The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011-11-15 CC PacketCNIL q- gil g6gat e r IMF TIFTNFEACE Cf ■IFOEI•TR REVISED Agenda CITY COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North November 15, 2011 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of November 1, 2011 regular and recessed meeting minutes (available Tuesday) and November 7, 2011 Special Meeting Minutes PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less STAFF REPORTS 2. Police Chief 3. Fire Chief 4. City Clerk 5. Community Dev. Director 6. Public Wks Dir /City Engr. 7. Finance Dir. 8. City Attorney 9. City Administrator CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) 10. Resolution 2011 -167, directing payment of bills 11. Possible approval of temporary liquor license — St. Croix Day Care Center fundraiser 12. Resolution 2011 -168, approving renewals of On -Sale, Off -Sale, Club, Wine, Wine With Strong Beer, Sunday On -Sale, On -Sale 3.2 %, Off -Sale 3.2 %, Micro Brewer Off -Sale, Micro Brewer Tap Room Liquor Licenses and Tobacco Licenses For 2012 13. Resolution 2011 -169, approval of agreement between the City and Veterans' Memorial Committee 14. Possible authorization to negotiate a contract with St. Croix Boat & Packet for parking ramp cleaning for 2012 15. Possible release of funds - Library PUBLIC HEARINGS - OUT OF RESPECT FOR OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 10 MINUTES OR LESS. 16. Possible approval of Ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance, related to Variance Review Criteria (Ordinance 1st Reading- Roll Call) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 17. Information on Brown's Creek Trail Overpass /Underpass NEW BUSINESS 18. Possible approval of new tobacco license for Valley Ridge Smoke Shop, Inc. (Resolution -Roll Call) 19. Possible approval to purchase John Deere 2720 Utility Tractor, Cab & Snow Blower 20. Discussion on proposed property taxes 21. Waiver of Assessments on 356 Ramsey St W related to property clean up charges(Resolution — Roll Call) PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED) COMMUNICATIONS /REQUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS 22. Blue Ribbon Update STAFF REPORTS (CONTINUED) ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE REVIEW ** 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. i Q11 aye 1NE tItTN ►LACE Of NIt NElt T! AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North November 15, 2011 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of November 1, 2011 regular (available Tuesday) and recessed meeting minutes and November 7, 2011 Special Meeting Minutes PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS OPEN FORUM 7:00 P.M. The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit Your comments to 5 minutes or less STAFF REPORTS 2. Police Chief 3. Fire Chief 4. City Clerk 5. Community Dev. Director 6. Public Wks Dir /City Engr. 7. Finance Dir. 8. City Attorney 9. City Administrator CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) 10. Resolution 2011 -167, directing payment of bills 11. Possible approval of temporary liquor license — St. Croix Day Care Center fundraiser 12. Resolution 2011 -168, approving renewals of On -Sale, Off -Sale, Club, Wine, Wine With Strong Beer, Sunday On -Sale, On -Sale 3.2 %, Off -Sale 3.2 %, Micro Brewer Off -Sale, Micro Brewer Tap Room Liquor Licenses and Tobacco Licenses For 2012 13. Resolution 2011 -169, approval of agreement between the City and Veterans' Memorial Committee 14. Possible authorization to negotiate a contract with St. Croix Boat & Packet for parking ramp cleaning for 2012 15. Possible release of funds - Library PUBLIC HEARINGS - OUT OF RESPECT FOR OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 10 MINUTES OR LESS. 16. Possible approval of Ordinance amending Zoning Ordinance, related to Variance Review Criteria (Ordinance 1st Reading- Roll Call) UNFINISHED BUSINESS 17. Information on Brown's Creek Trail Overpass /Underpass NEW BUSINESS 18. Possible approval of new tobacco license for Valley Ridge Smoke Shop, Inc. (Resolution -Roll Call) 19. Possible approval to purchase John Deere 2720 Utility Tractor, Cab & Snow Blower 20. Discussion on proposed property taxes PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED) COMMUNICATIONS /REQUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS 21. Blue Ribbon Update STAFF REPORTS (CONTINUED) ADJOURNMENT TO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR CITY ADMINISTRATOR PERFORMANCE REVIEW ** 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. 4 HOMEWARD DEPLOYED About the Sea of Goodwill Award Description The Sea of Goodwill award is presented to the local (civilian) community that best demonstrates superior support in meeting the Sea of Goodwill's goal of linking public, private, and governmental support for Service members; veterans; recovering wounded, ill, and injured warriors; Service member and veteran immediate family members; and the immediate surviving family members of Service members who have died in the line of duty, through a common understanding of what is required to ensure a sustainable life in civilian society. "' For the purposes of this award, "local (civilian) community" refers to a village, town, township, borough, city, or county. Examples of supporting activities within communities could include: • Employers: corporations, small business, organized labor, chamber of commerce and similar institutions • Non - profit organizations: foundations, philanthropic organizations, veterans support organizations, 4 housing /shelters • Health care: government health facilities, hospitals, clinics, professionals, peer to peer, social workers • Benefactors: private donors, foundations, charities, financial, time /volunteers • Educators: universities, colleges, vocational centers, student Vet organizations •. Advocates: individuals, professional organizations, entertainment, newspapers and radio, social networks •. Government departments and agencies at all levels (Federal /State /Local) for Veteran Affairs, health and human services, judicial services, housing, Labor, etc • Faith based`organizations: religious institutions, denominations, fellowship organizations. Nominations shoulo.focus on community support to Service members, veterans, and their families who.,.,; served during the period. 2001— 2011. The award will be presented on November 2 nd 2011 at the Homeward Deployed Awards Presentation at the Women in Military Service for America Memorial at Arlington Cemetery. Submission Format Email to info @"meant aepioyed.org all e-mail submissions will be acknowledged. r r All nominations must be received no later than 20 October 2011. For more information, contact Lisa Carey at 703 - 303- 0496,or Lisa @homewarddeployed.org or Anne Westerfield at 703 - 344 -4910 or anri(e @homewarddepioyed.org To read more about the Sea of Goodwill: http: / /www.warriorgateway.info /2010 /07 /sea- of- goodwill- white- paper/ To read more about Homeward Deployed: http : / /www.homewarddeploved.org/ 1 sea `Goodwill, p. 8 4gage 10► ►.....I►CI 1► ■I.OE► ►.. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES November 1, 2011 REGULAR MEETING 4:30 P.M. Mayor Harycki called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush, and Mayor Harycki OTHER BUSINESS Joint Workshop with Browns Creek Watershed District Board of Managers President Craig Leiser called the meeting of the Brown's Creek Watershed District to order. Present were Managers Leiser, Vanzwol, Taillon, and Johnson; absent, Manager Pundsack. Mr. Leiser noted changes to the printed agenda: table item 3 until the arrival of the presenter; delete item 5a) standardized rules for water quality requirements in Stillwater; and add item 6, public comments. Mayor Harycki and Councilmember Roush suggested that a time for public comment be added to all future agendas. Motion by Manager Johnson, seconded by Manager Vanzwol, to approve the amended agenda. All in favor. 2011 -2012 Water Quality Improvements projects Middle St. Croix WMO — Amy Carolan, Middle St. Croix WMO, provided updates on projects done in implementing the Lily Lake and McKusick Lake sub - watershed assessments. She stated the WMO received a $43,000 grant from the Board of Soil and Water Resources to begin improvements in two catchments in the Lily Lake sub - watershed. She reported that open houses were held in an effort to recruit property owners willing to install some type of stormwater treatment feature in the right -of -way adjacent to their property to capture runoff from the street. She added that there was a good response from the open houses and the WMO was able to select the best locations for the installation of a treatment feature, in this case focusing on rain gardens. She indicated that 17 locations were selected; installation of the rain gardens is under way and should be completed by the end of November. She explained that the same type of project was started in the McKusick sub - watershed with a $20,000 grant; rain gardens were installed at 6 locations. She stated that the WMO partnered with the City of Stillwater in the McKusick sub - watershed project, having some of the work done in conjunction with the City's street reconstruction project. She noted the WMO also received a $70,000 from the St. Croix River Association to partner with the City on the street project, noting that the WMO helped fund some of the bump -outs with stormwater treatments features on Wilkins Street. Ms. Carolan stated the WMO plans to continue similar efforts in 2012, with more catchments identified in both sub - watersheds for potential projects; she pointed out that the WMO has applied for an $82,000 grant from the Board of Soil and Water Resources. She added that the WMO would continue working with the City on the 2012 street project utilizing the money City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 from the St. Croix River Association. Ms. Carolan explained that the WMO would continue to seek additional funding to continue working in both watersheds; and that the WMO also will begin work on its 2014 ten -year plan. She suggested that managing the aquatic plant community in McKusick Lake will be looked at as part of the plan update. Brown's Creek Watershed District — Karen Kill, Brown's Creek Watershed District administrator, reviewed the Watershed District's 2011 -2012 projects, with a photo presentation highlighting an update on a project near the Stillwater Country Club clubhouse; a buffer restoration project along the east side of Long Lake; improvements to two culverts Brown's Creek flows through on the way to the St. Croix. She reported that the Watershed District was successful in obtaining a $210,000 Clean Water Legacy Grant to do extensive buffering along Oak Glen Golf Course, which might result in the lowering of the summer maximum water temperature of the stream by about 6 degrees. She indicated that the District has applied for another Clean Water Legacy grant for installation of an iron - enhanced sand filter in Settler's 5 Addition in 2012; and that it is hoped this device will result in a 118 - pound per year reduction in dissolved phosphorus, which achieves about 80% of the goal for the Lake McKusick diversion area. She continued that the Brown's Creek TMDL implementation plan has come up with about $2.9 million in projects to improve sediment reductions to Brown's Creek. She noted a lot of these projects are adjacent to the Zephyr line which is being purchased for the state trail and might provide opportunities for the installation of some of the projects as the trail is developed. Mr. Leiser pointed out the Watershed District had planned on doing these sediment reduction projects incrementally over a number of years, but now that the DNR will be working on removing rails and ties, it would seem an ideal time to bring in heavy mechanical equipment in conjunction with the DNR work to correct ravine problems. Mr. Leiser added that due to the lateness of the developments with the state trail plans, the District's budget didn't include any of the work in the Zephyr trail area; and that that a worst case scenario is that the work would result in a $129,000 increase in the District's proposed tax levy, a 25% increase in the levy. However, he informed them that Washington County has expressed a willingness to loan the District the money so it wouldn't have to increase its tax levy all at one time; and that it is also unclear at this time how much work the DNR might be willing to do as part of its trail development. Another unknown, he explained, is the DNR's timetable and whether there might be grant opportunities for work in 2013. City of Stillwater — Public Works Director Sanders provided an update on work done in conjunction with the City's street project. He reviewed two areas where infiltration treatment projects were done, Wilkins Street where bump -outs with rain gardens were installed, and two ponds at the Oak Glen golf course. He described that 8 rain gardens were installed on Wilkins between 4th and Owens streets; and that those projects enabled the City to exceed the Middle St. Croix WMO's requirements for infiltration. He noted that over the next 20 years the City must do treatment on 177 acres of impervious areas; he added that the City has achieved half of that goal with work done during its street projects in the past 4 or 5 years. Brown's Creek TMDL Implementation Plan — Camilla Correll of the Watershed District's engineering firm provided an update on the TMDL process and plan. She pointed out that Brown's Creek was listed as impaired due to a lack of cold water fish assemblage. She listed the TMDL stressor identification study identified stressors as suspended sediments or suspended solids, high temperature loads to the Creek, and high copper concentrations. She suggested stormwater runoff has been identified as the source of the suspended solids; sources of heat are stormwater runoff and lack of riparian cover or buffer. She reviewed the Page 2 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 allowable levels of suspended solids and permitted load allocations, existing load levels and load reduction goals. She described the areas east of Highway 15 and north of the diversion structure is the primary contributing areas and areas of focus for both suspended solid and heat load reduction; and that the purpose of the implementation plan is to identify activities that will address the primary stressors and provide guidance on meeting waste load and load allocations. She reviewed some of the existing practices and projects that will address stressors and will count toward meeting the load reductions, proposed projects and implementation activities. It was noted that the plan only achieves 25% of the sediment load reduction; Ms. Correll stated that it was difficult to develop a thermal model to quantify what types of load reductions might be seen from certain projects, such as the buffer restoration projects. It was expressed that a trend analysis will be done every 5 years to determine how effective practices are. Ms. Correll reviewed next steps for adoption of the plan. Other Opportunities for Collaboration — Mr. Leiser explained that a group of agencies has been formed to look at ways to make water management in Minnesota more efficient and more effective. He described four operational recommendations that have come out of the group. Mr. Leiser spoke of the recent examples of successful collaboration between the Watershed District and the WMO. Armory Update — Mayor Harycki informed the panel that this proposal is still in the very early stages; and Councilmember Roush noted there are wetlands on the proposed site and those will be preserved. Mr. Leiser requested that the Watershed be kept abreast of plans in a timely fashion. Councilmember Polehna inquired if anything is being done to address unregulated agricultural practices that contribute to infiltration problems to the St. Croix; and Mr. Leiser responded there are a lot of conflicting priorities and economics involved. Public Comment — Bruce Werre thanked the Watershed District, WMO and City for their work, noting he has one of the rain gardens in his yard. He indicated that he had a presentation planned regarding emerging vegetation on Lake McKusick and he is hoping a plan can be developed for a diverse plant community. No other comments were received. Motion by Manager Johnson, seconded by Manager Vanzwol, to adjourn at 5:50 p.m. All in favor. RECESSED MEETING Mayor Harycki called the meeting to order at 7 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush, and Mayor Harycki Staff present: City Attorney Magnuson Finance Director Harrison Fire Chief Glaser Police Chief Gannaway Public Works Director Sanders Community Development Director Turnblad City Planner Pogge City Clerk Ward 7:00 P.M. Page 3 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Harycki led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Councilmember Roush, seconded by Councilmember Cook, to approve the October 18, 2011, regular meeting and October 31, 2011, special meeting minutes. All in favor. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS Certificate of Appreciation — Volunteers of St. Paul Lutheran Church Mayor Harycki and Councilmember Polehna presented a Service Award to volunteers from St. Paul Lutheran Church for their efforts in support of the Yellow Ribbon campaign, that included a carnival and picnic for children of service members. STAFF REPORTS Fire Chief Glaser informed the Council that the meeting for the presentation on the shared services study has been scheduled for November 7, 2011, from 6 p.m. - 8 p.m., at the Washington County Government Center. Community Development Director Tumblad reported that the issuance of building permits and the number of inspections are above what they have been in recent years. Councilmember Cook noted that the Brown's Creek Watershed District has asked to be kept abreast of plans for the armory. Mr. Turnblad pointed out that a preliminary plan has not been developed yet, but that he would have no problem providing the Watershed District with concept plans. Public Works Director Sanders indicated that he had received a call from the Water Department regarding using the City's fuel purchase program for its department; and he thought the Water Board would be discussing utilizing that option. City Administrator Hansen expressed that he hopes to present information to the Council regarding the financial impact of changes to the market value homestead credit at the second Council meeting in November. OPEN FORUM No comments were received. CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution 2011 -157, directing payment of bills 2. Resolution 2011 -158, approval of contract for actuarial services 3. Resolution 2011 -159, approval of St. Croix Valley Rec Center and Lily Lake Ice Arena Management Agreement with St. Croix Caterers, Inc. 4. Resolution 2011 -160, approval of 2012 Cleaning Services Contract for City Hall with Dave Clark 5. Possible approval of Cable Communications Budgets for fiscal year 2012 Councilmember Cook asked when the Council had last been briefed by Rec Center Manager Doug Brady, and Mayor Harycki replied that would have occurred at budget time — July or August. Page 4 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 City Administrator Hansen stated that Mr. Brady is continually looking for innovative ways to keep the Rec Center usage up, despite the economy; and that Mr. Brady is looking at ways of working with the new hockey training center to see if there is a possibility of partnerships that might increase business even more. On a question by Councilmember Cook, Mr. Hansen answered that the new concessions agreement with Mr. Gartner is working relatively well; and that he usually meets with Mr. Brady about twice a month to discuss any problems /issues. Councilmember Roush asked if the rate on the St. Croix Boat & Packet agreement has changed, and Mr. Hansen responded that the renewal rate is the same as it has been since 1998 or 1999. