Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
March 09, 1998 Public Hearing
CiTY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD ADMINISTRATION 782-2806 Joseph Sturdevant Councilme~nbers Donald G. Jolly Marlaine Szurek Gary L. Peterson Robert W. Ruettimann City Manager Walter R. Fehst NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Notice is hereby given that a Public Hearing is to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follows: Meeting of: ' Date of Meeting: Time of Meeting: Location: City Council/Staff March 9, 1998 6:30 P. M. City Hall Council Chambers 590 40th Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, Mn. 55421 Purpose of Mtg: 1998 Sealcoat Public Improvement Project 2. 3. 4. AGENDA Call to Order/Roll Call Presentation of Information by Staff PIR #961 - Proiect #9801 Questions and Answers Consideration of Resolution No. 98-33 MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 98-33 being a resolution ordering improvement and preparation of plans. Adiournment THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY I~ EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS NOTICE FOR PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to City Charter, notice is hereby given that the City Council has determined the following Public Improvement Hearing be held on Monday, March 9, 1998, at 6:30 P.M. in the City Council Chamber, 590 40th Avenue N.E. to consider: P.I.R. 961 - Municipal Project 9801 - Seal Coat Streets in Zone 3. Seal coating of the bituminous City streets in Zone 3 listed below..Zone 3 is bounded by Central Avenue on the west, 47th Avenue from Central Avenue to Johnson Street and 45th Avenue from Arthur Street to Stinson Boulevard on the south, Stinson Boulevard on the east and the Corporate limit on the north. Street Project Limits Upland Crest Cherry Lane Khyber Lane Borealis Lane Central Avenue Service Drive 51 st Court Tyler Street Fairway Drive North Upland Crest Stinson Boulevard Heights Drive to Fairway Drive Fillmore Street to Cul-de-sac Fillmore Street to Cul-de-sac Fillmore Street to Cul-de-sac Approximately 380' south of 50t~ Avenue to 195' north of 50th Avenue Central Avenue to Central Avenue 494 Avenue to 50th Avenue 49th Avenue to Fairway Drive Pennine Pass to Stinson Boulevard 5th Street NW to 325' north of centerline of North Upland Crest Work would include selective concrete curb and gutter replacement, crack sealing, bituminous surface patching and seal coat application. Utility replacement work will also be done on. Upland Crest. The cost of this utility work is not included in the assessment. Estimated total assessed cost Proposed assessment period of 1 year. $24,475.22 Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 782-2800, extension 209, or TDD 782-2806 (for deaf only) to make arrangements. The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in employment or the provision of services. CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Walter Fehst City Manager ?ublished in Focus on 2/26/98 and 3/5/98 ASSESSMENT COSTS 1998 STREET SEAL COAT - ZONE 3 P.I.R. 961 - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PROJECT 9801 CENTRAL AVENUE TO STINSON BOULEVARD 47TH AVENUE (CENTRAL AVENUE TO JOHNSON STREET) AND 45TH AVENUE ( ARTHUR STREET TO STINSON BOULEVARD) TO NORTH CORPORATE LIMIT ESTIMATED COST SEAL COAT CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING ADMINISTRATION SEAL COAT PROJECT COST SANITARY SEWER CONSTRUCTION WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTION TOTAL PROJECT COST $24,475.22 $3,708.05 $741.99 $28,925.26 $12,077.00 $99,141.50 $140,143.76 ASSESSMENT FOOTAGE 10,077 STREET FEET 1,555 AVENUE FEET 10,077 + 1/3 (1,555) = 10,595.3333 FULL ASSESSMENT RATE $28,925.26 ................. $2.73 10,595.3333 $2.73 / 3 = $0.91 ESTIMATED COST SHARING TOTAL PROJECT COST CITY SHARE ASSESSED COST PROPOSED ASSESSMENT RATE $24,475.22 ................. $2.31 10,595.3333 $2.3t / 3 = $0.77 / ASSESSABLE STREET FOOT / ASSESSABLE AVENUE FOOT $140,143.76 ($115,668.54) $24,475.22 / ASSESSABLE STREET FOOT / ASSESSABLE AVENUE FOOT 02/03/98 PAGE 1 F\ENG123\9801\9801 