 99 - APPROVING INCREASE IN PERMIT A~TD CONTRACTOR LICENSE FEES BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the fees for Building, Plumbing and Mechamcal Permits and Contractors Licenses aze hereby adopted effective January 1, 2000, according the following schedule BUILDING PERiVIITS Total Valuation Sl 00 - SS00 00 S501 00 - 52000 00 $2001 00 - 525,000 00 $25,001 00 - S50,000 00 50,001 00 - S100,000 00 S 100,001 00 - $500,000 00 500,001 00 - 51,000,000 00 • 51,000,000 00 and up Fee $23 50 $23 50 for the first $500.00 plus $3 OS for each addrtonal $100 00, or fraction thereof, to and including $2000 00 $69 25 for the first $2000 00 plus $14 00 for each addrtonal $1000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including $25,000 00 $391 75 for the first $25,000 00 plus $10 10 for each addrtonal $1000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including $50,000 00 $643 75 for the first $50,000 00 plus $7 00 for each addrtonal $1000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including $100,000 00 $993 75 for the first $100,000 00 plus $5 60 for each addrtonal $1000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including $500,000 00 $3,233 75 for the first $500,000.00 plus $4 75 for each addrtonal $1000 00, or fraction thereof, to and including $1,000,000 00 $5,608 75 for the first $1,000,000 00 plus $3 65 for each addrtonal $1000 00, or fraction thereof PLUMBING PERivIITS: Commercial Permits: 1 % of bid plus 50¢ State Surchazge with a minimum of $50 00 (549 50 plust 50¢) Residential Permits: 57 00 per opening plus 50¢ state surchazge with a minimum of $50 00 ($49 50 plus 50¢) ivIECHANICAL PERMITS: Commercial Permits 1 % of bid plus 50~ State Surchazge with a minimum of S50 00 (549 50 plus 50¢ state surcharge) Residential Permits: Heat and Air Conditioning on same permit -Heating plant $49 50. A/C $25 00 plus 50¢ state surcharge Total $75 00 .t Heat OR Air Conditioning -Heat only $49 50 plus 50~ state surcharge, A/C only $49 50 plus SOc state surcharge ($50 00 minimum applies as above) Pernut and Contractor License Fees Resolution Page 2 CONTRACTOR'S LICENSES: Master Installer $50 00 per year GeneraUSpecialty Contractor X75 00 per year Adopted by Council this 16`h day of November, 1999 Jay Kimble, Mayor Attest Mork Weldon, City Clerk • (CORRECTED) RESOLUTION NO 99-331 APPROVING COMPENSATION FOR CITY COORDINATOR BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that Nile L Knesel, City Coordinator, shall receive an annual salary of $72,120 00, effective January 1. 1999 Adopted by the City Council this 16~' day of November 1999 Jay L Kimble, Mayor Attest Morli Weldon, City Clerk * Note to Council I inadvertently stated a salary of $70,120 00 in the resolution that was included in your packet The resolution should have read $72,120.00. • • Councilmember introduced the following resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoption CITY OF STILLWATER COUNTY OF WASHINGTON STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE MODIFICATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS NOS.1 THROUGH 7, ALL LOCATED WITHIN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1. BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Stillwater (the "City''), as follows Section 1. Recitals. 1.01 It has been proposed that the City modify the Tax Increment Financing Plans for • Tax Increment Financing Distracts Nos. 1 through 7, located within Development Distract No 1 to reflect increased project costs, an increase in Bonded Indebtedness budgeted for Tax Increment District No 4, a reduction of the Bonded Indebtedness budgeted for Tax Increment Distract No 1, and to authorize the making of loans and the repayment of loans between the varaous Tax Increment Districts and the various Funds maintained by the City, pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469 174 to 469.179, inclusive 1 02. The Council has caused to be prepared, and has investigated the facts with respect thereto, a proposed modification of the Tax Increment Financing Plans (the "Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans") for Tax Increment Financing Districts Nos 1 through 7 (collectively referred to as the "Plans"). 1 03 The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the modification of the Plans, including, but not limited to, a review of the proposed Plans by the Planning Commission and the holding of a Public Hearing upon notice as required by law 1 04 The Council hereby determines that it is necessary and in the best interest of the City at this time to modify the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans as proposed and as are on file Section 2. Adoption of the Plans 2.01 The Plans presented to the Council on this date, are hereby approved and adopted • and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk. Section 3 Implementation of the Modified Tax Increment Financing Plans • 3 O1 The officers of the City, the City's financial advisor, and the City's legal counsel and bond counsel are authonzed and directed to proceed with the implementation of the respective Plans and for this purpose to negotiate, draft, prepaze and present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember ,and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof and the following voted against the same Whereupon said Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted, and was signed by the Mayor • and attested to by the City Clerk Dated November 16, 1999 Jay L Kimble, Mayor Attest Morli Weldon, City Clerk 2 • STATE OF 1~IINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) AFFIDAVIT OF 1~IAILING I, Nancy Manos, duly sworn upon oath, state that on the 13th day of October, 1999, I mailed Tax Increment Financing Dtstncts Plan Amendments for the November 16, 1999 public hearing, by enclosing a true and correct copies thereof m envelopes, addressed as follows Chau Wally Abrahamson and County Board Members Washington County Government Center 14900 - 61st Street North Stillwater, MN 55082 Chair Melva Radtke and School Board Members Independent School District No 834 1875 South Greeley Street Stillwater, MN 55082 which is the last known addresses of said parties and depositing the same, with postage prepaid, in the United States mail at Stillwater, Minnesota Nancy Manos Subscribed and sworn to before me this ,' dday of October, 1999 • ~ ~i Notary Public +~,~ NOTARY PU=LIC - ~' ; __ ~',~ '~'~ WASHINGTON CDJI~~ i `f My Comm Ecpinas Jan 31 2=~7 MAG~'IJSON LAW I~~YI LICEYSED Lei MINNESOTA ~tiD WISCONSIN THE DESCH OFFICE BUILDING 333 VoerH ~tvN STREET • SUITE X202 • PO Box 438 • SrtLLwnTER, biN 55082 TELEPHONE (651) 439-9464 TELECOPIER (651) 439-5641 DAVID T. 1~1AGNUSON October 13, 1999 Chair iVielva Radtke and School Boazd Members Independent School District No 834 1875 South Greeley Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Attention. Superintendent of Schools, Dr Kathleen Macy Re• Tax Increment Financing Districts Plan Amendments Dear Chair Radtke and School Board Members RICH4RD D. ALLEr Enclosed please find one (1) copy of the proposed modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Plans for TAY Increment Fuiaucing Districts No 1 through 7 within Development District No 1, all within the City of Stillwater, to be considered by the City Council of the City of Stillwater at a hearing to be held at approxunately 7 00 p m on November 16, 1999, at City Hall. The Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act at Section 469 175, Subd 4, of the Minnesota Statutes requires that prior to the adoption of certain modifications to an existing taY increment financing plan, the City must provide an opportunity to the members of the School Board to meet with the City to review the fiscal and economic unphcations of the proposed or modified tax increment financing plan. The City proposes to modify the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Districts No 1 through 7, to reflect increased protect costs and increase the budget for bonded indebtedness, increased project costs, increased projected tax increments, increased amount of tax increments for repayment of bonds, both principal and interest attributable to the construction of an addition to the St CIOLY Valley Sports Complex that is proposed for construction with the assistance of the City of iVlahtomedi, increased budgeted amounts of bonded indebtedness, and to authorize the making of loans and the repayment of loans between the various tax increment financing districts within the city and the various funds maintained by the City We invite you to attend the Public Hearing to be held by the City Council on November 16, 1999, beginning at approximately 7 00 p m , or to direct any comments or questions you may have to my office It would be most helpful if written comments could be subrrutted prior to the Hearing Also, City Staff would be happy to meet with you with regard to the proposal Yours very truly, DT~Unm ~~ David T bla uson Stillwater Ci~Attorney U • MAGNUSON LAW FIRM LICE.YSED LY MI.YNESOTa A,YD WISCONSIN • DaviD T iVIAGNUSON October 13, 1999 Chair Wally Abrahamson and County Board Members Washington County Government Center 14900 - 61st Street North Stillwater, MN 5082 Attention: James Shugg, Administrator Re Tax Increment Fulancing Distracts Plan Amendments Dear Chair Abrahamson and Board Members RICxaxD D. ~iI.LEY Enclosed please find one (1) copy of the proposed modifications to the Tax Increment Financing Plans for TaY Increment Financing Distracts No 1 through 7 within Development Distract No 1, all within the City of Stillwater, to be considered by the City Council of the Crty of Stillwater at a hearing to be held at approxunately 7 00 p m. on November 16, 1999, ax City Hall. • The Minnesota Tax Increment Fuiancing Act at Section 469 175, Subd 4, of the Minnesota Statutes requires that pnor to the adoption of certain modifications to an existing tax increment financing plan, the City must provide an opportunity to the members of the School Board to meet with the City to review the fiscal and economic unplications of the proposed or modified tax increment financing plan. The City proposes to modify the Tax Increment Financing Plans for Tax Increment Financing Distracts No 1 through 7, to reflect increased project costs and increase the budget for bonded indebtedness, increased project costs, increased projected tax increments, increased amount of tax increments for repayment of bonds, both pnncipal and interest attributable to the construction of an addition to the St. Croix Valley Sports Complex that is proposed for construction with the assistance of the City of Mahtomedi, increased budgeted amounts of bonded indebtedness, and to authorize the malung of loans and the repayment of loans between the various tax increment financing districts within the city and the various funds maintained by the City We invite you to attend the Public Hearing to be held by the City Council on November 16, 1999, beginning at approximately 7 00 p m , or to direct any comments or questions you may have to my office It would be most helpful if written comments could be submitted pnor fo the Hearing Also, City Staff would be happy to meet with you with regard to the proposal Yours very truly, • DTM/nm THE DESCH OFFICE BUILDING 333 NORTfI Vi.VN STREET • SUITE #202 • P O Box 438 • $TILLWATER, 1biN 55082 TELEPHONE (651) 439-9464 • TELECOPIER (651) 439-5641 David T M~giiu~ son Stillwater Ctfy Attorney • '"_ :~ :. ~ NOTICE OF PUBLIC N~'~R~G CITY OF STILLWATER COUNTY OF W?~SH>iYGTON STATE OF i~IIiYN~SOTA NOTICE IS I-~~=.BY GIVEN that the Ciry Council (the "Council") of the City of Sciilwate:, County or" Waslvng*.on, State of IViinnesota, will hold a public heanng on Tuesday, i`+o~embe: 10, 1999, az approximately 7 00 p.m. at City Bali, 216 Noah Fourth Street, SaIIwater, tifinnesota. relators to the proposed modification of the Modified TaY Incremenu Financing Plans relating to Ta.Y Inc; eme:~t Financing District Nos. I through 7 located the: ein (the "il~lodif ed Tax Inc: e:neat Financing Plans''), pursuant to and in accordance with Itilinnesota Statutes, Sew ions a69 12 ^- to a69 13a and a69 174 to 469.179, inclusive, as amended, to reelect increased projem costs. inc: eased proje~ ed tax increments, increased amount of ta.~t incre:nezts for repayment of bonds, both pr,'ncipaI and interest attrioutable to the construc~ion of an addition to the St. Croix Valley Spors Complex that is proposed for gnstrucson with the assistance of the City of ~fahtomedi, and to authorize the malQns of loans and the repayment of loans between the various tax inc: e:nent financing dis`uic'~s and the various funds maintained by the Ciry. A copy of the l~iodin"ed Tax Increment Financing Plans wiiI be on file and avaiIable for public inspe~ ion at the o~ca of the City Cleric e All irte: ester per sons may appear at the he,.ring and present their vie:vs orally or in writins Date . October 5, 1 cce BY ORDER OF THE CITY COLJiv"CIL Itilorii 1~eldon, Ciry Cle: k • • THE CITY OF STILLWATER MODIFIED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS for TAX IN FINANCING DISTRICTS 1 THROUGH 7 Public Hearing for consideration of adoption November 16, 1999 ti • PROPOSED A~I~NDMENT TO THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLANS FOR • DISTRICTS NO. 1 THROUGH 7, DEVELOPII~IENT DISTRICT NO. 1 BACKGROUND The Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing Distract No 4, Development District No I, provides that Tax Increment may be used for the construction or renovation of a public park or a facility used for social, recreational or conference purposes Activity requiring the issuance of additional bonds is anticipated m Tax Increment Financing Distract No 4 for the financing of an addition to the City's Sports Center that is expected to be constructed with City funds and a contribution by the City ofMahtomedi PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS 1 That the amended budgets for Tax Increment Financing Distract No 1 through Tax Increment Financing District No 7 as adopted for the year ended December 31, 1996, be amended by increased project costs, increased projected tax increments, increased amount of tax increments for repayment of bonds, both principal and interest attributable to the construction of an addition to the St Croix Valley Sports Complex that is proposed for construction with the assistance of the City of Mahtomedi, increased budgeted amounts of bonded indebtedness 2 That the Tax Increment Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No 4 be clarified • by adding an additional sentence to paragraph R on page 8, VA 2 "That the City Council is authorized to issue Tax Increment Bonds for the purpose of assisting in the construction of a multi- purpose sports complex expected to be built on real estate previously acquired in the District by the City It is expected that funding will be obtained through the solicitation of gifts from individuals and other governmental units; and that the facility may be built in conjunction with the Ibfinnesota National Guard on the same site, provided that the amount of bonds issued must not exceed the bond indebtedness authorized previously and reflected in the Amended Budget " 3 That the financing plans of Tax Increment Financing District No 1, 3, 4, and 6 be amended by adding the following language "That the use of tax increments generated by the Distract maybe used for the purpose of the payment of Bonds, both principal and interest issued for assisting in the construction ofmulti-purpose sports complex and any additions thereto " 4 That the plans of Districts 1 through 7 be amended to permit the making of loans and the repayment of loans between all of the Districts and the vinous funds maintained by the City 5 That the amended budgets for Tax Increment Distracts No I, 3, 4, 6 and 7 are attached hereto as Exhibits A, B, C, D and E, respectively • CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF SOURCES AND USES OF PUBLIC FUNDS DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #1, TAX INCREMENT #1, • DOWNTOWN AND INDUSTRIAL PARK SCATTERED SITES A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Year Ended December 31, 1998 Accounted for in Onginal Amended Prior Current Budget Budget Years Year Sources of funds• Bond proceeds $ 1,450,000 $ 11,547,500 $ 4,729,050 $ - Tax increments 5,560,000 33,995,796 5,862,144 770,409 Direct charges to developer - - 28,070 - Refunds and reimburse- ments - - 132,097 - Interest 246,106 34,057 Miscellaneous - - 10,482 4,038 Saie of property - - 635,000 - Loans from other funds - 6,175,000 - - Total sourczs of funds $ 7,010.000 $ 51,718,296 $ 11,642,949 $ 808,504 • Uses of funds: Land acgwsition $ 1,050,000 $ 4,750,000 - $ 1,797,089 $ - Site improvements or preparation cysts 2,432,000 9,280,264 1,558,194 183,893 Installation of public utilities and • improvements 9,350,000 12,285,700 5,049,383 175,000 Public park faalities, social, recreational facaiiUes 8 improvements 3,000,000 Bond payments: Pnncipal 1,450,000 11,547,500 1,075,000 320,000 Interest 1,419,555 12,342.332 1,880,510 234,822 Fees - - 9,256 869 Loans to other funds 250,000 6,175,000 - - Administrative costs 1,308.000 1.387,500 - 536,401 73,588 Total uses of funds $ 17,259,555 $ 60,768,296 $ 11,905,833 $ 988,172 Distnct balance (deficiency) $ (10,249,555) $ (9,050,000) $ (262,884) $ (179,600"8) Transfer from other distncts 7,668,365 9,050,000 611,202 120,031 • Funds remaining (deficient) $ (2,581,190) $ - $ 348,318 $ (59,637) EXHIBIT A CITY OF STILLWATEI~, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF SOURCES AND USES OF PUBLIC FUNDS DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #1, TAX INCREMENT', ARKE? L PROJECT A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Year Ended Decemoer 31, 1998 Accounted for in Onginai Amended Pnor Cun'ent Budget Budget Years Year Sources of funds Bond proceeds ~ 1,200,000 Tax increments 2,166,776 Refunds and reimburse- ments _ Miscellaneous _ Interest _ Loans from otherfunds - Total sources of funds 5 3,366,776 Uses of funds: Land acquisition ~ 574,000 Site improvements or preparation costs - installation of public utilities and improvements 535,000 Public park facilities, social, recreatronal facilities ~ improvements Bond payments: Pnncipai 1,200,000 Interest 96"0,776 Fees _ Administrative costs 91,000 Loans to otherfunds - Total uses of funds 5 3,366,776 Distract balance (deficiency) 5 _ Transfer to other $ 2,005,000 $ 2,003,903 ~ - 6,750,000 1,930,180 270,039 - 2,462 - - 669 - - 125,409 22,851 1,750,000 - _ $10,505,000 $ 4,062,623 $ 292,890 ~ 500,000 $ 488,000 $ - 500,000 264,973 15,750 750,000 244,282 175,000 2,000,000 2,005,000 1,250,000 85,000 900,000 725,413 31,930 - 5,130 437 250,000 102,369 - 1,750,000 - ~ 8,655,000 S 3,080,167 5 308,117 ~ 1,850,000 $ 982,456 5 (15,227) distract - (1,850,000) (282,500) - Funds remaining deficcent) $ - 5 - S 699,950" $ (15,227) • • EXI?IBIT B • • • C17Y OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF SOURCES AND USES OF PUBLIC FUNDS DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #1, TAX INCREMENT #4, WOODLAND LAKES A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Year Ended Decemoer 31, 1998 Accounted for m Ongmal Amended Pnor Current Budget Budget Years Year Sources of funds. Bond proceeds $ 4,800,000 $ 9,800,000 $ 4,752,162 $ - Tax increments 13,495.615 23,314,146 1,617,360 642,764 Specaal assessments - - 115,167 - Refunds and reimburse- ments - - 2,367 - Miscellaneous - - 632 - Interest - - 152,614 22,737 Loans from otherfunds - 7,000,000 - - Total sources of funds $ 18,295,615 $40,114,146 $ 6,640,302 $ 665,501 Uses of funds: Land acquis~tron $ - $ 300,000 $ 291,062 $ - Site improvements or preparatron costs 1,818,181 3,500,000 3,441,641 - instaliatron of public ' utrlitres and improvements - 1,000,000 - 400,000 Public park facai'rties, soc~ai, recreatronal 5,000,000 , facilities & improvements Bond payments: Pnnc:pal 4,800,000 9,800,000 180,000 190,000 Interest 3,827,250 7,214,146 787,536 244,903 Fees - - 1,686 511 Admin~stratrve costs 181,819 300,000 77,181 30,937 Loans to other funds - 7,000,000 - - Total uses of funds $ 10,627,250 $34,114,146 '$ 4,779,106 $ 866,351 Distract balance (deficiency) $ 7,668,365 $ 6,000,000 $ 1,861,196 $ (200,850) Transfer to other distract (7,668,365) (6,000,000) (137,202) - Funds remaining (deficient) $ - $ - $ 1,723,994 $ (200,850) EXHIBIT C CITY OF STILLYVATErt, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF SOURCES AND USES OF PUBLIC FUNDS DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #1, TAX INCREMENT #6, JR. HIGH/CUB PROJECT A TAX INCREINENT FINANCING DISTRICT Year Ended December 31, 1998 Accounted for in Onginal Amended Pnor Current Budget Budges Years Year Sources of funds Bond proceeds $ 1,350,000 $ 1,350,000 $ 996,259 $ - Tax increments 3,795,000 5,085,113 681,762 203,351 Interest - - 36,409 12,305 Loans from otherfunds - 2,100,000 - _ Total sources of funds $ 5,145,000 $ 8,535,113 $ 1,714,430 $ 215,656 Uses of funds: Land acgwsition $ _ $ _ $ _ $ _ Site improvements or preparation costs 1,000,000 1,322,000 1,090,529 - Installation of pubbc utilities and • improvements 1,122,000 587,407 - 145,000 Public park faafities, social, recreational fac~6ties 8 improvements 1,200,000 Bond payments Pnncipal 1,350,000 1,350,000 130,000 70,000 Interest 525,706 525,706 167,018 38,060 Fees - - 1,024 308 Administrative costs 175,000 250,000 53,498 20,031 Loans to other funds - 2,100,000 - _ Total use of funds $ 4,172,706 $ 7,335,113 $ 1,442,069 $ 273,399 Distract balance (deficiency) $ 972,294 $ 1,200,000 "$ 272,361 $ (57,743) Transfer to other distract - (1,200,000) - _ Distract balance $ 972,294 $ - $ 272,361 $ (57,743) U EXHIBIT D CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA SCHEDULE OF SOURCES AND USES OF PUBLIC FUNDS • DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT #1, TAX INCREMENT #7, BLUFF CITY A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT Year Ended December 31, 1998 Accounted for in Onginal Amended Pnor Current Budget Budget Years Year Sources of funds: Bond proceeds $ 10,000,000 $ 10,000,000 $ - $ - Tax increments 12,919,165 12,919,165 11,753 11,144 Interest - - 176 392 Other 18,090,585 18,090,585 802,741 - Loans from other funds - 7,200,000 - - Total sources of funds $ 41,009,750 $ 48,209,750 $ 814,670 $ 11,536 Uses of funds: • Land acquis~t~on $ 2,500,000 $ 2,500,000 $ 802,741 $ - S~te improvements or preparation costs 11,000,000 11,000,000 1,825 14,896 Instailat~on of public ufilities and improvements 9,450,000 9,450,000 - - - Bond payments: Pnnc~pal 10,000,000 10,000,000 - - Interest 6,859,750 6,859,750 - - Administrattve costs 1,200,000 1,200,000 Loans to other funds - 7,200,000 - 2,594 Total uses of funds $ 41,009,750 $ 48,209,750 $ 804,566 $ 17,490 Distnct balance (deficiency) $ - $ - Transfer to other distnct - - Funds remaining • (deficient) $ - $ - $ 10,104 $ (5,954) $ 10,104 $ (5,954) h EXHIBIT E RESOLUTION OF THE STILLWATER PLANNIlVG COMMISSION FINDING THE CITY'S DESIGNATION • CREATING DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO 2 AND THE THE PROPOSED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR PROPOSED TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO 8, ALL TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY WHEREAS, the City's proposed creation of the Development Program for Development District No 2, and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for proposed Tax Increment Financing District No 8, respectively, within Development District No 2 have been submitted to the Stillwater Planning Commission pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469 124 through 469 134 and Section 469 175, Subd 3 (3), respectively, and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the proposed Development Program and Tax Increment Financing Plan (together the "Plans") to determine whether the PLANS ARE CONSISTENT with the Comprehensive Plan of the City, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Stillwater Planning commission that the Plans are consistent with the Stillwater Comprehensive Plan and conform to the general plan for Development and Redevelopment within the city Adopted ATTEST ~~ ~'-~j f SF\T BY: 11-16-9° ,11~5ti~1t 11:~S1i Ci'Y AD~lI• y 9~3G88u9,= 2~ 2 yea ~» ~o^ ~o~T~ 7rau ~ reo~ss lr Scs~ ~~S~iIl~TGTON COUN'T'Y OFi=~CE OF ADMINISTRATION GpyERlylylENT CENTER P.O BOX 6 14849 82i11D 6TRE~'r MOR7M ~ S7ILLWATER. NI9IW~SOTA B308Z-003e b51-4u0-SC00 FaesMlla Nachino 55i-430.6077 Jaen~a R Sehup (ra~nty Adn~Y+iatratm VlrBkre Erdahl Deatrty Admmietratcr November ~), 1999 Mr. L'av~d T l~ia~ius~a Stillwater City Attorney P O Bo ; 438 St~llwatcr,14L~155082 SLLbJert. Tax Increment Financing Districts Plan Amendments for Districts No 1 through ; Dear fir. Mag>suson: Thank you for your invitation to provide cvtnments eoneenung the above-rcfeienced tax increair'nt financing distnictl: plan amc ndments ut tha City of Stillwater. `ti ashington C;ounly submits the following conun~iis on the prcposa; pursuant to Minricsota Statute 469 175, subd 2- d Since the protects atTectcd arc located v-ithin the City of Stillwater and since ali irnprovcment5 on C S A.H 5 have been completed, there appears to be mtnlnal -mpact on County services 2. l7ie proposedmodi fication incorporates bueigat amzrldments that would authorize additivnai ~~penditures not eontaircd in the original plans or in pre•~ious modifications to the districts. This has no aJmnislra.livc unpaci on the Coun~y However. bcxause the prcposai rnalilication authorizes new ezpend>i tureti fnr the n~paymcnt of bonds attributable to the construction of an addition to the St Croix Va11ey Sports Complex that is proposed for construction with the assistance of the City of vlahtomedi, the Disticts will retain "axccss increments" of apprvxtriate?y $7UU,OOU over the life of the Districts winch would otherwise have been retJmed to the County This is of particular concern to the County. Washington County does not stippvrl lht; wt: ul' tux incr~xiicsit financing for rxreational purposes, such as iw arenas, and does not bcitevc that WaQhington C`ounry cili~,s should pay increased t'.ounty taxes to support local recreational projects. 'i'r.~ink you fur i:ic opportuiuty to provide comments on the proposed modification. VVc request that these comme:its be incorporated mto the puhllc record at *~he public hearing on ~iove+nbt:r 16, 1999 s• ~rzly, mes'R_ Schug Ccuiity .4ciministracor c,c Washington County Board of Cominissioners Jay Kimble, Mayor, City of 5Ullwater Tile Knesel, Stillwater City Caorduiator EQUAL E'VIp~0Yh1ENT OoPORTUN'TY ! APFIRM.~TIVE ACTON t MEMO To: Mayor and City Council From: Steve Russell, Commumty Development Director Subject: Modification of Variance Request for 2nd Sheet of Ice (Case No. V/99-48) Date: November 12, 1999 The Planning Comnssion reviewed the 6 foot variance modification at their meeting of November 8, 1999 and voted 4-4 The request has been appealed to the Council for final decision. The original variance was approved by the City on October 14, 1997. The arclitect has provided possible changes to the north elevation of the building to help break up the bulk of the wall Recommendation Decision Attachment Planning Commission staff report of November 8, 1999. • • MEMO To: Planning Commission From: Steve Russell, Community Development Dnrector Subject: Modification to Existing Variance for Construction of Stillwater Recreation Center Addition Date: November 4, 1999 Discussion: A previous variance was approved by the City Council to allow an addition to the ice area to be relocated 40 feet from the Orleans Street property lane The bunldnng setback requirements for the Busnness Park Commercial Dnstract next to a resrdentnal distract is 75 feet The current proposal is fora 34 foot setback The normal setback for the BP-C Dnstnct ns 40 feet. The exnstmg land use directly across the street ns the Senior Center and Bodlovick Apartments Landscaping has been mstalled and is shown on the site plan to screen and soften the appearance of the 34 foot north buildmg facade as seen from Orleans Street As you may remember, the Planning Commission previously denied the ongmal request and rat was appealed to Council (see attached staff report and mmutes) Recommendation: Approval Attachments: Application and site plan. CPC Action on 11-8-99: 4-4 Split • • Case No: v ` Date Filed: Fee Paid: Receipt No. PLANNING ADMINISTRA~'ION FORM ACTION REQUESTED: FEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CITY OF STILLWATER 216 NORTH FOURTH STREET STILLWATER, MN 55082 Certificate of Compliance $70 _ Conditional or Special Use Permit X50/200 Design Review $25 _ Planned Unit Development* 500 ,... C~ Variance ~t/L $701200 Comprehensive Plan Amendment* $500 Zoning Amendment* $300 Subdivision* + 50 Resubdivision $100 Total Fee *An escrow fee is also required to cover the costs of aftorney and engineering fees (see attachea~ The applicant is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of all forms and supporting material submitted in connection with any application. Ali supporting material (i.e., photos, sketches, etc.) submitted with application becomes the property of the City of Stillwater PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION Address of Project ~~ 75- /~'~i~./~~lh~_ Assessor's Parcel No. ~l2 D 3~~~ f ~~~ Zoning District P-~' / Description of Project /~or~' T,.,~1 r>~ ~-..Y. a~ ~'`'~ Sh,.e~cJf- n .~ /iC~_ ~ . ~ ~i.~ ~~~ 7`7~.., f ~ `IGG~< ?.r /~l.l4ii ~..re s/L "! hereby state the foregoing statements and all dafa, information and evidence submitted herewifh in all respects, to the best of my knowledge and belief, Prue and correct. 1 further certify 1 will comply with the permif if it is granted and used." Property d T" ,j, Mailing Address 2~(~ it,/ ~1/~-- 1~ Mailing Address Telephone No._ ~ ~(L=~~ 2. ~ Telephone No. Signature _ V~~2~c~ _~,,^; ,',~ Signature ,_ - City -State -Zip -Sfi~l/IGv-z~ ~ /!~ J City -State -Zip, SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION Lot Size (dimensions) ~, x ~2-- • Land Area _ f/i, 2 ~i Height of Buildings: StoTries r Feet Principal ,_,,L,__~S Accessory f ~y ~~ ~ kd~7 ~~ = y 0 Revised: September 16,1998 ~(, S4 y ~ ' Total building floor Area sq. ft. Existing sq. ft. Proposed sq. ft. Paved Impervious Area sq. ft. Number of off street parking spaces provided _~ ., *e,`` '~ ~, .~ , ~ ~~~ ~~ ~1~ ~~~ lbtepl~~Q ~' IOtflll0l. ° • ~ +` ~ ~ r + f 1 ~ a '~""~ f / ~. ,~ -'• J,# ~,r . ~ -~, 0 ~ ~~ .~ ~,~ ' ~~ ORLEANS' TfION g`~ r, i~ 4 ~ Imo O'~ ~,,/~° 3 ~j1/vl .sr .m..e '' i "~`' - wssr .. ~~ - ~~1~w. - ~ / Y ~ \ a~ STILLWATER USTRIAL, PART{ Y /tl PARK ~/ /~ ~~ STII,LWATER MARKETPLAC~~ °unore ~ 4 .. .. °~°~. ~ ~ L ~ ~ A E ~~,s ~~ r .~ A ,'~ ~'-°~ °~; 0 ~L--~-'~ a ~ , , ~~ ~ 9'~ ~, A Y ..__..._._.Y.r_,.,. 2 i t ~6 3~~' '. 1 S a ~ 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ =~ ~ ~ " '~~ I anwu aa°..aero , ~ ow 1 .. 1A ~ A ,~ 1 ,_.._ RN , PA y D .N = NtARKETPLACE ~ ~ t ~ N - it R ~ ~ sTU.LwATBR IIVDUSTRiAL Location Map ~ ~ STILd..WAT R INDUST ~ ~ ° i ° E i azlw amw wsw ruN nar TlIN 731N 130N YOU AREI~1 rmN asN ,~ TL7N TtM axzov axles xmw Viamty Map .. o Seale In Feet .aa~.a rmaN~.r .w.r n..