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Menikheim, to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearings. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Possible approval of second reading of Ordinance 1041 an ordinance amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 41, entitled License Permits and Prohibitions by addition Standards for certain Seasonal Outdoor Sales Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the proposed ordinance that had a first reading approval with no corrections or comments. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Roush, to adopt Ordinance 1041, an ordinance amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 41, entitled License, Permits and Prohibitions by addition Standards for certain Seasonal Outdoor Sales. Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None NEW BUSINESS Possible approval of Main Street Pedestrian Walkway Project Public Restroom Change Orders #1 and #2 Community Development Director Turnblad stated staff had rejected the first requested change order. He recounted that this change order is due to some unexpected contaminated soils that were discovered and had to be stockpiled by the contractor, as well as some electrical conduit and sign post footings found in excavating. He informed the Council that the cost for the additional work required by these unexpected findings is $3,187.53 and that staff authorized that amount to keep the project going so construction can continue through the winter. He also noted the City received favorable bids on the pedestrian walkway portion of the project, so the overall project is still under estimated cost. On a question by Councilmember Roush, Mr. Turnblad responded that contingencies were built into the estimated cost, but not in the bid prices. Page 5 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 Councilmember Polehna questioned paying for the removal of the conduit /concrete post, and suggested that it should be the responsibility of the contractor. Motion by Councilmember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Menikheim, to adopt Resolution 2011 -161, Approval of Change Order #2 Main Street Pedestrian Walkway Project Public Restroom. Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None Consideration of a request by Trinity Lutheran Church to lease parking lot spaces on Wednesday and Thursday November 2nd and 3rd for their Lutefisk Dinner Community Development Director Turnblad reported that the Parking Commission had reviewed the request to lease a number of parking spaces in the municipal parking ramp for the Church's annual fundraiser dinner. He added the Parking Commission and staff recommends a fee of $1 per car. He continued that in addition to the fee, Mr. Turnblad and staff recommended that the Church be billed after the event, rather than up front, so actual usage can be determined. City Administrator Hansen pointed out the Church has been a very good partner in the past. Motion by Councilmember Roush, seconded by Councilmember Cook, to approve the lease of the parking spaces as recommended. All in favor. Possible authorization to prepare feasibility report for 2012 Street Improvement Project Public Works Director Sanders reviewed the streets proposed to be included in the 2012 street improvement project. Mayor Harycki stated the total mileage proposed for 2012 is down from past years. Mr. Sanders indicated that the streets proposed for total reconstruction has no curb and gutter, which adds to the cost of a project. Several Councilmembers asked about Pine Street from Greeley to Third; and Mr. Sanders answered that he thought that would be included in next year's project. Mayor Harycki asked about the possibility of cooperating with Washington County in bidding the street project; and Mr. Sanders replied that he thought the City's project mileage is enough to support bidding alone and that he has talked with the County about cooperative efforts, such as working with the County on crack sealing. Motion by Councilmember Roush, seconded by Councilmember Cook, to adopt Resolution 2011 -162, ordering preparation of report for 2012 Street Improvements (Project 2012 -02). Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None Possible approval of changes to Downtown Facade Improvement Program Amendments and Updates Community Development Director Turnblad explained that the program has generated a lot of interest and resulted in a number of good projects. He reported that staff believes the program is a strong economic development tool, but he offered that only about half of the money the Council allocated to the program has been spent. He suggested that the Page 6ofII City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 recommendation is that the Council eliminates the deadline for application so all of the $500,000 allocated to the program can be spent. He noted that of the seven projects granted loans, three did not start work by the required date of Sept. 1; and that the three owners who did not meet that deadline indicated they had delayed the start of work until the end of the busy summer season. He expressed that staff also is recommending that the deadline for beginning construction be extended until May 1. It was noted the resolution of approval indicates a date of March l; Mr. Turnblad added that he would recommend May 1 due to potential weather issues for construction. Community Development Director Turnblad spoke to the proposed project at 114 E. Chestnut St., which was tabled at the last Council meeting due to a tax delinquency on the property. He pointed out that staff subsequently looked into that issue and found that the property owner has entered a 5 -year repayment plan with the County. The owners of the property have indicated that if the City is still willing to loan the money for the proposed facade project, they would pay the back taxes in a single lump sum, rather than over the five years, and the taxes would be paid before the City issues the loan for the project. City Attorney Magnuson stated that there could be an issue with the deadline extension due to TIF regulations; he suggested adding language to the resolution indicating approval is contingent on review and approval of legal counsel. Councilmember Cook verified that extending the deadline for these three projects would not tie up money that could be utilized for other projects; Mr. Turnblad stated there is still over $200,000 available but added that staff would monitor that situation. Motion by Councilmember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adopt Resolution 2011 -163, approving changes to Downtown Facade Improvement Program, with recommended program amendments with the changes discussed (date of May 1 and legal counsel review). Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None Motion by Councilmember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adopt Resolution 2011 -164, approving funding requests for the fagade renovation loan program for the 114 E. Chestnut St. project, subject to taxes being paid prior to the issuances of any loan money. Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None Discussion of David Paradeau letter Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed Mr. Paradeau is interested in selling portions of three parcels he owns, the properties at issue, and the type of interest Mr. Paradeau has on those properties. He stated Mr. Paradeau would like to sell the properties either to a condominium or hospitality developer or to the City for public use. Mr. Turnblad pointed out that a sale to a condominium or hospitality industry developer would require some major approvals from the City, including a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning. Mr. Turnblad noted that the proposed state trail would have to be realigned in order for the properties to be buildable. Mr. Turnblad informed the Council that the question is whether the Council would support some type of condo or hospitality development; if not, Mr. Paradeau has indicated he will put forth a proposal for City purchase for public use. Page 7 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 Mayor Harycki asked if there is any compelling reason for the City to purchase these properties. Councilmember Menikheim suggested there should be some planning for how to accommodate the thousands of bicyclists who will be coming into town with the development of the state trail; and that he didn't think the City was in any position to respond to Mr. Paradeau until it does some additional planning. City Administrator Hansen pointed out this proposal has been before the Council on several previous occasions; and that there were not compelling reasons before and there are no compelling reasons at this point in time to take any - action. Mr. Hansen reiterated that he shared Councilmember Menikheim's concern about taking any actions too quickly that might impact the DNR's plans. No action was taken. Councilmember Menikheim suggested it might be good to have a presentation about how Lanesboro has dealt with a state trail. Possible approval to give comments to the Mn DNR as they develop the Master Plan for the Browns Creek State Trail Community Development Director Turnblad told the Council that the DNR is in the process of developing a master plan for the state trail. He added that the master plan is something of a guide document that touches on all of the major elements including types of uses; how the trail crosses Manning Avenue; and any other issues of concern. The master plan also will include trail management and implementation plan, and general construction schedule. He stated the DNR hopes to have the master plan in draft form by the end of the month. He reviewed the proposed alignment of the trail in Stillwater. He spoke of an issue regarding the City parking lot at the trail head — whether the City can charge for parking since it maintains the lot — as well as parking /restrooms at the trail location at Brown's Creek Park. He requested comments from Council that they might like to submit to the DNR for consideration in the master plan. Councilmember Cook inquired about the issue regarding the overpass /underpass at Manning Avenue. Councilmember Roush expressed that he has strong feelings regarding the preference for an underpass at Manning, as does the Park Board. Community Development Director Turnblad provided photos of a trail overpass at Highway 36 /Century Avenue and underpass on County Road 12; Councilmember Roush felt the likely design for an overpass was very invasive visually. Councilmember Cook offered that she thought the design was a nice bridge and good way to get over a congested area; however she personally would have more concern, from a safety perspective, with an underpass. Councilmember Menikheim asked about the cost differential between the two crossings; and Councilmember Roush responded that the exact figures aren't known, but an underpass will be slightly more expensive. Public Works Director Sanders added that his only concern with an underpass would be drainage. Regarding usage, Community Development Director Turnblad reported that the Parks Commission recommended that foot and bicycle traffic take priority; if it is possible to Page 8 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 accommodate horses and a full 10' -wide pavement section for pedestrians/bicyclists, the Commission would not want to discount that use, at least as far as Brown's Creek Park. Mayor Harycki asked about winter use; and Mr. Turnblad replied that cross country skiing would work, but the DNR does not plan to groom the trail; use would definitely be limited to non - motorized use. In additional discussion about an overpass /underpass at Manning, Mayor Harycki stated that the Council does not have to deal with the cost issue to comment for the master plan; he added that he would favor an underpass. Councilmember Cook expressed her preference for an overpass. City Administrator Hansen suggested that members forward comment /concerns to Community Development Director Turnblad; and that citizen input be welcomed and forwarded to Mr. Turnblad. Councilmember Polehna expressed that it would be important for all City trails to have access to the state trail; Mr. Turnblad offered that it has already been incorporated in City comments. Mayor Harycki asked about a connection for Millbrook; and Mr. Sanders answered that the City does have a trail easement and trail connections in that area. Police Chief Gannaway expressed that he does quite a bit of cycling, and that most cyclists prefer bridge crossings. Councilmember Roush spoke of the visual impact on adjacent property owners. Councilmember Polehna suggested that a decision of overpass /underpass will be an engineering decision that the Council won't have much say in. In discussion, it was decided to post information on the City web site and direct people who have opinions /concerns regarding the trail and overpass /underpass issue to forward those comments to the contact person at the DNR. Regarding the Council position, Mayor Harycki and Councilmember Roush indicated preference for the underpass, Councilmember Cook in favor of an overpass, and Councilmembers Polehna and Menikheim undecided. Councilmember Roush requested that a vote be taken on the Parks Commission's recommendation for an underpass. Motion by Councilmember Roush, seconded by Mayor Harycki, to approve the resolution in support of that recommendation. Ayes: Councilmember Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: Councilmembers Polehna, Cook, Menikheim Mayor Harycki asked about the possible pedestrian tunnel at Boutwell and Northland and the possibility of a applying for a safety grant to get that project done. Mr. Sanders responded that he would talk with the County about possibly pursing a grant application when federal money becomes available. Request to vacate a portion of a conservation/scenic easement at 725 Reunion Road Community Development Director Turnblad reviewed the request which is to construct a pool /deck/patio within a conservation easement. He explained the easement is required in this PUD for all properties within 1,000 feet of Long Lake; and that the request is simply to Page 9ofII City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 relocate the conservation easement from the rear yard to the front yard. He indicated that the request is consistent with the intent of the PUD as the property is not on the lake. He added that staff recommends approval. Councilmember Roush inquired if this would create a precedent for other properties; and Mr. Turnblad replied that not as long as the City maintains the 50% conservation easement on the property. Motion by Councilmember Roush, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adopt Resolution 2011 -165, vacating a portion of a conservation/scenic easement. Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None Appointment to Water Board Mayor Harycki informed the panel that he and Councilmember Menikheim had interviewed candidates and had talked with Adam Nyberg of the Water Board. He continued that it was the consensus is to appoint George Vania to the Board. Mayor Harycki noted that in conversations with Mr. Nyberg, the Water Board would welcome having a non - voting Councilmember attend meetings to help improve communication. Councilmember Menikheim pointed out that Mr. Nyberg also indicated the Board would be willing to provide quarterly updates to the Council. Councilmembers Menikheim and Cook both expressed an interest in serving as the Council representative to the Water Board; it was decided that Mr. Menikheim would serve as the representative, with Ms. Cook as alternate. Motion by Councilmember Menikheim, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adopt Resolution 2011 -166, approval of George Vania to Board of Water Commissioners and designating Council Representative (non- voting); with Councilmember Menikheim as the Council representative to the Water Board and Councilmember Cook as the alternate representative. Ayes: Councilmembers Cook, Menikheim, Polehna, Roush and Mayor Harycki Nays: None COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS Councilmember Menikheim indicated that he had sent an e -mail regarding the function of the various groups, including the Chamber, IBA, and CVB for formalization of duties moving forward. Councilmember Cook reported that she had received a question regarding the status of the City's contract with the Conach Group and asked whether that had been re- drafted. City Attorney Magnuson answered that there had been some discussions, but a new agreement has not been drafted at this point; and that he anticipates that might be ready around the first of December. ADJOURNMENT City Attorney Magnuson noted the Open Meeting, law provides some right to close meetings that are discretionary and others are required to be closed. Mr. Magnuson explained that this Page 10 of 11 City Council Meeting November 1, 2011 meeting will be closed under Minnesota Statute 14D.05, subd. 2 to consider active investigative data as defined in Minnesota Statute § 13.82 subd. 7. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Cook, to adjourn to Executive Session to discuss data private issues at 8:45 p.m. All in favor. Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk Resolution 2011 -157, directing payment of bills Resolution 2011 -158, approval of contract for actuarial services Resolution 2011 -159, approval of St. Croix Valley Rec Center and Lily Lake Ice Arena Management Agreement with St. Croix Caterers, Inc. Resolution 2011 -160, approval of 2012 Cleaning Services Contract for City Hall with Dave Clark Resolution 2011 -161, Approval of Change Order #2 Main Street Pedestrian Walkway Project Public Restroom. Resolution 2011 -162, ordering preparation of report for 2012 Street Improvements (Project 2012 -02) Resolution 2011 -163, approving changes to Downtown Fagade Improvement Program Resolution 2011 -164, approving funding requests for the fagade renovation loan program for the 114 E. Chestnut St. project Resolution 2011 -165, vacating a portion of a conservation/scenic easement Resolution 2011 -166, approval of George Vania to Board of Water Commissioners and designating Council Representative (non- voting); Ordinance 1041, an ordinance amending the Stillwater City Code, Chapter 41, entitled License, Permits and Prohibitions by addition Standards for certain Seasonal Outdoor Sales. Page 11 of 11 ter IN IINTH PLA CE OF Y /OA EAOTA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING Held at Washington County Government Center — LL 16 Monday, November 7, 2011 SPECIAL MEETING Present: Councilmembers Menikheim, Cook, Roush, and Mayor Harycki Staff present: City Administrator Hansen Fire Chief Glaser Deputy Chief Ballis 6:00 P.M. The City Council met in a special meeting at the Washington County Government Center with members from the Cities of Lake Elmo and Mahtomedi to hear a presentation regarding the feasibility of shared or cooperative Fire and Emergency Services. ADJOURNMENT The meeting ended at 7:45 p.m. Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Larry D. Hansen, Acting City Clerk RESOLUTION 2011 -167 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 $501,012.07 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 15th day of November, 2011. Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F Ward, City Clerk LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Account Temps Ace Hardware Action Rental Allen, Brad American Planning Association Aramark Uniform Services Arrow Building Center Aspen Mills AT &T Bauer Built Briggs and Morgan, P.A. Bryan Rock Buetow & Associates, Inc. Carquest Auto Parts Catco CDW Government, Inc. Century College Century Power Equipment ChloeNoel Skate &Sportswear Comcast Computer Services of Florida Cub Fury Dodge Chrysler Gertens Wholesale Global Risk Innovations Goodin Company Gopher State One Call Hodges Badge Company, Inc. Ice Skating Institute International Code Council, Inc Jefferson Fire & Safety, Inc. Lab Safety Supply, Inc L & D Sign Lennar Lowe's LTG Power Equipment KorTerra Inc. Lake Country Door LLC Lakeview Hospital League of Minnesota Cities League of MN Cities Insurance Trust (0049) Loffler Companies, Inc. Marine Services, Inc. Professional Service Supplies Concrete Reimburse Expenses Deposition APA Membership Michel J Pogge Mats,Uniforms & Towels Supplies to Repair Old PW Garage Boots Telephone Tire Repair on Grader General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Storm Sewer Repair Feasibility study Equipment Repair Supplies Equipment Repair Supplies Web & Email security Public safety instructor Education Classes Tires Uniforms for Resale Telephone Professional Service Election Food Vehicle Maintenance Supplies Spruce & Dogwood Plants Blue card command online class Equipment Repair Supplies Billable Tickets Badges for Skating Show Exhibition Sig Changes Blitzfire nozzle Stair Treads Repair Lights Grading Escrow Refunds Repair Supplies Equipment Repair Supplies Kor Web Ticket Splitting Service Repair Shop Doors Legal Blood Draws MN Cities Stormwater Coalition Contribut LMCIT Insurance Claim Sonciwall Gateway Security& Firewall maint Repairs on Boston Whaler Menards Supplies 5,280.00 557.00 197.72 8.00 404.00 712.48 2,626.01 89.95 273.81 752.39 500.00 424.51 1,462.50 1,263.49 222.84 6,143.50 1,200.00 112.22 33.40 405.45 260.00 61.52 16.46 159.24 1,212.75 72.55 524.45 695.50 25.00 62.30 2,400.00 101.19 1,583.52 7,500.00 30.02 45.90 800.00 88.00 100.00 690.00 1,000.00 6,254.22 647.28 626.25 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Page 2 Metropolitan Council Wastewater Charge December 119,240.94 Miller Excavating Install Sanitary Sewer Manhole 3,935.38 Minvalco, Inc. Honeywell Temperature control 162.90 MN Chiefs of Police Assoc. Permits to Acquire 58.78 MN Dept of Labor & Industry Elevator Annual Operating Public Works 100.00 MN Occupational Health Drug Testing 127.20 MN Pollution Control Agency Voluntary Investigation Cleanup 562.50 MN Wastewater Operators Assoc. Training 60.00 NAPA Auto Parts Diesel Exhaust Fluid 19.19 Nardini Fire Inspections 85.25 Needels Supply, Inc. Caster Mop Bucket 55.56 Office Depot Office Supplies 601.60 Peterson, Craig Reimburse for Parking Deposition 13.00 Pioneer Field Marking Paint 485.70 Plant Health Associates Professional Service 750.00 Practically Connected, Inc. Equipment Repair Supplies 706.40 Quality Flow Systems, Inc. Sewer Chewer 18,126.00 Quill Corporation Copy Paper 95.87 R & R Specialties, Inc. Emission Test 432.50 Riedell Shoes, Inc. Skates for Resale 168.36 River Valley Printing Inc. Business Cards 44.89 Sanders, Shawn Reimburse for APWA Conference 275.00 Simplex Grinnell LP Stillwater Parking Structure 455.29 Sprint PCS Cell Phone 113.66 Sprint Subpoena Compliance MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension 30.00 St. Croix Boat & Packet Co. October Arena Billing, Lowell Inn Ramp Clean 50,643.71 St. Croix Recreation Co. Installation Play Equipment & Shred Wood 2,867.81 Stender, Jeff Reimburse for Parking Mpls Deposition 13.00 Stillwater &Oak Park Heights CVB 3rd Qtr Lodging Tax 53,375.53 Stillwater Motor Company Vehicle Repair 65.69 Stillwater Printers Ice Skating Flyers 1,161.68 Stillwater Rotary Club Membership 4th Qtr 2011 182.50 Stork Twin City Testing Corporation Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test 102.00 Streicher's Police Supplies 376.01 Sun Newspapers Publications 45.10 SW WC Service Cooperatives Cobra and Retirees Health Ins. 55,253.85 T.A. Schifsly & Sons, Inc. Asphalt 568.97 Tessman Co. Supplies 32.06 The Conach Group October Legislative Consulting Services 1,500.00 Toll Gas Acetylene 10.20 Tri State Bobcat, Inc. Equipment Repair Supplies 2,071.84 UPS Freight 11.35 USA Mobility Wireless, Inc. Pagers 47.14 Verizon Wireless Internet & Cell Phones 1,846.58 Visu_Sewer, Inc. Install Short Liner 1,675.00 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Page 3 Washington County Sheriffs Office 3rd qtr MDC's 5,250.00 West Information Charges Professional Service 93.39 Wingfoot Commercial Tire Tires 3,213.40 Wolf Marine, Inc. Propane 461.70 Yocum Oil Company Fuel 10,158.27 Zayo Telephone 568.51 Ziegler Equipment Repair Supplies 142.69 Zoller Rob Reimburse for Supplies for Fire Prev Week 265.45 LIBRARY Ace Hardware Janitorial Supplies 11.49 Aramark Towel & Rug Service 63.21 Baker & Taylor Library Materials 26.79 BWI Books Library Materials 1,287.55 Brodart Library Materials 2,360.39 Cole Information Reference Directory 383.95 Lamb, Linda Refund 133.00 Midwest Tape AV Materials 45.72 Quill Supplies 187.98 Recorded Book Replacement CD's 27.80 Security Response Maintenance Contract 155.67 Washington County Library Library Materials 686.15 Xcel Energy Utilities 3,563.05 ADDENDUM Tim Bell Reimburse for Pack Battery for Equip 106.05 Brine's Partnership LLP Facade Renovation Loan Program 1,340.00 Century Link Telephone 370.24 C. Hassis Lawn Maintenance 899.91 Clarey's Safety Equipment, Inc. Inspection Fire Extinguishers 121.00 Clark, Dan Cleaning City Hail and Public Works 1,057.50 Tom Linhoff Reimburse for Expenses at Conference 218.00 Magnuson Law Firm Professional Services 8,994.16 Metro Fire SCBA FlowTest 75.33 Terra General Contractors Pedestrian Walkway Restroom Application 1 52,152.65 Trans Union LLC New Hire Backgrounds 67.10 Watermain Crossings LLC Facade Renovation Loan Program 39,650.00 Xcel Electricity, Gas 692.56 TOTAL 501,012.07 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Adopted by the City Council this 15th Day of November, 2011 Page 4 LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Account Temps Professional Service 3,520.00 Ace Hardware Supplies 557.00 Action Rental Concrete 197.72 Allen, Brad Reimburse Expenses Deposition 39.88 American Planning Association APA Membership Michel J Pogge 404.00 Aramark Uniform Services Mats,Uniforms & Towels 712.48 Arrow Building Center Supplies to Repair Old PW Garage 2,626.01 Aspen Mills Boots 89.95 AT &T Telephone 273.81 Bauer Built Tire Repair on Grader 754.15 Briggs and Morgan, P.A. General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding 500.00 Bryan Rock Storm Sewer Repair 424.51 Buetow & Associates, Inc. Feasibility study 1,462.50 Carquest Auto Parts Equipment Repair Supplies 1,258.89 Catco Equipment Repair Supplies 222.84 CDW Government, Inc. Web & Email security 6,143.50 Century College Public safety instructor Education Classes 1,200.00 Century Power Equipment Tires 112.22 ChloeNoel Skate &Sportswear Uniforms for Resale 33.40 Comcast Telephone 405.45 Computer Services of Florida Professional Service 260.00 Cub Election Food 61.52 Fury Dodge Chrysler Vehicle Maintenance Supplies 16.46 Gertens Wholesale Spruce & Dogwood Plants 159.24 Global Risk Innovations Blue card command online class 1,212.75 Goodin Company Equipment Repair Supplies 72.55 Gopher State One Call Billable Tickets 524.45 Hodges Badge Company, Inc. Badges for Skating 695.50 Ice Skating Institute Show Exhibition 25.00 International Code Council, Inc Sig Changes 62.30 Jefferson Fire & Safety, Inc. Blitzfire nozzle 2,400.00 Lab Safety Supply, Inc Stair Treads 101.19 L & D Sign Repair Lights 1,592.52 Lennar Grading Escrow Refunds 6,000.00 Lowe's Repair Supplies 30.02 LTG Power Equipment Equipment Repair Supplies 45.90 KorTerra Inc. Kor Web Ticket Splitting Service 800.00 Lake Country Door LLC Repair Shop Doors 88.00 Lakeview Hospital Legal Blood Draws 100.00 League of Minnesota Cities MN Cities Stormwater Coalition Contribut 690.00 League of MN Cities Insurance Trust (0049) LMCIT Insurance Claim 1,000.00 Loffler Companies, Inc. Sonciwall Gateway Security& Firewall maint 6,254.22 Marine Services, Inc. Repairs on Boston Whaler 647.28 Menards Supplies 608.29 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Page 2 Metropolitan Council Wastewater Charge December 119,240.94 Miller Excavating Install Sanitary Sewer Manhole 3,935.38 Minvalco, Inc. Honeywell Temperature control 162.90 MN Chiefs of Police Assoc. Permits to Acquire 58.78 MN Dept of Labor & Industry Elevator Annual Operating Public Works 100.00 MN Occupational Health Drug Testing 127.20 MN Pollution Control Agency Voluntary Investigation Cleanup 562.50 MN Wastewater Operators Assoc. Training 60.00 NAPA Auto Parts Diesel Exhaust Fluid 19.19 Nardini Fire Inspections 85.25 Needels Supply, Inc. Caster Mop Bucket 55.56 Office Depot Office Supplies 543.10 Peterson, Craig Reimburse for Parking & Meals Deposition 22.18 Pioneer Field Marking Paint 485.70 Plant Health Associates Professional Service 750.00 Practically Connected, Inc. Equipment Repair Supplies 706.40 Quality Flow Systems, Inc. Sewer Chewer 18,126.00 Quill Corporation Copy Paper 95.87 R & R Specialties, Inc. Emission Test 432.50 Riedell Shoes, Inc. Skates for Resale 168.36 River Valley Printing Inc. Business Cards 44.89 Sanders, Shawn Reimburse for APWA Conference 275.00 Simplex Grinnell LP Stillwater Parking Structure 455.29 Sprint PCS Cell Phone 113.66 Sprint Subpoena Compliance MN Bureau of Criminal Apprehension 30.00 St. Croix Boat & Packet Co. October Arena Billing, Lowell Inn Ramp Clean 50,643.71 St. Croix Recreation Co. Installation Play Equipment & Shred Wood 2,867.81 Stender, Jeff Reimburse for Parking Mpls Deposition 13.00 Stillwater &Oak Park Heights CVB 3rd Qtr Lodging Tax 53,375.53 Stillwater Motor Company Vehicle Repair 65.69 Stillwater Printers Ice Skating Flyers 1,161.68 Stillwater Rotary Club Membership 4th Qtr 2011 182.50 Stork Twin City Testing Corporation Dynamic Cone Penetrometer Test 102.00 Streicher's Police Supplies 376.01 Sun Newspapers Publications 45.10 SW WC Service Cooperatives Cobra and Retirees Health Ins. 55,253.85 T.A. Schifsly & Sons, Inc. Asphalt 568.97 Tessman Co. Supplies 32.06 The Conach Group October Legislative Consulting Services 1,500.00 Toll Gas Acetylene 10.20 Tousley Ford Vehicle Repairs 1,690.28 Tri State Bobcat, Inc. Equipment Repair Supplies 2,071.84 Ty Custom Design, Inc. City of Stillwater Pins 512.50 UPS Freight 11.35 USA Mobility Wireless, Inc. Pagers 47.14 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2011 -167 Page 3 11.49 Verizon Wireless Internet & Cell Phones 1,846.58 Visu_Sewer, Inc. Install Short Liner 1,675.00 Washington County Sheriffs Office 3rd qtr MDC's 5,250.00 West Information Charges Professional Service 93.39 Wingfoot Commercial Tire Tires 3,213.40 Wolf Marine, Inc. Propane 461.70 Yocum Oil Company Fuel 10,158.27 Zayo Telephone 568.51 Ziegler Equipment Repair Supplies 142.69 Zoller Rob Reimburse for Supplies for Fire Prev Week 265.45 LIBRARY Ace Hardware Janitorial Supplies 11.49 Aramark Towel & Rug Service 63.21 Baker & Taylor Library Materials 26.79 BWI Books Library Materials 1,287.55 Brodart Library Materials 2,360.39 Cole Information Reference Directory 383.95 Lamb, Linda Refund 133.00 Midwest Tape AV Materials 45.72 Quill Supplies 187.98 Recorded Book Replacement CD's 27.80 Security Response Maintenance Contract 155.67 Washington County Library Library Materials 686.15 Xcel Energy Utilities 3,563.05 A Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division g er, e • 444 Cedar St —Suite 133 St. Paul, MN 55101 -5133 mob.: . (651)296 -9519 Fax (651)297 -5259 TTY (651)282 -6555 �I3v - ?w APPLICATION AND PERMIT FOR A TEMPORARY ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE TYPE OR PRINT INFORMATION NA OFQRGANI�A I N DATE ERG IZED TAX EXEMPT NUMBER STREET ADDRESS + CITY kS �7I� STATE ZIP CODE MN 650 NAME F PERSO MAKING APPLICATION 1r� BUSINES PHONE HOME PHONE sl) 3 9- a7 c�aSi �3� -ASV ►1 DATES LIQUO W L B SOLD TYPE OF ORGANIZATION ❑ CLUB OCHARITABLE ORELIGIOUS %OTHER NONPROF ORGANIZATIO FFICER'S NAME AUD S `yl OR IZATIO O CER'S NAME ADDRESS r� �l ORG IZATIOIO FFICER'S NAME ADrAZESS �( e -U 1 Location where license will be used. If an outdoor area, describe Will applicant contract for intoxicating liquor services? If so, give the name and address of the liquor licensee providing the service. NQ Will the applicant carry liquor liability in�s!j nce? If so, the carrier's name and amount of coverage. (NOTE: Insurance is not mandatory.) 1`�tD APPROVAL APPLICATION MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OR COUNTY BEFORE SUB WrMG TO ALCOHOL & GAMBLING ENFORCEMENT CITY /COUNTY City of Stillwater DATE APPROVED CITY FEE AMOUNT $25.00 per day LICENSE DATES DATE FEE PAID SIGNATURE CITY CLERK OR COUNTY OFFICIAL APPROVED Alcohol & Gambling Enforcement Director Note: Do not separate these two parts, send both parts to the address above and the original signed by this division will be returned as the license. Submit to the city or County at least 3o days before the event. PS -09079 (61 RESOLUTION 2011 -168 APPROVING RENEWALS OF ON -SALE, OFF -SALE, CLUB, WINE, WINE WITH STRONG BEER, SUNDAY ON -SALE, ON -SALE 3.2 %, OFF -SALE 3.2 %, MICRO BREWER OFFSALE, MICRO BREWER TAP ROOM LIQUOR LICENSES AND TOBACCO LICENSES FOR 2012 WHEREAS, requests for renewals have been requested by the businesses listed below: and WHEREAS, approval is contingent upon receipt of all required documentation, completion of background investigations, and the fulfillment of all requirements for eligibility to hold a liquor and /or tobacco license in the City of Stillwater and State of Minnesota agencies; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, hereby approves the renewals of the businesses listed below for On -sale, Off -sale, Club, Wine, Win with Strong Beer, Sunday On -sale, On -sale 3.2 %, Off -Sale 3.2% liquor licenses and tobacco licenses for 2011. Acapulco of Stillwater Inc. ol I AW Acapulco Mexican Restaurant 11M ii; ONSALE, SUNDAY Stillwater American Legion #48 American Legion CLUB Aristos LLC Aristos WINE W /SB Brine's Bar & Restaurant, LLC Brine's Bar & Restaurant ONSALE, SUNDAY Chilkoot Cafe & Cyclery, LLC Chilkoot Cafe & Cyclery WINE W /SB SuperValu, Inc. Cub Discount Liquor OFFSALE SuperValu, Inc. Cub Foods 3.2 ONSALE Dock Cafe Corp. Dock Cafe ONSALE, SUNDAY Domacin LLC Domacin Wine Bar WINE W /SB Elephant Walk Inc. Elephant Walk B & B WINE D & D of Minnesota Famous Dave's BBQ ONSALE, SUNDAY Freight House LLC Freight House ONSALE, SUNDAY Hansen's Liquors LLC Hansen's Liquors OFFSALE, TOBACCO EKS Inc. Harbor Bar ONSALE, SUNDAY, TOBACCO Haskell's, Inc. Haskell's OFFSALE, TOBACCO Kwik Trip, Inc. Kwik Trip #415 TOBACCO Lens Family Foods Lens Family Foods TOBACCO Liberty Village Wine & Spirits, Inc. Liberty Wine & Spirits OFFSALE, TOBACCO Lift Bridge Brewing Technologies, LLC Lift Bridge Brewing Company MICRO BREWER OFFSALE, TAP ROOM St. Croix Boat & Packet Co. Lowell Inn ONSALE, SUNDAY Lucky's Station LLC Lucky's Station TOBACCO Lucky's Station LLC Lucky's Station TOBACCO Luna Rosa, Inc. Luna Rossa Trattoria & Wine Bar ONSALE, SUNDAY, OFFSALE Mad Capper Saloon & Eatery Inc. Mad Capper ONSALE, SUNDAY Gartner Studios Mara Mi Cafe WINE W /SB B.A. Mensch, Inc. Marx Wine Bar and Grill ONSALE, SUNDAY Meister, Eileen V. Meister's Bar & Grill ONSALE or tin C & G Suko p, LLC Murasaki WINE W /SB VDR Inc. Nacho Mama's ONSALE, SUNDAY E & K Convenience, Inc. Neighbor Stop TOBACCO TJ Stillwater LLC No -Neck Tony's ONSALE, SUNDAY, 2AM North Hill Liquor Ltd. North Hill Liquor OFFSALE Minnesota Winegrowers Cooperative Northern Vineyards 3.2 ONSALE Oak Glen Limited Ptsp. Oak Glen ONSALE, SUNDAY Beach Blanket Bingo Inc. P.D. Pappy's ONSALE, SUNDAY Roman Market, Inc. Patriot's Tavern ONSALE, SUNDAY Monique's LLC Pub Monique ONSALE, SUNDAY Rafter's LLC Rafters ONSALE, SUNDAY Reve' 324 Inc. Reve' 324 WINE W /SB Oasis Cafe Inc. River Oasis Cafe WINE W /SB Rivertown Inn, LLC Rivertown Inn WINE Shanghai Stillwater LLC Shanghai Bistro ONSALE, SUNDAY, 2AM Bad Latitude, LLC Smalley's Caribbean Barbeque ONSALE, SUNDAY Stillwater Brewing Company, LLC Stillwater Brewers MICRO BREWER OFFSALE, TAP ROOM Stillwater Country Club, Inc. Stillwater Country Club CLUB Stillwater K.C. Hall, Inc. Stillwater K.C. Hall CLUB CWPHRC, Inc. Stillwater Liquors OFFSALE, TOBACCO BPOE Lodge 179 Stillwater Lodge CLUB Durant Schmitt LLC Stillwater's The Green Room ONSALE, SUNDAY, 2AM Vackra Nya Liv, Inc. The Bikery WINE W /SB The Chef s Gallery, LLC The Chef s Gallery WINE W /SB St. Croix Boat and Packet Co. The Grand WINE W /SB The Edge Performance HockeyTraining Center LLC The Lumberyard WINE W /SB Tobacco Market, Inc. Tobacco Market TOBACCO Valley Ridge Smoke Shop, Inc. Valley Ridge Smoke Shop TOBACCO St. Croix Preservation Co., Inc. Water Street Inn ONSALE, SUNDAY, TOBACCO DNR Properties LLC Whitey's ONSALE, SUNDAY, OFFSALE, TOBACCO Yocum Oil Company Yocum's Holiday #3838 TOBACCO Adopted by Council this 15'' day of November 2011. ATTEST: Ken Harycki, Mayor Diane F. Ward, City Clerk PIU11111115Li UtWil MEMORANDUM TO: 11410]31 Mayor & City Council Larry D. Hansen, City Administrator 444,-4- SUBJECT: Veterans' Memorial Contract The Veterans' Memorial contract for the maintenance of the City parking lot by Cub Foods and the historic court house technically expired last July. The veterans group has reorganized and we now have new contact members who are doing a very good job and all the problems of the past are gone. The attached resolution will renew their contract on an annual basis which I think is appropriate for a volunteer organization that can change quickly. RECOMMENDATION: I strongly recommend renewing the existing contract on an annual basis. RESOLUTION NO. 2 011 —1 6 9 WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater is the owner of Riverview Parking Lot and is a party to a Master Agreement with SuperValu, Inc. that was made March 7, 1995; and WHEREAS, an Assignment of the Agreement was executed by the City and SuperValu, Inc. on a trial basis on July 6, 2007, and affirmed on December 31, 2008; and WHEREAS, the City and the Veterans' Memorial Committee desire to extend the Agreement on a year -to -year basis beginning November 2011; and WHEREAS, since the terms of the Agreement and the Assignment do not change as to SuperValu, Inc., the Agreement may be extended on a yearly basis without the consent of SuperValu, Inc. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Assignment made December 31, 2008 be and the same is hereby extended until November 1, 2012, subject to the Assent of the Veterans' Memorial Committee. Adopted by the City of Stillwater this 15 day of November, 201 L CITY OF STILLWATER Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk ASSENT VETERANS' MEMORIAL COMMITTEE By r THE 9IRTHPt.ACE OF MINNESOTA TO: Mayor & Councilmembers FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director DATE: November 10, 2011 RE: Parking Ramp Maintenance Contract BACKGROUND The City has a contract with St. Croix Boat & Packet for cleaning the parking ramp's south elevator tower, stairwell, bathrooms and areas just outside the entrances. The contract expires on December 30, 2011. DISCUSSION When the City last bid this contract the lowest bidder was St. Croix Boat & Packet at $750 a month. The next closest bid was $1,421.44 a month. Based upon the large discrepancy and the good work that St. Croix Boat & Packet has done over the last year, staff would like to offer the contract to St. Croix Boat & Packet again. If the Council concurs, staff will bring a contract back for approval at the first meeting in December. REQUESTED ACTION Authorize staff to negotiate a contract with St. Croix Boat & Packet for parking ramp cleaning services in 2012. bt Stillwater Public Library 224 Third St. N. Stillwater MN 55082 651.275.4338 www.stillwaterlibrary.org To: Mayor and City Council From: Lynne Bertalmio, Library Director Re: 2011 Capital Budget Release — Part IV November 10, 2011 At its monthly meeting on November 8, 2011, the Board of Trustees passed a resolution requesting that the City Council approve the release of funds from the library's 2011 capital budget for the following items from the library's 2011 capital budget plan. Display shelving for the mystery collection $2,500 In 2005 -2006, the library expansion increased the size of the space devoted to the library's mystery collection. However, mysteries are so popular with our patrons that growth in the collection is outstripping available shelving. Also, with a very active mystery book club, the library needs more display shelving in this area. As the mystery collection is housed in the historic portion of the building, the shelving selected will need to match the existing shelving in quality. Laptop computer 1,500 The library will purchase a laptop computer for multiple uses: • A laptop — now aging — is used by staff to consult the catalog and Internet throughout the building via wireless technology. • It is also used in the classes that the library gives on electronic databases. • It is sometimes used by our meeting room clients in conjunction with our data projector. 