HEAR. 123 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE 1998 STREET SEAL COAT - ZONE 3 P.I.R. 961 - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PROJECT 9801 CENTRAL AVENUE TO STINSON BOULEVARD 47TH AVENUE (CENTRAL AVENUE TO JOHNSON STREET) AND 45TH AVENUE ( ARTHUR STREET TO STINSON BOULEVARD) TO NORTH CORPORATE LIMIT SEAL COAT CONSTRUCTION No. Description 1 Curb and gutter repair 2 Surface repair costs 3 Sweep before sealcoat 4 Sealcoat 5 Sweep after sealcoat CONSTRUCTION COST Quantity Unit Unit Price 9O L.F. $22.00 1 L.S. $11,296.64 21,958 S.Y. $0.02 21,958 S.Y. $0.45 21,958 S.Y. $0.04 Total $1,980.00 $11,296.64 $439.16 $9,881.10 $878.32 $24,475.22 03/04/98 PAGE 1 F\ENG123\9801\9801 HEAR. 123 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE P.I.R. 961 - COLUMBIA HEIGHTS PROJECT 9801 1998 STREET SEAL COAT - ZONE 3 CENTRAL AVENUE TO STINSON BOULEVARD 47TH AVENUE (CENTRAL AVENUE TO JOHNSON STREET) AND 45TH AVENUE ( ARTHUR STREET TO STINSON BOULEVARD) TO NORTH CORPORATE LIMIT SANITARY SEWER CONSTRUCTION No. Descrit3tlon I Remove bituminous pavement 2 Remove sanitary sewer 3 Temporary water service 4 8" PVC sanitary sewer 5 8" x 4" PVC VVye 6 Reconnect service 7 Pipe bedding 8 Recycled base 9 Common excavation 10 Bituminous wear course 11 Bituminous binder course 12 Tack coat WATER MAIN CONSTRUCTION No. Description 1 Remove concrete curb and gutter 2 Remove concrete driveway 3 Remove concrete walk 4 Remove bituminous pavement 5 Remove bituminous ddveway 6 Remove watermain 7 Remove hydrant lead 8 Remove gate valve and box 9 Sawcut concrete 10 Sawcut bituminous 11 Salvage hydrant 12 Temporary water service 13 8" Water main 14 6" Hydrant lead 15 8" Gate valve and box 16 6" Hydrant gate valve 17 Install hydrant 18 Water main fittings 19 t" Corporation 20 Reconnect water service 21 Pipe bedding 22 Recycled base 23 Aggregate base class 5 24 Common excavation 25 Bituminous wear course 26 Bituminous binder course 27 Bituminous driveway 28 Tack coat 29 Concrete curb and gutter 30 Concrete driveway 31 Concrete sidewalk 32 Sod with topsoil TOTALCONSTRUCTION COST Quantity Unit Unit Price Total QuantitV 289 S.Y. $1.00 $289.00 173 LF. $15.00 $2,595.00 1 ES. $1,000.00 $1,000.00 173 L.F. $25.00 $4,325.00 2 Ea. $50.00 $100.00 2 Ea. $200.00 $400.00 40 Ton $16.00 $640.00 101 Ton $8.00 $808.00 48 C.Y. $4.00 $192.00 32 Ton $27.00 $864.00 32 Ton $27.00 $864.00 14 Gal. $2.00 $28.00 ~o~ UnitPdce $12,077.00 Total 460 L.F. $5.00 $2,300.00 500 S.F. $2.00 $1,000.00 300 S.F. $1.50 $450.00 2022 S.Y. $1.00 $2,022.00 56 S.Y. $2.00 $112.00 100 L.F. $15.00 $1,500.00 3 Ea. $200.00 $600.00 3 Ea. $400.00 $t,200.00 100 LF. $3.00 $300.00 100 L.F. $2.00 $200.00 3 Ea. $500.00 $1,500.00 I L.S. $3,000.00 $3,000.00 1300 L.F. $25.00 $32,500.00 60 L.F. $20.00 $1,200.00 3 Ea. $600.00 $1,800.00 3 Ea. $400.00 $1,200.00 3 Ea. $1,100.00 $3,300.00 1270 Lb. $2.75 $3,492.50 29 Ea. $100.00 $2,900.00 29 Ea. $200.00 $5,800.00 151 Ton $16.00 $2,416.00 705 Ton $8.00 $5,640.00 85 Ton $8.00 $680.00 337 C.Y. $4.00 $1,348.00 222 Ton $27.00 $5,994.00 222 Ton $27.00 $5,994.00 56 S.Y. $15.00 $840.00 101 Gal. $2.00 $202.00 460 L.F. $10.00 $4,600.00 500 S.F. $4.00 $2,000.00 300 S.F. $2.50 $750.00 767 S.Y. $3.00 $2,301.00 $99,141.50 [$135,693.72] 02/03198 PAGE 2 FSENG123\9801\9801 HEAR.123 1998 SEAL COAT - ZONE 3 ,What, is seal coaing? Seal coating consists of spraying an asphalt emulsion on the street and immediately covering the emulsion with small rock. The rock is pushed into the emulsion with rollers. The emulsion acts like a glue between the street surface and the rock. The excess rock is swept up within several days. The finished thickness of the seal coat is about 1/4 inch. 