~° wmnnut~ ew~b.ne°° w.~ Wn~ ~°I°131HOOtlS v.Rw ar.~u«tma°n a.onmeww luau 1 ~ ~,y ~ r 1 r. ~ . . t IrtneRa+t: srRUtnA:£ nea Nose PRr8:A8T CONCRETE PNES EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION MASTER PLAN -BUILDING ELEVATIONS STILLWATER TRAINING AND COMMUNITY CENTER o~z Ankeny Kell Architects, P.A. / Stefan Larson Associates $~' 997 821 Raymond Awnue, S! Pal AIN 55114 / SW North Fourth Slreat, SlBrote IAN 55082 • • u • m 0 co i Q co co N [] 67 .,.1 L V L .-1 • ~ d Y T C d Y C Q .~ u7 I!) fU ti !O N 0 07 H 3 T, .o N N N 07 C .~ i 0 rn ~, a r' ~ ~~ ~ ~ Valle Ice Arena Addition Stillwater. Minnesota ~ ,. WEST ORLEMIB AYE ,~~ ,` ~` `~ \~ \~ ~ ` \ \~ ~ 1 ...~ ~ lNttti~ ~~ \1 \~ ~ ~ \` \~ ,~ ~1 `` _._ . _. _____ 1 bEe~ ~ q( CURVE CREST BLVD a Recreation Center ~n~ CODE REVIEW PRQAC~ TEAK OE~1ElOaPER ~ w ~/7o-na 1 7u el ac.aue ARCHT T E C i ' s~ , p y ~ ~ y 17W Ilwl MN x ~ ((~1ia r h~ (h9 07FMU l1N IIC1 { IRIL ENS ICL TAIITB ~~ y 7 117'Yy7 M 71n{WSuIM 700 qy~ b INrt~WM IW L ~ A //i1 OI 73107 T{ p1~ 777-1117 ra 77 777-1017 r I S 4101 ~~)7W MI ~ ~ 107.017 '1 7m y~yy 7' r~ Lx~na~ ~ 1 7M I 110 >r • M~ ~ ~ ~ ~rr C~ ~~ X ~~ ~~ ~~ Al {/tOAIYMbrM~ • ~J MEMORANDUM ~~j~_ /~ TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director DA: October 3, 1997 RE: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL OF VARIANCE FOR SPORTS COMPLEX The planning commission reviewed the variance request at their meeting of September 8, 1997. They felt the height of the air structure was to tall and did not meet the Market Place Design Guidelines. They felt the Orleans Street setback could be mitigated but that the project could be moved to the south (this would reduce the public works site) The 75 foot setback from Orleans Street is required because of the PUD Single Family designation although the senior center and Bodlovick Apartments azea across the street form the project The 40 foot proposed setback would provide opportunity for screening of the future second ice azea There are no feasible options to reducing the height of the air dome. For the dome to be the size as proposed the 70 foot height is required The Market Place Design Guidelines aze meet for commercial uses and did not anticipate a fieldhouse. The Comprehensive Plan indicates a commumty center in this azea (council may want to continue this item to your special meeting of October 14,1997) Recommendation: Decision on request. Attachment: Planning Commission staff report and meeting minutes of 9-8-97. s y r • PLANNING COMMISSION Sept. 8, 1997 Present: Jerry Fontaine, chairman Glenna Bealka, Russ Hultman, Kirk Roetman, Tom Wiedner and Terry Zoller Others: Steve Russell, Community Development Director Absent: John Rheinberger, Don Valsvik and Darwin Wald Chairman Fontaine called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Mr. Zoller, seconded by Mrs. Bealka, moved approval of the minutes of Aug. 11, 1997; all in favor. Case No. SUB/97-45 A subdivision of Lot 3, Block 21, Carli and Schulenberg's Addition to create a 100 x 75 foot lot fronting St. Croix Avenue in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Jon Whitcomb, applicant. n u Mr. Whitcomb was present and provided a diagram of the parcels. He said all setbacks could be met should he decide a construct a new home on the subdivided parcel. Speaking in opposition to the proposal were Jean Robinson, Oak Park Heights, mother of Elizabeth Fontaine, who lives directly to the rear of the proposed parcel; Elizabeth Fontaine; Kelly Klein, 1212 N. Third St.; Linda Furst, 1311 N. Third St.; Randy Zalmer, 1211 N. Third St.; Tom Furst, 1311 N. Third St.; Darrin Anderson, 1218 N. Third St.; Scott Anders, 1224 St. Croix Avenue; and Barb Fazendin, 1320 N. Second St. _ Concerns centered on traffic, the potential impact on property values, and the potential for drainage problems due to the slope of the parcel. f ty Mr. Russell suggested requiring a utility easement for drainage and other utilities as a condition of approval; he also suggested spelling out the removal of the porch on the existing lot as an added condition. Mr. Fontaine suggested adding another condition stating that all drainage must be retained on the property or directed to the street. • Mr. Zoller moved approval with the three additional conditions, noting the request does meet all cities ordinances/codes and from a policy standpoint can't be denied. Mrs. Bealka seconded the motion; all in favor. • Case No. SUP/97-46 A special use permit for a hospital expansion and interior renovation at 927 W. Churchill, Lakeview Hospital, in the RB, Two Family Residential District. BWBR Architects, applicant. Dennis Vonasek of BWBR was present for the discussion. He explained the request is fora 2,100 square foot addition; five parking spots will be relocated. Jim Qualey, 1014 S. Greeley, questioned how far forward the addition will come from the existing building. The addition will extend four feet beyond the existing building, Mr. Vonasek said. Mr. Wiedner, seconded by Mr. Hultman, moved approval as conditioned; motion passed unanimously. Case No. VI97-47 A variance to front and street side yard setbacks for construction of a 24 x 30 foot attached garage at 703 W. Willard St. in the RB, Two Family Residential District. Brenda Koller, applicant. Ms. Koller was present for the discussion. She said she had changed her request to a 24 x 24 foot garage. There ~rvas some confusion regarding the setbacks as indicated in the drawings. _ Mr. Wiedner suggested there is no hardship that would necessitate granting a variance; the applicant could build asingle-car garage, he suggested. Mr. Roetman argued there is a hardship in the applicant cannot have a garage without a variance. Mr. Roetman moved approval of a variance to construct a 24 x 24 garage with the condition~~that the structure be of style and materials similar to the house and that all drainage remain on site. Mrs. Bealka seconded the motion. Vote was 3-3, representing denial of the request. Voting against the motion of approval were Mr. Wiedner, Mr. Fontaine and Mr. Zoller. Case No. V/97-48 A variance to the setback (75 feet required, 40 feet proposed) and building height (70 feet proposed, 40 feet allowed) to construct an ice arena and air dome at 2305 West Orleans in the BP-O, Business Park Office, and BP-I, Business Park Industrial, districts. Ankeny/Kell Architects for the City of Stillwater, applicant. Duane Kell and Eric Lagerquist of Ankeny/Kell and Amy Stefan of Stefan Larson Associates reviewed building and landscaping plans. The project, if approved by the City, will be built in 2 phases. The first phase will include the ice arena, dome, an outdoor ice sheet and 228 parking spaces. Mr. Kell said after review by the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC), plans had been modified slightly on the north elevation so the precast concrete material will more "sympathetic" to the building material colors on the other elevations. Roger Tomten, chairman of the HPC, was present. He explained that the HPC was concerned about the used of precast concrete on the north elevation which is not in conformance with design guidelines. He said the changes Mr. Kell talked about had not been reviewed by HPC, and he said he assumed the HPC would have the opportunity to review the proposal again in the future as changes are explained in detail. Ear! and Marguerite Olson, 7 424 Cottage Drive, outlined some of their concerns about the potential impact on the residential neighborhood -- height of the dome, noise from the Public Works operation, etc. Mr. Roetman expressed his concern about the height of the dome, noting the City had tried hard to keep the entrance to the city as aesthetically pleasing as possible through signage regulations and other design guidelines. Mr. Fontaine said he had difficulty allowing the City to do what businesses would not be allowed to do. Mr. Zoller spoke about the history of the property and the project. He argued that the dome is a unique structure for a unique purpose. Mr. Wiedner agreed that the project is serving a public purpose, but also noted the City could change its ordinance to accommodate the project if desired. Mr. Zoller argued that granting a variance is the proper way to proceed because there is a hardship involved -- the proposal is the only economically feasibl~wvay the structure can be constructed. Mr. Roetman, seconded by Mr. Wiedner, voted to deny the requested variances. Motion passed 4-2, with Mrs. Bealka and Mr. Zoller voting against denial. • • MAGNUSON LAW FIR1vI LICE~iSED IN MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN • THE DESCH OFFICE Bli11DIVG 333 tioRTH ~~ STREET • SUr['E X202 • PO Boa[ 438 • STILLWATER M:V »082 TELEPHO~lE (651) 439-9464 • TELECOPIER (651) 439-5641 DAVID T. vIAGrL~SO~Y MEMORANDUM TO Nlayor, City Council and Staff FROM. David T. Masnuson DATE. November 12, 1999 RE Newspaper Stands and Outdoor Pop Machines RICHaitD D. ALLEr The subject of the regulation of newspaper vendnig devices has been considered several • times by the City Council and we have been asked our opuuon with regazd to the legality of enforcros such regulations. I enclose a memorandum that I did for the City Council m 1988 and one that Mr Allen did for practically the same subject 10 years later. Also the issue of regulating pop machines in the Downtown has been studied by the HentaQe Preservation Commission. I believe in the I-iistoncal I3istrict, the City could enact regulations that require the pop machines to be out of sight It is interesting that the City of Ft Lauderdale Flonda was recently successful in a recent case that was before the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court denied certioi~ui on November 1, 1999 that had the effect of upholding the local rule banning begging in anon-hostile, non-aggressive manner in a public place. r~ \J While pop machines and newspaper stands aze not besging, they aze a form of conduct or "speech'' for oses of the First Amendment. I enclose a copy of a summary of that case for the • Pine Council and Staff s review Ultimately, as with so many local issues, we can expect that these measures would be very controversial and touch some of the same nerves that were touched in recent fights over the Tree Ordinance Somehow nghts that people perceive as being protected by the Constitution tend to generate student interest Respectfully, ~~ <~~- David T. Masiiuson DT~i/nm C7 • 11'SAGNUSON 8 DIEPERINK • David T. iVla~nuson Ann L. Dleperlnk MEMO TO: NILE KRIESEL AND CITY COUNCIL Susan L. Thorn Admtmstrattve Assistant - Llsa Gldlow Moriarty Legal Assistant FROM: DAVID T. MAGNUSON, STILLWATER CITY ATTORNEY DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1988 IN RE: REGULATION OF NEWSPAPER VENDING DEVICES Some years ago, the City of Roseville adopted an Ordinance prohibiting the installation of newspaper tubes on public right- of-ways. The St. Paul Dispatch immediately sought a Restraining Order in the District Court of Ramsey County and Judge Schultz, • in a learned opinion, said that the Ordinance bridged the - constitutional right to free speech contained in the First Amendment. Subsequently, the City of Roseville adopted a permit process and this sort of regulation is permissable. I enclose a copy of the current Roseville Ordinance that has withstood court _ challenges, however, before we draft such an Ordinance for consideration, the entire staff should be allowed to comment on the implimentation of it's provisions. I await council's direction before doing further work. ATTOR\E~5 AT LAW THE GRA\D GARAGE Sc G~ILLERY 32a ~OLTH ~t~l• STREET STILLRATER. ~tl\~VESOTA 55082 teti2~ s3o-9sba • • .9 , i nn '] 77 I CJ` . Ol O ~ STREETS, DR I VEtitAYS /t~`;D P~'tt;i:t P.G LOTS (8? h'o new~papor vending nachine r:cr b3 pl~cod to a public right-~ of-way ad,ja;,ent to a proporty zorod residentiat and contair~inC four' resldenttal ~ntts cr loss. 83. - r S c r. ,. 83.Qi 0. ~1o Ur:+~~th r I ~i Str~~t ~' jg~s to b~ F~ ~• ~~ri No F „son o th 'r than an e.~rptoyeo or duly authcrtzad agent of the City, shalt ereot any sign purporting to by a streot namo sign within the ccrporate limits of of thv City. • ,~ ii t CITY OF ROSEVILLE ORDINANCE NO. 920 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTIONS 13.310, 13.320, 13.330, and 13.340 OF THE CITY CODE OF THE CITY OF ROSEVILLE AND ADDING A NEW CHAPTER 84 REGULATING USE OF NEWSPAPER RECEPTACLES. The City Council of the City of Roseville does hereby ordain: I. Sections 13.310, 13.320, 13.330, and 13.340 of the City Code of the City of Roseville are hereby repealed. II. The City Code of the City of Roseville is hereby amended by adding a new Chapter 84 to read as follows: 84. Newspaper Receptacles 84.010. Definition of Newspaper Receptacles. For the purposes of this ordinance, a "newspaper receptacle" is any outside device, whether tubular, box shaped, or otherwise, designed for and used to receive newspapers, advertising flyers, or similar printed material, delivered by a carrier. Included in this definition are such devices which may be attached to the sides of buildings, free standing posts, mailbox posts, and other outside structures. 84.020. Newspaper Receptacles Limited. Newspaper recep- tacles are prohibited in public rights-of-way except at the roadway curb of each lot no more than two (2) newspaper receptacles may be attached to a rural delivery mailbox post. On lots where no mailbox post is available or where such placement is impractical, no more than two (2) newspaper receptacles may be placed on a single post, provided that if there is a mailbox on the lot, the newspaper receptacle post shall be located within eighteen (18) inches of the mailbox post. In no event will there be more than two (2) newspaper receptacles on any lot. 84.030. Exceptions. (1) Where rural mailboxes are located on one side of the street, newspaper receptacles may be placed on the side of the street where the residence is located or on the mailbox post or within eighteen (18) inches of the mailbox post in accordance with Section 84.020, regardless of which side of the street the mailbox is located. (2) On lots where more than ane dwelling unit is located, no more than two (2) newspaper receptacles may be placed for each dwelling unit. 84.040. Color of Newspaper Receptacles. All newspaper receptacles permitted by Section 84.020 shall be of a brown or tan color or such other neutral color as approved, in writing, by the City Public Works Director. Permitted newspaper receptacles shall not display the name of a newspaper or other advertising message but may display an indentifying mark for each publisher using the receptacle, not to exceed two (2) inches by two (2) inches in size. 84.050. Permission. Each publisher which has placed or places a newspaper receptacle pursuant to this ordinance shall provide the occupier of the dwelling to which it is adjacent with a self addressed postcard, printed in such a manner that the occupier may instruct the publisher to remove the newspaper receptacle. In the event the publisher receives instruction from the occupier to remove the newspaper receptacle, the publisher shall remove the same within ten (! 0) days of receipt of the instruction. 84.060. Effective Date. TIus limitation on the use of newspaper receptacles applies to all receptacles placed after Apr~i 1, 1983. Those newspaper receptacles which do not comply with the provisions of this ordinance and which were placed prior to April 1, 1983, shall be brought into compliance with this ordinance by September 1, 1983. III. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Roseville this I4th day of February , 1983. ATTEST: ~~~ ~~ /Manager c.~J /~ ~,n-~ ' Ma~6r • • .. S'T'A'T'E OF MINNESOTA DIS'T'RIC'T' COURT • COUN'T'Y OF RAriSEY SECOND JUDICIAL DIS'T'RICT FILE N0. 454191 Brian Downs, Charles Enderby, Ray Klemenhagen, Timothy Johnson, Harvey Putnam, and Northwest Publications, Inc., Plaintiffs, vs. City of Roseville, FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW and ORDER FOR JUDGDIENT Defendant. •> • The above entitled matter came on for hearing before the undersigned, Judge of Ramsey County District Court, on the 3rd day of May, 1982. Plaintiffs were represented by Oppenheimer, Wolff, Foster, Shepard and Donnelly, by Paul R. Hannah, Esq., and Michaela White Maenner, Esq. Defendant was represented by Peterson, Bell and Converse, by Roger A. Jensen, Esq. Based upon the evidence adduced at trial, the arguments and briefs of counsel, and upon all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, the Court hereby makes its: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Roseville Ordinance 13.310, et seq. imposes restrictions on the placement and composition of newspaper tubes in public rights-of-way in the City of Roseville by: (a) Restricting the number of tubes to one per lot. (b) Limiting the color of tubes to brown, tan, or some other neutral color. --~ •- i . ~~ (c) Prohibiting advertising messages on the side of tubes. (d) Requiring the written consent of the adjoining property • owner where tubes currently are located as well as for the placement of tubes in the future. 2. The Roseville City Council adopted the ordinance after conducting several public hearings and after reviewing an extensive record made by the Roseville Planning Commission, including evidence in favor of and opposed to the ordinance. 3. At trial, ft was agreed by the parties, that the Court could include in its Order provisions for: (a) Placement of additional newspaper receptacles adjacent to lots where more than one dwelling unit are located. (b) Where rural mailboxes are all located on one side of the street, a publisher shall have the option of placing the newspaper receptacles within ?8 inches of the mailbox post, regardless of which side of the street the mailbox is located, or placing the newspaper re- ceptacle on the side of the street where the residence is located. • (c) F.ach publisher using a newspaper receptacle may place its own two inch by two inch identifying mark on the newspaper receptacle. 4. The ordinance restrictions on the color of newspaper receptacles and prohibiting advertising messages are reasonable time, place and manner restrictions. 5. The ordinance restrictions requiring the written consent of adjoining property owners where newspaper receptacles are placed and the limitation of one newspaper receptacle per stake or mailbox post are unreasonable, but a restriction allowing no more than two receptacles per stake or per mailbox post and a requirement that publishers provide self addressed postcards allo•~ing subscribers to instruct publisher to remove ne•.~spaper L' -2- f f • receptacles, would be reasonable. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Those portions of Roseville Ordinance 13.310, et seq., limiting the color of newspaper tubes and prohibiting advertising messages on the sides of tubes are reasonable and valid restric- tions. 2. Those portions of Roseville Ordinance 13.310, et seq., requiring the written consent of adjoining property owners where newspaper receptacles are already in place and limiting the number of receptacles to one per lot are unreasonable and are invalid. 3. The Court approves and would deem valid provisions • of the ordinance allowing multiple newspaper receptacles adjacent to lots where more than one dwelling unit is located; the option of placing newspaper receptacles on the side of the street where mailbox posts are located or the side of the street where the dwelling being served is located; the allowance of one two inch by two inch identifying mark on each newspaper receptacle per publisher where more than one publisher uses a newspaper tube; a limitation of two newspaper receptacles per lot attached to one stake or mailbox post; and, a requirement that all subscribers with newspaper tubes currently and new subscribers be provided with a self addressed post card printed in such a manner so as to allow the subscriber to instruct the publisher placing the newspaper receptacle to remove it. r~ L_J -3- C ORDF'R FOR JIJDGMF,NT LET JUDG:~FDI'1' BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. • BY THE COURT: (fir ~ ~ ~ /a ~~ udge of District Cour t DATED : a-d' ~ l (, ,. ~ .. ri E bi O R A N D U M • The freedom of the press guarantee of the United States Constitution's First Amendment not only includes the right to publish, but includes the right to circulate what has been published. The right to publish would be meaningless if that which is pub- lished cannot be distributed. Lovell v. Griffin, 303 US 333 (1938); and Schneider v. Ervin ton, 308 US 147 (1939). On the other hand, a city such as Roseville has the right to impose time, place and manner restrictions on the means of circulation so long as the restrictions are reasonable and directly advance a government interest. Heffron v. International Societv for Krishna, 452 US E40 (1981). A Court reviewing an ordinance which restricts the circulation of newspapers must balance the pub- lishers' rights to circulate against the city's legitimate inter- ' ests in limiting that circulation. Here, the Court concludes that Roseville's ordinance does further legitimate public interests in maintaining at.trac- tive and uncluttered streets as well as facilitating the storage of snow and placement of utilities in the public boulevards. Plaintiffs did establish, however, that the limitation of one newspaper receptacle per residence will impede motor delivery of newspapers where two or more newspapers are delivered to a residence, especially on Sundays when it will be difficult to fit two Sunday newspapers into the standard size newspaper receptacle. The Court believes that allowing two receptacles per residence will not unduly jeopardize the city's purposes • -1- M and will allow ample space for two or more newspapers to be placed at the same time. • The Court also believes that requiring written approval from property owners for the placement of receptacles, especially where receptacles are already in place, will impose an unnecessary burden. Requiring a publisher to provide a self addressed post- card to subscribers whereby the subscriber can simply check a box requesting removal of the receptacle will serve the same purpose at a significantly lessened burden. The Court, therefore, upholds Roseville's newspaper receptacle ordinance with the exception of that portion of the ordinance restricting the use of newspaper receptacles to one per residence and that portion requiring prior written approval from the owner of the property. The Court ~~~ -~e-rspectively deems reasonable provisions •ahich would allow no more than two news- • paper receptacles per stake or mailbox post and a requirement that self addressed postcards be provided to subscribers by the publisher, printed in such a manner so as to allow subscribers to instruct the publisher placing the newspaper receptacle to remove it. ~ ,v"`~ H.Ta.S. -2- • • C~~t c~~cisio~s • C. Thomas Fafinslci Licensing ne~vsracks mate denial of a permit and an protected from judiaal second guess- illegitunate abuse of power ing The Court stated that a policy An ordinance is unconstitutional if it The aty may require periodic hcens- decision is an evaluation and balancing gives a government official or agency ing of conduct associated with e.Ypres- of social, political, and economic consid- unbounded discretion to approve or sion, but a city is constitutionally erations and "not the application of deny periodic pernut applicatons for required to maintain a neutral txitera saentific and technical skills in carrying the placement of newsracks. in its licensing decisions to uisure that out established policy." In this case, the city passed an the deasion is not based on the content In flux case, as in Nusbaum, the ordinance giving the mayor the author- of thie speech. Therefore, an ordinance MnDOT adopted the Minnesota Man- ity to grant or deny annual perrrut iS unconstitutional >f it gives an official ual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. applications for the placement of news- unbounded discretion to approve or 'lie Court m Nusbaum found the adop- racks on public property. Upon the deny permit applications and to inipose tion of the manual to be a protected mayor's approval, the city issued per- conditions he or she deems necessary planning level activity. In this case, the ants subject to a few restncnons..4ri and reasonable. Court said the implementation of a architectual review board had to The court spetafically declined to policy may be protected ~ the unple- approve the newsrack design and the make a ailing as to the validity of an mentation involves the balancing of owner had to comply with any neces- ordinance that totally bans newsracks public policy considerations. Therefore, sary and reasonable conditions the on public property, however, this case when the implementation of a policy is mayor unposed. Also, the newsrack seems to indicate that such an ordi- policy maluiig itself, rt may be pro- owner had to indemnify the ary against nance would be an unconstitutional tested by the discretionary immunity any liability ansing from the newsrack. restriction of the freedom of expres- doctrine. The district court found the ordi- sion. (City of Lakewood v. Plain Dealer - - l Th h Ci 6 W 4611 6- 56 U S L P bli h Co nance constitutiona . t rcnit e . , . . u ing . s Caurt of Appeals reversed the district 14-88 ) court's decision and found the ordi- nance to be unconstitutional in three b di F h ~terpretation of ecause t e or nance J respects. irst, gave the mayor unbounded discretion di immunit ti y scre onary in granting or denying apphcanons and doctrine placing conditions on issued permits. Second, because upon the mayor's The recent Minnesota Supreme approval, the architectual board of court cases of Chabot and Nusbaum review had unbounded discretion in (see June issue of Minnesota Cities p design approval`~Finally, the court of 47 for a siirimary) and three other appeals held that the idemniry require- casese have narrowed the discretionary merit violated the First Amendment unmunity doctnrie because the city did not place sunilar In Holmquist v. State of ll~lmnesota, requirements on owners of similar the plantiff was involved in aone- structures occupying public property vehicle accident which he argued was The Supreme Court determined that caused by the Muinesota Department the circulation of material on newsracks of Transportation's failure to post a is a First Amendment freedom of sign warning of a narrowing shoulder. expression issue It held that requiring The Supreme Court held in favor of the an indiviaual to apply annually fora state because there was no casual pernut could pressure self-censoring of connection between the state action the material in an effort to receive a and the plantiff's in~unes. favorable application renew For exa_*n- While the Court did not decide this pie, a newspaper which reties heavily case on the discretionary unmunity on newsrack circulation may be pres- doctnrie, it did give guidance to the sured to endorse an incumbent mayor proper interpretation of Nusbaum and or refrain from criticizing an incumbent Chabot "[T]he fundamental inquiry mayor in order to avoid a problematic must be whether the challenged deci- penmt review sion involves a policy making decision The Court also recognized the prob- entrusted to the political branches of lem of distinguishing between a legiti- government and is, therefore, to be ..~ C rvwo 1.v~~+r.