6 Computers @ $1000 each 6,000 The library's newest computer was purchased in 2008. Many of our computers are therefore reaching the end of their natural life span. In May 2011, the library, together with the Washington County Library, migrated to a new automated integrated library system. The new software, as displayed on our current public service staff computers, is difficult to view and read. We will purchase six new computers with bigger screens for public service staff and move these staff computers to replace the oldest of our computers for the public. Rich Bornt, in consultation with Rose Holman, is advising us on appropriate models of computers. TO: Mayor & Councilmembers I#Jv DATE: ettryber'8, 2011 APPLICANT: City of Stillwater RE: Variance Review Criteria REPORT AUTHOR: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director Sz BACKGROUND During the 2011 legislative session the state law relating to variance review standards was amended. To be consistent with the new law, the city should amend its Zoning Ordinance. DISCUSSION The primary change in the state statute is that the term "hardship" is now eliminated and allows a zoning authority to issue a variance if there are "practical difficulties ". "Practical difficulties" are described in the statute as follows: • "the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control; • the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and • the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality." Attached are both the statutory changes and the first draft of revisions to the city code. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission and City staff recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed code amendment. Attachment: 15 Draft of Ordinance Legislative Version 2011 Session Law for Variances League of Minnesota Cities Brief First Reading ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE STILLWATER CITY CODE CHAPTER 31, ENTITLED ZONING ORDINANCE BY REVISING THE SECTION RELATED TO VARIANCES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER DOES ORDAIN: Re 1p ace. City Code Chapter 31, Section 31 -208, Variance, is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: Sec 31 -208. Variances Variances shall require the following: (a) Purpose. The purpose of the variance is to allow variation from the strict application of the terms of this chapter where, by reason of the exceptional physical characteristics of the property, the literal enforcement of the requirements of this chapter would cause practical difficulties for the landowner. (b) General provisions. In no case may a variance be granted to permit a use or a density other than a use or density permitted in the district. Nonconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance. The planning commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. (c) Procedure. A public hearing must be held by the planning commission. (d) Findings required. The planning commission may grant a variance, but only when all of the following conditions are found: (1) The variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this chapter. (2) The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (3) The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties', as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: (i) The proposed variance is reasonable; (ii) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landowner; and (iii) The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. V Reading Page 2 of 2 Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties. (e) Recurrent conditions. A variance may not be authorized if the community development director finds that the condition of the property or the intended use of the property for which the variance is sought is so general or recurrent in nature that a general regulation for the condition is required. (f) Precedents. A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. (g) Height variances. The city council is the final city authority for deciding upon any request for a height variance that would be more than ten percent greater than the height allowed in this chapter. The planning commission must hold a public hearing on a height variance request and must make a recommendation to the city council on whether the requested variance meets the findings required in Section 31- 208(d). 2. Sa_ vinas In all other ways City Code Chapter 31 will remain in full force and effect. 3. Effective Date This Ordinance will be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Enacted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this day of , 2011. CITY OF STILLWATER Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Diane Ward, City Clerk Legislative Version Sec 31 -208. Variances Variances shall require the following: (a) Purpose. The purpose of the variance is to allow variation from the strict application of the terms of this chapter where, by reason of the exceptional Physical characteristics of the vroverty, sliallow 1 OF the literal enforcement of the requirements of this chapter would involve cause practical difficulties for the landowneroi' uld causeundue ka4 (b) General provisions. In no case may a variance be granted to permit a use or a density other than a use or density permitted in the district. Nonconforming uses or neighboring lands, structures or buildings in the same district or other districts may not be considered grounds for issuance of a variance. The planning commission may impose conditions in the granting of a variance. A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough Proportionality to the impact created by the variance (c) Procedure. A public hearing must be held by the planning commission. (d) Findings required. The planning commission may grant a , may be grant^ but only when all of the following conditions are found: a (1) n i l -'cai `hi „ „1;.,,. t O p ,,.k., e t c4 a by a act of t4i� l Us ti f ^ a vaFiancze.The variance is in harmony with the general «� purposes and intent of this chapter. (2) n t„ . th atie a nd eHoy wel# „c r aiid, i f gr anted, specia • il . ,.t e d h., . ,hh „ „° The variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan. (3) The +1, , >:.,,. of th . - 411 „t b o f su b s t,,,t;�l deti to adjaeeiit pi Mid will not mat&44k impair- 04e puFpase b , ii;tenf of this 4 of th p ;,,t -e n ot ad The applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with this chapter. "Practical difficulties ", as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that all of the following must be found to apply: (i) The proposed variance is reasonable; (ii) The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property and that are not created by the landoxvner; and (iii) - The variance, if granted, v\ not alter the essential character of the neighborhood. Legislative Version Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties (e) Recurrent conditions. A variance may not be authorized if the community development director finds that the condition of the property or the intended use of the property for which the variance is sought is so general or recurrent in nature that a general regulation for the condition is required. (f) Precedents. A previous variance must not be considered to have set a precedent for the granting of further variances. Each case must be considered on its merits. (g) Height variances. The city council is the final city authority for deciding upon any request for a height variance that would be more than ten percent greater than the height allowed in this chapter. The planning commission must hold a public hearing on a height variance request and must make a recommendation to the city council on whether the requested variance meets the findings required in Section 31- 208(d). Chapter 19 - Revisor of Statutes Minnesota Session Laws Page 1 of 2 Search Key: (1) lsmgtiage te be deleted (2) new language 2011, Regular Session This document represents the act as presented to the governor. The version passed by the legislature is the final engrossment. It does not represent the official 2011 session law, which will be available here summer 2011. CHAPTER 19-- H.F.No. 52 An act relating to local government; providing for variances from city, county, and town zoning controls and ordinances;amending Minnesota Statutes 2010, sections 394.27, subdivision 7; 462.357, subdivision 6. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 394.27, subdivision 7, is amended to read: Subd. 7. Variances; hai dship practical difficulties The board of adjustment shall have the exclusive power to order the issuance of variances from the terms requirements of any official control including restrictions placed on nonconformities. Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the official control and when 'll - 0 - ms-ef the winnee variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan. Variances may be granted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the official control. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the rg anting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by an official control; the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner; and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone sha* do not constitute _practical difficulties. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the official controls. No variance may be granted that would allow any use that is prehibiteel not allowed in the zoning district in which the subject property is located. The board of adjustment may impose conditions in the granting of variances tm A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective the day following final enactment. Sec. 2. Minnesota Statutes 2010, section 462.357, subdivision 6, is amended to read: Subd. 6. Appeals and adjustments. Appeals to the board of appeals and adjustments may be taken by any affected person upon compliance with any reasonable https: / /www. revisor .mn.gov /laws / ?id =19 &year =2011 &type =0 5/5/2011 Chapter 19 - Revisor of Statutes conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments has the following powers with respect to the zoning ordinance: (1) To hear and decide appeals where it is alleged that there is an error in any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by an administrative officer in the enforcement of the zoning ordinance. (2) To hear requests for variances from the tees uniy when it is demonshated that stich actions will be in ke*ng vvith the spirit requirements of the zoning_ ordinance including restrictions placed on nonconformities Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general poses and intent of the ordinance and when the variances are consistent with the comprehensive plan Variances maybe ranted when the applicant for the variance establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the zoning ordinance. "Practical difficulties," as used in connection with the granting of a variance, means that the property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted by the zoning ordinance, the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property not created by the landowner-,,• and the variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Economic considerations alone 1+Mff do not constitute ern mtdne hardship if reasvnMbie use f1MT tite rlorcrtY exists Myder tile terms 0 practical difficulties Practical difficulties include but is are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined in section 216C.06, subdivision 14, when in harmony with the ordinance. The board of appeals and adjustments or the governing body as the case may be, may not permit as a variance any use that is not pcnnittccl allowed under the zoning ordinance for property in the zone where the affected person's land is located. The board or governing body as the case may be, may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one family dwelling as a two family dwelling. The board or governing body as the case may be may impose conditions in the granting of variances to instire comphartee and to protect adjacent propert • A condition must be directly related to and must bear a rou h proportionality to the impact created by the variance. EFFECTIVE DATE This section is effective the day following final enactment. https: / /www.revisor.nm.gov /laws / ?id =19 &year =2011 &type =0 Page 2 of 2 5/5/2011 2 O® of CONNECTING & INNOVATING j�INNESOTA SINCE 1913 CITIES 2011 Variance Legislation The changes, which are now in effect, may require some cities to change ordinances or statutory cross - references. After a long and contentious session working to restore city variance authority, the final version of HF 52 supported by the League and allies was passed unanimously by the Legislature. On May 5, Gov. Dayton signed 2011 Minnesota Laws, Chapter 19, amending Minnesota Statutes, section 462.357, subdivision 6 to restore municipal variance authority in response to Krummenacher v. City of Minnetonka, 783 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. June 24, 2010). The law also provides consistent statutory language between Minnesota Statutes, chapter 462 and the county variance authority of Minnesota Statutes, section 394.27, subdivision 7. In Krummenacher, the Minnesota Supreme Court narrowly interpreted the statutory definition of "undue hardship" and held that the "reasonable use" prong of the "undue hardship" test is not whether the proposed use is reasonable, but rather whether there is a reasonable use in the absence of the variance. The new law changes that factor back to the "reasonable manner" understanding that had been used by some lower courts prior to the Krummenacher ruling. The new law was effective on May 6, the day following the governor's approval. Presumably it applies to pending applications, as the general rule is that cities are to apply the law at the time of the decision, rather than at the time of application. Learn More Read more about variances in: The new law renames the municipal variance standard from "undue hardship" to "practical difficulties," but otherwise retains the familiar three - factor test of (1) reasonableness, (2) uniqueness, and (3) essential character. Also included is a sentence new to city variance authority that was already in the county statutes: "Variances shall only be permitted when they are in harmony with the general purposes and intent of the ordinance and when the terms of the variance are consistent with the comprehensive plan." In addition, the new law clarifies that conditions may be imposed on granting of variances if those conditions are directly related to and bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. Consult your attorney for advice concerning specific situations. Land Use Variances: Frequently Asked Questions LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 145 UNIVERSITY AVE. WEST PHONE: (651) 281 -1200 PAx (651) 281 - 1298 INSURANCE TRUST ST. PAUL, MN 55103 -2044 TOLL FREE: (800) 925-1122 WEB: W W W.LMc.ORG In evaluating variance requests under the new law, cities should adopt findings addressing the following questions: • Is the variance in harmony with the purposes and intent of the ordinance? • Is the variance consistent with the comprehensive plan? • Does the proposal put property to use in a reasonable manner? • Are there unique circumstances to the property not created by the landowner? • Will the variance, if granted, alter the essential character of the locality? Some cities may have ordinance provisions that codified the old statutory language, or that have their own set of standards. For those cities, the question may be whether you have to first amend your zoning code before processing variances under the new standard. A credible argument can be made that that the statutory language pre -empts inconsistent local ordinance provisions. Under a pre - emption theory, cities could apply the new law immediately without necessarily amending their ordinance first. In any regard, it would be best practice for cities to revisit their ordinance provisions and consider adopting language that mirrors the new statute. Attached are a collection of sample documents reflecting the 2011 variance legislation. The attached samples include a draft ordinance, application form, and findings of fact template. While the attached materials may contain provisions that could serve as models in drafting your own documents, your city attorney would need to review prior to council action to tailor to your city's needs. Your city may have different ordinance requirements that need to be accommodated. If you have questions about how your city should approach variances under this new statute, you should discuss it with your city attorney or contact Jed Burkett, LMC land use attorney, at jburkett a)lmc.org or (651) 281 -1247, or Tom Grundhoefer, LMC general counsel, at tgrundho @lmc.org or (651) 281 -1266. Jed Burkett 06/11 2 a' water P H Memo Community Development Department To: City Council From: Michel Pogge, City Planner oA Date: Thursday, November 10, 2011 Re: Browns Creek State Trail Grade separated crossing at Manning Avenue Message: The Council requested additional information related to a grade separated crossing at Manning Avenue for the new Browns Creek State Trial. Specifically the Council required information on user preferences on overpasses vs underpasses. Staff made inquires to the MN DNR, the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center at the University of North Carolina, and conducted internet searches. At this time no specific survey could be found that quantified user preferences on one type of crossing over the other. Many of the reports noted that users were generally neutral on the type of crossing (overpasses vs underpasses) and other factors such as ability of the user, change in grade required to create the grade separated crossing, and overall design played a role in user preference. Attached is additional detail on this. At this point the DNR plans to identify in the Master Plan that a grade separated crossing at Manning Avenue is needed due to current traffic speeds and volumes on Manning Avenue. While the DNR has not definitively decided, they likely will not identify the type of grade separated crossing (overpass or underpass) that should be built across Manning Avenue in the Master Plan and leave it open for further discussions. Next Open House and Release of the Master Plan In talking with the DNR, they anticipate the master plan for the trail will be released to the Public on December 1St. Copies of the plan will be available on the DNR's website at http: / / www. dnr.state.mn.us/ input/ mgmtplans/ trails/ browns_creek.html Additionally, the DNR just announced that the second open house on the trail master plan will take place on Wednesday December 7, 2011 from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. at the Stillwater Public Library, 224 Third