~ Fryberaer, Buchanan, Smith and Frederick,P.A. Attortteys A Regional Law Firm Based in Duluth 302 West superior street Duluth, Minnesota 502 1-800-223-2774 EXT 168 Harold A. Robert E. Frederick Toftey 25 years 15 years Municipal Law Municipal Finance Experience Experience Serving communities in Central, Western and Northern Minnesota in the areas of. • Municipal Financing* • Tax Increment • Spec,al Assessments • Condemnation • titunicipal Construction Litigation 'Listed in the Bond Buyer's Directory MAGNUSON LAW FIRM LICENSED IN ~11NNESOT.114ND WISCONSIN • THE DESCH OFFICE BLILDIYG 333 \ORTH ~IAIV $TREET • $LITE X202 • P O BO\ 43$ • $TILLWATER ~iN 55082 TELEPHO\E (613) 439-I~6-F • TELECOPIER (612) 139-5641 Davin T. ~IaGVUSOY RlCxaxD D. ALLEv MEMORANDUM TO: Nile Kriesel, Stillwater City Coordinator; and D~ '~ FROM: Richazd D. Allen, Assistant Stillwater City Attorn DATE: October 20, 1998 SUBJECT: Constitutionality of an Ordinance Banning or Otherwise Limiting Nonsubscribed for Newspapers/Advertisements to Residences i City residents have raised concerns about the increase in the amount of nonsubscribed for materials which have been appearing on their doorsteps or hung on their mailboxes. Residents aze concerned about the unsightliness of these materials which often blow around their neighborhoods as well as that lazge number of such materials left lying in front of homes aze a sure sign to criminals that the owner is away. This memo will explore the options available_to the City to address these concerns. Any limlts or restrictions on home delivery necessarily fall into two (2) groups: Some form a complete ban on nonrequested delivery; or conditioning the delivery in some manner. The distribution, however, of both noncommercial literature (newspapers and political flyers) as well as nonmisleading commercial literature (advertisements) is protected by the First Amendment. This protectlon, is of course, not absolute. The government may Impose "reasonable° restrictions on the tune, place and manner of speech. Restrictions of ttus klnd aze valid provided they aze- 1. Justified wlthout reference to the content of the regulated speech, 2. Narrowly tailored to serve a significant governmental interest; and 3 Leave open ample alternative channels for the communication of the information. r~ U Nile Kriesel and David T Magnuson Page 2 October 20, 1998 While a complete ban on the delivery of nonrequested materials would be the simplest to enact and enforce, it faces near certain defeat unconstitutlonal grounds. While such a ban is by its nature content neutral and both crime prevention and aesthetic concerns have been held by the Courts to be significant governmental mterests, such bans always fail as not being narrowly tailored. They simply suppress too much speech. While the City's interests aze legitimate, they must be balanced by an individual's right to decide for him or herself what materials she wants to receive. Any tune the government substitutes its judgment for a citizen as to what iQfonnation she is able to receive, Courts have held such restrictions as too broad and therefore unconstitutional. The more difficult issue then becomes what type of restrictions are viable Unfortunately, Supreme Coup decisions ui this area are few and because they always involve a balancing test, exact answers are difficult to discern. A review of case Iaw does indicate some parameters Cities which, because of their suburban nature, tend to have deliveries of materials made from vehicles have been successful in requiring materials to be left in paper boxes or tubes and fiirther • limiting the design and number of such devices per household. This helps address both the aesthetic and litter type concerns and is somewhat helpful regarding crime concerns. It also can be used to allow residents to determine if he or she wishes to receive such materials iii that such ordinances often require anyone placing a box on a person's premises must also include some kind of postcard to be return to its delivery source requiring the removal of the tube These hype of regulations would unfortunately not be much help in Stillwater, as most deliveries are made by hand and tubes and other such devices are not used. Permissible regulations could also require that the delivery be left in such a way as to prevent it from blowing away or being soaked by the rain. Any such requirements would be difficult to specify and enforce. The most helpful, although constitutionally problematic approach, is to require that no materials be left without the permission of the homeowner. Such regulations have the benefit of leaving the decision of what materials to receive to the homeowner It also, however, can subject homeowners to a barrage of people ringing their doorbell requesting permission to leave matenals which many might consider more offensive It would be permissible to minimally limit the hours of such delivenes and also to allow residents to place signs declaring their desire that no materials be left. It would then be up to the City to determine a method to prosecute violators n ~J Nile Kriesel and David T. Magnuson • Page 3 October 20, 1998 As described above, the ability of the City to regulate rionrequested deliveries is limited. The Courts have time and again noted that the absolute importance of the First Amendment in protecting the free flow of information from alI sources makes acceptable the imposing of some burden on even unwilling listeners. If you wish to proceed with the drafting of an Ordinance limiting the delivery of such materials, careful consideration will be needed to find the exact minimum of regulation necessary to meet the City's interests. RDA/ds • n LJ Court Upholds Panhandling Laww Fort Lauderdale Prevails OverACLU 6y Suscn M, Pamas The city of Foi t Imuderdnle Fla. won nn important battl for cities everywhere by sue cessfully arguing that its regu- lation prohibiting all forms o soliciting, begging and panhan- dling on the Fort Lauderdale 13eacli did not violate the I~'irst Amendment freedom of speech nglits of Homeless people. _ tort Lauderdale won the appeal against the ACLU in the U S Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and the US Supreme Court denied certio- rari, thereby refusing to hear tiro case on November 1, 1999 Tliis case is important for cities because the court has upheld a local rule banning begging in a non-hostile, non -aggressive manner in n public place Foi t Lauclordale's regula- tion states that its intent is "to provide citizens with a safe environment in which recre- ational opportunity can be maximized " 1t further pro- hibits soliciting, begging or panhandling on the Fort Laud- erclale Beach area."to eliminate nuisance activity on the beach and provide patrons with a ~ pleasant environment in wliicli to recreate " Tlie city anti the ACLU agreed that tourism f played an important economic role in the State of I'lorida and for the City of Fort Lauderdale, that "Fort Lauderdale is the premiere tourist location of Iiroward County," and that the "beach area is Fort Laud- erdale's number one tourist attraction." Tlie court, in reaching its decision to uphold the city's rule, acknowledged that beg- ging is a form of speech for pur- poses of the First Amendment, and that Fort Lauderdale's Wile sou slit to restrict speech in a pubic forum (the beach and ncljacent areas) Under First Amendment caselaw, the city can read ict speech in a public forum pro- t vided that the regulation does not restrict the content of the speech, but rather only the time, place or manner of expression. Such a time, place anti manner restriction can only survive a First Amenci- ment challenge if it is content neiiti al, narrowly tailored to serve a significant government interest, and leaves open ample alternative methods of communication In applying this legal teat to Fort Lauderdale's rule, the court held that the rifle was content neutral because it was not aimed at the content of the action of soliciting, bogging or Panhandling, but rather at the secondary effects of such con- duct on tourism and the siir_ rounding commpnity The court also held that the city's rule was narrowly tai- lored to serve life qty's interest in providing a safe, pleasant environment anti eliminating nuisance activity on the beach In so determining, the court stated that "the city has made that judgment, we cannot con- he discretionary determina- tion that begging in this desig- nated, limited beach area adversely impacts tourism. Without second-guessing :~~;,~.a~.:,i,:, ~ ,,,,,; .:,. , . 1,'4 , I ' N(e~ n ~ gyip ~ C7F' ~WNe..~ ~ ~~1~ p~ ~,~~ ~yy~yy~~//~ ~M'1 ` , u7f~K' , :x'y4,~^'i '1 L"(~'f', , ~, k _ ~ t- r r a •f•, .T'. . '~y~j,.m ~ 1~Sa~rty~iy i i-ident Clinto ' ` ~' " '+~§''~`y'' ' ri vetoed the ~Departmenta-of ;, u's~ioe,~atid ;St~te;~approppiations measure;(H,R.s ~, lY: a`tSdmos~ notablx the'Administratioa,oan,~';' ie` '1 fazlQd t4 ads ua 1 proposed 21st ~: 4 to p fluid the ~ ~tiative which builds on the existing Cora~={, ~~~gn~'i~rvloes (COPS) program. , Clinton,t' ~t p the''1$,tp~~g bills for fiscal 2000, which;:,, ~; , vetoed four Qthers and is certain to i'aject ~~ ~+~',d~1a1•MWmae ~ ,,.s,,~r~.F.,Mw.~„~; ~- ~igtess completed action ' ~~.hPPropriation~ measure, which~the Presi- ; 1,~;'~deeP1Y'tlawed ",The measure makes a -.9?, ~ ~ i the-bo , rigs ~ ard~cut that will shortchange numerous ~.p q ~; x Y ~~~ jl ~~ 1 , ~~~* ,i ,~. 7fah~ .t ~. .i~,~~ ` ~' ~, ;li +~ 5!1 •~al. u ~! • 1 4iLl terms, the;preside~t h `` ~: { , ~~~~,beobai~e lavi~t as.said; he.will'noti;, ~ ~ ~~Ral?ublicans, do.not have ;~ ~; -r+~~,#~- eo,the two sides will have to;~ [a~,°~'or~~jsl#~a replay of the.1996 dns~Alnnlr:.~ et~',1• elude that banning begging in this limited beach area bur- dens substantially more speech than is necessary to further the government's legitimate inter- est " The court also foun-- d hn1 begging, soliciting, and pan- handling was permitted else- where in the city, therefore, ample alternative methods of communication existed. ^ Cl_ _a! _ _ _ - wattiup helped himself by vigor- to __-.-- -- rm as of ----- - -•-„ .. -_ - _mayor Bozeman yr; ~.~~:.....,.....~..._..__ __ ---___ .- _ . MAGNUSON LAW FIRM LICENSED IN MINNESOTA Ai~ID WISCONSIN • THE DESCH OFFICE BUILDING 333 NORTH blaPi STREET • Su1TE #202 • PO Bo`[ 438 • ST[LLWATER. MN 55082 TELEPHONE (651)439-9464 TELECGPIER (651) 439-5631 D44ID T. ~IAGNtiSON RICHARD D. ALLEr MEMORANDUM TO• Nile Kriesel, Stillwater City Coordinator; and David T. Magnuson, Stillwater City Attorney FROM• Richazd D. Allen, Assistant Stillwater City Attorney DATE: May 27, 1999 SUBJECT: Constitutionality of an Ordinance Banning or Otherwise Limiting Nonsubscribed for Newspapers/Advertisements to Residences City residents have raised concerns about the increase in the amount of nonsubscribed for materials which have been appeazing on their doorsteps or hung on their mailboxes. Residents aze concerned about the unsightliness of these materials which often blow around their neighborhoods as well as that lazge number of such materials left lying in front of homes aze a sure sign to criminals that the owner is away. This memo will explore the options available.to the City to address these concerns Any limits or restrictions on home delivery necessarily fall Into two (2) groups. Some form a complete ban on nonrequested delivery; or conditioning the delivery in some manner. The distribution, however, of both noncommercial literature (newspapers and political flyers} as well as nonmisleading commercial literature (advertisements) Is protected by the First Amendment This protection, is of course, not absolute. The government may Impose "reasonable" restrictions on the time, place and manner of speech. Restnctions of this kind aze valid provided they aze• 1 Justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech; 2 Narrowly tailored to serve a sigmficant governmental interest, and 3 Leave open ample alternative channels for the communication of the Information .] Nile Knesel and David T Magnuson Page 2 May 27, 1999 While a complete ban on the delivery of nonrequested materials would be the simplest to enact and enforce, it faces neaz certain defeat unconstitutional grounds. While such a ban is by its nature content neutral and both crone prevention and aesthetic concerns have been held by the Courts to be significant governmental interests, such bans always fail as not being narrowly tailored. They simply suppress too much speech While the City's interests are legitimate, they must be balanced by an individual's right to decide for him or herself what materials she wants to receive. Any time the government substitutes its judgment for a citizen as to what information she is able to receive, Courts have held such restrictions as too broad and therefore unconstitutional The more difficult issue then becomes what type of restrictions aze viable Unfortunately, Supreme Court decisions in this area aze few and because they always involve a balancing test, exact answers aze difficult to discern. A review of case law does indicate some parameters. Cities which, because of their suburban nature, tend to have delivenes of materials made from • vehicles have been successful in requiring materials to be left in paper boxes or tubes and further limiting the design and number of such devices per household. This helps address both the aesthetic and litter type concerns and is somewhat helpfiil regazding crime concerns. It also can be used to allow residents to determine if he or she wishes to receive such materials in that such ordinances often require anyone placing a box on a person's premises must also include some kind of postcazd to be return to its delivery source requiring the removal of the tube. These type of regulations would unfortunately not be much help in Stillwater, as most delivenes are made by hand and tubes and other such devices aze not used. Permissible regulations could also require that the delivery be left in such a way as to prevent it from blowing away or being soaked by the rain. Any such requirements would be difficult to specify and enforce The most helpful, although constitutionally problematic approach, is to require that no materials be left without the permission of the homeowner Such regulations have the benefit of leaving the decision of what materials to receive to the homeowner It also, however, can subject homeowners to a barrage of people ringing their doorbell requesting permission to leave materials which many might consider more offensive. It would be permissible to minimally limit the hours of such delivenes and also to allow residents to place signs declaring their desire that no materials be left. It would then be up to the City to determine a method to prosecute violators "• Nile Kriesel and David T. Magnuson Page 3 May 27, 1999 As described above, the ability of the City to regulate nonrequested deliveries is lunited. The Courts have time and again noted that the absolute importance of the First Amendment in protecting the free flow of information from all sources makes acceptable the imposing of some burden on even unwilling listeners. If you wish to proceed with the drafting of an Ordinance limiting the delivery of such materials, careful consideration will be needed to find the exact minimum of regulation necessary to meet the City's interests. RDA/ds s MEMO ~'o. Mayor and City Council ~~ From: Klayton Eckles, City Engineer/Public Works Director Sub~ect• Reports from Barr Engineenng on Territonal Wall and Storm Sewer Repaus Date• November 10, 1999 Discussion: Attached are two reports from Barr Engineenng One discusses the proposed modifications to the City's storm sewer system to deal with excess storm water and flooding which occurs on and azound the Temtonal Prison property The second report deals with an analysis of the stability of the wall and cost estimates for rehabilitation In the storm sewer system analysis Barr comes up with two options for dealing with the storm water One is to install a lazger pipe through the site to carry the water down to Main Street (this is similaz to the SEH proposed solution) Option 1 is a new option which would make modifications to the up stream ravines which would help meter the water slower into the existing storm pipe and therefore ehminate the need to replace the existing system Under both options it is recommended that additional capacity be added from Main Street to the nver The preferred option descnbes as option one shows an estimated total project cost of $408,550. Due to the preliminary nature of the study, it is also suggested that this estimate could range plus or minus 10 percent The second study looks at the wall stability and ground water hydraulics behind the wall The report finds that ~verall the pnmary walls azound the pnson grounds aze generally in good condition and also that conditions aze favorable to successfully make repairs to those azeas that have failed. The report also discusses a number of nonstructural restoration work that could be completed Items discussed include stone archway repairs, guazd post restoration, a trail system, wetland enhancement or protections and water features The cost of the structural repau's restoration and addition of a ground water collection system for the wall is estimated at $414,416 Again an additional range of plus or minus 10 percent has been added due to some of the numerous unknowns concerning the project. The other restoration work listed above has a huge vanation in cost, since much of the work would be to restore the histoncal character to create an interpretative environment. The cost range for these improvements therefore would range from zero to $1,020,000 Summary of Probably Costs Estimated Cost Range Storm Sewer System Improvements $367,700 - $449,400 Wall Repairs and Ground Water Collection System $373,000 - $456,000 Histoncal Restoration Work an~ Considerations $0 - $1,020,000 Recommendation: Staffhas no formal recommendation on this at this time. It appeazs that this information should be sufficient to continue discussions with the potential developer of the site. It is intended to be used to finalize the development agreement • Barr Engineenng Company 4700 West 77th Street • Minneapolis, MN 55435-4803 Phone 612-832-2600 • Fax 612-832-2601 BARR Minneapolis, MN • Hibbing, MN • Duluth, MN • Ann Arbor, MI • Jefferson City, MO • November 3, 1999 IClayton Eckles City of Stillwater 216 North 4~' Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Re: Stillwater Prison Storm Sewer System-Engineering Study Dear Mr. Eckles. We have completed our evaluation of the stonnwater system tributary to the Histonc Stillwater Pnson site in order to recommend necessary flood protection improvements. The large retauung wall behind the prison is failing due to the combnnatnon of water that collects above the walls, groundwater pressures from behind the wall, and surface flows that cascade over the wall during large stone events To prevent a future wall failure, a prnmary goal involves minimizing the potential for surface water to be directed to the wall. The source of the pooling water above the wall appears to be due to both groundwater and stonnwater runoff. The stonmwater runoff ns a result of insufficient capacity of the existing storm sewer system. Thus, dunng vanous stones that overtax the existing system, water redirects itself by overland flow to the wall In addition, significant flooding occurs on Second Street and North Main Street. A secondary goal ns to mimmnze the sigmficant amount of water that can overtop Second Street that could result in a severe roadway washout, and minimize the amount of water that collects on North Main St near the pnson. As a result of these problems and exnsting nnterests to restore the historic prison, the city retained the services of Barr Engineering to Identify and analyze optnons to prevent surface flows from overtopping the pnson's retaining walls • 2 Determine viable solutions to the flooding on North Mam Street and Second Street 3. Perform geotechnical and hydrogeolognc reviews of the area behind the wall to detennnne the groundwater nmpact on the retaining wall stability. (Due to 1999 financial constraints, thus review was to be done without performing soil borings and subsurface tests at this time. Under this approach, of the city decides to repair the wall, the subsurface work necessary for a complete analysis would be performed as part of the final desngn of the wall repair and necessary groundwater controls.) 4 Prepare a prelnminary desngn to restore the wall and prevent future fanlures. Mr Clayton Eckles November 3, 1999 Page 2 • Items 1 and 2 above are addressed in this report. Items 3 and 4 above are discussed in a separate report that will also be submitted to the City. Items 1 and 2 are addressed in this letter report Specifically, this letter describes (a) the data-gathering activities necessary to enable the analyses, (b) the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed to model existing conditions, (c) the various possible options analyzed to correct the flooding problems, and (d) recommendations for corrective actions. Data-Gathering Activities and Model Preparation The city provided Barr with most of the data necessary for the analyses including the Elm Street Storm Sewer Outlet Feasibihty Study (prepared by SEH), storm sewer information of many of the storm sewers in the watershed area tributary to the prison and the North Mam Street flooding areas, and land use information. Watershed Dat~Drainage divides in the tributary watershed were initially taken from the SEH Elm Street Storm Sewer Outlet Feasibility Study, and revised where needed during our field venfication activities. This network of watersheds is shown in Figure 1 The land use information (shown in Figure 2), and watershed divides, were digitized and incorporated into the ArcView GIS (a computerzed geographic information system) prepared for thus study. The percent imperviousness values were estimated for each type of land use in the study area. Table 1 shows the percent imperviousness assumed for each type of land use. By determining the amount of each type of land use in each subwatershed, the percent imperviousness for each subwatershed was calculated using a weighted average. Tlus information, along with values of flow length, watershed slope and flow velocity were then incorporated into the Ban Watershed Model and run for the 10-year iiz-hour and 1-hour duration storm events, as well as 100-year, ifi-hour, 1-hour, 2-hour, 3-hour, 6-hour, 12-hour, 24-hour, 2-day and 4-day events. From the model, the hydrographs for each subwatershed were generated. Storm Sewer and Pond Data-Storm sewer and pond information for facilities in the vicinity of the prison (i.e., pipe and manhole inverts, pipe diameters and shapes, top of casting elevations, storage inlet~outlet structures, etc.) were taken from construction plans provided by the city. Additional information such as contours and cntical elevation points for the sedimentation pond was obtained through field surveys performed by Barr Engineering. Thus survey work became necessary when it was determined that (a) there was conflicting pond and storm sewer information, and (b) special site- specific information was not available. This necessary survey work was not in Barr's onginal scope of work. The pipe and pond information, along with the hydrographs generated in the Barr Watershed Model, were then input into the XPSWMM Version 6.02 computer program to model the existing pipe and overflow conditions of the North Main Street area. XPSWMM Version 6 02, the EPA's storm water • management model with a graphical interface provided by XP Software, was used to route runoff Mr Clayton Eckles _- November 3, 1999 Page 3 • through the system of ponds, pipes, and ditches. Once the existing problem areas were identified, possible solutions were investigated using the XPSWMM model. Hydrologic/Hydraulic Analyses Existing Conditions-There are three retaimng walls on the north side of the pnson. a lower, middle and upper wall It appears that one of the purposes of the middle and upper wall was to form the sides of a channel that directed surface flows (from the west) around the prison. More recently, a 36-inch storm sewer was constructed between the middle and upper walls. Flows from three large subwatersheds drain to this pipe and the channel that overlies it; the Elm Street Ravine watershed, the Aspen Street Ravine watershed, and the First Street watershed (Figure 1). The Elm Street Ravine watershed is the area that drams to the recently constructed sedimentation pond dust west of Second Street and the prison. The Aspen Street Ravine watershed is the area north of the pnson that drams to the ravine dust west of the intersection of Second Street and Aspen Street. The First Street watershed is the area and drains to a storm sewer in First Street and connects to the 36-inch pipe running between the middle and upper pnson retaining walls. Our analysis revealed that dunng the 100-year, 1-hour duration event, the existing storm sewers cannot manage all of the flows. As a result, a substantial amount of water is directed to the lower pnson wall at the location where it is collapsing. Essentially, flows from the Elm Street Ravme will • overtop Second Street. Sunultaneously, flows from the Aspen Street Ravine watershed overtop a small dike and flow down Aspen Street to Second Street, then down Second Street to loin the Elm Street flows overtopping Second Street. These excess flows (5 1 acre-feet from Elm Street Ravme and 1.9 acre-feet from Aspen Street Ravine) then combine and flow directly to the lower prison wall and cascade over it. We believe this has occurred dunng some recent storm events and has played a part in the wall failure. Once the water has cascaded over the retaining wall, it flows through the prison grounds to North Main Street where it floods on the road until it is either collected in small storm sewers and directed to the St. Croix or it flows overland through the Zephyr train station property to the St. Croix. At the same time these flows are flooding onto North Main Street, excess flows not managed in storm sewers from the First Street watershed flow west down Elm Street to North Main Street These excess flows (that cannot be managed in the 36-inch storm sewer) then flow south down North Mam Street to the same location where flows that pass through the pnson grounds are flooding North Main Street 2.5 acre-feet of excess flows from the First Street watershed combine with the 7.0 acre-feet from the Elm Street Ravme and Aspen Street-Ravine watersheds at the low point in North Main Street. Therefore, a total of 9.5 acre-feet of water flows to the low point in North Main Street during the 100-year, 1-hour storm. Options Analyzed to Correct the Flooding Problems-Two options were considered to prevent • flooding above the pnson wall. Option 1 involves utilizing the Elm Street and Aspen Street ravines as detention areas to detain the excess flows so that they only pass through their outlet pipes, thus Mr Clayton Eckles _- November 3,1999 Page 4 • enabling the existing 36-inch pipe system to convey flows away from the prison's lower wall. Option 1 is shown in Figure 3 Under Option 2, the Elm Street Ravine pond remains as a sedimentation basin, the Aspen Street Ravme is modified to provide more stormwater detention, and the 36-inch pipe is removed and replaced with a larger pipe to provide enough capacity to prevent floodwaters from overtopping Second Street and then flooding above the pnson wall Option 2 is shown in Figure 4. Presently there is a approximately a 30-foot long open channel between the stone culvert and the 36-inch pipe. For both options, an enclosed connection between the stone culvert in Second Street and the pipe system above the wall is recommended to prevent the possibility of water escaping the system at that point and flowing towards the pnson wall. For Option 1, the Elm Street Ravine pond would have to be modified to accommodate 6.4 acre-feet of storage This would involve raising the existing berm to an elevation of 795.2 and lowering the invert of the sediment pond's outlet pipe to the base of the existing pond. The raised berm elevation is 1.0 feet below the entrance to the Sutherland home on the north side of the basin. If a storm larger than a 100-year storm were to occur, water would overtop the dike and flow to Second Street without flooding the Sutherland residence Increasing the berm height at the mouth of the Aspen Street Ravme by 6 feet would provide an additiona12.6 acre-feet of storage. The use of these two ponding areas would eliminate the overflow of water to Second Street and the pnson wall during the critical 100-year storm while using the existing pipe system. The 10-year, 1-hour storm will result in no flooding along the system (including North Main Street) However, with these revisions alone, the • 100-year, 1-hour storm will still cause some flooding on North Mam Street. Approxunately 4.3 acre- feet from the First Street watershed Wnll still flow to the low point on North Main Street. It will combine with an additiona10.4 acre-feet of excess flows from the pnson grounds for a total of 4 7 acre-feet. To prevent this downstream flooding, either the 36-inch pipe from the First Street connection to the St. Croix River would need to be increased to 48 inches (Option lA), or high- capacity catch basins would be constructed at the intersection of Elm and North Main streets where the 36-inch pipe would be replaced with a 48-inch pipe from North Mam Street to the aver (Option 1B) For Option 2, the Elm Street Ravme pond is unchanged, but the Aspen Street Ravme dike is raised 6 feet. This would provide substantially less upstream storage than Option 1. As a result, the existing 24-inch pipe from the Elm Street Ravme sediment pond that connects the stone culvert in Second Street would need to be changed to a 36-inch outlet. The existing stone culvert would remain, and downstream of the stone culvert all the existing 36-inch pipe would have to be increased to a 54-inch pipe to provide enough capacity for the 100-year, 1 hour storm. This system would result in no flooding at the wall or downstream on North Main Street. Higher-capacity catch basins would need to be constructed at the intersections of First Street and Elm Street and Elm Street and North Mam Street. Tables 2 and 3 provide estimated costs for Options 1 and 2, respectively. Both estimates consider corrections necessary to solve the wall flooding, Second Street flooding and North Main Street flooding. From Table 2, the preliminary cost of Option 1 would likely range from $367,700 to Mr Clayton Eckles November 3, 1999 Page 5 • $449,400. From Table 3, the cost of Option 2 would likely range from $434,100 to $530,500 If the City desires to only correct the pnson wall floodmg problem and exclude corrections at North Main Street, the cost of an Option 1 project would likely range from $214,000 to $261,500 Such a reduced project would not be advisable for Option 2 because fixmg the wall flooding problem would create a more severe condition on North Maln Street than what presently exists Recommendations and Conclusions We recommend the city choose Option 1 to correct the flooding problems. Option 1 is less expensive than Option 2, but it will result m the loss of the Elm Street Ravme sedimentation pond due to the loss of wet detention or dead storage in the pond However, this pond is so small compared to the upstream drainage area and, due to the high discharge velocities entenng it, it is likely not very effective as a water quality treatment device. In addition to Option 1 being substantially less expensive than Option 2, the following are added benefits of Option 1 1. The pnson wall and pnson grounds will have a 100-year design level of protection 2. The city will prevent frequent overtoppmg of Second Street and, m turn, minimize the • potential for a significant washout to occur. 3. The flooding on North Mam Street will be greatly reduced. (The 9.5 acre-feet of floodmg is reduced to 0 4 acre-feet ) 4 The city will be able to construct an mterpretive walk path along the top side of the pnson retaining walls. 5 Option 1 could be constructed in two projects. If the city should decide to do the North Mam Street component of Option 1 at a later date, significant flood reduction on North Mam will still be achieved (over existing conditions) by a pnson wall flood protection project When you have had a chance to review this report, perhaps it would be appropriate to meet to discuss the city's options and desires and any questions you may have regarding this report. Sincerely, ~d>/ Steven M Klein SMK/cnl Enclosures ODMA~PCDOCS~DOCS~211018~1 • • • Table 1: Percent Imperviousness Assumed for Each Type of Land Use in the Study Area Type of Land Use Percent Impevious (~) Water 100 Wetland 100 Commercial 70 Medwm Density Residential 4-8 lots er acre) 40 Golf 15 NaturaVPark/Open 0 - 10 P ~23~82~309u_use xls Table 2 • Option #1: Utilize Detention in Both Elm Stn:et and Aspen Street Ravine Cost Estimate • Item Unit Unit Cost ~uanti Extension Elm Street Dike CY $ 10 5,000 $ 50,000 As en Street Dike CY $ 10 4,500 $ 45,000 Elm Street Ravine Control Structure ~ncludin lowenn outlet i e LS $ 7,000 1 $ 7,000 2nd Street Control Structure LS $ 7,000 1 $ 7,000 As en Street Ravine Control Structure LS $ 7,000 1 $ 7,000 Hi h-Ca ac Inlet Catch Basins and Leads EA $ 6,500 8 $ 52,000 Stone Culvert/36-Inch RCP Connection LS $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000 Rela 24-Inch RCP LF $ 35 50 $ 1,750 48-Inch RCP LF $ 100 264 $ 26,400 Re air North Main Street LS $ 7,500 1 $ 7,500 Restoration reve etation AC $ 2 3,000 $ 6,000 St. Croix Outlet Structure LS $ 10,000 1 $ 10,000 Re air 1st Street LS $ 7,500 1 $ 7,500 Dike Overflow Protection SY $ 10 540 $ 5,400 Subtotal $ 247,550 Mobilization (10%) $ 24,800 Total Construction $ 272,350 Engineenng (25%) $ 68,100 Contingency (25%) $ 68,100 Total Project $ 408,550 Range of Project Cost ± 10% $ 367,700 TO $449,400 Pro ect cost if North Mam Street and First Work is Excluded Subtotal $ 144,150 Mobilization (10%) $ 14,400 Total Construction $ 158,550 Engineenng (25%) $ 39,600 Contingency (25%) $ 39,600 Total Pro'ect $ 237,750 Range of Project Cost ± 10% $ 214,000 TO $ 261,500 • Table 3 Option #2: Utilize Detention in Aspen Street Ravine and Increase Pipe Along North Side of Prison Cost Estimate • Item Unit Unit Cost Quanti Extension As en Street Dike CY $ 10 4,500 $ 45,000 As en Street Control Structure LS $ 7,000 1 $ 7,000 2nd Street Control Structure LS $ 7,000 1 $ 7,000 Elm Street Ravine Control Structure LS $ 7,000 1 $ 7,000 Remove 24-Inch RCP LF $ 12 50 $ 600 36-Inch RCP LF $ 75 50 $ 3,750 54-Inch RCP LF $ 110 1,116 $ 122,760 Hi h-Ca ac Catch Basins and Leads EA $ 6,500 8 $ 52,000 Stone Culvert/54-Inch RCP Connection LS $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000 St. Croix Outlet Structure LS $ 10,000 1 $ 10,000 Dike Overflow Protection SY $ 10 270 $ 2,700 Re air 1st Street LS $ 7,500 1 $ 7,500 Re air North Main Street LS $ 7 500 1 $ 7,500 Restoration AC $ 1.5 3000 $ 4,500 Subtotal $ 292,310 Mobilization (10%) $ 29,230 Total Construction $ 321,540 Engineering (25%) $ 80,385 Contingency (25%) $ 80,385 Total Pro ect $ 482 310 Range of Project Cost ± 10% $434,100 TO $ 530,500 • Watersheds Existing Storm Sewer Existing Retaining Wall Existing Pond -~. 0 500 1000 Feet Figure 1 STUDY AREA AND WATERSHED DIVIDES BARR .~... LEGEN~ Existing Land Use NaturaVPark/Open ;~,~, Golf Course Medium f~ensity Residential Commercial Open Water Wetland 0 500 1000 Feet Figure 2 EXISTING LAND USE BARB ~~ LEGE N Berm N Berm N Option 1 b and 1 a N Option 1 a N Existing Storm Sewer Existing Retaining Wall Watersheds ® Storage Pond 0 250 500 Feet Figure 3 OPTION BARR t. „' Option 2 Berm N Existing Storm Sewer Existing Retaining Wall Watersheds Existing Pond -~. 250 500 Fee Figure 4 OPTION 2 BARB Barr Engmeenng Company 4700 West 77th Street • Minneapolis, MN 55435-4803 Phone 612-832-2600 • Fax 612-832-2601 PARR • Minneapolis, MN • Hibbing, MN • Duluth, MN • Ann Arbor, MI • Jefferson City, MO November 10, 1999 Mr. Klayton Eckles City Engineer City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082-4898 Re: Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stability Analysis for the Historic Stillwater Prison Site Dear Mr. Eckles: As you requested, we have recently completed the groundwater hydrauLc analysis and stone retaining wall stability analysis for the historic Stillwater Prison site. The purposes of these services was to assist in developing a better understanding of the impact of stonnwater and groundwater on • the stone retauung wall stability. It was also the intent of our study to evaluate the structural integnty of the existing stone retaining wall and provide our opinions and preliminary recommendations on corrective measures that would be necessary to restore the failed areas of the wall to prevent future wall failures. On September 27, 1999 Barr engineers performed a visual site reconnaissance of the retaining walls. The visual reconnaissance performed included walking the entire length of the upper and lower walls and measuring the height of the walls at approximately 100-foot horizontal intervals. Our engineers also noted the conditions of the walls and the nature of any seepage that was observed Description of Walis There are three stone walls at the pnson, built from blocks of dolomite and sandstone that are typically about 2 feet tall, 3 feet wide, and 2 to 3 feet deep. The inner wall is typically about 30 feet high and surrounds the prison grounds on the north, west and most of the south (there is a section about 200 feet long on the south side of the prison grounds were the wall apparently was not built because the sandstone bedrock uses steeply and the inner walls are terminated at the outcrop). A second stone wall is offset about 20 to 100 feet back and uphill from the inner stone wall and rims the prison grounds on the north and west. The second stone wall is typically about 15 feet high, as measured from the top of the inner wall. The land surface between the top of the inner wall and the base of the second wall is relatively flat. The condition of the second wall along the west side of the pnson grounds is poor and much of it is covered by colluvium (rubble, dirt, rocks that have fallen Mr Klayton Eckle: Groundwater Hydranhc Analya~s snd Wall Stability Analya~a for the H~stonc Stillwater Pnaon Site November 10, 1999 Page 2 • down), making it difficult to discern the wall from earth. The second wall does not appear to be present on the south side of the prison grounds There is a much smaller (approximately 6 feet high) third stone wall about 20 feet north of the second stone wall along the north side of the pnson grounds. This stone wall borders Elm Street and appears to be part of a constructed drainage way. Amore recently constructed, buried, concrete storm-sewer culvert ties between the second and third walls. The Inner (Lower) Stone Wall The inner wall rises at an angle of approximately 10 to 15 degrees from vertical into the hillside At its western terminus (Station A) it is 13 feet high and reaches an approximately uniform height of 27 to 33 feet immediately to the west. At the base of the wall on the north and south sides of the pnson grounds, a 3- to 5-foot-wide drainage channel with flowing water is present. The water flows east and enters into a small storm sewer that directs water to the St. Croix River. Along the north side of the prison grounds, the wall is generally in good condition. Some mortar is missing or was never placed (particularly along the bottom 10 feet of the wall) and the base blocks have fallen out in some locations (it appears that there may be a second course of blocks behind the • first course at the base). Flat stones, approximately 0.5 feet high, 3 feet deep, and 6 feet long have been placed at the top of the wall to serve as a cap. Beginning at Station F and moving westward, trees were observed growing out of the mortar, particular along the upper reaches of the wall. At Station I, there were elm trees growing from the wall at a frequency of about one for every 41inea1 feet of wall. At Station J (where the wall takes a 45 degree dog to the southwest), the condition of the mortar has detenorated noticeably. Immediately to the southwest, at Station L, substantial failure of a portion of the wall was observed. The base section of wall to a height of about 15 feet from the top of the wall, about 20 feet wide, and 2 to 4 feet deep has fallen down, forming a pile (about 2 feet high) of colluvium at the base of the wall. Seepage is prevalent at the top inside of the failure as drips and rivulets. There is a 4-inch- diameter steel pipe inside a 6-inch-diameter pipe that juts-from the wall about 8 feet below the wall's top at the failure. This pipe sticks out about 3 feet and is dripping water. It appears that tlus pipe was part of the original wall construction and was designed to route seepage from above the inner wall. • A second failure, very similar to the first was observed about 10 feet beyond the first failure at Station M. The main difference between this failure and the other is that this failure has a "blockier" appearance, suggesting that it may have been more recent. A 1.5-inch-diameter steel pipe huts out Mr Klayton Eckles Groundwater Hydraulic Malyns and Wall StaMltty Analysis for the H~stonc Stillwater Pnson Site November 10,1999 • Page 3 16 feet from the top of the wall immediately to the south of this second failure. Seepage with Iron flock cascades to a pool at the base of the wall at an estimated rate of about 2 gallons per minute This pool is about 20 feet by 8 feet and follows along the base of the wall (see Figure 1) It is from this pool that most of the seepage discharges Into the drainage way at the base of the north Inner wall The wall takes of 45 degree jog about due south behind the second failure and appears to be in excellent condition At Station 0, the lower 2 feet of the wall is wet and moss-covered but there is no visible seepage. Two clay 4- to 6-inch-diameter clay pipes but out from the wall about 4 feet below the top of the wall but there is no seepage from these pipes At Station Q the wall jogs 30 degrees to the southeast. There is no visible seepage but a shallow pond has formed in a wetland area 25 to 30 feet away from the wall to the northeast (toward the pnson buildings). At Station S, the wall is in contact with the sandstone bedrock (presumably the Jordan Sandstone). The lower 20 feet of the sandstone is tan with cross bedding and grades upward to a slightly more blocky sandstone. Manganese and iron staining are present along the lower 5 feet above the colluvium at the base of the near-vertical sandstone outcrop but there is not seepage visible from the wall. There is a sprang at the base of the wall, about 10 feet north of the contact with the bedrock. Flow from this spring is estimated at 3 to 5 gpm and forms a creek that flows toward the gravel dnveway (northeast). For about the next 200 feet, there is no inner wall because the steep sandstone bedrock forms a natural wall. The stone wall picks up again along the southeast side of the prison grounds About 20 feet before the wall recommences, there is a cave dug into the sandstone and from this cave water flows into the drainage way that has formed along the base of the wall. Two more caves are present immediately to the east, with constructed entrances through the stone wall and into the sandstone. Water flows from all of these caves It is clear that the seepage is groundwater flowing from the bedrock in the back of these caves. Second (Middle) Stone Wall The second stone wall is typically about 15 feet high. It appears to be in good condition along the north side of the pnson grounds and in poor to obscured condition along the west side of the prison grounds. It is not present southwest and south of the pnson grounds. West of Station 0, the wall is covered with colluvium and has taken on the natural angle of repose of the surrounding soil. Third (Uppermost) Stone Wall • The third stone wall was observed only on the north side of the pnson grounds. This wall is only about 4 to 6 feet high and was constructed of limestone blocks similar to the other walls. It appears Mr Klayton Eckles Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis aad Wall Stabtl~ty Analysis for the Hrstonc Stillwater Pneon Site November 10,1999 Page 4 to function as a separation between the residential azeas to the north and the prison grounds to the south and forms the north side of a channel (between the second and third wall) that directs flows from the west of 2nd Street azound the prison grounds. It is generally in good condition Summary of Observed Seepage North and West Wall Section Seepage on the north inner wall appears to originate in the 40- to 50-foot azea of the two wall failures (Stations J to Station N). The seepage face is quite high on the wall less than 15 feet from the top of the wall. Much of the seepage is from the insides of the wall failures. The seepage forms a pool at the base of the inner wall and flows to the east in a channel to Station A, where it goes under North Main Street a small culvert. On top of the inner wall above the failures (i e., between the inner wall and the second wall), there is a large pond azea, with water to a depth of about 1 to 2 feet. Water from this ponded area drains right up to the top of the inner wall, where it appears to seep downward. We believe that the soil immediately behind the inner wall in this azea is saturated up to the top of the inner wall. The source of the water for this ponded area is not completely clear but there aze a number of small seeps and springs near the base of the second wall above Stations L and K where water is coming out of the colluvium. Between the middle and uppermost wall is ahand-constructed, stone-block culvert 4 feet wide by 5 feet high that goes underneath 2nd Street Immediately east of the outlet of the culvert there is a more recently constructed concrete culvert that has a rebaz grate. This culvert is somewhat buried and appears to be constructed along the entire north side of the pnson grounds between the second and third walls. A concrete-ring and buck manhole was found where the 1st Street Storm Sewer likely connects to this stone sewer. On the west side of the road, near where the hand-built culvert daylights, there is a modern retention pond which appears to collect surface drainage from the entire upstream ravine area. The water in this pond may be seeping into the ground and contributing to the discharge through the rock wall South Wall Section Seepage along the base of the lower wall south of the pnson grounds is coming from the sandstone bedrock (Jordan Sandstone). The seepage is generally concentrated in the appazently hand-dug caves. In the absence of these caves, seepage would still likely be present (the caves serve to make the seepage sources more obvious). Possible Sources for Seepage Figure 2 shows the Minnesota Geological Survey's interpretation of the bedrock contacts m the vicinity of the old Stillwater Pnson. The prison grounds are m an azea where the Jordan Sandstone Mr Klayton Eckles Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stalnlity Analysis for the Histonc Stillwater Pnson Site November 10, 1999 • Page S crops out or subcrops beneath colluvium. The second wall roughly corresponds to the area where the Jordan Sandstone is in contact with the overlying Prairie du Chien Group dolomite (presumably the basal Coon Valley Member). Below the Jordan Sandstone is the less permeable Franconia Formation. The St. Croix River valley is a regional discharge zone for groundwater in the Prairie du Chien Group, the Jordan Sandstone, and the Franconia-Ironton-Galesville Formations. The ravine that the old Stillwater Prison is built in is an incision into these umts. Ravines such as these tend to be localized discharge zones and focus the discharge of groundwater into the ravine instead of into the St. Croix River. Obvious bedrock discharge of groundwater is observed in the caves However, it is reasonable to assume that groundwater in the Praine du Chien Group is also discharging into the ravine, but its seepage cannot be seen because the seepage is underground into the valley fill matenal of the ravine (west of the prison). The ravine is also an area where runoff can accumulate and seep into the soil. Even if the stormwater detention basin that is west of the prison grounds were removed, the water that flows into the ravine would continue to seep into the soil. Added to this source of water is groundwater from the Praine du Chien Group that likely is charging the valley fill material in the ravine. Rerouting stonnwater out of the ravine might have some effect at reducing seepage but probably not to any meaningful extent. It appears that regional groundwater flow is responsible for most of the water that seeps through the walls. As such, there is little that can be done to prevent this except to manage it in a seepage collection system. The seepage at the wall failures (around Station L) could likely be controlled by: (1) preventing ponding of water from seeps above the inner wall, and (2) installing a drain behind the wall in the area of the failures and routing this water through the base of the wall and to the drainage that runs east along the base of the inner wall to the north and south sides of the pnson. The seepage from caves cannot be easily controlled but it doesn't appear to be causing any problem at this time. Much could be done to develop and maintain a channel along the base of the wall. For both drainages, it would appear prudent to estabLsh a maintainable channel water feature a few feet away from the wall's base in order to minimize the channel undercutting the wall. Retaining Wall Evaluation Review of Available Information To assist in our evaluation we reviewed available aerial photographs, topographic maps and previous soil borings that had been performed on the Stillwater Prison site. Historical information was not reviewed in detail, however, we had been told that the Stillwater Prison site may have at one time served as a rock quarry. - Mr Klayton Eckles Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stability Analysis for the H~stonc Stillwater Prison Site November l0, 1999 • Page 6 It appeazs that the pnson was built neaz the north of a natural valley As part of the pnson construction it also appeazs that one of the reasons for the upper retaining walls (on the north side of the pnson) was to form the sides of a channel that routed flows from the valley around the pnson A number of bonngs had been taken on the pnson site This boring information was provided to Barr by the developer. All of these bonngs aze within the boundary of the lower perimeter stone retaining wall at elevations that match the existing pazking lot and driveway grades that surround the old prison buildings We were not able to locate any bonngs that had been performed close to the base of the lower retaining wall or at locations above and behind any of the retaining walls The soil bonngs we reviewed indicated a variety of soil conditions Beneath surficial fill deposits, most of the borings encountered predominantly fine grained appazent alluvial soils that ranged from loose to dense conditions Some of the bonngs encountered bedrock at depths within 5 feet of the surface while others were terminated before encountering bedrock, indicating a boned valley exists in the azea Summary of Site Reconnaissance Attached Figures 4 and 5 show the approximate wall heights and features at stations we designated as • A through S Also shown on these figures aze wall section drawings that we developed based on our visual observations In the Appendix of this correspondence we have included our typed field notes of the conditions observed at each of the designated wall stations (A through S) Generally, the results of our observations would suggest that the walls were well crafted when they were built neazly a century ago For the most part, the stone blocks that were used for construction probably have the same appeazance today as when they were initially placed during construction of the walls We did not observe azeas of discernible wall bulging or significant differential settlement In some azeas the wall points had been mortared However, in most azeas the points of the retaining wall were not filled by anything other than soil and gravel-size particles In many areas these conditions have been cause for the growth of vegetation from many of the points In some areas we noted where stone blocks were either missing or were substantially weathered from appazent saturation and frost action Two prominent azeas along the lower/inner wall were of interest where portions of the wall had actually collapsed On Figure 4 we have shown these failed areas occumng at Stations L and M A cross section of the failed azea, designated Section A is portrayed on Figure 5. These wall failures aze approximately the same size and shape At the base of each failed area is a mound of block debris The lazger blocks are on the order of 8 cubic feet or more in volume. At each failure azea, it was noted that water was seeping from the top of the failure zone and out from the back of the wall Behind the top of the wall at these failed areas we noted an area of ponded water that was approximately 20 to 30 feet in diameter It appeazs the water at this location collects from surface Mr Klayton Eckles Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stabtltty Analysis for the H~stonc Stillwater Pnson Srte November 10,1999 • Page 7 runoff and groundwater discharge. We suspect this pond is one of the sources of water emanating from behind the failed areas. In general, drainage conditions behind the lower wall at the locations where the failures have occurred is considered poor. When observing the exposed material behind the wall in the failed areas it was difficult to determine if the material was rock rubble that had been placed behind the wall as it was being constructed, or if it is natural weathered rock. Because of obvious safety reasons, we did not perform any work in the failure zone However, a geologist at Barr viewed photographs (attached) of the exposed matenals and expressed the opimon that the material exposed behind the wall failures appeared to be natural weather bedrock. Preliminary Wall Stability Assessment and Analysis Based on our visual observations and measurements performed we modeled two cross sections of the wall for stability analysis. Assumptions were made with regard to the unit weight of the stone blocks and interblock frictional resistance. In one case we assumed the wall had been constructed adjacent to a natural bedrock face where the only lateral pressures would result from water behind the wall. The second case analyzed assumed that soil and rock rubble had been placed behind the wall and that there was some lateral earth pressure imposed by the backfill/possible native materials and hydrostatic forces. In an effort to evaluate overturning and sliding resistance we were not able to quantify the type of foundation that'the wall is presently supported on (soil or bedrock) Due to the lack of evidence that the wall has expenenced large differential settlements we made the assumption that the wall is likely founded on bedrock or well-compacted soils. However, the two areas where failures occurred may suggest that foundation conditions are different than those assumed in the analysis. Based on our results of the analysis the lower stone retauung wall may be inadequately sized to withstand traditional soil earth pressure to resist either a sliding failure or buckling/overiuniing failure. Therefore, it is not likely that much fill or naturally-placed soils lay behind the wall Based on our analysis, assuming that the wall was constructed adjacent to native bedrock and that hydrostatic forces would compose the only driving force, it appears the wall is adequately sized to resist sliding and buckling/overtiiining failure, provided the hydrostatic head behind the base of the wall does not exceed 20 feet Our preliminary analysis indicates that with hydrostatic forces attributed to a water head of.more than 20 feet behind the wall, wall stabihty~afety factors decrease to values that are not considered safe. Based on our observations and analysis it is our preliminary opinion at this point of the study that hydrostatic pressures combined with freeze-thaw deformation were cause for slow detenoration of the wall integrity. This slow detenoration, however, may likely have been accelerated by surface • flows cascading over the wall dunng large stone events. Without confirmation of what exists behind Mr Klayton Ecklea Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stability Analysis for the HlstonC Stillwater Pnson Site November 10, 1999 • Page 8 the wall in the failed areas (native bedrock, or soils and rubble) our analysis at this point must be considered preliminary. Preliminary Wall Repair Recommendations We recommend a section of wall (approximately 100 feet in length), which spans the two future areas, be carefully dismantled. The type and consistency of the rock/soil behind the wall will need to be evaluated at that time to determine if it will remain stable during the reconstruction activities As part of the wall reconstruction it will be necessary to provide a drainage system behind the wall to reduce the risk of hydrostatic pressures developing. The drainage system would consist of a groundwater collection and discharge system and a small surface water collection system. This of course is predicted on the assumption that the city correct the mayor surface runoff problems described in our November 3, 19991etter report to the city. On the attached Figure 6 we have provided a conceptual groundwater collection and surface water drainage system design Preliminary Cost Estimate In the Appendix of this correspondence we have included a tabulation of approximate reconstruction • costs for the sections of wall that have failed, including the necessary drainage system These costs should be considered preliminary and may be more or less depending on the results of further study and final design efforts. Final Design Information Needs Prior to initiating reconstruction of the retaining wall we recommend that additional information be obtained in the form of additional soil bonngs and cores at the base of and behind the failed portions wall It would also be beneficial to install one or more piezometers behind the wall to evaluate sources of water behind the wall and fluctuations. The conditions behind and beneath the retainng wall, particularly areas that have failed need to be further defined before final design can be started Other Restoration Work and Considerations In the ultimate restoration of the historic pnson site, there are other items that will likely need to be considered and planned for. They include but are not limited-to the following: 1. The stone wall archways and the caves behind them-Though not a structural issue, these areas have histoncal significance and they perhaps pose a safety problem. At a minimum, these archways should be equipped with doors or aesthetic bamcades/enclosures that prevent people from entering the small caves in the bedrock. A design consideration for these • barricades/enclosures may be for them to look as they did during prison operations. Mr Klayton Eckles Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stability Analysis for the Iiistonc Stillwater Pnson Site November 10, 1999 • Page 9 2. The sentry/guard posts azeas along the upper retaining wall-At venous locations along the upper stone walls are azeas where sentries or guazds were placed to watch over the prison The City may desire these areas to be restored to their condition and appearance during pnson operations In addition, public access to these azeas may be desired. 3 An above-wall trail system-As mentioned in Item 2 above, the City may desire public access to the sentry/guard azeas In addition to that access, the City may want an above-wall trail system regazdless of whether or not the sentry/guazd azeas are accessible Because of the terrain and wooded nature of the azea, it may be advisable to have such a trail system lighted Handicap accessibility may also be desirable, but it is likely not realistic due to the elevation differences and the need to maintain a wooded setting 4 Wetlands-Presently there aze azeas along the stone wall where pools and waterways take on a wetland appeazance or may in fact be defined as wetlands. If they aze wetlands, they are to be either protected or replaced elsewhere if damaged The wall failure correction and pnson restoration design should include a wetland delineation/survey and should consider potential wetland impacts 5 Water Features-The ongoing flow of groundwater in the vicinity of the stone walls may • lend itself nicely to a vanety of aesthetic water features The wall failure correction and the pnson restoration designs should consider potential water features as amenities At this point, Barr has not analyzed the above five items. Therefore, we have not prepazed an estimate of costs for such work However, from our experience and to help the City further consider and perhaps plan for these items, listed below aze possible ranges in cost for the five items described above Item #1 Stone wall azchway enclosures and cave backfill $50,000 to $150,000 Item #2 Sentry/guazd post restoration $30,000 to $120,000 Item #3. Above-wall trail system $50,000 to $350,000 Item #4 Wetlands $10,000,to $200,000 Item #5: Water features $20,000 to $200,000 The range of costs for items 1 through 5 above aze only provided to give the City an understanding of potential costs and should not be considered as a cost estimate for any of the items A cost estimate for any of those items can only be prepazed after a more detailed analysis of the specific components can be made. • Mr Klayton Edclea Groundwater Hydraulic Analysis and Wall Stabd~ty Analysra for tlu HlstonC Stillwater Pnson Site November 10,1999 • Paga 10 General It has been a pleasure performing these services for you. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence or the attachments, please contact us at your convenience. Since y, ~~~ M. Klein, P. . Vice President /cnl Enclosures ODMA~PCDOCS~DOCS~21111'1 V 1 1 ~J • • Table 1 Preliminary Cost Estimate Wall Repairs and Groundwater Collection System Cost Estimate Item Unit Unit Cost Gtuanti Extension Remove/Salva a and Rela Wall Stones CF $ 10 9,200 $ 92,000 Re lace Unsalva eable Wall Stones with New Stones CF $ 20 4,000 $ 80,000 Groundwater Collection S stem LS $ 13,000 1 $ 13,000 Remove Ve etation from Wafl Face and Cleanu LS $ 15,000 1 $ 15,000 Patch/Re lace Localized Detenorated Wall Stones CF $ 20 2,000 $ 40,000 Surface Dram S stem LS $ 9,000 0 1 $ 9,000 Subtotal $ 249,000 Mobilization (10%) $ 24,900 Total Construction* $ 273,900 City Costs (7°k) $ 19,173 Investigation for Final Design $ 20,000 Engineenng (12°~) $ 32,868 Contingency (25%) $ 68,475 Total Pro ect $ 414 416 Range of Project Cost ± 10% $ 373,000 TO $ 456,000 *Cost does not include any special doors or repairs to the arch doorways to the caves behind the retaining wall • 211049 Figure 1 Features • • ota t.«xtlorrs ~ ob.eNea draerpe pmtam EXPLANATION surface water fead,res ~-~ ~ dew ~ ~- P~dine ..... second stone Wall Thal elan. wax 8eoond Well (covered and tlrokan) Venous Features ® ~ stone Blodr Culvert .c ,' _ modem storm aewsr (brsied) Types of Walls ~• lnrrarstoneW89 e. s RodC Well Outcrop Figure 2 • of Units -from MGS EXPLANATION --- ot„arvad diaraige paltam surface water features Saoond Swna wau Varloua Feedures ~^~^ P~ Thad Sbms WaY ® Roan ~ P~~ • • • • • ~ Saooad wall (oowuad and Mokan) Q Stale Biodc Culvert Types Of Wells Bedrock Sut-crop (from MGS Maps) modern slomt sewer (boned) .r~r Mrarr Sloe Wall ® JORDAN SANDSTONE ® ^ ~ Well pu~P ~ PRAIRIE DU CHIEN GROUP ® ST LJ-WRENCEfRAWCONIAFRMS :~ STILLWATER PRISON SITE RETAINING WALL EVALUATION ~~ SEWER (~IW) >~ ~~ DEA71110N POND ;~ ROAD TURN AREA • PONDINC (lYP) LoWa+ sTDNE rA~1L, - C~ I~ NATURAL ~F~ CAVES - ,'.,W-`o~i~lAiER PRISON SIZE o ,oo zoo 4. ,~ SCALE IN FEET NNN STREET ® UIESfONE BLOCKS ® uHESroNE a.DCKS wnH 11111E EKNINC NORIAR BEHIND E10511N6 T1A11 SANDSTONE ROCK EARTH IN1ERgL - - DELINEATES WATER lOCA1KMi ~ OIRECiK1N OF WATER FlAW Flgure 3 PLAN VIEW CITY OF STILLWATER • >, a2 StE0. PIPE • • ~S 0 S 10 SCALE N FFET 11~sNc B' ! 4' PIPE DFIPPNC wAIER MORE MORE TNAx 711® lWN1N F wALL TiON: STA. 475 1~y I~'s~-a~ o s 10 L ~ SCALE IN FEET ~ 27 0 0 5 f0 SCNE N FEET CENERALY NEAR wA0. :APS ARE xERE 1HAN sECnoes UAfN1N E wAIL ~S - 0 S 10 ~SOALE N FEET 0 5 t0 ~ ~ ~SCAIE IN FEET ~ GENERALY NEAR WALL LAPS ARE NERE TNAN 7ECTIOIIs TION: STA. 700 I •S- o s to ~, ~~~ SCALE N FEET -o t -s-a o s to i~ ~~i i ~SCNE N FEET EW TREES, T 1 EVERY 4 R FEET UP rAu 0 0.0 1 "S'0 'O I . aTil~l~~: STA. o s to o s 10 1 ~ ~SCAIE N FEET ~ ~ ~ SCALE N FEET ~ a 2s VASt ~ NoRaR 0. 0 ~. ^ t .S-0 ' 0 S 10 ~~ i i ~Fn~~ ~r~ ry~ SCALE IN FEET ®1 ~ _ Auu>~YJOr.~.1~G 0 5 f0 i~~~~i i SCALE IN FEET Figure 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF STILLWATER -0. JO FLAT STONES rL1ANY EW TREES aR0YMN0 WT OF wAIL,AlSO YANY DEAD TREES PROTRUana FxDN cRAas 1 ~5 o s 10 ~, „~ ~scAlE N FEET f.. , ~, -~ . ~-a o •s- o s 10 SCALE N FEET • • • ROCK CONTACT ~~ ~~ WISSNE SANO51ONE WRH CROSS- BEDDINO -EL 3S -a o a s to SCALE IN FEET , -a 33 -a 31 -a o -a o I• 1• , o s 1o a s 10 ~SCAEE IN FEET I ~ ~ ~SCAIE M FEET ~ ~!' 