St. North. The purposed of this open house will be to review the draft master plan. Comments on the draft plan will be accepted for a minimum of 30 days after the plan is released. From the desk of... Michel Pogge, AICP - City Planner - City of Stillwater - 216 N. 4 11, Street - Stillwater, MN 55082 651.430 -8822 -Fax: 651.430 -8810 -email: mpogge @ci.stillwater.mn.us UNDERPASS VS. BRI Safety Convenience User Experience Resident Impact Environmental Impact Aesthetics Constructability Cost al r� �r P# AWN • W: GN Clear Advantage Neutral Clear Disadvantage Disadvantages: They require longer approaches to achieve the standard 17 feet (5.1 m) of clearance over most roadways. With an additional structural depth of 3 feet (0.9 m), the total rise will be 20 feet (6 m). At 5 percent, this will require a 400 foot (120 m) approach ramp at each end, for a total of 800 feet (240 m). This can be alleviated if there are opportunities to take advantage of the natural terrain, such as where the roadway is built in a cut section (Figure A1.8). FIGURE A1.8 Overcrossing Configurations 3 ft (0.9 m) 3ft(0.9m) - 200 ft (60 m) - - - - -* (NOT TO SCALE) 3 f (0.9 m) 40ft(12m) A8 Appendix A Part I. Design and Engineering Guidelines C. Design Guidelines There are advantages and disadvantages to both over - crossings and under - crossings. for Bicycle Facilities Under- crossings Advantages: They often provide an opportunity to reduce approach grades, as (continued) the required 10 foot (3 m) clearance is less than the clearance required for crossing over a roadway. There may be occasions where the roadway is elevated and an undercrossing can be constructed with little or no grade. They are gener- ally less expensive to build. Disadvantages: They often present security problems, due to reduced visibility. An open, well - lighted structure may end up costing as much as an over - crossing. They may require drainage if the sag point is lower than the surrounding terrain. Over - crossings Advantages: They are more open and present fewer security problems. Disadvantages: They require longer approaches to achieve the standard 17 feet (5.1 m) of clearance over most roadways. With an additional structural depth of 3 feet (0.9 m), the total rise will be 20 feet (6 m). At 5 percent, this will require a 400 foot (120 m) approach ramp at each end, for a total of 800 feet (240 m). This can be alleviated if there are opportunities to take advantage of the natural terrain, such as where the roadway is built in a cut section (Figure A1.8). FIGURE A1.8 Overcrossing Configurations 3 ft (0.9 m) 3ft(0.9m) - 200 ft (60 m) - - - - -* (NOT TO SCALE) 3 f (0.9 m) 40ft(12m) A8 z Appendix A Part I: Design and Engineering Guidelines C. Design Guidelines A stop sign should be placed about 5 ft. before the intersection. Direction flow for Bicycle Facilities should be treated either with physical separation or a center line approaching the intersection for the last 100 feet. (continued) If the street is above four or more lanes or two /three lanes without adequate gaps, a median refuge should be provided in the middle of the street crossed. The refuge should be 8 feet at a minimum, 10 feet is desired. Another potential design option for street crossings is to slow motor vehicle traffic approaching the crossing through such techniques as speed bumps in advance of the cross- ing, or a painted or textured crosswalk. C1 B(5) STRUCTURES The minimum total width of off - street path structures should be the same as the approach paved path, including a minimum 2 foot (0.6 m) shy distance on both sides. For example, a 10 foot (3 m) wide path requires a 14 foot (4.2 m) wide structure (Figure Al .2). This applies for both overcrossings and under- crossings. The overhead clearance of an under - crossing should be at least 10 feet (3 m). An 8 foot (2.4 m) minimum may be allowable with good horizontal and verti- cal clearance, so users approaching the structure can see through to the other end. Undercrossings should be as visually open as possible for the safety and personal security of bicyclists and pedestrians (Figure Al .7). Illumination must be provided in areas of poor daytime and nighttime visibility. FIGUREA1.7 UndercrossingConfigurdtions 3ft(09m) ft _a_�:�c_n— M) Si 10f (3.0 m) "15 Y 260 ft (78 m) (NOT TO SCALE) 3ft(09m) 6.5 ft 10 ft (3.0 m) 130 ft (39 m) (NOT TO SCALE) i <...._..._. 26 ft (7.8 m) ._. 3ft(09 m) m 13 ft " i. -F a ___. _._........ ..._.. ............. .__J (3.9 m) 10 ft (3.0 m) A7 Appendix A Part I: Design and Engineering Guidelines FIGURE A1.5 Off - Street Path Adjacent to Trees path I root barrier asphalts aggregate Vegetation Off - street paths built along streams and in wood- ed areas present special problems. Vegetation can begin to encroach on a path in a single growing season, and the roots of shrubs and trees can pierce through the path surfacing and cause it to bubble up and break apart in a short period of time. Preventive methods include: regular removal of vegetation, realignment of the path away from trees, and placement of root barriers (a 12 inch [300 mm] deep metal shield) along the edge of the path (Figure Al. 5). CIB(3) GRADES Based on AASHTO recommendations and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements, 5 percent should be considered the maximum grade allowable for off - street paths. A grade of 10 percent is allowed under AASHTO guidelines for distances of up to 500 ft., provided there is good horizontal align- ment and sight distance, but an exception to the ADA standards will be needed. C1B(4) CROSSINGS Grade Separated Crossings When the decision to construct a off - street path has been made, grade separa- tion should be considered for all crossings of thoroughfares, particularly for free- way ramp crossings, as most path users expect continued separation from traffic. At -grade crossings introduce conflict points. The greatest conflicts occurs where paths cross freeway entrance and exit ramps. Motor vehicle drivers using these ramps are seeking opportunities to merge with other motor vehicles; they are not expecting bicyclists and pedestrians to appear at these locations. However, grade- separated crossings should minimize the burden for the user, and not, for example, require a steep uphill and /or winding climb. At -grade Crossings When a grade- separated crossing can- not be provided, the optimum at- grade crossing has either light traffic or a traffic signal that trail users can activate (Figure Al. 6). If a signal is provided, signal loop detectors may be placed in the pavement to detect bicy- cles if they can provide advance detec- tion, and a pedestrian- actuated button provided (placed such that cyclists can press it without dismounting.) A6 FIGURE A1.6 At -Grade Crossing of a Thoroughfare with a Median Island Chapter 6: Bridges, Over /Underpasses, Rest Areas and Shuttle Sites 179 required on a daily, 24 -hour basis. For tunnels longer than 15 m (50 ft), constant illumination is recommended. All lighting should be recessed and vandal resistant. Providing skylights in the middle of the structure (an opportunity occurring with an overhead urban section roadway with a raised median) can reduce lighting needs during daylight hours. See Section 5 -8 for more information on lighting. 6 -7.0 Rest Areas and Overlooks structures add interest to the route and serve as points of reference. Interpretive signs installed at natural or historical points of interest serve to educate path users. Locations already offering services, such as restaurants and museums, tend to attract bicyclists and are natural locations for rest areas. Sheltered, sunny spots can offer better climactic conditions and increase the length of the bicycling season. Rest areas and overlooks can offer Figure 6 -7: Example of a rest area with interpretive signage a more pleasant experience if exposure to wind and noise levels is mitigated. Planting trees and shrubs is the most aesthetically pleasing way to create windbreaks. Spruces, firs, and cedars, with their full bases, form a more wind resistant grove than trees with higher branching patterns. Reduce the ambient noise level on a bikeway located near freeways, boulevards, or industries by installing acoustic screens, such as earth berms or low walls. Avoid creating an environment where bicyclists or pedestrians might feel isolated and vulnerable. Ideally, on a recreational bikeway, there should be a rest area every 5 km (3 mi). Access routes from the path to rest areas should be clearly marked and lead directly to bicycle parking, in order to prevent bikes being locked to trees, shrubs, and other vulnerable objects. Rest stops may be equipped with tables or benches, secure parking facilities, waste receptacles, and trail literature. Access to restrooms and drinking water for bicyclists is desirable. At major March 2007 MWDOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual 178 Chapter 6: Bridges, Over /Underpasses, Rest Areas and Shuttle Sites An underpass may have less grade change for a bicyclist to negotiate than an overpass because a typical overpass requires a 5.2 m (17 ft) vertical clearance over the highway. A disadvantage is that unless it is well located and openly designed, it maybe intimidating and avoided by bicyclists and pedestrians. Providing adequate drainage may also be a problem; providing a surface that does not become excessively slippery when wet is important. Proper drainage design is a key element to prevent wet silt deposits that are a common hazard for bicyclists using underpasses. The inclusion of gutters at the edge of the underpass and the base of a retaining wall are good design elements to ensure a clear riding surface. Underpasses are usually constructed of pre -cast concrete in a shape having the proper vertical and horizontal clearances. See Figure 6 -6. Figure 6 -6: Example of precast concrete underpass with adequate vertical clearance The horizontal and vertical alignments in an underpass should be straight for the full length and for an adequate distance on each approach. The minimum width of an underpass for bicyclists and pedestrians should be 3.6 m (12 ft), or the paved width of the approach path plus 0.6 m (2 ft), whichever is greater. The recommended width of an underpass is 4.2 m (14 ft), which allows several users to pass one another safely. Greater width may be justified in areas with many potential users or at a location where there is an event - clearing peak demand. The recommended vertical clearance is 3 m (10 ft) for a pedestrian /bicycle underpass. If access for emergency vehicles is not required, vertical clearance for bicyclists shall be at least 2.4 m (8 ft). Underpass design and layout should carefully consider its location and user safety. Visibility through a tunnel and adequate lighting enhance users' perception of personal safety. When the underpass is long (e.g., when traversing a four -lane road), wider or flared openings are recommended to improve natural lighting and visibility. Channeling with fences or walls into a tunnel should be evaluated for safety. If it is likely that bicyclists and pedestrians will avoid the underpass and try to cross the road or railway in unsafe conditions, barrier fencing or visual screening with dense vegetation may be needed to help direct users to the underpass. Approaches and grades should provide the maximum possible field and range of vision toward the underpass, for both bicyclist and pedestrian. For short underpasses or tunnels, modest lighting may be all that is required. Generally, the longer the structure, the greater the need for illumination. In certain cases, lighting may be Mn /DOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual March 2007 Chapter 6: Bridges, Over /Underpasses, Rest Areas and Shu Sites 177 6 -6.0 Bicycle and Pedestrian Underpasses and Tunnels March 2007 MWDOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual A bikeway underpass should be considered if there is no safe and direct on- street crossing, if the facility to be crossed is elevated, if an existing motor vehicle under - crossing is too narrow for a bicycle facility, and when the underpass would not require bicyclists to negotiate significant elevation changes. Underpass costs may be lower than those for overpasses. Figure 6 -5: Bikeway under an existing bridge structure 176 Chapter 6: Bridges, Over /Underpasses, Rest Areas and Shuttle Sites Overpasses require railings for both bicyclists and pedestrians. The railing height for bicyclists shall be 1.4 m (4.5 ft) from the overpass deck, with a pedestrian handrail at a height of 1.1 m (3.5 ft). Where a bicycle /pedestrian overpass crosses a roadway or railway, 2.4 m (8 ft) high protective screening shall be used to prevent objects from being thrown off the bridge. Refer to Section 6 -3.2 for guidance on bicycle /pedestrian railings and protective screening. Structures designed for pedestrian live loads are satisfactory for bicycles. The Mn /DOT LRFD Bridge Design Manual (Section 3.4.4, Pedestrian Live Load) specifies that bridges carrying only bicycle /pedestrian traffic should be designed with a live load intensity of 0.085 ksf. However, if maintenance and emergency vehicles may need access to the overpass, the structure must be designed for the vehicle load. 6 -5.0 Bikeways Under Existing Bridge Structures approaches. Figure 6 -5 provides examples of locations, separations, and widths for modifying existing roadway facilities to accommodate a bikeway. The bikeway and /or sidewalk width should be continuous under the highway structure. It is preferred that bikeways have a width of 3 m (10 ft), but a 2.4 m (8 ft) width may be allowable for short segments. Where access for emergency vehicles is necessary, vertical clearances shall be a minimum of 3 m (10 ft). Where access for emergency vehicles is not needed, vertical clearances over the bikeway shall be a minimum of 2.4 m (8 ft). Figure 6.4: Example of bikeway under an existing bridge structure A full engineering and design analysis is required for every proposed bikeway under an existing bridge structure. Mn /DOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual March 2007 Chapter 6: Bridges, Over /Underpasses, Rest Areas and Shuttle Sites 175 • When vehicular bridges do not provide bicycle route continuity and directness. The design of a bicycle and pedestrian overpass shall consider requirements for grade, turning radius, width, cross slope, and speed. In some cases, for the safety of all types of traffic, the bicycle design speed may need to be reduced from the approaching bikeway. The profile across a bridge should follow a smooth line with no sharp changes in grade over the piers. To ensure the safety of users of all ability and skill level, bicycle and pedestrian overpasses should be designed in accordance with the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities (1999), the AASHTO Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges and the Mn /DOT LRFD Bridge Design Manual. ADA standards for accessible design are also applicable, but, for the most part, those have been incorporated into AASHTO standards, since accessible design benefits bicyclists and able- bodied pedestrians as well as those with mobility impairments. The recommended minimum width of an overpass for bicyclists and pedestrians is 3.6 m (12 ft), or the paved width of the approach path plus 0.6 m (2 ft), whichever is greater. The desirable width of an overpass is the width of the approach path plus 1.2 m (4 ft). The bridge width is measured from the face of handrail to face of handrail. Carrying the clear areas across the structure provides necessary horizontal shy distance from the railing and provides maneuvering space to avoid conflicts with pedestrians and oncoming bicyclists. Access by emergency, patrol, and maintenance vehicles should be considered when establishing vertical and horizontal clearances. The path's shoulder width should taper as necessary to match the overpass width (if applicable). Greater width may be appropriate in heavily traveled urban corridors, and near university campuses or near facilities that have pedestrian event - clearing peaks. When physical constraints limit the width of a bicycle /pedestrian overpass, it may be necessary to provide a substandard width. In very rare instances, a reduced width of 2.4 m (8 ft) may used, but only where all of the following conditions occur: • Bicycle traffic is expected to be low, even on peak days or during peak hours. • Only occasional pedestrian use of the facility is expected. • Horizontal and vertical alignment will provide safe and frequent passing opportunities. • Normal maintenance vehicle loading conditions or widths will not exceed the bridge design parameters. 0 State Aid funds are not being used on the project. The vertical clearance from the pavement to any overhead object on an overpass shall be a minimum of 2.4 m (8 ft) for bicyclists, but 2.7 m (10 ft) vertical clearance may be appropriate to accommodate occasional maintenance or security vehicles using the overpass. The vertical clearance of the bottom of the overpass structure over a street or highway is typically at least 5.2 m (17 ft), but requirements must be verified on a case -by -case basis. The access ramps for bicycle /pedestrian overpasses must meet ADA design standards, for which the preferred maximum grade is 5 percent (20:1). However, grades up to 8.33 percent (12:1) are permitted if a platform 1.5 m (5 ft) long is provided between each 0.75 m (2.5 ft) change in elevation. A 1.8 m (6 ft) clear flat platform is to be provided at the bottom of each ramp. March 2007 Mn /DOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual 174 Chapter 6: Bridges, Over /Underpasses, Rest Areas and Shuttle Sites Mn /DOT has developed a bicycle railing attachment to the Type F barrier for use when bridge shoulders carry a bicycle route. (See Bridge Details Manual Part II, Figure 5- 397.158.) This railing may be applied to other traffic barriers where the same or greater offset distance to the face of metal rail is provided and the post attachment has the same or greater strength. If the bridge is over a roadway or railroad, protective screening or fencing to a height of 1.8 to 2.4 m (6 to 8 ft) is required to prevent objects from being thrown onto the roadway below. Mn /DOT policy requires a protective screening system to be incorporated into the railing on new bridges, or when railings are replaced on existing bridges. The standard height for protective screening is 2.4 m (8 ft). The protective screening shall not allow passage of objects greater than 150 mm (6 in). 