20!' ZONE OF PdiOED WATER SANDSTONE AND IIAESTONE TOP OF PAM -~ ELEVAININ YIIRIES ~ RECEM ALLINML NATERWS I~_ -I~~ - ~~~ -i~l~ll-~' ~ ~ BEOROac III / T ~- ASSIRED RENAMNC BLDac ~ THM3INESS ~ F TD ~ ZONE OF FALUHE 5 E ~- UYT OF FAIUNIE i I I • ~~ 1a o s 10 ~~ SCALE N FEET V - _ F.~J~1~L o s 10 ~, ~.~ ~SCAIE IN FEET NOTE WALL BUILT NTD iNE NATURAL ROCK _~ 11=~ ~ ~=1 I I-- 8-73' L BEDROCK ~nGnON 1 s- ~ ~ o s 10 ~ ~ ~ i i ~BCME N FEET 1CK5 I NISSNC NTACT CLA1 4-6' 0 1 a-o ~~ a , s' 1a SCALE IN FEEJJ J1 wAU. s co,hNEo .o 15' PIPE 1 AT OU1 c ~ WATER PDND 1 -0-0 o s 10 i~~~~i i SCAIF N FEET Figure 5 EXISTING CONDITIONS CITY OF STILLWATER WALL IEDOES --~ SNALL POPD ~ • _ 1.1 0 f0 20 SCAIE N FEET PLACE AGCREOATE AROUND MANHOLE i• Jj 1 aTDN 12' ASSUMED BEDROCK CONTACT REYOYE EXCESS NATURAL ROCK AND PLACE AGGREGATE BETNEEN THE NANRAL SURFACE AND THE PROPOSED wALL 1' ° _ ~ o .s fa ~~ ,~ SCALE IN FEET 2'/ NFFP HOLE FLFXIBIa PIPE ~ BIOCK WALL ND TO S ww~ wALL _ ~ s ~ ~ Figure 6 PRELIMINARY REPAIR DETAILS CITY OF STILLWATER ~110N: SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE 1 ~D-p - - -- -- -- o s fo i~ ~~i i SCALE TI FEET 4'/ MANHOLE DNiECT atAINACE DITCHES IN MANHOLE DRANACE DITCH ® SECTION: DRANdAGE Il11D I1IMIHOIE Ts Station A Wall sloping to street -height of 13 feet Box culvert directs flowage at foot of wall underneath highway Station B Wall looks m-tact between A & B Mortar mmssing, especially in upper 10 feet of wall Flow at foot of wall in vegetated channel that is @ 5-feet wide Wall is 23 feet high Station C Blocks of wall missing from section - 3 feet wide by 3 feet high, by 2 feet deep at foot of wall, with rubble below There is a 4-foot diameter rusted steel standpipe nsmg 8 feet above channel and bolted to the wall -around ten feet west of station C Wall is 26 feet high Station D Bottom course of rock blocks is missing to depth of @ 2 feet and a height of ~ 2-3 feet, begging at Station D. Wall is beginning at 10 degrees Mortar is missing in lower 10 feet Wall is 27 feet high • Station E 30-feet from D, where 40-degree angle m wall begins constructed path into the second wall, 12 feet back from the inner wall many steel chains and circles in second wall Wall is 27 feet tall Station F Wall is intact but mortar is missing from most Joints no visible seepage from wall (or any indication that there ever was any) elm trees grow out of ledge CAP 20 feet above ground Wall is 27 feet high Station G Wall is about 10 feet from the gravel road that surrounds the pnson buildings many elm trees growing from wall -some are rather large many dead trees protruding from cracks in wall no visible seepage from wall some stones are missing at the bottom -only to a depth of about 1.5 feet Second (upper) wall is about 15 feet from the edge of the lower wall Flat stones have been placed on top of the wall beginning at station E Wall is 30 feet high Station H S 2-inch steel piping Jutting out from wall C 12-feet above channel -sticks out about 1.5 feet _+ no visible seepage from wall • wall is 32 feet high Station I ' Many elm trees grov-nng from cracks all up and down the wall -about 1 every 4 lineal feet, spaced around wall Wall is 33 feet high Station J Appears to be larger gaps between blocks - especially at the base Mortar is generally missing Wall is 33 feet high Station K Change to the angle of the wall by 45 degrees Station L Begmmng of wall failure The distance from the top of the wall to the channel is 29 to 30 feet There is about 2 feet of cotluvium at the base of the failed wall. The failure is about 20 feet v~nde and 2 to 4 feet deep The top of the failure is 15 feet from the top of the wall Seepage is prevalent at the top inside of the failure with daps and nvulets There is a 4-inch diameter steel pipe inside a 6-inch diameter pipe hutting from the wall about 8 feet below the top of the wall It sticks out about 3 feet and is dnpping water Station M • Similar to L - a second failure of the same height, separated from the other failure by 10 feet of intact wall The shape of this failure is "blockier", suggesting that it may be more recent Station N ~ S inch diameter steep pipe~utting out 16 feet from the top of the wall Seepage with iron flock cascades to the pool at the base of the wall, about 2 gpm The wall is 31 feet high 1-inch diameter steel rods protrude from the rock face The pool at the base of the wall is about 20 feet by 8 feet and follows along the wall Station 0 Break m the direction of the wall by 45 degrees Two clay pipes, 4 to 6 inches in diameter~ut out from the wall about 4 feet below the top of the wall - without any seepage Lower 2 feet of the wall is wet and moss-covered Upper wall looks like it has crumbled here and is at the angle of repose Station P Wall is in good shape There are few trees hutting from the wall (in fact, almost none) No visible seepage and no channel or ponding Ground at the foot of the wall is a little moist mortar in lower 5-10 feet of wall is intact but is missing above • flat rocks on top are still present wall is 33 feet high a _~ Station Q Break in the du~ection of the wall of 30 degrees Wall slopes back at 14 degrees No upper (second) wall present but a steeep slope is present wall is 31 feet high wall is in good shape with no sign of seepage Station R Basically the same as Q There is a lazge wet azea about 25-30 feet away from the wall and pazallel to the wall Wall is 33 feet high Station S Contact of the wall with sandstone bedrock -either Jordan Sandstone or Franconia Formation There is a spnng at the base of the wall about 10 feet north of the contact emanating from the colluvium Flow is estimated at 3 to 5 gpm from a creek that flows to towazd the gravel driveway Wall is 35 feet high. The lower 20 feet of the bedrock is massive tan sandstone with cross-bedding It grades upwazd in a slightly more blocky sandstone Manganese and iron staining are present along the lower 5 feet above the colluvium but there is no visible seepage from the rock itself • • • ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY LEASE OF A PORTION OF CITY-OWNED PROPERTY TO MAX TODD MARINE SERVICES, INC. FOR THE OPERATION OF A MARINE SERVICE BUSINESS The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain That after publication of nonce and a public heanng, all held according to law, the City Council hereby finds that it is in the best interests of the City to enter into a Lease Agreement with Max Todo, Marine Services, Inc , a Minnesota corporation, for the temporary use of approxunately 250 feet of ever frontage near the south end of the so-called Aiple Property for the operation of a marine service business. 2 That the form of Lease attached to this Ordinance as Exhibit "A", be and the same hereby is approved 3 Upon expiration of the 30 day waiting penod as required by the City Charter, the ordinance will be effective and the Mayor and Clerk will be authorized to sign • and execute the Lease on behalf of the City Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 16th day of November, 1999 By Jay L Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Morli Weldon, City Clerk • LEASE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made this 16th day of December, 1999, between the City of Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota, a Home Rule City of the Third Class ("City") and Max Todo, Marine Services, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, with offices at 16355 - 18th Street South, Lakeland, Mmnesota 55082 ("Max Todo'. 1 Recital. The City is the owner of real estate with frontage on the St Croix River ("Property"), part of which was formerly rented to Aiple Towing Company who operated a bazge terninal facility from the site 2. The Property A portion of this Property is the subject of this Lease and is described on the attached Exhibit "A", the Property where currently a City owned bazge entitled the "Frank E" is moored along with a City owned vessel known as the "Cayuga", a vessel that is held by the City for future use as pazk facility, but that currently is m need of substantial repair 3. Tenn The City is willing to lease the site to Max Todo by this instrument for an imtial three (3) year penod and two (2) one-year extension penods on the consideration and according to the teens set forth in this Lease Agreement. 4 Rent. As and for rent payable to the City during the term of this Agreement, Max Todo will perform repairs to the Cayuga according to the repair items list schedule attached to this Agreement as Exhibit "B". The order and timing of the work will be determined by Max Todo but all work must be completed during the initial three (3) yeaz term of this Agreement As additional rent, Max Todo will move the City bazge from the Property to Lowell Pazk for the LumberJack Days celebration and return it to its mooring site on the Property at no chazge to the City This provision will not prevent Max Todo from charging pnvate parties for services rendered to them beyond the actual moonng and spudding down of the barge Max Todo will also, at the end of the teen of this Agreement, move the Cayuga to its final location, without chazge to the City Any use of the bazge by Max Todo or others will require pnor approval of the City Coordmator. 5. Appearance. Max Todo agrees to maintain the physical appearance of the Property in its present condition and promises to erect no additional out buildings or structures on the Property 6 Moonn Max Todo will be allowed to bring to the Property and moor on the e Property a marine crane, tug boat, additional bazges, material for the construction of new bazges, welding equipment and additional boats and vehicles as needed to reasonably maintain their business 7 Landscapma Max Todo will also plant shrubs, annual and perenmal flowers, grade the access road, cut and trim brush and weeds, and maintain the Property in a presentable fashion 8 Lock Out Gate Max Todo will construct lock out gates that will be installed to secure the Property and prevent public access to the Cayuga, the barge and their business property 9 Waiver Max Todo also agrees and waives by this Lease any claim that they might otherwise have to compensation as a lessee in possession under any state or federal law or rule should the property be needed to accommodate construction of an interstate bndge, bridge piers or abutments or other possible bridge construction impacts in the event the Property or any part of it is needed for bridge construction or bridge construction impacts or is affected by bndge a construction impacts. Max Todo upon ninety (90) days written notice by the City agrees to accommodate any such construction or impacts In that event the City agrees to reasonably explore relocation of Max Todo for the remainder of the Lease period as long as a relocation does not involve expense or chazge to the City and the accommodation can reasonably be made If reasonable accommodations can not be made without charge to the City, Max Todo agrees to vacate the Property leaving it in as good as condition as it is now found, waive any claim for material or work done to the Cayuga, the bazge or the premises and this Agreement will be null and void. In that event, Max Todo will be relieved from further repairs to the bazge or Cayuga 10 Moorins Visitors. Max Todo also agrees to reasonably accommodate, at the request of the City, any marine services who aze temporarily working on public projects on tie St Croix River on a temporary basis and who are in need of loading, unloading or mooring vessels involved in this work This provision will be operative on a case by case basis and may not unreasonably disrupt Max Todo's operations, or provide a competitor with an unreasonable advantage C. 2 11 Insurance Max Todo must insure the Property and the Cayuga against all nsks • and provide the City with a certificate of insurance evidencing $1,000,000 combined single limits coverage on their operation, naming the City as an additional insured as their interest may appeaz 12 Prohibition Assi nment This Agreement and the nghts granted hereunder may not be assigned or transferred by Max Todo without the pnor wntten consent of the City 13 Conditions Precedent This Agreement will not be effective unless all City Charter provisions that pertain to the use of City owned land have been followed and approved by the City Council or the voters in the event that a referendum and also the approval of the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1N WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands this 16th day of December, 1999 CITY OF STILLWATER By i Jay L Kimble, Its Mayor ATTEST Morli Weldon, Its City Clerk MAX TODD, MARINE SERVICES, INC. By Thomas F Huninghake Its President By Audrey J Guild Its Secretary • 3 LJ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 16th day of December, 1999, by Jay L Kimble, Mayor and Morli Weldon, Clerk, for the City of Stillwater Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) • The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 16th day of December, 1999, by Thomas F. Huninghake, the President, and Audrey J. Guild, the Secretary, duly authorized agents for Max Todo, Manne Services, Inc , a Minnesota corporation Notary Public • 4 r • _ _ ~ _ • -- -- _ mo t, c ~ o f~ ~c /~ i v ~ r n a _ _. - - J 1---~--._ _ _ •1Mf 4+ ~ /IM I I~ 1 $ ~ • /~~fy bw/'C~ -- - f - I M +' _ _ _ . ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ --~.-/ - ~ t l I ••w Grw.i ~qw~ -- ` \ I•I4i _ ~~ onn ~ I n+~ r•~• ~ ~o • List of Reo~ir Items • • 1.) Repair and or replace broken windows. 2.) Repair holes in deck. 3.) Repair roof. 4.) Lock for hatch cover. 5.) Intense inner hull and bilge cleaning. 6.) Removal of any remaining fuel and or lubricants. 7.) Reinforce Collision Bulk Head to be water tight. 8.) Aft Bulk Head to be raised 3' to 4' and reinforced. 9.) Shaft Bulk Head to be raised 3' to 4' and reinforced. 10.) Contain current leaks and future leaks. 11.) Emergency pumps plumbed in and installed. 12.) Paint removal and new paint. 13.) Permanent repair of Bow Tank. 14.) Level Alarm System. 15.) Removal of any unnecessary pipes, wire, tanks etc. 16.) Lock-Out Gate. 17.) Clean up grounds and plant flowers and shrubs for aesthetics. ~~ „~I/ CITY OF STILLWATER MEMO • November 12,1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Shawn Sanders, Civil Engineer ~~ SUBJECT: Myrtle and Greeley Streets Lift Station Improvements Project 9920 DISCUSSION: Bids the Myrtle and Greeley Streets Lift Station were opened today at 10:00 a.m. Three bids were received with the results as follows: BIDDER BID AMOUNT Bazbazossa and Sons, Inc $133,790.00 Osseo, Minnesota • Jay Bros. $172,221.00 Forest Lake, Minnesota Gridor Construction Inc. $217,810.00 Plymouth, Minnesota ENGINEER"S ESTIMATE $100,000.00 Although the lowest bid was higher than the engineer's estimate, funds are available for this improvement, including a $130,000 carryover from the 1998 budget for lift station upgrades. Barbarossa and Sons has indicated that they could start the work in three weeks. The completion date is January 31, 2000. RECOMII~NDATION• ~ Staff recommends that Council receives the bids and awazds the contract to Bazbazossa and Sons for their low bid of $133,790.00. ACTION REQUIRED: If Council concurs with the staff recommendation, they should pass a motion adopting • Resolution No. 99 =, ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR GREELEY AND MYRTLE STREET LIFT STATION IMPROVEMEMTS (PROJECT 9920). RESOLUTION NO.99- ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR MYRTLE AND GREELEY STREETS LIFTSTATION IMPROVEMENTS (Project 9920) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the construction of the Myrtle and Crreeley Streets Liftstation Improvements, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement, BIDDER BID AMOUNT Barbarossa & Sons, Inc $133,790.00 Osseo,lVlinnesota Jay Bros. $172,221.00 Forest Lake,lVbnnesota Cmdor Construction Inc. $217,810.00 Plymouth, Minnesota Engineer's Estimate $100,000.00 AND, WHEREAS, rt appears that Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., of Osseo, Minnesota is the lowest responsible bidder NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA: 1 The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and duected to enter into a contract with Barbarossa & Sons, Inc., of Osseo, Mininesota in the name of the City of Stillwater for the construction of according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and duected to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except the deposits of the successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed r Adopted by the City Council this 16~' day of November, 1999. Jay Kunble, Mayor ATTEST Morh Weldon, City Clerk MEMORANDUM TO Mayor and Council FR City Coordinator RE Addendum to Solid Waste Contact DA November 12, 1999 Discussion Accompanying this memorandum is the proposed Addendum to the Sohd Waste collection agreement. The changes to the agreement aze listed in the memo that Chantell has provided you I believe the changes aze consistent with previous Council review and conceptual approval. Unfortunately, a wnnkle has surfaced regazdmg the agreement. The Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance ("OES'~, upon the request of the Washington County Department of Health and Environment, reviewed the existing agreement. Their position, as explained in the attached letter from Sherry Enzler, Director of OES, is that the City is in violation of Minn. Stat • Section 115 46, subd 5, which appazently requires cities to require their solid waste contractors to bring the waste to the RDF plant located in Newport, Minnesota. The question appears to be whether or not the provisions of the aforementioned statute apply to the City's agreement m that it was entered into prior to the adoption of the County solid waste plan. It would appear that the provisions of the plan do not apply to the present agreement as it relates to taking the waste to the RDF plant. As explained in the letter that the City Attorney sent to Ms Enzler, the County plan was adopted by the County Boazd on November 24, 1992 and the City entered mto the original agreement with Junker Sanitation on June 30, 1992 - pnor to the adoption of the plan Therefore, according to the City Attorney, the addendum to the agreement does not have to be consistent with the County solid waste plan. Further, the addendum is merely a modification to the existing agreement and not a renewal of the agreement. I am not sure what needs to be done in regards to this matter at this time I know that the County desires to have all of the waste collected in the County to go to the RDF plant. However, I do not believe we can require the contractor to do so Hopefully, the City Attorney can advise you more fully on this matter at the meeting Recommendation. Council consider approval of the addendum to the solid waste collection agreement. ~~ • Memo ~ DATE: November 10, 1999 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Chantell Kadin Administrative Assistant/Personnel Coordinator RE: Solid Waste Contract Addendum As you directed, staff has put together the attached Addendum to the Solid Waste Contract with Waste Management, Inc. The following is a brief summary of all the changes included in the Addendum. 1 Contractor is responsible for billing residents directly. A Recycling Subsidy will be paid to the Contractor by the City, as billed quarterly. The Subsidy will be negotiated annually and determined by the monies the City receives from the Washington County Municipal Curbside Recycling and Waste Reduction Grant. • 2. Contractor will provide the City with a list of unpaid bills and the City will certify them to Washington County for payment on residents' property taxes. 3 Residents will have adrop-off site for consumer electronics (TVs, computer monitors, etc.) The Contractor will also provide a truck and staff for consumer electronics during the City's Annual Household Hazardous Waste Day each spring 4 Excess waste will be picked up and billed $1.50 directly to residents on their quarterly statement This eliminates the need for residents to obtain special "City" gazbage bags for excess waste. 5 Contractor will provide free gazbage service to all City-owned facilities and the Lumbei~ack Days celebration. 6 The Contractor will make dumpsters available in the event of a natural disaster 7 The rate schedule will be as shown on Attachment A in the Addendum. 8 The Contract will be effective, January 1, 2000 -December 31, 2002 9 One, 3-year extension may be applied for by the Contractor. • • ADDENDUM TO SOLID WASTE CONTRACT This Addendum, made on this day of , 1999, to the Original Agreement, signed on June 30, 1992, and as amended, by and between Junker Sanitation Services, Inc whose contract has been purchased by Waste Management, Inc., "Contractor," and the City of Stillwater, a municipal corporation, of the County of Washington, State of Minnesota, "City," hereby amends the following: ITEM 3 BILLING Item 3 shall be amended to read - - -- -- ---~ , ...,.,.. o~-~~- s ~ ~+~ea~a~x moxaaozepea + Pa~'t~'t'i2rtt dL1rr t~=S +t, +...,t t. ,7• ---' + a , ~2S4E1@H6e- The Contractor shall be res onsible for billin and collectin char es from all units. • which shall include apartment dwellings including apartment dwellings in the central business distract condomuuum and townhouse buildings Bed and Breakfast operations and businesses operating out of a residence. The Contractor shall be compensated for the billin res onsibili er umt as fisted in Attachment A -Rate Schedule Effective January 1-December 31 2000 of the contract The Contractor shall invoice the Citv quarterly for the Rec clip Subsidy as shown in Attachment A. Certification of Unpaid Bills The City will certify to Washineton County on an annual basis all delinquent refuse and recycling charses These amounts will be payable with the owners property taxes The City will reimburse the hauler when it receives payment from the County in the r i~ summary of collection efforts in order that the City can provide the notice to each owner needed to effectuate this certification to the County Auditor in a timely manner The Contractor shall provide the Citv with the list to be certified in a format (electromc paper. or otherwise) that is most acceptable to the City. ITEM 4 DISPOSITION OF SOLID WASTE • Item 4 shall be amended to include the following addition• Solid Waste Contract Addendum 2000-2002 Page 1 of 5 CONSUMER ELECTRONICS • The Contractor shall provide adrop-off site within 15 miles of the Citv limits for certain consumer electronics that contain lead. such as televisions and computer monitors. At the drop-off site, residents must present identification with a valid Citv of Stillwater residential address prior to beins allowed to drop-off certain consumer electronics The Contractor shall provide a truck and staff at the City's Annual Household Hazazdous Waste Dav. Residents must present identification with a valid Citv of Stillwater residential address to be allowed to drop-off certain consumer electronics at the Citv_'s Annual Household Hazardous Waste Dav Residents will be allowed to drop-off at a site or at the City's Annual Household Hazazdous Waste Dav a reasonable number of certain consumer electronics that would normally accumulate in a household within a period of one year without any additional chazge. After that reasonable number has been met the Contractor shall chazge the resident directly for the service. ITEM 9 VOLUME BASED SYSTEM Item 9, third paragraph shall be amended to read: In the event a residence desires collection of waste in excess of the container size it has selected, ' ' a ~ b D - • b~ the Contractor shall pick up the excess waste and bill the resident directly on the resident's quarterly invoice in the amount of $1.50 for each additional 30-sallon bas of excess household waste. However, the Contractor is required to pick up unlimited quantities of extra household waste at no additional charge Item 9, fifth pazagraph shall be deleted and replaced by Attachment A -Rate Schedule Effective January 1 -December 31, 1999. Item 9 shall be amended to include: Recycling Subsidy The Recycling Subsidy shall be negotiated between the Contractor and the City on an annual basis. The Recycling Subsidy will be determined by the amount of grant money the City receives from the Washington County Municipal Curbside Recycling and Waste Reduction Grant. ITEM 15 CITY SOLlD WASTE Item 15 shall be amended to read: In addition to residential service, the Contractor shall pick up without additional chazge, such trash as is the responsibility of the City, or which is accumulated by the City, or for the City, such as street cans and pazk barrels, -'-°• =a°a *'~^*, ~~*"° ~~*~• a^°^ ~^* ~-^~-~~° }#$ 6~~~~}-EA~~34~3C'~S 6F ~H~~~5~2~5 ~6~t13~'5-~1~~66c~ +a''z°c-~ea~F&fe`e9F~vt-~2-@vir-..eecc-`e6 Solid Waste Contract Addendum 2000-2002 Page 2 of 5 . 'This includes • trash from all City-owned facilities and the annual Lumberiack Davs celebration. In the event of a natural disaster within the Crtv. the Contractor shall make dumpsters available as necessary for cleanup. ITEM 31 EXPIRATION Item 31 shall be deleted and replaced with the following: This agreement shall be in full force and effect from and after January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2002. ITEM 32 RENEWAL TERMS Item 32, shall be amended to read: The parties agree to begin a period of renegotiations of the contract not less than one yeaz before the end of the contract term or renewal term. Notwithstanding, the foregoing, the Contractor may apply for eve one 3-yeaz extensions by making application to do so not later than twelve (12) months prior to the expiration of this contract or its renewal term on forms provided by the City. The City shall conduct an evaluation of the Contractor and the solid waste system and the proposal. This evaluation shall be completed by the City within six (6) months after receipt of the application and determination by the City of its completeness. If the evaluation reveals that the Contractor has shown substantial performance of the contract or a renewal term, the Contractor shall be entitled to one, three-yeaz renewal term beyond the contract term. • Nothing in this contract shall be construed to require an extension of this contract. Upon expiration of the contract and renewal terms, the City shall have the right, at its discretion, to extend the contract; invite additional contract applications or proposals; or ternunate the contract without further action. • Solid Waste Contract Addendum 2000-2002 Pa~,e 3 of 5 ]N WITNESS WHEREOF, We have hereunto set our hands the day and year first above wntten. • WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC By By CITY OF STILLWATER. By Jay Kimble, Mayor By Morli Weldon, City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. • COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1999 by ~ on behalf of Waste Management, Inc. STATE OF iVIINNESOTA ) ss COUNTY OF WASHINGTON) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 1999 by and on behalf of the Crty of Stillwater day of r' Solid Waste Contract Addendum 2000-2003 Page 4 of ~ • ATTACHMENT A RATE SCHEDULE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1-DECEMBER 31, 2000 • C] Rates The rate for collection per month shall be as follows for the years 2000-2002 with the exception of the Recycling Subsidy Sr. Accounts Collection/Disposal $5 25 Yard Waste $1 50 Recycling $2 40 Less '00 Recyclin g Subsidy($ 75) Appliances $ .40 Billing 20 Total Amount Billed to Resident in 2000 $9 00 30 Gallon 60 Gallon 90 Gallon $7.70 $9.49 $11.35 $1.50 $150 $ 1.50 $2.40 $2.40 $ 2 40 ($ 75) ($ 75) ($ 75) $ 40 $ 40 $ .40 $ 20 $ .20 .20 $1145 $13.24 $15.10 Solid Waste Contract Addendum 2000-2002 Page 5 of 5 11~09i5c 16:22 IIAVID T. MAGr'L'san MAG~SCN l_=1.~ r : RM '~ 4368'.9 hC 793 d02 ~„~jsorrl~w~xM LtCENBED IN ;4lL~ih'L'SOZ1 A+VD WtSCOYSIIV TtsE DE3C8 OFxrc: ButLOlYO • 333 \oaTit ~LiQ+ STR:ET • Sutra #ZOZ • PQ Eox 4J5 • STCI.;,w~7t{l, >~ 550E T~I.S?ti9~iE' (651) 439-9464 •'rg1.8COFfkn (65') 439-5641 IZ1CAwRD D. 4LI~1 Taveraber 9, 1999 Sherry A. ]rnzler Minnesota. 0~'ice of Environmental Assistance 520 Lafayette Road \orth St. Paul, MN SS15S-100 Dear Sherry. 1 am writing in response to your letter of Nov~mb~r 3, 1999 addressed to Stillwater Mayor lay Kunble with regard to the apphcabilily of Minn Stat § 1 iSA-~6,subd. 5 to the renewal of the waste coat: act that the City of Stillwater has with Waste 1,iaaageme:it, L+:c Based upon a more careful review of the dates of adoption of setieral documents, we '?o not agree with your corclusian that the current Proposed addendum to the garbage con7act must be eonsisteat with W ashtngton County's solid waste plan. First, you are correct that the County's solid wasu plan was subtr..tted to O.E A. for approval on July 13, 1992 and that the Metropolitan Council approved the plan on Scrtembe: 4, 1992 Records reveal, however, that the plan was not actua]ly adopted by Liiasllingtca Cculty ;intil November Z4, 1932 when the Washington Count<f Board adoptad tFe Washington Cot.nt} Solid W aste Management Ordinauc. that's lo~own as County Ordlnar-ce h'o l OS. A further review of Ctty records rc•resls that d:e City of Shllwater's solid waste contrac: that is now the subJect of your ingairy was actually adopted on June 30, 1992, well bsforc the e~ecttve dace of forrial county adoption of their solid waste management plan. By way of background, Junker salutation was fast awarded a contract for the collection of solid waste in the City of Stillwater pursuaat to a public bidding process In March of 1968 for a six-year period. On July 1, 197A, abet an attorney's Bane."al opinion tlsat solid waste contacts were personal sernce contracts and that they could be negotiated rather than publ:cl; bid, the City of Stillwater extended the Junkcr s3riitation contract until June 30, 1984 and on April 15, 1980, extcadcd the contract to expize cn June 30,1992. In anticipation of the expiration of the garbage contract on July 1, 1992, and pursuant to a state and counry effort to reduce solid waste and iralce more efficitiit solid waste collec:icn, the • 11 %D9/SS 16:22 MAC~#.:SON LaI,J F i Rh1 ~ 4308E~9 NO.793 D03 City of Shllwaer established the Solid Waste Advisory Comauttea. The Conunittee was apaointed on Septrsriber 27, 1988, and issued its fast repori on May 2, 1989 ?he Solid Wasie Committee continued work du~iug 1990, 1991, and 1992, and recommended to the City Council the adoption of the City of Stillwater Solid W :ste Maiiagemeat Plan which was approved by the City Council on December 4, 1991 by Resolution Number 91-~9. 71ie underlying concern of tlu Sohd Waste Commute:,, the City Council and the City stag was that adequate time be available to negotiate with the existing hauler to de*.ermme ii thn exishrtg hauler coald achieve the goals of the Solid Waste Plan. If eForts proved fivitless and impass reached, a nonce could be seat during becember of 1991 to insure that the 180 day planning pe:~od reeuired by Minn. Stet. § 115A.94 subd. 4 could be uulized and, if necessary, a new contractor chosen under the public bidding process that would be in place prior to the expiration of the healer's contract on July 1,1992. On January 7, 1992, the Council accepted the Staffs work on a propostd solid waste contract and set a public hea~iag on the proposal for February 4, 1992. Negotiations eortinued during that spring resulting in the finalization or ari agreemet approved and executed en the 30t1i o: June, 1992. For your information, a copy of that 3grc.,:aent is enclosed. You will note that this agreement contains the same section 32 and 's, in essence, the same agreement that is currently being extended based upon the contractual nght of rnewal except for a failure of performance. As pointed out earlier, is appears that the contract entered into oa the 30t3 of ,lone 1942 will not expire until Jul} 1, 2005. W'e trust that this additional information will allow you to re- evaluate the position of your agency. Yours very truly, David T ltiiagaus n Stillwater Ci~torney DTM/wv Enclosure cc: Judy Hume: Nile L. Kresel Bruce Malec • ~~e5o:a Offs e c ~~` J~ Environments! ~l Assistance November 3. 1999 Mayor Jay Kimble Citv of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear 1~1ay ble: _ ,, I am writing to- you regarding the applicability of the public entities law, Minn. Stat. § 11 SA.46, subd. 5, to the renewal of a contract that the city of Stillwater (City) has with Waste _ _ Management, Inc (WMI) for garbage collection and disposal. The Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) has an interest in this matter bECa~~a the CEA, iu ccr.;unct:Ln ti~:tL the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ('1i1PCA), has the responsibility to implement and enforce the public entities law. Recently, Judy Hunter, of the Washington County Department of Public Health and Environment, sent OEA a copy of a letter she received from your city attorney, Mr. David Magnuson. in which he informed Washington County that the public entities law did not apply to Stillwater's garbage contract because the contract was entered into before the effective date of the statute. I have consulted with the Attorney General's Office about this issue, and we believe that there is a misunderstanding about the effective date of the statute and its applicability to the City v Minn. Star. § 1 I ~A.46, subd. 5 was enacted during the 1991 legislative session and became effective August 1, 1991. See 1991 Minn Laws. eh. 337, § 16., At that time, the statute applied to political subdivisions, such as cities, towns, and counties. The statute was amended in 1995 to broaden its reach to include all "public entities," defined to include not only cities, towns, and counties, but also. for example, state agencies, metropolitan governmental entities, and school districts. See 1995 Minn Laws, ch.2=t7, art. 1, § 8 As enacted in 1991, the statute provided. JURISDICTION OF PLAN. (a) After a county plan has been submitted for approval under subdivision 1, a political subdivision within the county may not enter into a binding agreement governing a solid waste management activity that is inconsistent with the county plan without the consent of the county. (b) After a county plan has been approved under subdivision 1, the plan governs alI solid waste management in the county and a political subdivision within the county may not develop or implement a solid waste management actin ity, other than an activity to reduce waste generation or reuse waste materials. that is inconsistent with the county plan that the county is actively implementing v<ithout the consent of the county • • Mayor Jay Kimble • November 3, 1999 Page 2 Washington County's solid waste management plan was submitted to OEA for approval on July 13,1992, and the Metropolitan Council approved the plan on September 24,1992. According to Mr Magnusan's letter, the City entered into it's original gazbage contract an July b, 1993. Thus. when the City entered into its gazbage contract in 1993, the public entities law was in effect (1991) and the Washington County solid waste management plan was approved by the OEA (1992). Consequently, at the time that the City entered into its contract, it was obligated under the public entities la~v to develop and implement solid waste management activities (including contracting for gazbage collection and disposal) in a manner that was consistent with Washington County's solid waste management plan, unless it received the consent of the county to deviate from the plan. Washington County's plan, as approved by OEA in 1992, selected resource recovery through refuse derived fuel processing at the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Facility as its preferred method of waste management in the county. The most recent Washington County solid waste management plan approved by the OEA on June 16, 1999 calls for optimizing the amount of mixed municipal solid waste that is processed at the Ramsey/Washington County Resource Recovery Facility by working with public entities to ensure that their waste is managed in accordance with the County's solid waste management plan and the public entities law. • It is my understanding from talking with Ms. Hunter that Dunker Sanitation, Inc., the original holder of the City's contract, managed the City's waste under the contract consistent with the county plan by bringing the waste to the Newport Resource Recovery Facility. However, after United Waste Systems and then Waste Management, Inc. (WMI) purchased the company and took over responsibilities under the contract, WMI no longer delivered waste to a resource recovery facility. I understand that the City Council will be considering the renewal of this garbage service contract at its November meeting To bnng the city into compliance with the law, the city must choose ore of the following tv~~o optians: 1. Make arrangements to send city waste to a resource recovery facility 2 Ask for and receive a Washington County board resolution excusing the city from complying with the county plan. Then, determine the potential liability to the city for managing the ~vaste in this manner, develop a plan for managing the liability, and submit the plan to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (biPCA). VVe request that you apprise us on or before November 19, 1999, which of these options the city will use to comply with the law If option #2 is chosen, please indicate the date of the county board meeting at which the city will be requesting an exemption from the county plan. Mayor Jay Kimble _ November 3, 1999 Page 3 If the City approves a contract or contract extension that does not ensure that waste is managed using a resource recovery facility, and the city does not have county boazd approval, the City will continue to be xn violation of Minn. Stat. § 115A.46, subd. 5. We encourage the City Council to take immediate steps to bring the City into compliance v~-ith the law and avoid a potential enforcement action. If you have questions or would like further information, please contact Janet Berryhill of (651) 215-0285 • Very truly yours, Sherry A Director cc• Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator Bruce Malec, WMI Steve Batchelor, WMI Judy Hunter, Washington County Jeff Connell, MPCA Beverly Conerton, Attorney General r: • RESOLUTION NO RESCINDING RESOLUTION 99-193 AND APPROVING ADDENDUM TO CONTRACT WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, that Resolution 99-193, Approving Amended Contract with Waste Management, Inc ,adopted July 20, 1999, is hereby rescinded, and the addendum to the contract between the City of Stillwater and Waste Management, Inc ,attached as Exhibit A, is hereby approved Adopted by Council this 16th day of November, 1999 Jay Kimble, Mayor ATTEST Morli Weldon, City Clerk • t -tL:6i~-X15-0~~1 Nov 16 9G ,~+t . t>s ., o ~~,, t, . ,t+: a~ Ernrironm~ental ~ l~ssistant~ LL 1"I ER Fl'~XED: NC?VF1ltRF:t, 1G, 1999 No~ernber 16, 1999 l~layor Jay Kimble City of Stillwater 21 G ]`arth 4th Streit Stillwater, MAi 531)82 Dear Iviayor krmble: Y understand the city eounc~l may discuss the erty's garbage service contract tonight. The Office of Lnvuonmertal Assigt~nce has received the city attorney's Itiovcmber 9, ] 999 respan~e letter regarduig the city's garbage service contract. Aur Attorney Geuc:al staff rs cutmatly reviewing the lebal documents regarding this issue. The OE.~ will respond to your November 9, 1999 letter as scorn a.S passible after the Attorney Gene: al stai~has completed their reviow. In the meantime, l strongly recommend that the city council wait to sign the contract with Waste management until this ist,ne bass been re9oh-ed. Signrna a contract now fray put the city in a weaker bargaining position if the contrac! bps to be rnodiiied at a later date to cor.~ply wrth the law. Sincerely, Janet Aerrylull Scruor Program Analyst M ldCt,rurt,t rf , r , u, l:cur ,, r.,, !N u,+rf t oi, ~ ,1,d,t ~ 1Nu1+1 ~ull.trr.f f u+nr ~; e , K~..7 7~u , Ir ~ t~ • r I gal~r 2A N ~ S(, P•U ~ I,vv • ' 1 ~+. U~ '~l{ ' • ~ r• .~i ', Jf • u ~J 'y,, 'I~Sr • IJ~~ IK d t~tlV ~., ~ i4I, • ', r + , / is:~5 r:~.ec:~ F.a? • /' 4 Councilmember introduced the following • resolution, the reading of which was dispensed wrth by unanimous consent, and moved rts adoption RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED CREATION BY THE CITY OF DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.2 AND OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.2 AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHIVIENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT N0.8 AND THE ADOPTION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN RELATING THERETO, ALL LOCATED WITHIN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.2 • BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows Section 1 Public Hearine This Council shall meet on Tuesday, December 21, 1999, at approximately 7 00 p m , to hold a public hearing on the following matters (a) the establishment of Development District No 2 pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469 124 to 469 134 and the establishment of Tax Increment Financing Distract No 8 (a Housing District) pursuant to and in accordance wrth 1VLnnesota Statutes Sections 469 174 to 469 179 The Development Program for proposed Development District No 2 and the financing plans for proposed Tax Increment Financing Distract No 8, are referred to as (the "Plans) Section 2 Notice of Hearing Filing of Program The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearang, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A", to be given as required by law, to distribute copies of the proposed Development programs for Development District No 2 and the financing plans for Tax Increment Financing Distract No 8 (the "Plans") to the Board of Commissioners of Washington County and the School Board of Independent School District No 834, to place a copy of the Plans on file in the City Clerk's Office at City Hall and to make such copy available for inspection by the public no later than November 21, 1999 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember following voted in favor thereof and upon vote being taken thereon, the and the following voted against the same whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted by the Council of the Crty of Stillwater, Minnesota on November , 1999 Jay L Kimble, Mayor Attest Morli Weldon, City Clerk C. U • 1 • THE CITY OF STILLWATER DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM for DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.2 and THE ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT N0.8 AND THE ADOPTION OF THE TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT N0.8 IN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT N0.2 Public Hearing for consideration of adoption December 21,1999 • TABLE OF CONTENTS • Pase ARTICLE 1 - DEFI1~tITIONS 1 Section 1 O1 Definitions 1 ARTICLE 2 -STATEMENT OF NEED, PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY 2 Section 2 O1 Statement of Need and Public Purpose 2 Section 2 02 Development Distracts, Statutory Authority 3 Section 2 03 Tax Increment Financing Distracts, Statutory Authority 3 ARTICLE 3 -STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES 3 Section 3 O 1 Statement of Goals 3 Section 3 02 Statement of Objectives .. 3 Section 3 03 Actions to Accomplish Objectives .. ... .. 4 Section 3 04 Public Improvements, Public Costs, Costs 5 Section 3 OS Environmental Controls 5 Section 3 06 Proposed Reuse of Property 5 Section 3 07 Rehabilitation .. 5 Section 3 08 Relocation 5 ARTICLE 4 -TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN NO 8 5 Section 4 O1 Statement of Goals and Objectives 5 Section 4 02 Statement Actions to Accomplish Objectives 6 Section 4 03 Land to be Included in Financing District No 8 6 • Section 4 04 Property to be Acquired .. .. . 6 Section 4 OS Development Activity for which Contracts Have Been Signed. 6 Section 4 06 Specific Development Expected to Occur Within the District No 8, Need for Tax Increment Financing 6 Section 4 07 Estimated Public Costs 6 Section 4 08 Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness 7 Section 4 09 Sources of Revenue 7 Section 4 10 Original Tax Capacity Value 7 Section 4 11 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity Value and Computation of Tax Increment 7 Section 4 12 Duration of Financing District No 8 8 Section 4 13 Estimated Impact of Tax Increment Financing 8 Section 4 14 Fiscal Disparity Contributions 8 Section 4 15 Cash Flow Analysis 8 Section 4 16 Use of Tax Increment 8 Section 4 17 Excess Tax Increments 9 Section 4 18 Administration of Tax Increment Financing Distract 9 EXHIBITS "A" AND "B" • ARTICLE 1- • DEFINITIONS Section 1.01. Definitions The terms defined below shall, for purposes of this Development Program and all related tax increment financing plans, have the meanings specified herein "Bonds" means Tax Increment Bonds or General Obligation Improvement Bonds issued by the City to finance the cost of public improvements m Development District No 2 "City" means the City of Stillwater, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota "Comprehensive Plan" means the City's Comprehensive Plan which contains the objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use, development, redevelopment and preservation for all lands and water within the City, as approved by the Metropolitan Council from time to tame "Council" means the City Council of the City "County" means the County of Washington, Minnesota "Development District Act" means Minn Stat , §§ 469 124 through 469 134, as amended from time to time "Development District No 2" means Development District No 2 in the City, which has been established pursuant to and in accordance with the Development District Act "Development Proexam" means this Development Program for Development District No 2, as amended from time to time As defined in Minn Stat , § 469 125, Subdivision 3, a development program is a statement of objectives of the City for improvement of a development district which contains a complete statement as to the public facilities to be constructed within the distnct, the open space to be created, the environmental controls to be applied, the proposed reuse of private property and the proposed operations of the district ai3er the capital improvements within the district have been completed "Financing District No 8" means Tax Increment Financing Distract No 8 of the City which is established within Development District No 2 pursuant to the Tax Increment Financing Act, and compnses the area described in the attached Exhibit `=A" "Financing Plan No 8" means the tax increment financing plan adopted for Financing District No 8, which is set forth in Article IV, as amended from time to time "Public Costs" means the cost of all public improvements to be constructed in aid of Development Distnct No 2, and all other costs to be incurred by the City in aid of Development District No 8, as shown in Financing Plan No 8 . "State" means the State of Minnesota "Tax Increment Bonds" means any general obligation or revenue bonds to be issued by the City pursuant to the Tax Increment Financing Act to finance the Public costs incurred and to be incurred by the City in and of Development District No 2 as stated m the Development Program, Financing Plan No 8, and any tax increment financing plan hereafter adopted with respect to any other tax increment financing dnstnct established within Development Distract No 2 the term "Tax Increment Bonds" also includes any obligations issued to refund the Tax Increment Bonds "Tax Increment Financing Distract" means any tax increment financing district established or to be established in the future in Development District No 2 "Tax Increment Financing Act" means Minn Stat , § 469 174 through 469 179, as amended from time to time "Tax Increment Financing Plan" means any tax increment financing plan adopted with respect to a Tax Increment Financing District ARTICLE 2 - STATEMENT OF NEED, PUBLIC PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY Section 2.01. Statement of Need and Public Purpose The City Council of the City has determined that there is a need for the City to take certain actions designed to encourage, ensure and facilitate development and redevelopment by the private sector of underutilized and unused land located within the corporate limits of the City, in order to provide additional housing opportunities for residents of the Crty and the surrounding area, to improve the tax base of the City, Independent School District No 834 (the School Distract) and Washington County (the County), thereby enabling them to better utilize existing public facilities and provide needed public services, and to improve the general economy of the City, the County and the State Specifically, the City Council has determined that the property within Development District No 2 ns either underutilized or unused due to a variety of factors, including due to a variety of factors, including fragmented ownership of the property, inadequate and multiple zoning of the property, excessive property cost composing costs of clearance, grading and soil correction, and inadequate public improvements to serve the property, all of which have resulted in a lack of private investment, that, as a result, the property is not providing adequate housug opportunities, and is not contributing to the tax base and general economy of the City, the School District, the County and the State to its full potential, and, therefore, that it is necessary for the City to exercise its authority under the Development D~stnct Act and the Tax Increment Financing Act to develop, nmplement and finance a program designed to encourage, ensure and fac~lrtate the development and redevelopment of the property located in Development District No 2 into low and moderate income housing units and to further accomplish the public purposes specified in this pazagraph The development proposed for the Development District No 2 would not occur solely through private investment in the foreseeable future, Increment Financing Plan No 8 is consistent with the Development Program, and the Financing Plan No 8 will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or _ redevelopment of the property located in Financing District No 8 and the Development Distract No 2 by private enterprise 2 The welfare of the City, the County and the State of Minnesota requires active promotion, • attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce by the City Section 2.02. Development Districts. Statutory Authontv The Development Distract Act authorizes the City upon certain findings by the City Council, to establish and designate development distracts within the City and to establish, develop and administer development programs, therefore, to meet the needs and accomplish the public purposes specified in Section 2 O1 In accordance with the purposes set forth in Section 469 124 of the Development District Act, the City Council has established Development District No 2 Section 2.03. Tax Increment Financinit Districts. Statutory Authority The Tax Increment Financing Act authorizes the City, upon certain findings by the City Council, to establish and designate tax increment financing districts within Development District No 2 and to adopt and implement a tax increment financing plan to accomplish the Development Program established for Development District No 2 ARTICLE 3 - STATEMENT OF GOALS AND OBJECTIVES Section 3,01. Statement of Goals The Council determines that the establishment of Development District No 2 and the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No 8 therein will provide the City with the ability to achieve certain public goals and objectives not otherwise obtainable in the foreseeable future without City intervention in the normal development process These goals include (a) restoring and improving the tax base and tax revenue generating capacity of Development District No 2, (b) increasing employment opportunities and employment in the City, (c) increasing the supply of all types and levels of housing in the City, including housing affordable by persons of low and moderate income, (d) realizing comprehensive planning goals, (e) removing blighted conditions, and (f) revitalizing the property within Development Distract No 2 to create an attractive, comfortable, convenient, and efficient area for industrial, commercial, governmental, convention, affordable housing and related uses Section 3.02. Statement of Objectives The City seeks to achieve the following program objectives in Development District No 2 1 Secure the prompt development of property in Development District No 2 for its highest and best use, in a manner consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and with a minimum of adverse impact on the environment, and thereby promote and secure the development of other land in the City 2 Secure additional employment opportunities wrthm Development District No 2 and the City for residents of the City and the surrounding area, thereby improving living standards, reducing unemployment and the loss of skilled and unskilled labor and other human resources m the City 3 Secure the increase of real property subject to ad valorem taxation by the . City, Independent School District No 834, Washington County, and other taxing 3 jurisdictions, in order to better enable such entities to pay for governmental services and programs required to be provided by them 4 Provide for the financing and construction of public improvements in and adjacent to Development District No 2, necessary for the orderly and beneficial development of Development District No 2 and adjacent areas of the City 5 Secure appropriate development in Development Distnct No 2 so as to maintain the area in a manner compatible with its accessibility and prorninence in the City 6 Secure expansion, improvement, and development of existing businesses in Development District No 2 and the City 7 Create a desirable and unique character within Development District No 2 through quality land use alternatives 8 Provide maximum opportunity for private redevelopment of existing areas and structures which are compatible with the Development Program 9 Provide for housing intended for occupancy in part by persons or families with low and moderate income as defined in Chapter 462A, Title II of the National Housing Act of 1934, the National Housing Act of 1959, the United States Housing Act of 1937, as amended, Title V of the Housing Act of 1949, as amended, and any other similar present or future federal, state or municipal laws or rules promulgated under those • acts Section 3.03. Actions to Accom fish Objectives Actions to be taken by the City to accomplish the goals and objectives set forth in Section 3 O1 and Section 3 02 included 1 Acquiring property or property rights which is vacant, unused, underused, or inappropriately used for new or expanding uses as well as housing uses 2 Acquire property containing structurally substandard buildings and remove structurally substandard buildings for which rehabilitation is not feasible 3 Resell property described in paragraphs 1 and Z for development or redevelopment consistent with the Development Program 4 Encourage the renovation and expansion of existing structures 5 Eliminating blighting influences which impede potential development 6 Acquisition of property for park and trail purposes and providing park and trail improvements to compliment private development • 4 7 Constructing road, badge, sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and other local improvements needed to serve existing and proposed development consistent with the Development Program and the Comprehensive Plan 8 Pay principal and interest on General Obligation Improvement Bonds pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 and General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds pursuant to the Tax Increment Financing Act to finance the cost of local improvements constructed to serve Development District No 2, and other public costs incurred and to be incurred by the City in and of the Distract in accordance with State law Section 3.04. Public Improvements. Public Costs. Costs The public improvements to be made within Development District No 2 include sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, road, bridge, recreational, parking and pazk and open space improvements Section 3.05. Environmental Controls The proposed development activities in the Development District are not expected to present significant environmental concerns However, all municipal actions, public improvements and private development shall be carried out in a manner consistent with all applicable federal and state environmental controls and standards, all necessary documents relating to environmental impacts shall be prepared, and all necessary authorizations relating to environmental matters shall be obtained Section 3.06. Proposed Reuse of Provertv The Development Program does not contemplate the acquisition of private property until such time as a private developer presents an • economically feasible program for the reuse of that property Proposals, in order to be considered, must be within the framework of the goals and objectives set forth in Section 3 O1 and Section 3 02. Prior to formal consideration of the acquisition of any property, the City Council will require a binding contract, performance bond or other evidence or guarantees that a supporting tax increment or other funds will be available to repay the public cost associated with the proposed acquisition It is the intent of the Crty to negotiate the acquisition of property whenever necessary Appropriate restrictions regarding the reuse and redevelopment of property shall be incorporated into any land sale contract or development agreement to which the City is a part. Section 3.07. Rehabilitation Owners of properties within Development District No 2 will be encouraged to rehabilitate their properties to conform with the applicable state and local codes and ordinances, as well as any design standards Section 3.08. Relocation The Crty accepts rts responsibility for providing for relocation assistance pursuant to the Development Distract Act and the Tax Increment Financing Act ARTICLE 4 - TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN NO.B Section 4.01. Statement of Goals and Objectives See Sections 3 O1 and 3 02, of the • Development Program for Development District No 2 for a statement of goals and objectives for Financ~ng District No 8 Further, the District ~s created as a Housing Distract within the meaning of Minn Stat § 469 174, subd 11 Section 4.02. Statement Actions to Accomplish Objectives See Section 3 03 of the Development Program for Development District No 2 for a statement of the actions to be taken by the City to accomplish the goals and objectives set forth in Article III of the Development Program for Development District No 2 Section 4.03. Land to be Included in Financing District No 8 The Land to be included in Financing District No 8 is described on the attached Exhibit "A" Section 4.04. Prope_rtv to be Acquired The Crty will acquire approximately S O1 acres of land within the Distract for use as park trails and open space all of which will be beneficial and complementary to the housing proposed for the Distract Section 4.05. Development Activity for which Contracts Have Been Sinned As of the date of adoption of tlus Financing Plan No 8, the City has entered into a Development Agreement with ANCHOBAYPRO, INC , a Nlmnesota corporation, for the development of the land in Financing Distract No 8 as a Housing D~stnct, however, no tax increment funds have been expended pursuant to that agreement Section 4.06. Specific Development Expected to Occur Within the Distract No 8 Need for Tax Increment Financin The development activities proposed to take place within the project include the construction by ANCHOBAYPRO of thu~teen (13) single family detached homes and eighty-six (86) townhomes and the construction of streets, sanitary sewer mains and services, water mains and services, and storm sewer facilities and services necessary to serve the project The proposed development, in the opinion of the Crty, could not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future, and thus the use of tax increment financing to assist the proposed development is necessary This determination is based upon studies made by the City as to the cost of providing sewer and water service to the land in Financing District No 8 and Development District No 2, a stone water and drainage control study done for the Distract, and planning studies of the area that were done in preparation for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment recently submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review Section 4.07. Estimated Public Costs The improvements to be made and other public actions required F~nanc~ng Distract No 8 ~s estimated to be not less than $ estimated total Public Cost of to be taken within Tax Increment and includes • • 6 Sewer and Water Improvements $ • Pazking Lot Construction Land Acquisition Storm Sewer Pazk and Pathway Improvements Soil Corrections Contingencies Capitalized Interest Discount LegaUFiscal/Admimstration Retaining Wall Total Estimated Public Costs The Public Costs set forth above are estimates and the amounts allocated to any item may be reallocated among any of the other items set forth above Section 4.08. Estimated Amount of Bonded Indebtedness It is anticipated that Bonds will be issued to finance the estimated Public Costs to be incurred with respect to Financing District No 8 Further, some Public Costs will be paid by developer funds, and