6 -4.0 Bicycle and Pedestrian Overpasses A shared -use bridge structure allows bicyclists and pedestrians to cross busy roadways, railways, or bodies of water to reach popular destinations. Preferred applications for bicycle /pedestrian overpasses include: • Locations that would otherwise be difficult or impossible to cross (freeways, rivers, railroads, etc.) Connecting schools to neighborhoods over high - volume, high -speed arterial roadways where signalized crossings are more than 137.5 m (450 ft) apart • When a reasonably direct on -road alignment is not available, or the Figure 6 -3: direct on -road connection is Example of creative use of an overpass for non - perceived by the public to be motorized users unsafe • When bicyclists and pedestrians would otherwise be required to negotiate a significant change in elevation Mn /DOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual March 2007 Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines Chapter 3— Off - Street Facilities Bicycle Facility Types Grade Separated Crossings - Tunnels and underpasses may present a number of trade -offs that need to be examined. Personal safety and security is an extremely important factor in determining whether or not a tunnel is the right type of grade separation. Engineers must also consider soil strength in addition to bedrock and groundwater elevation. A community may want to look at other routes/ options before installing expensive tunnels. Above: This grade separated underpass in Victoria, BC along the Galloping Goose Trail is a great example of how to use public art to prevent graffiti. Above: This trail underpass in Adelaide, Australia is very narrow and trail users must make an abrupt turn at the end of the tunnel. Often called cattle passes, this type of design is not recommended. Box culverts may be used if they are at least 12 feet wide, 10 feet tall, and well lit. Above: This trail underpass in Davis, California is an excellent example of a wide and safe grade separated crossing. Above: This tunnel was recently constructed along a trail in Deventer, Netherlands. The trail passes underneath a busy roadway with truck traffic. Above: This trail in Wroclaw, Poland has an excellent access ramp with crosswalk markings to denote the pedestrian and bicycle conflict zone. The dark and graffiti filled underpass however, does not look as inviting. Tunnel design must address personal safety/ security concerns such as lighting and sight lines. Page 26 Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines Bicycle Facility Types Chapter 3— Off - Street Facilities Grade Separated Crossings - Crossings must consider safety and security, must be lit, and should be wide enough to make users feel comfortable. All crossings must be at least 12 feet wide and have at least 10 feet of vertical clearance to allow for emergency and maintenance vehicles. When an approaching trail is wider than 12 feet the crossing width should match. Page 25 Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines Chapter 3— Off - Street Facilities Bicycle Facility Types Grade Separated Crossings - Physical barriers discourage bicycling. Physical barriers are typically major highways or freeways, rivers, railroad corridors, and steep hills. To remove these barriers it may be appropriate to construct an exclusive bicycle and pedestrian crossing. A crossing can be a bridge or tunnel. Although cost effectiveness is important, safety is the most important factor when determining the need for a new bicycle /pedestrian crossing. Not providing a safe and direct route may result in bicyclists taking unnecessary risks and may result in crashes and injuries. Because of the expense of a bicycle and pedestrian crossing the following criteria should be considered to minimize the number of crossings constructed across the city: • The crossing needs to be constructed in a spot that will maximize pedestrian and bicycle use. The most direct route should be pursued if possible. An origin destination study may be helpful in placing a crossing. • The number of barrier crossings per mile should be evaluated. Several alignment alternatives should be explored before it is concluded that a crossing is needed. There may be a nearby at -grade crossing that could be improved to accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians. • Existing underutilized or abandoned crossings should be repaired or retrofitted if practical to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. • Employment and population density near the proposed crossing needs to be considered to help justify the investment. • Community input should be gathered to determine need and to minimize neighborhood visual impact. In some cases a signature bridge or tunnel may help enhance the character of the neighborhood. • Crossings should be constructed to accommodate both bicycles and pedestrians. Right (From Top to Bottom): Martin Sabo Bridge, Loring Bikeway, Dinkytown Bikeway Connection (Bridge 9),1 -394 Pedestrian/Bicycle Bridge /Ramp, Stone Arch Bridge Page 24 Bicycle Facility Design Bicyclist Considerations Guidelines Chapter 2— Design Factors Types of Users and Types of Trips—Minneapolis streets and trails serve a diverse group of users. Every bicyclist has different skills and abilities and it is important to design a network of facilities that meet all bicyclists needs. Specific design treatments are suggested below. A Riders: AASHTO "A" riders are adults comfortable riding on all streets and are capable of riding in most conditions. Although "A" riders often ride with traffic and take the most direct route possible; good street and trail design is critical. It is important to make sure that all streets and trails are properly designed and maintained so that every street is suitable for biking. Bicycle lanes on major roadways and wide trails with plenty of passing room make cycling safer and more comfortable for this user group. In addition to bike lanes, innovative treatment such as bicycle detection at signals, bike boxes, destination and way - finding signage, and colored pavement markings may be considered to serve this user group. Wide outside lanes help vehicles and bicyclists safely pass and are recommended when there is not enough room for bike lanes. B Riders: AASHTO `B" riders are adults that are comfortable riding with traffic but prefer routes that have less vehicle traffic and greater separation from motorists. Bicycle lanes and shared use pavement markings help this user group feel more comfortable on busier streets. In corridors where a bike lane can not be installed along a major roadway, a bicycle boulevard may be considered on an adjacent street. Most cyclists in this group are comfortable riding with traffic on local streets. C Riders: AASHTO "C" riders consist of children, seniors, and vulnerable adults who are only comfortable riding on trails, sidewalks, and local streets. This is one of fastest growing segments of the population and thought must be given on how to safely design streets and trails to accommodate this user group. In many cases a bicycle is the sole form of transportation for many children and seniors. It is recommended that trails be designed wide enough to allow slower bicyclists to better mix with faster bikers and that busy intersections be designed with seniors and children in mind. When designing bicycle facilities it is important to keep sightlines clear since children tend to be more difficult to see. In addition, parents with children often have trailers, and seniors tend to travel more slowly. Page 7 Bicycle Facility Design Guidelines Chapter 2— Design Factors Bicyclist Considerations Types of Users and Types of Trips —Every bicyclist has different skills and abilities. Some adult bicyclists prefer to ride on- street with traffic and others prefer to ride on designated facilities like off - street trails and on- street bike lanes. As AASHTO suggests, children and seniors have different needs and also require consideration. The Mn/DOT Bikeway Facility Design Manual addresses the various user needs and will be referenced throughout this document. There are a number of categories of bicyclists based on the types of trips taken. Both recreational and commuter bicycling (trips to work) is on the rise throughout the city and has been well documented. The City of Minneapolis has worked hard over the years to develop and market facilities that serve commuter bicyclists. Similarly the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board (MPRB) has created an excellent network of routes and complimentary programming with recreational users in mind. Utilitarian bicycling (functional bicycling trips) is much tougher to track, but offers a great deal of potential. Many residents are now considering bicycling as a means of transportation to complete short trips to retail and commercial nodes to complete errands. This design guidelines will attempt to serve all types of bicyclists for all types of trips. Above: Stone Arch Bridge Advanced or experienced riders are generally using their bicycles as they would a motor vehicle. They are riding for convenience and speed and want direct access to destinations with a minimum of detour or delay. They are typically comfortable riding with motor vehicle traffic; however, they need sufficient operating space on the traveled way or shoulder to eliminate the need for either themselves or a passing vehicle to shift position. Basic or less confident adult riders may also be using their bicycles for transportation purposes, e.g., to get to the store or to visit friends, but prefer to avoid roads with fast and busy motor vehicle traffic unless there is ample roadway width to allow easy overtaking by faster motor vehicles. Thus, basic riders are comfortable riding on neighborhood streets and shared use paths and prefer designated facilities such as bike lanes or wide shoulder lanes on busier streets. Page 6 Children, riding on their own or with their parents, may not travel as fast as their adult counterparts but still require access to key destinations in their com- Above: AASHTO defines three major user groups; A, B, and C munity, such as schools, convenience stores and recreational facilities. Resi- riders. The City of Minneapolis dential streets with low motor vehicle speeds, linked with shared use paths and provides an assortment of facility busier streets with well - defined pavement markings between bicycles and mo- types to meet the diverse needs of for vehicles, can accommodate children without encouraging them to ride in the community. the travel lane of major arterials. Page 6 i Ad ministration Memorandum To: Mayor & City Council From: Diane Ward, City Clerk Date: 11/8/2011 Re: New Tobacco License An application has been received requesting a new tobacco license from Valley Ridge Smoke Shop to be located at 1250 Frontage Road (Valley Ridge Mall), Suite 1300. Approval for the license should be contingent upon approval by Police, Finance, Fire, and Building Departments. ACTION REOUIRED: If Council desires the tobacco license they should pass a motion to adopt a resolution approving the issuance of a new tobacco license to Valley Ridge Smoke Shop, Inc. APPROVING THE ISSUANCE OF A NEW TOBACCO LICENSE TO VALLEY RIDGE SMOKE SHOP, INC. WHEREAS, an application has been received requesting the issuance of a new tobacco license to Valley Ridge Smoke Shop, Inc.; and WHEREAS, all required forms have been submitted and fees paid. NOW THEREFORE, BE IF RESOLVED that the City Council of Stillwater, Minnesota, hereby approves the issuance of a new tobacco license conditioned upon approval by Police, Fire, Building Inspection and Finance Departments. Adopted by Council this 15` day of November, 2011 Ken Harycki, Mayor Attest: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk a ter - E B I R 7 NN P L A E 0 f- h! i M N is � £I 1 /! \ MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council CC: Larry Hansen, City Administrator Shawn Sanders Public Works Director/ City Engineer FROM: Tim Moore, Assistant Superintendant of Public Works l DATE: October 13, 2011 SUBJECT: Possible Purchase John Deere 2720 Utility Tractor, Cab and Snow Blower Background Currently the City of Stillwater owns a Toro 7610 Grounds master mower /blower used for Park Maintenance. This piece of equipment has seen very little utilization because of its size and durability. With two zero turn mowers used during the summer, a third zero turn mower is not needed. The size, ground speed and lack of commercial grade attachments has not enabled the Grounds master to be used efficiently due to break downs, travel time between areas and inability to handle deep and wet snow. This piece of equipment has +/- 400 hrs and is used mostly in the winter for clearing sidewalks and trails. It is not unusual for multiple breakdowns in a snow season which limits effectiveness of the Department. It is proposed that a newer piece of equipment be purchased that would increase our utilization and efficiency. Discussion Staff has been looking at purchasing a smaller more maneuverable John Deere tractor that would be better suited for park maintenance. It can handle the needs for parks, sidewalks, trails and parking ramp maintenance activities. It could be used for seeding, fertilizing, mowing trails, grading smaller gravel lots grooming infields and clearing snow from sidewalks and trails. Public Works has demoed a John Deere 2720 tractor and found the attachments needed to be compatible with what we already own for the bigger John Deere 4720 purchased last year. Because of the current market a good quality used tractor in this class cannot be located. Additionally, there is interest in the Toro 7610 with the upcoming winter season from contractors clearing small commercial areas. Recommendation Two quotes were received and both came in below State Bid Contract. Staff recommends purchasing a John Deere 2720 with cab and Blower from Frontier Ag & Turf, New Richmond for $23699.00. With a trade value of $16,000.00 on the Toro, the total cost of the purchase is $7699.00, not including tax. Funds from this tractor purchase would come from Parks Capital Outlay. A W"r-� A 0. �� 44.41. I—X Before changl Market value honie d credit (MVHC' Qualifying homeowners receive a state - f AX CRED[Ton their property tax bill that reduces the amount of property tax they are required to pay. The state is supposed to reimburse local governments, including cities, counties, and school districts, for the revenue lost as a result of the credit. pwpi;rty tax & other revenu market value hornesteFfd credit COMBINED REVENUES PAY FOR CITY SERVICES The intent of the law was for the state to subsidize a homeowner's property tax bill by promising to pay part of that bill to the city. Those MVHC dollars, combined with revenue from property taxes and other city revenue Sources, were to provide the necessary funds to pay for city services like police, tire, clean water, parks. etc. ,*,- W TAX CREDIT kL to INCONSISTENT REIMBURSEMENT LEAVES HOLE The state fails to reimburse cities for sorne or all of the property tax credit each year. City revenues fall short of those needed to fund city services, forcing responses like reduced services and increased property taxes. 9 , , 2011 tax credit changing to 2012 value excluslo/� After change Homestead market value exclusion (HIAVE'l Qualifying Homeowners will receive a VALUE EXCLUSION, which means that they will pay taxes on only a PORTION of their home's value. The previous credit program will be eliminated. value of honie minus exclusion Under the state's new market Value exclusion. qualifying homeowners pay tax on a PORTION of their !ionic's value; in other words, the TAXABLE MARKET VALUE goes DOWN. This leads horneowneisto expect lower tax bills. > VALUE EXCLUSION 01 hornestead Properiv BUT instead, the exclusion will reduce the overall tax, base so that TAX RATES WILL HAVE TO RISE in order to bring in even the same amount of tax dollars as last year to fund -!ty services. Higher tax rate,' WOUld apply to ALL property in the corm unity, including those homes receiving the exclusion. House Research Department The Homestead Market Value Exclusion September 2011 Page 6 Table 2 Computation of homestead net tax: old law versus new law, homestead valued at $200,000 Old Law New Law Step 1: EMV = $200,000 Step 1: EMV = $200,000 Step 2: Determine ro erty's market value exclusion (MVexcl): �i o� MVexc1= $30,400 — (($200,000 — $76,000) x .09) = $19,240 Step 3: Determine property's taxable market value (TMV): TMV = $200,000 — $19,240 = $180,760 Step 2: Determine property's net tax capacity (NTC) Step 4: Determine property's net tax capacity (NTC): NTC = $200,000 x .01 = $2,000 NTC = $180,760 x .01 = $1,808 Step 3: Determine property's gross tax: Gross tax = $2,000 x 105.81% = $2,116 Step 4: Determine property's market value homestead credit (MVHC): MVHC = $304 — (($200,000 — $76,000) x .0009) = $192 Step 5: Determine property's net tax capacity net tax: Step 5: Determine property's net tax capacity net tax: Net tax = $2,116 — $192 = $1,924 Net tax = $1,808 x 110.92% = $2,005 Step 6: Determine property's total net tax equal to its net tax capacity net tax Step 6: Determine property's total net tax equal to its net tax capacity net tax plus plus its referendum marke value tax (not discussed here) its referendum market value tax (not discussed here) Note that the tax rates are different between the old law and the new law. The rates used in the example are based on House Research estimat d s tatewide averse rates for taxes payable in 2011 under the old law, and under the new law assuming jurisdictions made no changes to their levies. 3 0 "L(m 12 %f •on 4t. c 36, 4fic ^ 1 1 1 160 = i R , Z klft Washington County Estimated Proposed 2012 Property Tax Impacts Selected Cities and Property Classifications Assuming Value Changed from 2011 to 2012 by Indicated Percentage (City Median % Change) City of Grant Levy Assumptions: Value Assumptions: Estimated Tax Impact: (832rRCwS) Change from 2011 to 2012 Due to: Tax Authors 2011 2012 $ Ch % Ch Washington County $86,783,800 $86,523,700 $260,100 -0.3% City of Grant $911,803 $1,043,200 $131,397 14.4% ISD 832 $11,671,125 $11,080,518 ($590,607) -5.1% ISD 834 $30,592,840 $31,781,615 $1,188,775 3.9% Carnelian Marine WS $428,500 $453,600 $25,100 5.9% Brown's Creek WS $720,000 $903,340 $183,340 25.5% Rice Creek WS $659,065 $827,630 $168,565 25.6% Valley Branch WS $675,503 $704,373 $28,870 4.3% Met Council $2,437,565 $2,603,511 $165,946 6.8% Met Mosquito $1,444,928 $1,456,983 $12,055 0.8% County HRA $3,332,236 $3,332,236 1 $0 1 0.0% Coun RRA $574,800 $574,800 1 $0 1 0.0% Estimated Tax Breakdown on Median Residential Homestead: (property in ISD 832 -Rice Creek WS) Tax Authori 2011 1 2012 $ Ch % Ch Estimated Market Value: 402,600 355,900 -46,700 -11.6% Exclusion: 5,200 Taxable Market Value: 402,600 350,700 - 51,900 -12.9% Washington County $1,211.93 $1,133.56 ($78.37 ) -6.5% City of Grant $446.22 $517.21 $70.99 15.9% 1 SD 832 $2,120.05 $1,901.19 $218.86 - 10.3% Metro Special Districts $53.21 $52.59 $0.62) -1.2% Other S ecial Districts - $115.09 $124.94 $9.85 8.6% Total 1 $3,946.50 $3,729.49 $217.01 -5.5% Classification Pay 2011 Estimated Market Value Pay 2012 Estimated Market Value Home- stead Exclusion Pay 2012 Taxable Market Value EMV % Ch Pay 2011 Net Tax Estimated Pay 2012 Net Tax $ Ch % Ch Portion of Change Attributable to Law Chan a Portion of Change Attributable to Other Factors Res Hstd 113,100 100,000 28,200 71,800 - 11.6% $841 $815 $26 -3.1% $63 7.5% $89) -10.6% 226,200 200,000. 