eligible expenses incurred by the developer for these purposes will be reimbursed to the developer from tax increment funds generated by the Distract. i Section 4.09. Sources of Revenue. The revenues to be used to pay the Public Costs in Financing District No 8 are Tax Increments, special assessments, sewer and water revenues and ad valorem taxes Section 4.10. Original Tax Ca~acrtv Value The onginal tax capacity value. of all taxable property m Financing Distract No 8 as most recently certified by the Commissioner of Revenue of the State of Minnesota, being the certification made in 1998 vvnth respect to the tax capacity value of such property as of January 2, 1999, for taxes payable in 1999 is estimated to be $ Section 4.11. Estimated Captured Tax Capacity ~ Value and Computation of Tax Increment Each yeaz the County Auditor will measure the amount of increase or decrease in the total tax capacity value of taxable property in Financing District No 8 to calculate the Tax Increments payable to the City in any yeaz in which there is an increase in total tax capacity value in Financing Distract No 8 above the original tax capacity value, Tax Increments will be payable to the City. In any yeaz in which the total tax capacity value in Financing Distract No 8 declines below the onginal tax capacity value, no tax capacity value will be captured from Financing Distract No 8 and no Tax Increments will be payable therefrom The County Auditor shall certify m each year after the date of the onginal tax capacity values were certified, the amount the onginal tax capacity values have increased or decreased as a result of • 7 1. changes in tax exempt status of property, • 2. reductions or enlazgements of the geographic boundaries of Financing District No 8, and 3 changes due to stipulations, adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements Upon completion of the development expected to occur in Financing District No 8, the City estimates the increase in market value of taxable property in Financing District No. 8 will be approximately $ The captured net tax capacity value upon completion of development is expected to be approximately $ The Tax lncrements will be captured for up to 25 yeazs from receipt of the first Tax Increments. The City determines that 100% of the available increase in tax capacity value of Financing District No 8 shall be used in accordance with this Financing Plan No 8. Section 4.12. Duration of Financing District No. 8. The Tax Increment Financing Act allows Housing Districts to remain in existence for a period of 25 years from the receipt of the first tax increments Therefore, Financing District No 8 may remain in effect unt1125 yeazs from the receipt of the first tax increments, or until such earlier date as all Public Costs have been paid in accordance with this Financing Plan No. 8. Section 4.13. Estimated Impact of Tax Increment Financing The Tax Increment Financing Act requires that tax increment financing plans estunate the unpact of a proposed district on the affected taxing jurisdictions There will be no adverse unpact on the other taxing jurisdictions during the term of Financing District No 8 since the development would not have occurred without the creation of Financing District No 8 and the provision of public assistance. A positive impact on other taxing jurisdictions will occur when Financing Distract No. 8 is decertified and the development in Financing District No 8 becomes part of the tax base of all affected taxing jurisdictions When this occurs, the tax capacity rates of the taxing jurisdictions will be lower than they would have been had Financing District No 8 not been established The estunated impact of Financing District No. 8 on taxing jurisdictions other than the City is set forth on attached Exhibit "B". -- Section 4.14. Fiscal Dispanty Contributions Applicable Fiscal Dispanty Contributions for Tax Increment District No 8 will be made from within the District. Section 4.15. Cash Flow Analysis See attached Exhibit `'B" Section 4.16. Use of Tax Increment The City hereby determines that it will use 100% of the captured tax capacity value of taxable property located in Financing District No 8 for the following activities 1 to finance or otherwise pay Public Costs set forth in the Tax Increment - Financing Plan 8 'i • 2 to reimburse developers for eligible costs incurred as defined m the Tax Increment Financing Act. 3 return the excess to the County Auditor for redistnbution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to then tax capacity rate. Tax Increments shall not be used to circumvent levy limitations applicable to the City or for other purposes prohibited by Section 469.176, Subdivision 4 of the Tax Increment Financing Act Section 4.17. Excess Tax Increments. Pursuant to the Tax Increment Financing Act, in any yeaz in which the Tax Increments exceed the amount necessary to pay the Public Costs authorized by the Development Program and this Financing Plan, including the amount necessary to cancel any tax levy as provided in Minn. Stat., § 475.61, Subdivision 3, the City shall use the excess amount to: 1. return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing junsdictions in proportion to their mill rate. In addition, the City may choose to modify its Financing Plan No 8 in order to finance additional Public Costs of Development District No 2. Section 4.18. Administration of Tax Increment Financing District. Administration • of Financing District No. 8 will be handled by the City Financial Director. The Tax Increments received as a result of increases in the tax capacity values of Financing District No. 8 will be maintained in a special account separate from all other municipal accounts and expended only upon municipal activities identified in the Development Program and this Financing Plan No. 8. • 9 M~'MO ~o: Mayor and City Council From: Steve Russell, Community Development Director '~ Subject: Comments on the Draft Lower St Croix Management Plan and Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) ` Date: November 16, 1999 The Draft Lower St Croix Management Plan is a comprehensive and lengthy document, over 300 pages The draft plan is the result of an extensive 3-yeaz public participation process The document clearly emphasis the natural scenic and aesthetic resources over lustonc and cultural resources Stillwater, a histonc aver town, predates the wild and scenic river legislation and deserves more emphasis m the plans purpose statements and throughout the document On page 16 in the Issue Identification Section, the plan states that "cultural resource management has been a lower pnonty than management of natural resources and resulted in the potential for degradation and loss of cultural resources " The management plan generally lacks specifics on cultural and histonc resources and how they will be managed and preserved - Management actions aze located on pages 29-39 Management actions include cooperation between pnvate and ',public entities, aver stewazdships, natural resource management, water quality and air quality, fishenes management, exotic species, threatened and endangered species, hunting and fishing, recreational use, commercial concessions, accessibility and interpretation Again the plan is silent on the subject of historic resources For some reason the City of Stillwater was sepazated into two nver management distncts, small town and nver town There is no reason presented for the sepazation The boundary of the small town/nver town is the Zephyr Depot To the north of the Depot (which is not in the nverway), the designation is small town Included in the small town area is the residential azeas of Boutwell Estates and Lakeside Dnve The nver shore south of the Depot is in the River Town Distnct The developed small town area is as or more intensely developed than the nver town azea For City planning purposes, it would be difficult to justify one set of rules for the azea north of the Depot and another for the azea south of the Depot There is not much discussion in the management plan on the how the plan will be administered Who will be responsible for land use decisions How will input from federal and state agencies be coordinated with the local planning or building permit review and approval process? This is cntical to the effective implementation of the plan and forthconung regulations Additional comments will be offered on the Preferred Plan Alternative Recommendation: Direct staff to prepaze a letter from the Mayor for signature commenting on the St Croix River Management Plan - - -- - - - -- - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - --- - DSC • 643.20025A • 12/98 ~ S~a~C°-~""~l WASHIl~TGTON COUNTY Derods C. Hegbwp District 1 t~tl OS! Bm PtrOvabek ~,,,, v COUNTY BOARD AGENDA Distrkt s htt,~ _ Od ~O~/ Wally Abahemaon Y NOVEMBER 16 1999 9:U0 A.M. D~ ~!°'"~ ~ ~ P10s~SS ~ ~wn+" f 7 Myra Peterson Dlstrkt 4 Dkk Staffoni District 6 1. 9:00 Roll Call 2. Constar Calendar 3. 9:00 Community Services Department - D Papin, Director Recognition to Foster Famdy of the Year and Adult Foster Care Resident 4. 9.05 U.S. Bureau of Census -Tammy Sassler, Partnership Specialist Presentation of Upcoming 2000 Census 5 9 35 General Administration - J. Schug, Administrator r A. Advertise for RFP for Washington County Purchasing Cards B Support Appointment of Donn Wisld as Transportation Advisory Board Chairperson 9.45 Discussion from the Audience Yurtors mayshare thetrconoerns wrth the CountyBoard of Commrssroners on any:tem not on the agenda. The C7rarrwrll drrect the County AdministYator m prima responses to year concentx You are encormsged not to be repetitious of prevrous spealaers and to latnt yous addros to fur . 7. Commissioner Reports -Comments -Questions Thupenod of trmeshall be rued by the Con>rrassroners ro report to thefull Board on conrnr:ttee actrvrt:es, make comments on matters of interest and :rrfosmatum, or r+~se questions to the staf f Thu action rs not rntended to nsrrlt rn srrbstantrve board action durrng thrs trm~ Any action rreacssary because of ducrrssron wrll be scheduled for a future board meeting 8. Board Cozrespondence 9. 10 00 Adj onrn 10. 10:10 Board Workshop with Community Servicrs Department to 10.50 Review Chemical Dependency Policy Issues (Continued from 11/9/99) 11. 10.55 Board Workshop with Community Services and Public Health & Environment to 11 40 Joint Strategy Planning for Aging Services • ***MEETING NOTICES LISTED ON BACK*** aawors fi.retrey ~~.e «. eaabt. tot we e, rt,. C Boerd Room H ou need mntaxe dw to or a hpner o/eees Belt 0.6000 lTDD I39-J2201 E~UAL EMPLOYMENT OTU1~ /AFFIRMATIVE ACTIO~i =MPLOYER WA.~ri1NCi1UN COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS , CONSENT CALENDAR** NOVEMBER 16, 1999 Tae following hems are prt:seatd far Board approvaUatiopaom DEP ~RT_1~NT/ACF'~TCY TTE1~ A:~saaoa A. Approval of the Novembe 2,1994 Board m~tmg mitttaes B Approval of Catmry co~cta an the Proposed Madificaon of Tax ~~-^---~~ Fit>artcag PLtns ttiatmg to Tax Iace~+r^r Fblmmcag Dtstrc Nos. 1 throm3h 7 m the Cuy of Stt~tvarc. C Apmoval of sta$ ~ on the Town of May Ca~s:ve Pisa (tabled on Novembe: 9,1999). ~~ $,v Aapl6~1 to raapomt Gsrid Bede and aupoiat Pat Sorge: to the Worl~OSCe Cotmci to tams e~trmg Jmte 30, 2001. +. ,; ~ ~' E. Anortsva'1 to arum the appomtmem of Shcsr'f James Fr~ic, Craylard Roos and Mary Meye to the Mensal Health Advtsor+ CoimcZ Assessmctt, Taxpayc Sesze,-s F Appsovai ofacaze~+~+* appiicaaoas farha®es~nead c'~~nrcaaoa 8t EIe:.aaas Hmaaa Resotar,~ G Approval of salary range far the ~~~*fir+**on of Asststaat Comuy Smvryor m the Deparmrent of Traatpozmrion and Phystcai Deveioptneat: H. Approval of baadiag/gradiag rao~eadaaans of the Comparable Warrh Committee: Pads DmGOr (rsvtsed) from D6-1-1 m D6-1-1, Facutus Maaagc(zevise~ framD6-1-1 too D6-1-1; and approval ofnew dassiaesdanasdjab descigtiaaforLand Stave~or from C4-2-2 to Gi-3-1. L Apmroval for a two-year spe-...al pro)ect j Scvu~ Spe~alist pomaon m Pnblie Hdth and ~^• P7bIic Health & Eavr<oamctt J Approval ofzesohiuon, subimuai ofa Clan Water Parme~hip grant to the MmnaotaPotltmote Control Agency for the Cottage Cauve Nazaee Study. Sar~srT S. Approval of joint power agte~ctt with the State of Mimtetota, Departmctt of Public Safe-y, AIphol 8c t.rdmbliag Eaf~ Dmsion, to candoct aloobol comQl>an~ cbetics for tmdcdge dtml®g for the zeiod Attgast 1,1999 to Jtme 30, 2000. Ttattsoortacoa 8c Physical L. Approval of stmple~tal agtzraeat gl with Toltz, Sorg, Duvall, Atidtason aadAssocatez, bin m the aaottnt of 530,000 • Development for ctgmeermg design scvtces for CSAH 39 istrplove:aotprojew M. Approval of rrsobrtion, acquar right of way forre~uetioa of C3AH 13. N. Approval of zesoIimon, acgtme ngai of way for ree~aueaon of CR 61. O Approval of resoInaon, request that the Comic of the Miimesota Deparmicsi of Tramportaaea gcform a study to detcm>ae the reasonable and safe sped am CSAH 16 (Valley Crr.3c Read) be~tve~ I-i94 and bite:Iachct Pariraay m Wooa'btay. P Approval ofresoluaon, rrgaesr f~dt from the MmaesotaDepartatctt of Traatpartatsaa's fisctl year 2001 tcimicpal agrr..aeat prigt~m to install a tia~c signal u CSAn I3 (-mwood Avatue) and the I 94 Naordt R~p/Loop mtcse~oa and co~tt to ~Iemt3 the prO]ecs if funding is provided 'Consent Calcdar'SCns are getc~lly ds~oed a5 scat of routine btt~, ntx> 3r*=-^^ and approved m one wta Camm>$aoes may e'er m gull a Consent Calodar ite.:.(s) for dtsassaoa and/or seguate asaoa .................................................................................. RED No Board .12eenag ~Iwember 30,1999 - S' Taaday MF.ETIlYGNdPiCLS Date Cammattee Time Lootlon Irovembes 15 Amcst:a RxJr=e ~' y i l CO zm. E'k Rrver Rrsomcs Rsovecy Faclriy November 16 Vallry Br~ne~ Wate:sbed LZtutet latcv~ear 1145 am Washington Co®ty Gov®mein Ccne Novembe 16 Qpea Enrollment Sesstoa fcr C~++~+~*+~ 100 pm Washington Ca®ty GovezoDeat Cesoer November 16 Ftoaace Cottoattiee 1.30 pm Washmgina Co®ey Govt::t®e~ Cate November 16 Le~.ttaave Cor:smutx 2.U0 pm Washington Cotmty Govezamea Cote November l6 Pnhl+rlS.CtlthAdvLtoryr'-,••••~•~•• 330pm w>s~Co®tYGovemmmtCe~se IYovesober 17 Mosgtirao Comml Exeatuve C~++*~- 9t10 am 2099 L~atvcsry Ave W. - St. Psd Novcaber 17 Reg, Solsd waste Mgt Caa:d Board 10 30 am. 2099 L~ty Ave W _ Se Pmt November 17 Ttaatparnnaa Advisory Baatd 2.00 pm i'0 E S• SL -Mess Psfc Cmae 18 w~ ~ ~'c~ ~O`~~ Cottoty cove~mc ccue lwvembe s ~ ~ w ashmgtoa eatmry Govesame~t Cate IvQVembC 13 Rrsotase Recovey ~,~ L'7+,+rrwR.r. 8 30 lin. 1670 Berm Averme - Map(C7Ynnd November 18 Camsmintry Coax-..crs 7.0 am Washington Co~mty Gove~au Ce.te Iwvetnbet 18 Mei TA3 1_30 pm 230 E S' SL -Man Psic Ccae havemixt 18 Red Rock C~-.c+rr 3 30 pm C :ttage Crtove Cm/ Fill • NOTICE OF INTENT TO AiI~ND THE • WASHINGTON COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CODE THE WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMIVIISSIONERS WILL HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON Tuesday, November 23,1999 at 9:40 a.m. County Board Chambers Washington County Government Center Stillwater, Minnesota NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Washington County Boazd of Commissioners will consider adoption of an ordinance amending the Washington County Development Code. The purpose of the public hearing is to consider the request of David Pazadeau, Minnesota Zephyr to amend Chapter Two, Zoning Regulations Section 3.2 Railroad Overlay District (2) Operations 1 (a) in order to allow the train to operate after 4.00 p.m. on Sunday and to operate after 10:00 p m. on New Year's Eve. The public is encouraged to attend and testify. Both written and oral statements will be accepted at the hearing. Written testimony may be directed to Ann Pung-Terwedo, Department • of Transportation and Physical Development, Land Management/Land Survey Division, Washington County Government Center, P.O Box 6, Stillwater, MN 5082-0006 or submitted at the time of the hearing. Washington County does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or disability in employment or the provision of services. Date: November ~, 1999 /s/ Ann Puns-Terwedo Senior Land Use Specialist • • BROWN'S CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT 1825 Curve Crest Blvd. Stillwater MN 55082 Tel: 651-430-8300 FAX: 651-430-8819 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ItiL~IYAGERS NOVEMBER 8,1999 1. Call to order @ 6:30 P;~f 2. Approval of Ageada 3. Approval of Minutes of October 28, 1999 Meeting 4. Treasurer s Report (Gordon) a. County Loan Status b. Financial Status c. Bills for approval and payment 5 Presentation of Draft EIS for the Cooperative Management Plan - Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway Randy Thoreson, National Park Service • 6 THPP Status Reports a. Status of permits; Wisconsin Central, May Township, Washington County b. Status of Plans and Specificahons/Bid Schedule c. Status of land acquisition options, general report 7. Second Generation Plan a. Planning options related to Water Governance Study b. Review and authorize letter seeking extension 8. Plats and Plans for review a. Follow-up on Green Twig Villas 9. Communications 10. Old Busmess~ew Business 11 Potential revisions to SWCD agreement for year 2000 12. Recess to Executive session 13. Reconvene m open session for adjournment Note Remember that it rs BCWD pokey to not begrn any new topic for discussion after 10 00 P.'Ll Boazd yieetmgs are held on the 2nd and -fth Mondays at 6-30 p m., at 1325 Curve Crest Boulevard, Sailwater, ;vN • 1~Ianagers: Craig Lesser, Pres Karen Kilberg, ~P Jon Michels, Secv E J Gordon, Treas Daniel Potter e Minutes of 1~Iee#ing Brawn's Creed Wate:~i~eri District October 11,1999 APPROVED Board Members Present: Craig Leiser Nei Gordon Dan Potter Karen Kilberg Don Peterson, Manager Appointee Absent: Jon Michels People present at meeting: Mark Done.ix, SWCD; Louis Smith, Legal Counsel; Dawn Hilde, Recording Secretary; Cecilio Olivier, Pat Conrad, Stu Grubb and Camilla Correll, EOR; Julie Westerlund, DNR; Jerry Tumquist, Oak Park Heights; Bill Johnson, CAC; and Dave Truax, CAC. 1. l~ieetins called to order at 6:40P.M. 2. 1~Iinutes for September 27 meeting were amended and approved. 3. Treasurer's Report - (Gordon) - Status of the Audit Process. Manager Gordon asked that we hold off on the audit until we have the money to pay for it. Our present balance is $28,OOOt. Manager Gordon passed out a draft of a letter to the county. We need to approach the county for a short term loan. Our tax increment money will not be available for 3: months. We will ask for a loan of approximately ~6~,000, short teen, separate from proposed letter. l~Ianaser Gordon asked that we investigate mechanisms to change our operations to alleviate our cash flow problems. He would like to see a pay as you go program. The motion was made to approve the letter and forward :t to the county. Motion seconded by ~lanaser Potter. Discussion centered around the need to clarify projects and subwatershed taxing. T'ne motion was amended to authorize treasurer to submit letter to county for watershed financins for their comments and resolution. It was also amended to say "We would also need the county's assistance in verifying property owner lists as we develop subwatershed delineations. Seconded by IVianager Potter. All four managers voted -Aye. No -Nays. • i/Ianager Gordon asked that the Board develop a plan so that we and other watersheds can fund projects without continuously being behind the eight ball. BCWD Approved iVleet:ng l~linutes Page 1 October 11, 1999 • 4. Second Generation Plan Review (Emmons) a) Carrulia Correll (EOR) gave a review of the CAC tour last Saturday. The turn-out was Brest and she thanked Julie Westerlund and Mark Doneux for their help. There were 8 CAC members present for the tour. b) Second Generation Work~*oup Carrulla Correll (EOR) gave a report on the actinties of the workgroup. The work eToup will extend for 6-8 months. 1~Ianager Leiser asked that the Work Group keep BWSR informed. Julie Westeriand has found a grant available through the DNR Adnunistration Budget. It is a Community Technical Assistance Grant in the amount of $9,000.00. She felt we could use the money to develop an outreach and education program. The deadline for application is October 15 and she will submit an application for BCWD. Manaser Gordon moved and Manager Potter seconded for Julie to apply for the grant. All ayes. 5. THPP Review A petition with 60 signatures was received and read by Manager Leiser. Dave Truax answered questions from the Board about the petition. Manager Gordon moved that we accept this petition from individuals signed and that this petition would not be binding on the Board Manager Potter seconded the motion. Four Ayes. Manager Leiser asked that a copy of the petition be sent to the LC1~, DNR and various townships involved. During discussion of the petition it was brought out that the reason for this petition is that people are concerned that the project be completed. a) Status of Pennittins (Cecilio EOR) Billy Thomas, FOR talked with the Wisconsin Railroad again and they see no major problems with our request but gsve no timeline as to when they would approve or disapprove our request for a permit. We are keeping our options open and have two alternate plans if the railroad does not give approval for a permit. Louis Srruth suggested we might put a little legal pressure on the railroad. The 11~iay and Grant meetings were attended last week to discuss grading permits. Grant will have to hire an engineering firm before they can review our project. Grant expects us to take possession of the land and then submit final plans and specs to their planning committee and then • the Board before they will consider a grading permit. IVlay also wants final plans and specs and stated that they would have to charge the Watershed for engineenng review time. BCWD Approved Meeting l~linutes Page 2 October 11, 1999 BiII Johnson asked about the easements. The underlying land will remain in the own ers name but have a watershed easement. Louis Smith stated that state law makes the Watershed exempt from municipal review fees. Louis stated if we apply for a permit and we are turned down for capacious reasons we could seek judicial review. The City of Grant has no specific grading permit ordinances. Cecilio Oliver stated that in his opinion we fall into the "exemption areas" per the Grant City requirements. Louis Smith asked FOR to get our documents ready as soon as possible and include the THPP Summary of Activities. Pat Conrad stated that he has already submitted the Wetland Banking Application and Wetland Delineation Report. The gas line people met with FOR staff on site and outlined where the gas lines are located. The appraiser was on the Marsha and Craig DeWolf property last Thursday. Break taken at 8:25P.1VI. Meeting was reconvened at 8:42P.M. Discussion continued on the issues involved with the DeWolf property. The Board feels it would not be reasonable to extend their investment "in kind" construction for easements beyond the appraised values. Any additional expenses would have to be paid by DeWolfs. Cecilio Oliver, FOR presented the October 1 memo to the Board entitled "Annual Maintenance and Operation Costs for THPP". The structural manholes, wetland and open channels and infiltration maintenance would cost approximately $4,910.00/year. Don Peterson asked how much of this fee is an engineering fee for maintenance. Cecilio stated that the actual maintenance could be handled by SWCD or anyone else, not necessarily the engineering firm. Manager Gordon asked if the $2050 for scraping was amortized over 20 years. Cecilio said yes. The Board could decide to do all of the maintenance or some of it. The Board asked that FOR add to the projection the cost of monitonng wells. The Board also asked that we break down the list by the items required by other state entities and the ones we would like to see maintained. b) Review of Alternate Designs FOR is looking into alternative routes to cross the railroad property. Stu Grubb, EOR, presented some of the ideas from his "fantasy memo" on burn pit alternatives. If we can dispose of some of the materials from the bum pit on the present property it would lower the bids considerably. • Don Truax asked about the burn pit remediation bids. The Board responded that they had received two bids but felt that neither was accurate enough to be considered. r BCWD Approved Meeting Minutes Paoe 3 October 11, 1999 ` Construction is still set for second or third week of November. We need to get our pe..nits and • the railroad permit. Cecilio stated that the project could be started on the downstream side which would give us time to work out our peZriitting problems. The final specs and plans are ready for construction. Manager Gordon asked if some of the legal costs incurred on this project could be recovered from the LCbIR? The LCibIR funds aze very precisely defined by task but one task is defined as easements acquired. The final heanns for Quick Take is set for October 29`x. Manager Gordon informed the Board that as of the 29~ we have to have escrowed in the bank an amount equal to the cost of our offer for the easements. IVianager Gordon is planning to ask the county for this money. Manager Gordon Motion - I request the Boazd to authorize Ned Gordon to approach the county for funds for the court required escrow amount, seconded by Manager Potter Four Ayes, no nays. The question was asked if the Commissioners come back with an amount that is higher than our offer, how much time to we have to put additional funds into the bank. No one had an answer. The Boazd had pre~riously decided to have awatershed-wide levy. There was some discussion of sub-watershed levies but if we do that we have to have another public meeting and another special meeting before October 29m. - - - The comment was made that the Board needs to put more pressure on the County Commissioners to help the Watershed with funds for these projects. Julie Westerlund talked about the progress on the Brown's Creek realigiment construction project. She felt the work was progressing well and that Jason Moeckel feels it will be completed before the snow flies. Julie asked that Jason be included on the agenda at the next meeting to present this project's progress. 6. Rules a) AUAR and Cooperative A~eement Status (Kilberg) The group has not met again. At our next meeting it would be nice to have three comparisons between the AUAR and the Watershed Rules. Mark Doneux will try to get the plans to Brett Emmons, FOR for this comparison. Manager Leiser stated that we need to address what the AUAR is before we can work on a cooperative agreement. • BCWD Approved Meeting itilinutes Page 4 October 11, 1999 • Don Peterson stated that if the AUAR is an attachment to a pernut it could be used as a tool to remove permit if terms are not followed. Again, it was brought out that the Canes involved would like the Watershed to be the enforcer. Manager Leiser asked Don Peterson if he would be willing to review the AUAR before the next meeting and be prepared to discuss it. He agreed. b) "FINAL" Additions or revisions to the rules for adoption Manager Potter asked if the Board was going to respond to Don Peterson's comments. Pat Conrad, EOR, asked if the Board intended to incorporate Don Peterson's comments into the rules. The consensus was to ask Smith Parker to make the minor additional insertions where indicated. After much discussion the decision was made to move the Rules vote to the next meeting, October 28`x. Louis Srruth had prepared three resolutions for the rule vote and they are listed as follows: 1) Resolution to adopt rules 2) Resolution adopting permit process guidelines 3) Resolution as to application of rules to e,usting municipally approved development. The Board asked Mark Doneux to request from the Cities of Stillwater and Oak Park Heights the formal documents claimed to have been submitted. These documents relate to groundwater, surface water, and other issues. Manager Leiser requested authorization to attend the MAWD Conference. He stated this should be considered as an authorized meeting for the manager to attend. During the first meeting of the boundaries group, called to facilitate the water governance recommendations, the Cities of Stillwater, Bayport and Oak Park Heights requested to have their own watershed in the new governance. Regular meeting adjourned at 10:18PM. Manager Dan Potter, Secretary • BCWD Approved Nieeting vlinutes Page 5 October 11, 1999 • Attn: Klayton Eckles ~C~OP~ BROV~~TN'S CREED WATERSI~ED DISTRICT 1825 Curve Crest Blvd. Stillwater MN 55082 Tel: 651-430-8300 FAX: 651-430-6819 November 3, 1999 Mr Klayton Eckles, City Engineer City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater MN 55082 Dear Klayton: In view of the many discussions that have been and will beheld between the Brown's Creek Watershed District and the City of Stillwater with regard to rules, rules implementation, permitting, and enforcement, I feel it is appropriate for the Board of Managers to formally and clearly state its position to the City of Stillwater. In courtesy to our many meehngs, I am addressing this letter to you on behalf of the City. First, with regard to the position of the Brown's Creek Watershed District concerning the City's AUAR process. The AUAR is just that, a process. It is an excellent inventory and assessment study. It clearly identifies the specific issues, develops alternate strategies for mitigation, prioritizes the needs, su changes can be integrated into the ~ g~~ or recommends procedures whereby essin develo ~ p~ ~°~ for periodic audit of the results, and establishes the criteria for g Pecs for the prorated costs of corrective actions. It also identifies water impacts that can be quantified d should be controlled with appropriate reference to either city ordinance or BCWD rules. It is not, however, an enforcement document. It may serve as the basis for discussion and negotiation with level means to issue permits or to enforce the conditions of an issued °~ but ~~ is no inherent City's land use and management plan and related ordinances in 1 ~ of the tl c~ ~u~ ~lementation of the governrnental agencies, including the BCWD, with authonty. Mi'tigahon measures ~ vified in thevAerUsight of other the form of capital projects, ordinances or other ~ ~, whether in Further, the Iaw is clear that performance of an AR does not eliminate or affec th ff e~ ~til they are implemented. public agency with respect to any future activities in the AUAR area. ~ orylunsdiction of any It is not the function or the purpose of the Brown's Creek Watershed District to criticize or appiove land use development plans, the orderly annexation process, or the manifest destiny of ti:e City of Stillwater. Our only concern is the management of water quality and quantity as it may affect the citizens and resources of the watershed. Where the ongin, transfer, management, removal, or panty of the water can be shown to directly involve or relate to the underlying land condition and use, we have an interface that requires consideration and clarification. It is the City's prerogative to determine how its land will be used, but the BCWD's responsibility, under specific statutory authority, to ensure that those uses of the land occumng pursuant to the City's plans and ordinances do not adversely affect the watershed's water resources. Under our statutory mandate (103D.341), we have developed and soon will adopt reasonable and enforceable regulations regarding the quality and quantity of water that is either on or ultimately under the land. It is our understanding that the City of Stillwater wants and expects to manage the water within the boundaries of the city. Further, it is our understanding that the City of Stillwater expects to continue to assess developers a significant fee for this purpose while mitigating several of the problems identified in the AUAR study. As you may remember from your time on the WMO, the BCWD cannot assess a permit fee any greater than the actual cost of doing the appropriate w and a reasonable administrative overhead. Thus, the BCWD does not have the ability to assess the additional fee on being used to build the infrastructure in the annexation area. 1~Ianaaers: Craig Leiser, Pres ~ Karen Kilberg, ~P Jon 1~tichels, Secy E J Gordon, Tress Daniel Potter iVlr Klayton Eckles November 3, 1999 Page 2 The City has clearly expressed its interest in exercising sole or primary authority in regulating to protect water resoi~ within the present and future City boundaries The watershed law provides a process for the Cary to assume that role. Under § 103B.211, subdivision 1, the BCWD will enforce its rules only until the time that it has approved the City's local water management plan and transferred its rules enforcement authority to the City. The central criteria for local plan approval aze consistency with the BCWD's watershed management plan and the City's demonstration that its ordinances, as adopted and implemented, will provide the same degree of water resource protection as the BCWD's rules. Until the local plan is approved and in effect, however, the BCWD retains the full authority and responsibility to apply its rules within City boundaries The City's desire to assume primary authority, of course, is complicated by the fact that the BCWD Second Generation Plan is in process We note that tIus does not absolve the BCWD from responsibility to adopt and enforce its rules; that responsibility is set forth in a different section and chapter from the plan revision process and applies regazdless of the status of the watershed plan at any given time. But in recognition of this situation, the District has beers and continues to be willing to work with the City in a creative way, within the discretion it possesses, to allow the City to assume the primary role in implementing its rotes. The BCWD is willing to consider the following options as to watershed rules and permitting activities: The City of Stillwater may choose to accept and endorse the BCWD Rules as consistent with the AUAR process for water quality and quantity management. The BCWD would then chazge for water management pernuts on the more limited basis indicated and the City would convert its current pernut fees to a different basis so that the monies received from developers remains constant. This would only apply to the portion of the City of Stillwater, either currently or through subsequent annexation, that is within the BCWD. The BCWD would retain the responsibility for enforcement within its boundaries. This is the situation that will exist under law absent any contrary arrangement between the B~ and the City. Or, The City of Stillwater may choose to accept and formally adopt the BCWD rules in their entirety and make them the basis for water management within the azea of the City that is within the Brown's Creek watershed. The City would continue to permit and assess all fees by whatever formula already being applied. The BCWD would hold the City accountable for all enforcement in situations of noncompliance with the rules. As §103B 211 provides, the BCWD would retain the ability to reassume its permitting and enforcement role if the City were not fully enforcing its ordinances. Alternatively, it would issue a general permit with the same terms as the City permit and exercise parallel oversight and enforcement authority. Or, The City of Stillwater may choose to consolidate its several existing ordinances, convert the remaining elements of water manageme.^.t issues ide :tified :-i the AUAR documents into specific enforceable language and combine all of these elements into a "Water Management Plan." This could then be submitted to the BCWD for review as a "quasi"-local plan for the City to implement in the interim until the BCWD's Second Generation Plan is completed. This "plan" could apply to the entire City of Stillwater within the watershed and not~ust the annexation azea. As long as the plan covers the same azeas of concern and the measurements aze reasonably consistent this action would empower the City to assume control of the permitting process under City ordinances that the BCWD has dete~rriined to be substantially equivalent to its rules. Finally, the City may wish to propose specific capital projects, such as the Long Lake diversion, as providing for alternative compliance with some or all requirements of the BCWD rules. This would be implemented not by changing the general language of the rules, but by entering into a cooperative agreement that would establish how the project would be accomplished and what the result of the project would be in terms of the compliance requirements from which development in the project azea would be excused This is the orientation of the meetings that have been held in recent months with the City and other parties regarding the diversion project • C+ptions 2, 3 and 4 aze all creative alternatives to option 1 that the BCWD is willing to explore with the City to achieve mutual protection goals in a way that is most efficient for those subject to the BCWD rules and agreeable to the City's preferred development review role The BCWD is and has been ready to cooperate with the City to advance what it b1r. Klayton Eckles November 3, 1999 Page 3 understands to be the City's interests in these regards. However, it is important to emphasize that what the City is asking is for the BCWD to exercise its discretion to go beyond what the law specifies-BCWD adoption and enforcement of its rules throughout the watershed. Accordingly, the BCWD will look to the City to facilitate whichever alternative it wishes to pursue by making the case for that alternative in a clear and conscientious fashion. The Brown's Creek Watershed Distract expects to continue the monitoring process throughout the watershed, including the identified AUAR azea. Such monitoring will serve as the basis for enforcement as well as establish baselines of flow, temperature, and quality for future development activities anywhere within the watershed. We also expect to continue the monitoring under our Second Generation Plan, and within any consolidation or restructuring of the watershed as considered by the Washington County Commissioners. As an additional clarification, the issue of enforcement is of great concern to the BCWD. Whichever option the City of Stillwater chooses it must include the dedication of resources to enforce permit requirements during land development and identify how enforcement wiI1 be implemented after the development has been completed. AlI of the monitoring data will be made available to serve as the basis of enforcement actions to all agencies within the watershed. As we aze mutually awaze, all rules aze subject to amendment based on new information. The BCWD expects to integrate the rules and the amendment process into the Second Generation Plan currently under development. The BCWD also would expect to vigorously seek adoption of the Plan and its rules by any subsequent organization's operating procedures in the event of consolidation or reorgazization. Finally, to put several procedural issues behind us and reduce the concerns expressed by the several developers that ttended our meetings, you will be receiving within the next several days copies of three resolutions that more clearly ~dicate the rules inlplementation process as well as a copy of the approved rules. We aze very concerned about the perception thiat the BCWD rules aze an additional layer of government or e.~cpense in the development approval process. We appreciate developer costs as well as the possibility of changing requirements after an eazlier approval. We fully understand that timing is critical to any development schedule. We believe that a single point of approval and a single set of standards is the optimal solution. Thank you for your consideration. If I can personally participate in further clarification or discussion with you or anyone else from the City of Stillwater, please let me laiow Yours truly, ~~ ~G ~~~iQ,PJt~ Craig F Leiser President, Brown's Creek Watershed Distract C. Tom Malena, City of Oak Pazk Heights Gary Enchson, City of Grant Mary Kueffiier, City of Lake Elmo Jim Schug, Washington County BCWD Board of vlanagers Mark Doneux Louis Smith • Brett Emmons WASHINGTON SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT r~ MINNESOTA 1825 Carve Croat Blvd., Aoom 10t Btiliwatar,llAN 5x082 (651)430-8820 Fax: (651) 430~Si8 SOIL ANA WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICTS ~i ove:nber 3, 1999 ' ~ O ~ V7 Mr. Je.~ry Och, Senior Utility Inspector l~IN DOT -Metro Division 1500 W. County Road B2 Roseville, MN 5~ 113 RE: Brown's Creek Ouflet Monitoring Station Pe~nit Application Dear Mr. Ochs As we discussed over the phone and at the site, the Brown's Creek Watershed District (BCWD) is intending to relocate and slightly enlarge a water monitoring station near the mouth of Brown's Creek_ The preferred relocation area is still within MN DOT right-of-way, therefore, we are submitting an "Application for Installation of Utilities or Misc. Work on Trunk Highway Right-Of-Way." The relocated monitoring site is ~roposed to be approximately 40 feet east of the wingwall of the box culvert under Highway 96. This box culvert is located approximately 250 feet west of the intersection of Mai T Highway 96 and ~1N Highway 95 on the north edge of the City of Stillwater. The monitoring equipment will be housed within a green fiberg~ass enclosure placed on a level eight foot by eight foot wooden platform. The enclosure is approximately four feet deep, six feet long and eight feet high. The enclosure will be placed about tea feet within the trees near the top of the bluff line and requires no significant excavation other than some minor hand digging to level the pad. The top of the structure will be approximately six to eight feet below Trunk Highway 96. These will be a small trench cut from the enclosure down into Brown's Creek to put the cabling for the monitoring equipment. As we discussed in the field, we will be notifying other agencies (via this letter) that the relocation will be taking place and assume no other permits aze required. This project is being conducted through a grant from vfet Council. The equipment would be in place a minimum of two years and would be used longer if funding was continued. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have to review and discuss our application. 11~fy phone number is 430-6826. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Sincer'e'lyn,~ i~~~W l,V l~iazk J. Doneux ter Resource Specialist AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY E~1FlOYEA eac. 1vN-DOT Application for Installation of Utllltles or l~iisc. Work on Trunk Highway Right-Of--Way 1997 Mai-DOT permit Project Schematic cc: BCWD Board of Managers, w/o enc. Chuck Holtman, Smith Parker, w/o enc. Cecilio Olivier, Emmons Olivier Resources, w/o enc. Molly Shodeen,ltilN DNR, Division of Waters, w/o enc. Klayton Eckles, City of Stillwater, w/o enc. Dan Seamon, USACOE, w/o enc. lbiike Meyer, Metropolitan Council, w/o enc. lV `,WP:WSD\BCWV10\WD4~ION1TOR11I01990C DOC • E.~ustiag Staaoa PLAN VIEW ; ~ ,• ~~ -------HyVy96--~--j------ ~ ~~~ Nor N.T , ~ , ~ , ~ , ~ ° , , ~~ ~ , , , Proposed ~ ~~ Station ,Box Calvert Brown's Creels ~~~ Sample Lines ' .~_ ROSS SECTION HWY 96 Beam Guard Proposed Monitoring Statron f~~~~~~~r~~~~~~ t l ~~~ t~ `~ i • ~~• ~~ l r~r ~~r-~ BrOwII'S Creek 1 .~ 1~~ ``- _- ~_ _1-- 1===- • 1 } ~ r l~1}-'j'Cii' ~ ~+ ln- ~~~ T~ ~~ ~~ Ge CG , ~ ~ ~~o~~G2 C~~tf~ ~r,...1+"S ~-~ C~~ 5 ~p~w73 ~ Si r /luyt~--cv- S ~s ~ ~~ ~ AvhD `1~r~ /t~ R` ~,.~ ~~ s-ate l G ~~ 3 ~ Ci'f L ~ - /~ ~ ~ ` V us ~~ ~cW~~Lf l~-~ ~ ~ t ~ TJ ~,. f ~ ~ °`t"`c (~~,,.ci+.~r f/ ~ e ~c~ /f N' C~ti~ lac ~ ~.(~, I '. ~ v~ J7''"b ST / ~~ f~~' ~, A Tl/ ~i,.,.r~~ f G / a r- ~S ~ . ~~~1 ~~ .~. ~~ ~ ~~ • • From Stan Narusiewicz Nov. 5,1999 6313 St. Croix Trail North Stillwater, Minnesota S~U82 To: Al Gore, Vice President of the United States Bruce Babbit, Secretary of Interior William W. Schenk, Regional Director National Park Service Kenneth R Wykle, Federal Highway Administration Bill Luther United States Congressman for Minnesota Jesse Ventura, Governor of Minnesota Elwyn Tinkieaberg, Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation Ted Mondale, Chairman Metropolitan Commission Buck Malick & Jim Harrison, M/W Boundary Waters Commission Walter Mondale & Gaylord Nelson, Authors of Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Ginny Yingling, Director Northstar Chapter Sierra Club Roger Tomten, Preservationist and Environmental Architect Beth Diem AIA and Todd Dresher AIA, Architects Don Empson, Historian Mayor and City-of St~7lwater Mayor and City of Oak Park Heights • Mayor and City of North St. Paul Mark Holsten, Minnesota State Representative Gery Laidig, Minnesota State Senator Tony Andersen, National Park Sen+ice Kathy Tunhiem, Tom Clarke, Dennis Kahnon, Concerned Citizens lblark Oberg, Environmentalist and Publisher Editors of Minnesota and Wisconsin News Media Dear Recipients- I must make you aware that the Minnesota Department of Transportation is making unfair comments At the October public information meeting in Stillwater, the Minnesota Department of Transportation stated "the National Park Service is comfortable with the proposed bridge crossing the Wild and Scenic St Croix River at Stillwater, Minnesota " I represent several thousand citizens who object to this bridge proposal and we are 100% certain that the National Park Service must veto the bridge if it becomes a real project This letter is provided to help you understand why we are 100% convinced the National Park Sernce should and will say no to the proposed bridge It is useful for each of us to realistically analyze and predict the outcome of the new Stillwater bridge proposal. The previous budge proposal was vetoed by the National Park Service and when challenged in the Federal Court, the veto was solidly upheld The new bridge proposal may suffer the identical fate and there is logic that can lead one O to that conclusion Resardless of how you or I feel about the bridge proposal, it will be the National Park Service who will ultmiately say "YES" or `PTO" This letter will help you understand their position To begin with, the entire bridge proposal is on a shaky political foundation. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation is faz from in complete agreement with the 1~1inriesota Department of Transportation The Minnesota Department of Transportation has serious disagreements within itself. And there is certainly very questionable agreement among the Governor of Minnesota, the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Department of Transportation on this bridge proposal. It is incorrect, unfair and misleading for the Minnesota Department of Transportation to claim this is a "consensus proposal" Like most concerned citizens, the National Pazk Service may have an interest in how the engineers and politicians view the bridge proposal, but they cannot be affected by these one sided views The National Park service must deal with its mandate to preserve and protect the St Croix River and Watershed in accordance with the "Wild and Scenic Rivers Act" So let us examine the bridge proposal from the National Pazk Service point of view and attempt to predict the outcome As you read the facts you can form your own conclusion as well as learn to realize and appreciate how difficult and momentous a decision this wi71 be for the National Pazk Service The first element to consider is the enormous (40 acre) interchange on the Minnesota side which will expose 12 paved traffic lanes, two highway overpasses and many circular access lanes. An utterly disgusting view from the Wisconsin side Exposure of this highly visible interchange with its 30 foot high retaining walls is in the direct view-shed from the St Croix River as well! The National Pazk Service will determine that this enormous Interchange would be a direct violation of the `ryVild and Scenic Rivers Act" and can be expected to respond with a "NO" to this analysis element of the bridge proposal Given the existing federal court ruling, it would be extremely difficult for the National Park Service to justify a `DES" to this proposed violation of the "Wild and Scenic Rivers Act" The next element is the proposed location and alignment of the new badge. The proposed location is different from the existing badge location as was the previous proposal and creates many policy problems for the National Pazk Sernce • For example, there is unacceptable additional visual impact whenever one proposes a new bridge location which deviates from an existing bridge location This was a major factor leading to the veto of the first bridge proposal Now another attempt to deviate from the existing corridor is being proposed To be consistent and conform with the federal court ruling the National Pazk Service has little choice other than to vote `iv0" on this element. Given the veto by the National Pazk Service to the previous bridge proposal, the Cooperative Management Plan for the Lower St Croix River now applies and explicitly states.... no increases could occur in the number of road or railway bridges ,., adsting bridges could be replaced with bridges of a similar scale in existing corridors (roughly equivalent to existing approach rights of way). Because of this, the Governor of Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Transportation wi71 soon be publicly chastised for wasting mi'lh'ons of 11~1mnesota taxpayers money on both this and the previous bridge proposal- The cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater could be included as co-contn'buters to this reclEless and illegal waste of ~nnesota taxpayers money It is encouraging to know that the National Park Service had akeady anticipated the Cooperative Management Plan for the Lower St Croix River with a protective policy aimed at supporting the `ryVild and Scenic Rivers Act". This is the policy of non- • proliferation. Simply stated "if a new replacement bridge is built, the existing historic lift bridge must come down". The "Plreseryationist Groans" may challenge the National Pazk Service if the outcome of their decision leads to the removal of the Historic Lift Bridge It will be very difficult for the National Park Service to make and justify a decision which forces the removal of the "Historic Lift Bridge" The next and last analysis element relates to the St. Croix River Watershed and the direct impact it has on the water quality of the river itself. This is probably the least understood but the most important element of the decision analysis being discussed herein. Protectirig the water quality is foremost and is one of the fundamental reasons for the creation of the "Wild and Scenic Rivers Act" The National Park Sernce should logically reason that by enabling the new bridge the officially-predicted three-fold increase to traffic will occur because of major new development in the St Croix Watershed This watershed encompasses hundreds of squaze miles and includes the entire Apple and Willow Rivers and all surrounding land surface including New Richmond There is room to develop two new cities the size of Woodbury This extensive new development in the watershed will most certainly cause negative impact to the crucial quality of the water in the river itself via surface runoff and • septic effluent seepage and discharge • Therefore, if the National Park Service intends to protect the river and its watershed as decreed by the "Wild and Scenic Rivers Act", it must say `2V0" to the proposed budge or risk formal criticism and complaint from the "Environmentalist Grouas': In summary, it is lushly likely that the National Park Service will veto the current bridle ronosal because A Negative visual impact from the enormous (40 Acre) Interchange B Negative visual impact from the bridge alignment and location C Consequences of causing removal of the Historical Lift Bridge D Negative impact to the future water quality within the river. In practical terms, the National Park Service could conclude `ryVe won't be formally criticized as much by saying `iV0" but we will surely be ordered into federal court if we wrongly choose to say `DES " Additionally, I can foresee the National Park Service saying "Furthermore, our collective conscience within the National Park Service is relieved because there are many other better alternative proposals to address the relatevely minor local traffic and Dseudo, non- existent regional transaortation re4uirement~ " "These alternative proposals such as, those provided by Architects Diem, Dresher • and Tomten, are much more friendly, favorable and protective of the river and to the United States and 1Vfinnesota taxpayers. A'e. the National Park Service, intend to follow our conscience while we continue to orated the river for all generations to come: " In closing, I hope this brief discussion will help you understand, accept, and appreciate the forth-coming veto of the current Stillwater bridge proposal You can help insure this by sending a much needed contribution to offset current and future expenses to "Save the River Fund" at 6313 St. Croix Trail N Stillwater, MN 55082 /C~~~ Stan Narusie z 651 439 4600 • h~^.V-10-iS99 10:0? CI t (OF CFr! „~ CiTY OF OAK PARK i3EIGHT5 • TUESDAY, NOVEMBEi~ 9,1999 CITY COUNCIL MEETING FOI.LO~ UP AGENDA x:00 Pa~i. 7:00 p m ~• 7:05 p.m. Z:IS p m C~II to OzdeJA~roval o~A~nda Apgxoved as presented. Car:3ed 5 - 0. II. DegartmentlCouncil Liaison Reports A. PIanaiag commission Update provided. Nest rneetiag is Novsmher 18'~ at 7:00 p.m. B. Parizs Commission Update provided Next rnesting is Nov~ez 15~' at 6:30 p.m. C. Cable Commission Update provided D. Water Maaagemeat Orgaaizaticns I. Brown's Creek Watershed District Update provided. 2 bfiddle St. Czoir Watexslsed District Nezt meeting m November. 3. Valley Brands Watershed District Notlsia f to zsport E. Other Motion to cancel November 16~ worl:seasioa. Carried 5 - 0. III. V:sitors/Pvblic Commeat A Recycling Award Terry Andersen, 19x220 Uppe: 5~`~ Btzeet Aorth. T~s u sa opooztum'ty {or t}se pw~c Fa adriner tha Cot::sal e~t~ gcesaons or sencera on :shies hoc par: o{ :he zegt~sr s~. {Pleare ~L-,ut ccmmet7te to 3 mtaxtes in Ien~tls.) 7:20 p.m IV. Consent A~e:~a (Roll Ca;I Vote} A. Approve Bi~s ~~' Invastmente B Apgsove City Council Minutes - October 26, I~99 C. Bayport Isagectioa Contract Approved as presented. Roll call vote Was talzen. Carried 5 - 0. hCU-10-1959 1O E? CITY CF OFN ?:30 p.m V Public Hearuiga ~ A. Pu}s~ic Hearing to Consider Assessments for the Kara Centez Improvements of 1998. Matter coatirmed to 3tiovarn'*~er Z9, 1999 at 3:30 p.m. ~iation carried. 5 - 0. 7.45 p rr. L'I. I~ew $us•:ness A Adopt Qrdi~arue No. 99-40i-_ eisriending Section 40i.00.C and 40I.06.C.5 I2elati>:g to Subm:ssica Regtiremeats under Planasd Unit Developments. Approved. Carried 5 - 0. B Speed limit Request. Staf~ directed to respond to raquasf stating Citp's position. Carried 5 - 0. C iunnyside Marina Update prorid~ed. D Dahl}te Arainage Eaguieering Raqueat Staff asected to zespond to request stating Ciiy's position. Carried. 5 - 0. E. Endorsemelt o~ ylaeter Plan Concept for Ceatxal Business I~istric: Update provided. Endorsement agprovecl. Motion carried d - I. Coaacilmensbez Beaudet opposed. F Authorization to o~fer RFP on Concept Plan for Central Business Dismct. Aut~orizatioit to offer RFP approved. iKotivxi carried 4 - I. Councilmember Beaudet opposed. v Funding Svu-ces Resclutioa approved. Roll call vote arcs talxen. Car_isd 5 - 0. 5:30 p.m r^ VII Olt $usuaess A. Bagineertig Coatzaet Contract approved watla team coaeept lieadecl up by Dennis Postltr and assisted bd Milxe ~'iu. Motion carried ~ -1. Couneilmensbez Beaudet opposed. B. Insurance Matter tabled to Novemb~-r 23'~ meeting. I~iotion earzied - 0. ~orIsseseivn scheduled for 6.00 p.=n. November 23'd. Motion cazriecl. 5 - 0. C. Payzou Automatic Deposit Approved. Motiom carried 5 - 0. D. Malley Vieov Condominiums North ~lssociatwn Report Motion to accept costs associa±ed with report. i~1otson carried ~:©~~aa LJ • _I~~V-10-1~G'3 10:98 CITY CF OFH 5-0. ~~ E Bv~er IGng $ignage Staff authorized to cancel Cond:tiona~ Use Permit i£ issues are riot iu:nmeaiately coneeted. Motioa carried 5 - 0. F ~~ICas:iage Homes Bid Authorizatoa to psoceed ~vitjt le~ action, Motaan parried 5 - 0. Motion to authorize staff to maze application stron~ler. 1~Iaticn carried 5 - 0. G• Degartmeat of Re~reaue LMiry Tax Studv Update prided. ~I. Radio System Ezpeaditure approved. A;etion carried 5 - 0. 9:00 p.m. VIII. Adjournmeat Meetia~ adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Carried 5 - 0. See:a~gat{serney a; .~+~se i rnau ~ni~,. /1 • /'~ . ©:.~D4 TuTFL F 94 Stillwater Township November 10, 1999 Chair Bergeron • 7 QO p m Regular Meeting ' Call To Order Aaenda• Adopt Minutes: Approve Minutes October 26 (Budget), October ?8, 1999 (Town Baard; Treasurer: l Balances and Budget 2 Claims & Checks 3 Ralph Hughes Investments A ttornev 1 Planner: 1 Adopt Zoning Ordinance 2 Adopt Comprehensive Plan 3 Pinewood Ridge Subdivision En~ineer• 1 Public Works• l Clerk: 1 Miscellaneous Committees: 1 Terms Ending a) Park -Rod Hunter b) Planning Commission -Carole Yoho and Meg Yuri loth Peo le: 8:00 P14 1 Waste iVlanagement Kim Carlson and Gard Boyum O!d Business: liew B~,siness• Adjourn • 1 ] ~05~1999 Pat Ba_ntl~ S~a~`~"ui WASHIl~TGTON CO b eeq D.rerieC.,,.g Okeriet 1 ~tl 0~ COUNTY BOARD AGENDA ~ ~PuOi k ~~~~._,~ ~( '-"w~i01i ~~"" ~0 Yc~esar ~ ar ~ NOVEMBER 9,1999, 9:00 A.M. _ Des ~hemmn M non P t n, e . Dlsales 4 Dklt Staffoed Dise~ies 5 1. 9 00 Roll Call 2. Consent Calendar 3. 9:00 Transportation and Physical Development - D. Wisniewsla, Director Set L~r:e, Time and Place for a Hearing m be Conducted m New Scandia Township for the Reversion of County Road 53 from the County to the Jurisdiction of New Scandia Township 4. 9:10 Public Health and Environment - M. McGlothlin, Director Commissioner Appointments - D~-egulation/RestNCtwring of the Electric Utdity Industry 5. 9:20 General Administration - J. Schug, Crnmty Administrator A. Voting Delegate and Alternate to the Annual Meeting of the MN Comities Insurance Trust B. Veterans Rest Camp Policy 6. 9:40 Discussion from the Audience • Yrsitors mayshara their carrcerrrs with drs CoeoityBomd ofC.orra orr airy item Trot orr the agenda. Tire ChairwiII direr! the Corarty ~dmirrirtrator to prr~me to yore avr~oerrrs You are errcoraaged rrot m be reaetitiores of previous speairers acrd m limn your addrers ovfiwe 7. Commissioner Reports -Comments - Qaestions Tirzsper.od of mrrasirall be resed by iha Cosr~iauros A~ seport m t)rsfedl Board orr arlivitie; nra~e aonanenb orr matters of 5rterest acrd it formation, or mire qua~arrs m thestaff. T7rir arliorr is not irrterrded m xsuit irr srdutmrtive board actron during thrs tone Arry aesiar rreoesrmy beaause ofdssa~orr wiII be sdredrded for a ftrtrrre boaad meeting 8. Board Correspondence 9. 10:00 Adj onrn 10. 10.10 Board Workshop with Commmiity Services Department to 10:55 Review Chemical Dependency Policy Issues 11. 10:55 Board Workshop with Assessment, Tazpayer Services and IIe~ons to 11:55 County Tax Abatement Policy and Proposed Tax Abatement far Tamarac3c Interchange Project in Woodbury ***MEETING NOTICES LISTED ON BACK SIDE*** ' • ff au Md dus~ o<or ~~ ~~rrwwt.h,e.. eaM 13660 !~O /79-JZ20 E~UAL EMPLOYMENT OFFORTUN~TI~/ AFriFiMATIVE ACTION EMFl.OYE~ WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR NOVEMBER 9, 1999 The following items are presented for Board approvaUadoption. ~ • DEPART'V~NT/AGENCY ITEM Administration A Approval of the October 27, 1999 Board meeting minutes. B Approval of County comments on the proposed modification of Tax Increment Financing D~stnct 1 and 2 in the City of St. Paul Park. C. Approval of staff comments on the Town of May Comprehensive plan. Assessment, Taxpayer Services D. Approval of resolution approving the basic sale price of $3,600 on tax forfeited and Elections parce120.032.21.12.0003 and authorize the Department ofAssessment, Taxpayer Services and Elections to offerparcel for sale to adjoining landowners at a private sale. E. Approval of resolution, application for Conveyance of TaxForfeited Lands for an authorized public use. Community Services F. Approval of contract with Family Means (formerly Family Service St. Croix) to provide management ofvolunteesrespite care services to frafi elderly and children with developmental disabt~ities for calendar year 1999 and 2000. G. Approval of federal Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Transitional Plan. • Human Resources H. Approval to ratify the 2000 meet and confer agreement with non union employee groups including Depaztment Heads, Confidential Supervisors and Confidential employees. Transportation and Physical I. Approval to set public hearing to consider a petition from the Minnesota Development Zephyr Ltd. to amend the Washington County Development Code for November 23, 1999 at 9:00 a.m *Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not raqunYag d~scnssion, and approved m one vote. Camm~ssioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for d~scussmn and/or separate action. ********************~k*~Irilr#~katalr~k~k**********#*~****************** REMI1~iDER: No Board 1~ieeting November 30,1999 - 5" Tuesday IviEETING NOTICES Date Committee Time Location November 8 November 9 Rnsh Line Comdor Personnel Committ 3 30 p.m. White Bear Lake City Hall -White Bear Lake November 9 ee Mental Health Advisory Council 12 00 p m. 4 00 p.m. Washington County Govemment Center Christ Lutheran Church -Lake Elmo November 10 November 10 911 Boazd MELSA 10 30 a.m 2099 University Ave. W. - St. Pahl November 10 Metro Inter-County Association 12 00 p m. 2 00 p m St. Pant Public Iabrary - St Pahl Kelly I~ -161 St. Anthony Ave - St Pahl November 11 Community Social Services Advisory 7 30 a m. Washington County Government Center November 11 Metro TAB 12 30 p m. 230 E. 5~ St. -Mears Park Ce~e