19,200 180,800 -11.6% $2,054 $1,954 $100 -4.9% $77 3.8% $178 -8.6% 339,400 300,000 10,200 289,800 -11.6% $3,269 1 $3,093 $175) -5.4% $92 2.8% ($267 ) -8.2% 452,500 400,000 1,200 398,800 - 11.6% $4,447 $4,232 $215 -4.8% $107 2.4% $321 -7.2% 565,600 500,000 0 500,000 - 11.6% $5,689 $5,303 $386 -6.8% $131 2.3% $517 -9.1% 848,400 750,000 0 750,000 - 11.6% $9,031 $8,499 $532 -5.9% $213 2.4% $744 -8.2% Res Non -Hstd 402,600 355,900 355,900 - 11.6% $3,957 $3,775 $182 -4.6% $93 2.4% $275 -6.9% Ap artment 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 0.0% $17,727 1 $19,178 $1,451 8.2% $490 2.8% $961 5.4% Comm/Ind 25,000 25,000 25,000 0.0% $603 $642 $39 6.4%11 $6 1.0% $32 5.4% 250,000 250,000 250,000 0.0% $6,772 $7,212 $440 6.5% $72 1.1% $369 5.4% 500,000 500,000 500,000 0.0% $14,656 $15,613 $957 6.5% $156 1.1% $801 5.5% 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 0.0% $30,424 $32,416 $1,992 6.5% $325 1.1% $1,667 5.5% Count o Resid ential Homesteads by Value Range: 0- 76,000 1 76,100- 100,000 100,100- 150,000 3 150,100- 200,000 15 200,100- 250,000 108 250,100- 300,000 232 300,100 - 350,000 282 350,100 - 400,000 186 400,100 - 450,000 176 450,100- 500,000 77 500,100 - 750,000 161 750,100- 1,000,000 over 1,000,000 4 § 2 Washington County Estimated Proposed 2012 Property Tax Impacts Selected Cities and Property Classifications Assuming Value Changed from 2011 to 2012 by Indicated Percentage (City Median % Change) City of Stillwater Levy Assumptions: Value Assumptions: Estimated Tax Impact: Change from 2011 to 2012 Due to: TaxAuthori 2011 2012`: $Ch ' - $577.67 Washin ton Coun $86,783,800 $86,523,700 $260,100 $1,063.83 Ci of Stillwater $10 158,367 $10,246,597 $88 230 $809.99 ISD834 $30,592,840 $31,781,615 $1,188,775 P Met Council $2,437,565 $2,603 511 $165 946 $23.84 Met Mos uito $1,444,928 $1,456 983 $12 055 $2,533.95 Met Council Transit $3,142 983 $3,238 058 $95,075 $17 Coun HRA $3,332,236 $3,332,236 $0 0.0% 1 1 Coun!y RRA 1 $574,800 1 $574,800 -M-0-02 $134 Estimated Tax Breakdown on Median Residential Homestead: Tax Author 2011 ' 1 2012' Market Value: 216,800 212,900 -3,900 -1.8% Washington County $553.26 $577.67 $24.41 4.4% City of Stillwater $1,049.59 $1,063.83 $14.24 1.4% School District 834 $750.14 $809.99 $59.85 8.0% Metro Special Districts $53.73 $58.62 $4.89 9.1% Other S ecial DI cis $22.83 $23.84 $1.01 4.4% Total $2,429.55 $2,533.95 $104.40 4.3% Classification Pay 2011_- Estimated Market Value Pay 2012 Estimated Market Value Home- stead Exclusion Pay 2012 Taxable- Market Value EMV Pay 2011. % - Net Ch .Tax Estimated. Pay 2012 Net ' Tax $ Ch % Ch Portion of Change Attributable to Law Chan e „ Portion of Change Attributable to Other Factors Res Hstd 100,000 _ 98,200 28 400 69,800 -1.8% $920 $947 $27 2.9% $18 2.0% $9 0.9% 200,000 196,400 19,600 176,800 -1.8% $2,212 $2,305 $93 4.2% $76 3.4% $17 0.8% 300,000 294 600 10,700 283,900 -1,8% $3,505 $3 665 $160 4.6% $134 3.8% $26 0.7% 400,000 392,8001 1.900 390,900 -1.8% $4,7971 $5,024 $226 4.7% $191 4.0% $35 0.7% 500,000 491,000 0 491,000 -1.8% $6,012 $6,306 $294 4.99 $242 4.0% $52 0.9% Res Non -Hstd 216,800 212,900 4.0% 212,900 -1.8% $2,607 $2,734 $127 4.9% $105 4.0% $22 0.9% A artment 500 000 500,000 $127 500,000 0.0% $7314 $7,804 $490 6.7% $308 4.2% $183 2.5% Comm/Ind 300,000 300,000 4.6% 300,000 0.0% $9,037 $9,724 $687 7.6% $156 1.7% $531 5.9% 500,000 500,000 $9,882 500,000 87 0.0% $15,7 $17,082 $1,205 7.6% $275 1.7% $930 5.9% 75 0000 750,000 $16,396 750,000 0.0% $24,427 $26,279 $1,853 7.6% $423 1.7% $1,429 5.9% 1,000,000 1,000,000 0.0% 1,000000 0.0% $32,976 $35,477 $2,501 7.6% $572 1.7% $1,929 5.8% City of Woodbury Levy Assumptions: Value Assumptions: Estimated Tax Impact: Change from 2011 to 2012 Due to: imAutho 2011 2012' $Ch %'Ch Washington County $86,783,800 $86,523,700 $260,100 -043% City of Woodbury $27,915,979 $27,915,979 $0 0.0% ISO 833 $53,693,352 $53,580,297 ($113,055) -0.2% South Washington WS $687,279 $711,044 $23,765 3.5% Woodbury HRA $250,000 $250,000 $0 0.0% Met Council $2,437,565 $2,603,511 $165,946 6.8% Met Mosquito 1 $1,444,928 1 $1,456,983 $12,055 0.8% Met Council Transit $3,142,983 $3,238,058 $95,075 3.0% County HRA $3,332,236 $3,332,236 $0 0.0% Coun RRA $574,800 $574,800 $0 0.0% Estimated Tax Breakdown on Median Residential Homestead: Tax Authority 2011 1 2012 1 $ C 11 %'Ch Market Value: 246,600 241,400 -5,200 -2.1% Washington County $701.69 $730.39 $28.70 4.1% City of Woodbury $874.52 $872.68 $1.84 -0.2 °k School District 833 $1.331.72 $1,341.07 $9.35 0.7% Metro Special Districts $62.46 $67.96 $5.50 8.8% OtherSpecial Districts $49.91 $51.67 $1.76 3.5% Total $3,020.30 $3,063.77 $43.47 1.4% Ciassification Pay2011 Estimated Market Value Pay 2012 Estimated Market Value Home= stead Exclusion Pay 2012 Taxable Market Value - EMV % Ch pay 2011 Net , ,, Tax Estimated Pay.2012 Net: Tax $ Cho % " Cho- Portion oF Change Attributable to . Law Chan a Port on o Change Attributable to Other Factors Res Hstd 100 97,900 28,400 69,500 -2.1% $1,003 $996 $7 -0.7% $19 1.9% $27 -217% 200,000 195,800 19,600 176,200 -21% $2,379 $2,407 $28 1.2% $81 3.4% $53 -2.2% 300,000 293,700 10,800 282,900 -2.1% $3;755 $3,817 $62 1.7% $142 3.8% $80 -2.1% 400,000 391,6001 2,000 389,600 -2.1% $5,131 1 $5228 $97 1.9% $204 4.0% $106 -201% 500,000 489,500 0 489,500 -2.1% $6,429 $6,563 $134 2.1% $257 4.0% $124 -1.9% Res Non -Hstd 246.600 241,400 241,400 -2.1% $3,171 $3,236 $66 2.1% $127 4.0% $61 -1.9% A artment 500,000 500,000 500,000 0.0% $7,741 $8,096 $355 4.6% $3291 4.2% $26 0.3% Comm /Ind 300,000 300,000 300,000 0.0% $9,344 $9,882 $538 5.8% $169 1.8% $369 3.9% 500,000 500,000 500,000 0.0% $16,396 $17,345 $950 5.8% $297 1.8% $652 4.0% 750,000 750,000 750,000 0.0% $25,210 $26,675 $1,465 5.8 °b $458 1.8% $1,007 4.0% 1,000,000 1,050,0001 1,000,000 070 $34,025 $36,005 $1980 5.8% $619 1.8%1 $1,361 1 4.0% r H F R 1 H R _ ?? Memo Community Development Department To: City Council From: Michel Pogge, City Planner Date: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 Re: Waiver of Assessments on 356 Ramsey St W related to property clean up charges Message: Starting in the Spring of 2010, City staff contacted the former property owner of 356 Ramsey St W a number of times concerning a hazardous garage in an attempt to get it demolished. After giving a number of extensions to the former property owner, the City issued an abatement order to demolish the garage in the fall of 2010. By that time the garage had also fallen in to foreclosure. Copies of the abatement notice were mailed to the former property owner, the bank, the builder and the known real estate agent. Ultimately, the City Council reviewed the demolition action and approved a contract to have the work done on October 5, 2010. Additionally, while the property was in foreclosure the City completed snow removal in the winter of 2010/2011. The current property owners, Chance and Melissa Davis, indicate that the fees were not disclosed to them by the seller. Additionally, the title company failed to complete an assessment search with the City. If an assessment search would have been completed by the title company as is normally done, these costs would have been discovered. The Davis' would like the opportunity to bring an action against the seller (bank) and the title company to recover these costs. Therefore, they have requested that the assessment be deferred for one year while they pursue these actions. To allow this they have provided the City a waiver of assessment that calls for the assessment to be payable starting with tax year 2013 as opposed to 2012. Staff Recommendation Approve the request as presented. From the desk of... Michel Pogge, AICP • City Planner - City of Stillwater - 216 N. 4 11, Street - Stillwater, MN 55082 651.430 -8822 -Fax: 651.430 -8810 -email: mpogge@ci.stillwater.mn.us RESOLUTION 2011- APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT OF ASSESSMENT AND WAIVER OF IRREGULARITY AND APPEAL WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater completed certain property clean up actions on the property at 356 Ramsey St W in the fall of 2010 and the winter of 2011; and WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City to assess the costs of the clean up actions against the property; and WHEREAS, the current owners, Chance and Melissa Davis, (hereinafter "Owners ") purchased the property without these clean up charges being disclosed to them; and WHEREAS, the Owners are requesting that the assessment be deferred until tax year payable 2013 in order that they can pursue an action against the previous property owner for this charges; and WHEREAS, the Owners agree that a special assessment be spread against their property in five (5) equal annual installments with interest on the unpaid balance at the rate of 4 1/2% simple interest per annum starting in tax year payable. BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that the agreement of assessment and waiver of irregularity and appeal agreement between Chance and Melissa Davis and the City of Stillwater is hereby approved and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that the assessment on 356 Ramsey St W (PID # 28.030.20.42.0137) be struck from the assessment rolls for tax year payable 2012 as listed in Resolutions # 136 and 137. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 3rd day May, 2011 CITY OF STILLWATER Ken Harycki, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk AGREEMENT OF ASSESSMENT AND WAIVER OF IRREGULARITY AND APPEAL REGARDING CITY OF STILLWATER PROPERTY CLEAN UP WORK THIS AGREEMENT, IS MADE THIS / day of t 2011, between the City of Stillwater, 216 N. 4 th Street, Stillwater, State of Minnesota, 55082, hereinafter referred to as the City and Chance & Melissa Davis, owner of the property at 356 Ramsey St W in Stillwater, Minnesota (PID # 28.030.20.42.0137) hereinafter referred to as Owner. In consideration of the action of the City Council related to property clean up, owner hereby approves the work completed by the City to demolish a garage, complete storm water improvements, install a retaining wall, and other clean up services (the "Improvements ") at the above location pursuant to Statutes, Chapter 429. These costs will be incorporated into the assessment roll for the project and will be spread over a five - year period, at an annual interest rate of 4.5 %, and payable with annual property taxes starting in payable tax year 2013. The total cost of the Improvements is $8,935.79. The owner may at anytime after the assessment hearing and prior to November 15 of any year, pay the remaining principal balance (in whole or part) to the City of Stillwater. OWNER expressly waives objection to any irregularity with regard to the property clean up improvements and assessments and any claim that the amount thereof levied against owners property is excessive, together with all rights to appeal in the courts regarding the Improvements. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, 11.46i44c,G o 3 hereunto signed this agreement the day and year above written. OWNER Chance Davis Melissa Davis STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF WASHINGTON )s.s. C CITY OF STILLWATER Ken Harycki, Its Mayor Diane F. Ward, Its Clerk On this day of , 2011, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, Appeared Ken Harycki and Diane Ward to me personally known who, being duly sworn did say they are the Mayor and City Clerk named in the foregoing instrument and that this instrument was signed as the free act and deed of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )s.s. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this IL4 day of NrOV , 2011 By Chance Davis and Melissa Davis, Owner. *Ntary ublic EA NOTARY PUBLIC tu MINNESOTA " „!* ° My Commission Expires Jan. 31, 2015 MCD Name 7 A.M. REG. ED REG TOTAL REG. SIGNATURES ABS TOTAL VOTING /o VOTER TURNOUT ISD 834 - Stillwater W -1 P1 & P2 2,398 21 2,419 841 71 912 37.7% ISD 834 - Stillwater W -2 P3, P4 1,654 25 1,679 579 32 611 36.4% ISD 834 - Stillwater W -2 P5 1,209 7 1,216 395 24 419 34.5% ISD 834 - Stillwater W -3 P6 1,400 23 1,423 582 28 610 42.9% ISD 834 - Stillwater W -3 P7 1,743 28 1,771 720 24 744 42.0% ISD 834 - Stillwater W -4 P8 1,482 29 1,511 484 8 492 1 32.6% ISD 834 - Stillwater W -4 P9 1,913 25 1 1,938 761 52 813 1 42.0% �choot �isT. • Finance Committee November 8 Board of Commissioners Wa�mgtm Metro Emergency Services Board 4 W' Dennis C. Hegberg, District 1 CU i�. C01 VV y MN Inter -County Association " ' Bill Pulkrabek, District 2 November 10 Metro. Transportation Advisory Board Gary Kriesel, Chair, District 3 November 10 Gateway Corridor Commission Autumn Lehrke, District 4 Lisa Welk, District 5 BOARD AGENDA NOVEMBER 8, 2011— 9:00 A.M. 1. 9:00 Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance 2. 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibility orfunction of Washington County Government, whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board must fill out a comment card before the meeting begins and give it to the County Board secretary or the County Administrator. The County Board Chair will ask you to come to the podium, state your name and address, and present your comments. Your comments must be addressed exclusively to the Board Chair and the full Board of Commissioners. Comments addressed to individual Board members will not be allowed. You are encouraged to limityourpresentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the right to limit an individual's presentation ifit becomes redundant, repetitive, overly argumentative, or if it is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County's responsibilities 3. 9:10 Consent Calendar — Roll Call Vote 4. 9:10 Property Records and Taxpayer Services — Kevin Corbid, Director A. Resolution — Conveying Five Tax Forfeited Parcels to the U.S. National Park Service B. Resolution — Setting Date and Terms for a Private Sale of Property Located in St. Paul Park 5. 9:25 General Administration - Jim Schug, County Administrator 6. 9:30 Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities, make comments on matters of interest and information, or raise questions to the staff. This action is not intended to result in substantive board action during this time. Any action necessary because of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. 7. Board Correspondence 8. 9:55 Adjourn 9. 10:00 to 10:20 — Board Workshop with the Office of Administration Update the County Board on the County's Communication Planning + + : NO BOARD MEETING ON NOVEMBER 29' — 5" TUESDAY MEETING NOTICES" ( "Meeting dates, time and locations may change. Contact the Office ofAdmimstration or individual agencies for the most current information) Date Committee Time Location November 8 Finance Committee November 8 Mental Health Advisory Council November 9 Metro Emergency Services Board November 9 Metro Library Service Agency November 9 MN Inter -County Association November 10 MN Transportation Alliance Annual Meeting November 10 Metro. Transportation Advisory Board Programming Committee November 10 Gateway Corridor Commission 10:30 a.m. Washington County Government Center 4:00 p.m. Washington County Government Center 10:30 a.m. 2099 University Avenue — St. Paul 12:00 p.m. 101 Empire Drive — St. Paul 2:00 p.m. Kelly Inn, Sibley Room, 2 Floor — St. Paul 9:00 a.m. 1320 County road 5 NE — Isanti 12:30 p.m. 3:30 p.m. Assfative hstetwV devices we avafaW for use in the 390 Robert Street North — St. Paul 8301 Valley Creek Road — Woodbury City Hall EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY J AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR NOVEMBER 8, 2011 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT /AGENCY ITEM Administration A. Approval of agreement between Washington County and the Belwin Conservancy providing state grant funds to the Belwin Conservancy to acquire interests in property along Valley Creek in Afton, Minnesota. Human Resources B. Approval to revise Policy #5023 Paid Time OffPolicy and Policy 95012, Paid Time Off/Vacation Cash -out. Public Health and Environment C. Approval of resolution authorizing the identification of $34.70 per ton as the "market price" for purposes of the Solid Waste Management Tax, effective January 1, 2012; and, authorizing the Department of Public Health and Environment to submit this "market price" and supporting documentation to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Public Works D. Approval of Change Order #4 to contract with W.L. Hall Company, as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $4, 668. E. Approval of Change Order #8 to contract with Wasche Commercial Finishes, Inc. as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $1,766. F. Approval of Change Order #6 to contract with Target Commercial Interiors, as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $407. G. Approval of Change Order #5 to contract with Twin City Hardware Company, Inc. as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $14,952. H. Approval of Change Order #7 to contract with Zind, Inc., as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $7,253. I. Approval of Change Order #8 to contract with Klamm Mechanical Contractors, Inc., as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $7,372.85. J. Approval of Change Order 99 to contract with Parsons Electric, LLC, as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $27,089.80; and approval of Change Order 910 to contract with Parsons Electric, LLC, as part of the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvement Project, in the amount of $16,328.85. K. Approval of resolution to convey lands to the City of Cottage Grove for the Public Safety /City Hall Facility. L. Approval of resolution, final payments on the 2025 Government Center Campus Improvements Project to Peoples Electric Co., Inc., Kone, Inc. and MG McGrath, Inc. *Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. Asaishve kstmng devices are ava7a* for we m Me County Board Room EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Summary of Proceedings 4 Washington County Board of Commissioners November 1, 2011 Present were Commissioners Dennis C. Hegberg, District 1; Bill Pulkrabek, District 2; Gary Kriesel, District 3; Autumn Lehrke, District 4; and Lisa Weik, District 5. Absent none. Board Chair Kriesel presided. Commissioner Reports — Comments — Ouestions The Commissioners reported on the following items: - Commissioner Hegberg — reported on the Counties Transit Improvement Board meeting and he attended the County Road 14/8 interchange opening in Hugo; - Commissioner Lehrke — reported she recorded a segment for County Insight; attended the Red Rock Corridor meeting; she was involved with the Monster Bash Parade in Cottage Grove; she will be attending the Cottage Grove Prayer Breakfast, the Minnesota High Speed Rail, a veteran's fair, and she will meet with Newport businesses this Thursday; - Commissioner Weik — reported she attended the Solid Waste Management Coordinating Board; she attended a Reform 2.0 meeting in Woodbury last week; she attended the Metro Mosquito Control District meeting; and she participated in the annual Spooktacular in Woodbury; - Commissioner Kriesel — reported he attended the Solid Waste Management coordinating Board, Mosquito Control, Counties Transit Improvement Board, and the Community Corrections meetings; he also attended the Annual St. Croix River Coalition Crossing meeting in Hudson. Community Services Approval of the following actions: - Appoint John Burbank, Cottage Grove, to the Community Development Block Grant Citizens Advisory Committee to fill an unexpired term to December 31, 2013; - 2012 cooperative agreement with Community Services, the Sheriff, and the County Attorney to administer the Child Support Enforcement Program; - Contract with Oak Park Heights Senior Living to provide services to individuals receiving Medical Assistance Home and Community Based Services; - Board workshop held to discuss day training and habilitation services. General Administration Approval of the following actions: - October 18, 2011 Board meeting minutes; - County comments on the City of Lakeland's proposal to establish a new redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 -2 to assist in the acquisition and renovation of an existing commercial building for a corporate headquarters and to waive the 30 day notice of public hearing that is scheduled for Friday, November 4,2011; - The County Board Chair announced that County Administrator Jim Schug would be retiring at the end of January, 2012. The Board thanked Mr. Schug for his many years of service to Washington County and wished biro and his family the very best; - Board correspondence was received and placed on file; - Board workshop held to discuss the 2012 proposed Washington County Legislative Agenda. Information Technology Approval to renew contract to purchase software licensing, maintenance and support from Infor Global Technologies for Infinium Application Manager, Human Resources /Payroll, Query and Infinium Self Service software through December 31, 2012. Public Health and Environment Approval of the following actions: - Resolution No. 2011 -129 to submit grant application to the National Association of County and City Health Officials for the Accreditation Support Initiative; - Board workshop with the Watershed Management Organizations' and the Washington Conservation District to discuss their 2012 budget, priority projects and activities, and program services. Pnhlie Warkc Approval of the following actions: - Maintenance agreement with the Rice Creek Watershed District for storm water Best Management Practices for the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail Pedestrian Overpass on County Road 83 (11 Avenue Southwest) Project in the City of Forest Lake. Sheriffs Office Approval of the following actions: - Agreement with the Minnesota Department of Corrections to license space to mount antennas and equipment on the Government Center and Law Enforcement Center buildings for their 800 MHz network; - Mutual Aid Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Hudson, Wisconsin Police Department. A complete text of the Official Proceedings of the Washington County Board of Commissioners is available for public inspection at the Office of Administration, Washington County Government Center, 14949 62 Street N., Stillwater, Minnesota. Summary of Proceedings Washington County Board of Commissioners October 25, 2011 a a Fr ' y Present were Commissioners Dennis C. Hegberg, District 1; Bill Pulkrabek, District' G Kriesel, District 3; and Autumn Lehrke, District 4. Commissioner Lisa Weik, District 5, absent. Board Chair Kriesel presided. Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions The Commissioners reported on the following items: - Commissioner Weik — reported on the following events she attended: the National Transportation Conference, Rail- Volution, in Washington D.C. with over 1200 attendees, representing 197 cities, 6 countries and commissioners from the five counties representing CTIB; she recapped several of the classes she attended and to check Facebook and Twitter for further information; Gateway Corridor Commission met October 13 the Metro County Commissioners Met Council workgroup; the Greater MSP roll out; the Woodbury Yellow Ribbon Committee; a meeting with Pete Orput, County Attorney and George Kuprian, Assistant Washington County Attorney for a department update, tour of the office and a training session on how to address a jury; an AMC District 10 Board of Directors meeting; and a Public Health Advisory Committee meeting; - Commissioner Lehrke — reported on the following events she attended: Met. Area Agency on Aging meeting, a National Association of Counties webinar, and the 4 -H awards; - Commissioner He ber — reported on the Minnesota Inter - County Association meeting; he toured the City of Hugo; he attended the Ramsey/Washington Community Action program meeting; and the Metropolitan Transportation Advisory Board; he attended the grand opening ceremony for the Broadway Avenue Bridge in Forest Lake; and the Minnesota Inter - County Association meeting; - Commissioner Kriesel — reported he attended the Lower St. Croix Valley Alliance meeting; and reported the Lower Valley Cities have requested a four -way stop at Stagecoach and Hudson Road due to a recent fatality. Community Corrections Adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -127, accept Target Corporation grant in the amount of $1,000 for juvenile programming. General Administration Approval of the following actions: - Presentation of the distinguished budget award for 2010; - Update on State's competitive bid process related to contracting for managed care plans; decision was made to contract with Healthpartners and Ucare effective January 1, 2012; - Board correspondence was received and placed on file; - Workshop to discuss possible purchase of approximately 4 acres of the Rolland property adjacent to the Cottage Grove Regional Park. Human Resources Approval to revise Human Resources Policy #5025 Employee Wellness Program. Public Works Approval of the following actions: - Resolution No. 2011 -128, approve the release of access control along County State Aid Highway 10 (CSAH 10) 20 feet west of vacated Denver Avenue; - Cooperative Agreement with South Washington Watershed District; - Awarding bids for construction of Lake Elmo Park Reserve Winter Recreation facility to Jorgenson Construction, Inc. for bid division 1, Parkos Construction Company, Inc. for bid division 2, and Sterling Electric Corporation for bid division 3; - Workshop to review draft regional transitway guidelines developed by the Metropolitan Council. A complete text of the Official Proceedings of the Washington County Board of Commissioners is available for public inspection at the Office of Administration, Washington County Government Center, 14949 62n Street N., Stillwater, Minnesota. Wa�Wngton 1—omft-0-0 coiirty BOARD AGENDA NOVEMBER 15,2011— 9:00 A.M. 1. 9:00 Roll Call Board of Commissioners Dennis C. Hogberg, District 1 Bill Pulkrabek, District 2 Gary Kriesel, Chair, District 3 Autumn Lehrke, District 4 Lisa Welk, District 5 Pledge of Allegiance 2. 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibility or function of Washington County Government, whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board must fill out a comment card before the meeting begins and give it to the County Board secretary or the County Administrator. The County Board Chair will ask you to come to the podium, state your name and address, and present your comments. Your comments must be addressed exclusively to the Board Chair and the full Board of Commissioners. Comments addressed to individual Board members will not be allowed. You are encouraged to limit yourpresentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the right to fimit an individual's presentation if it becomes redundant, repetitive, overly argumentative, or if it is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County's responsibilities 3. 9:10 Consent Calendar — Roll Call Vote 4. 9:10 Property Records and Taxpayer Services — Kevin Corbid, Director Resolution — 10 -Year Repurchase Application for Parcel Located in Pine Springs 5. 9:15 Public Works — Ted Schoenecker, Transportation Manager Review Comment Letter on the Metropolitan Council's Draft Regional Transitway Guidelines 6. 9:25 Human Resources — Kay McAloney, Director Discussion on Filling the Position of County Administrator 7. 9:40 General Administration — Jim Schug, County Administrator 8. 9 :50 Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities, make comments on matters of interest and information or raise questions to the staff. This action is not intended to result in substantive board action during this time. Any action necessary because of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. 9. Board Correspondence 10. 10:15 Adjourn 11. 10:20 to 10:50 — Board Workshop with Property Records and Taxpayer Services Review Proposed 2012 Taxes 12. 10:50 to 11:20 — Board Workshop with the Office of Administration Update on the 2012 Budget RF.MiND�R NO BOARD MEETING ON NOVEMBER 29 — 5 TUESDAY MEETING NOTICES" ( "Meeting dates, time and locations may change. Contact the Office of Administration or individual agencies for the most current information) Date Committee Time Location November 15 Housing & Redevelopment Authority 3:30 p.m. 1584 Hadley Avenue North — Oakdale November 16 Workforce Investment Board 8:30 a.m. Washington County Government Center — LL -13 November 16 Counties Transit Improvement Board 8:30 a.m. Metro Transit Heywood Bldg., 560 Sixth Avenue North, Minneapolis November 16 Ramsey Station Kickoff 11:00 a.m. Departing from Target Field - Minneapolis November 16 Plat Commission 9:30 a.m. Washington County Government Center Meeting Notices Continued. on Back assi�ive rrsienins devices are eva7awe for use in ne county tad Room EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR NOVEMBER 15, 2011 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY ITEM Administration A. Approval of the October 25 and November 1, 2011 Board Meeting minutes. B. Approval to establish December 13, 2011 for a public hearing on the final 2012 -2016 Washington County Capital Improvement Plan. C. Approval of an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the county to provide the Department of Natural Resources a property survey for the Browns Creek State Trail Corridor. D. Approval to adopt the 2012 Washington County Legislative positions. Attorneys E. Approval of the Auto Theft Prevention Grant awarded to the Washington and Anoka County Attorney's Office, for the time period of July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2013. Community Services F. Approval of agreement with East Metro Women's Council for $130,667 in Family Homelessness Prevention and Assistance Program funds. G. Approval of the agreement to provide $49,000 in Family Homelessness Prevention and Assistance Program funds to Human Services, Incorporated. Property Records H. Approval of resolution, authorizing a repurchase application of tax forfeited parcel 03. and Taxpayer Services 029.20.21.0010, by Dick Monty, heir to the previous owner. Public Works I. Approval of resolution awarding the bid for the lease of agricultural land in Lake Elmo Park Reserve and St. Croix Bluffs Park for 2012 and enter into agricultural lease agreements with Matthew Wohlman (St. Croix Bluffs Regional Park) and David See Farms (Lake Elmo Park Reserve). J. Approval to award the bid for snow removal services to Prescription Landscape, the lowest responsible bidder. K. Approval of resolution vacating the county's interest in certain real estate of former designated County State Aid Highway 38 within the City of St. Paul Park Sheriff's Office L. Approval of a contract for the new inmate commissary and accounting system for the Washington County Sheriff's Office. *Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R* R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R at R R R* R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R MEETING NOTICES (Continued) ** (* *Meeting dates, time and locations may change. Contact the Office of Administration or individual agencies for the most current information) Date Committee November 16 Metro Transportation Advisory Board 9:30 am. Policy & Advisory Board November 17 Metro Mosquito Control Exec. Commission November 17 Metropolitan Area Agency on Aging November 17 Rush Line Corridor Task Force November 17 Red Rock Corridor November 17 Community Action Program - Ramsey and Washington Counties Time Location Assistiwe listaung devices 12:00 p.m. 390 Robert Street North — St. Paul 9:00 am. 2099 University Avenue West — St. Paul 9:30 am. 2365 McKnight Road — North St. Paul 3:30 p.m. White Bear Lake City Hall 4:00 p.m. Cottage Grove City Hall — 7516 80 th St. S. 6:00 p.m. 450 Syndicate Street North — St. Paul svaraW for use in are Cormry Solid Room EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Washington County, Minnesota Board of Commissioners - Actions Actions at the Tuesday, November 1, 2011 Board Meeting This page is a brief view of the actions taken by the Washington County Board of Commissioners. For further information, please telephone 651 -430 -6001. Washington County's mission is to provide quality public services in a cost - effective manner through innovation, leadership, and the cooperation of dedicatedpeople. Burbank named to Community Development Block Grant advisory committee John Burbank, Cottage Grove, was named to the Washington County Community Development Block Grant Citizens Advisory Committee by the Washington County Board of Commissioners Nov. 1. He will serve a term that will expire Dec. 31, 2013. His appointment was recommended by Commissioner Autumn Lehrke, District 4. The Washington County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Citizen Advisory Committee is established to provide public input to and increase accountability of the CDBG and HOME programs in Washington County. The purpose of the CDBG program is to develop strong urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable living environment, and expanding economic opportunities, principally for low- and moderate - income persons. The HOME program was created by the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 and is the largest federal block grant available to communities to create affordable housing. The intent of the program is to increase the supply of decent affordable housing to low- and very low - income households; strengthen the ability of state and local governments to provide housing; and leverage non - federal sources of funds for affordable housing. The CDBG Citizen Advisory Committee consists of 11 voting members appointed by the County Board and two ex- officio members. County comments on City of Lakeland tax increment financing district The Washington County Board of Commissioners approved comments Nov. 1 on the City of Lakeland's proposal to establish a redevelopment tax increment financing (TIF) district in the city. The tax increment financing district is to assist in the acquisition and renovation of an existing commercial building for a corporate headquarters. Commercial Management, LLC, a full- service property management company now in Bayport, has acquired and proposes to renovate an existing commercial building at 84 St. Croix Trail S. for use as its corporate headquarters. The project will result in six jobs operating in the renovated facility. TIF uses the additional property taxes paid as a result of development in the district to pay for part of the development costs. When a new building is constructed or renovated, the market value of the property and its property taxes typically rise, because the improvements add value to the parcel. Taxing districts that would usually benefit from the rising market value, such as the county, forego the increased property taxes for a set amount of time, and so much approve of the TIF process. Page 1 of 3 Senior living home in Oak Park Heights contracted to provide services to seniors Oak Park Heights Senior Living in Oak Park Heights may provide services to individuals receiving Medical Assistance Home and Community Based Services, after the Washington County Board of Commissioners approved a contract with the facility Nov. 1. State statute requires counties to take the responsibility of issuing, managing, and monitoring contracts to providers of Home and Community Based Services through Medical Assistance (MA) Waivers. Oak Park Senior Living is a new facility in Oak Park Heights with 120 units. The facility provides 24 -hour Customized Living (commonly known as assisted living) to both private -pay clients and clients eligible for Home and Community Based Services through MA waivers. The company that owns this site operates other sites in Dakota and Hennepin counties. Twenty- four -hour Customized Living is a service designed for persons in need of regular supervision and assistance with daily activities such as medication administration, personal care, and housekeeping. These individuals are assessed by county staff and are determined not to need the level of care provided in a skilled nursing home, but are unable to remain safely in their own homes. Each client receives individualized services based on level of need. The provider's rate is determined based on this individualized assessment and is billed directly to MA through the Elderly Waiver Program. The facility intends to serve more than 20 waiver clients, who will pay a reduced rate rent. The provider will complete an annual program evaluation describing any incident or maltreatment reports and outlining how its services have helped delay the onset of institutional, i.e., nursing home, placement. Public health department will apply for funds to help with accreditation The Washington County Public Health and Environment Department will apply for funds from the National Association of City and County Health Officials (NACCHO) to help with the department's national accreditation process. The Washington County Board of Commissioners approved the application Nov. 1. With funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NACCHO will fund a limited number of local health departments nationwide to support their preparation work for national accreditation. The goal of the national accreditation program is to improve and protect the health of the public by advancing the quality and performance of health departments across the country. Funds can be used to address any performance standard that a department does not meet. The department's application is requesting a grant for $10,000 with a $3,000 in -kind contribution of existing funding, to be used between Nov. 15, 2011 through May 31, 2012. The Washington County department completed an extensive self - assessment of its performance of the national standards in October 2011. A significant deficit was identified in long -term organizational strategic planning. The department does not have a three- to five -year strategic plan in place that sets its future direction of priorities and resource needs. If the department is awarded this grant, the money will be used to cover staff expenses related to time spent on a strategic planning process and to contract with a consultant to facilitate the process. Pedestrian overpass construction will include stormwater management The Washington County Board of Commissioners and the Rice Creek Watershed District now have in place a maintenance agreement that outlines a stormwater management best practices plan for the construction of the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail pedestrian overpass of County Road 83 in Forest Lake. The County Board agreed to the plan at its meeting Nov. 1. State statute requires a stormwater management plan for the construction. Page 2 of 3 The terms of the watershed district's permit issuance require an executed maintenance agreement for stormwater Best Management Practices. The best practices will be installed during the construction of the Hardwood Creek Regional Trail Pedestrian Overpass of County Road 83 Project in Forest Lake. Washington County Sheriff s Office, Hudson Police Department have agreement Sworn officers from the Washington County Sheriffs Office and the City of Hudson, Wis., Police Department will be able to extend their services into each other's respective jurisdictions for the purpose of providing assistance in emergency situations and to enforce laws of their respective states. The Washington County Board of Commissioners agreed Nov. 1 to the mutual aid joint powers agreement that would allow for the peace officers to work in each other's jurisdictions. This Joint Powers Agreement will grant the City of Hudson Police Department peace officers the authority, when requested, to act with all the arrest and peace officer authority of an officer of the Washington County Sheriffs Office while within the boundaries of the City of Stillwater. Washington County Sheriffs deputies will have the same authority while in the City of Hudson, Wis. Such joint powers agreements are allowed by the laws of both states. Department of Corrections will license space to put antennas, equipment on Government Center The Washington County Board of Commissioners approved an agreement with the Minnesota Department of Corrections Nov. 1 to license space to mount antennas and equipment on the Government Center and Law Enforcement Center buildings in Stillwater for its 800 MHz network. These antennas and installed equipment will be used to operate the 800 MHz network which will allow the Department of Corrections to communicate with other network users. This license would not require expenditures by Washington County and the revenue of $6,600 per year will support the operation of the county's 800 MHz public safety radio system. Board reviews watershed districts' budgets The Washington County Board of Commissioners reviewed budgets and projects for water management organizations (WMOs) that have jurisdiction in Washington County at a workshop Nov. 1. Brown's Creek, Carnelian- Marine -St. Croix, Comfort Lake- Forest Lake, Middle St. Croix, Ramsey - Washington, Rice Creek, South Washington and Valley Branch WMOs all have jurisdiction in Washington County. Board members reviewed the budgets from each WMO, and saw highlights of major projects being undertaken by the WMOs. It also reviewed the budget and projects for the Washington Conservation District, which oversees conservation projects throughout the county. Page 3 of 3