'Prior to seal coating, the cracks will be filled with a sealant and the potholes will be repaired. Why seal coating.9, Seal coating provides a protective surface for the street. Sunlight and summer heat "dry" out the surface of bituminous streets, leading to failure of the pavement over time. The asphalt emulsion helps keep the original surface in good condition. The rock provides a rougher surface to improve traction. Seal coats provide little structural strength to the pavement, yet timely seal coating can double the useful life of a street. It is generally recognized that streets should be seal coated every 6 to 8 years in our climate. The City of Columbia Heights policy is to seal coat every 8 years. When will seal coating be done? Seal coating is usually done between June and August. The actual procedure generally takes about one week for the area proposed. Signs are posted the day before a particular street is seal coated as a reminder not to park on the street the next day. Streets will be closed temporarily (less than 1 hour) during the seal coat operation. ~ESOLUTION NO. 98 - 33 BEING A RESOLUTION ORDERING IMPROVEMENT AND PREPARATION OF PLANS WHEREAS, Resolution No. 98-25 of the City of Columbia Heights City Council adopted the 9th day of February, 1998, fixed a date for a council hearing on the proposed improvement of Zone 3 AND WHEREAS, ten days mailed notice and two weeks published notice of the hearing was given, and the hearing was held thereon the 9th day of March, 1998, at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard thereon, and WHEREAS, the Council determines to proceed with this local improvement, a portion of the cost being defrayed by special assessments under Charter provisions. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA: 1. That the location and extent of such improvements is as follows: Seal coating all bituminous City streets in Zone 3 listed below. Zone 3 is bounded by Central Avenue N.E. on the west, 45th Avenue N.E. and 47th Avenue N.E. on the south, Stinson Boulevard on the east and Corporate limits on the north. S_T_BEEZ Upland Crest Cheery Lane Khyber Lane Borealis Lane Central Ave. Service Drive 51st Court Tyler Street Fairway Drive North Upland Crest Stinson Boulevard PROJECT LIMITS Heights Drive to Fairway Drive Fillmore Street to Cul-de-sac Fillmore Street to Cul-de-sac Fillmore Street to Cul-de-sac approximately 380' south of 50th Avenue to 195' north of 50th Avenue Central Avenue N.E. to Central Avenue N.E. 49th Avenue N.E. to 50th Avenue N.E. 49th Avenue to Fairway Drive Pennine Pass to Stinson Boulevard 5~ St. N.W. to 325' north of centerline of North Upland Crest Work would include selective concrete curb and gutter replacement, crack sealing, bituminous surface patching and seal coat application. o Such improvement is necessary, cost-effective, and feasible as detailed in the feasibility report. Such improvement is hereby ordered as proposed in the Council Resolution adopted the 9th day of February, 1998. 4. These improvements shall also be known as P.I.R. #961 - Project 9801. o Kevin Hansen is hereby designated as the engineer for this improvement. The engineer shall prepare plans and specifications for the making of such improvement and advertise for bids. Adopted by the Council this 9th day of March, 1998. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Calh CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Jo-Anne Student, Secretary to the Council Joseph Sturdevant, Mayor AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS - MONDAY, MARCH 9, 1998 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, 590 40TH AVENUE NE Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 782-2800, Extension 209, to make arrangements. 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL (Commencement of Cablecasting of Regular Meeting on Television.) 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA (The Council, upon majority vote of its members, may make additions and deletions to the agenda. These may be items brought to the attention of the Council under the previous portion of agenda, or items submitted after the agenda preparation deadline.) 4. CONSENT AGENDA (These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and ~vill be enacted as part of the Consent Agenda by one motion. Items removed from consent agenda approval will be taken up as next order of business.) A. Move to adopt the consent agenda items as listed below: 1) Approval of Regular Council Mtg. and Public Hrg. Feb. 23, 1998 2) Fluorescent Bulb Collection - May 2, 1998 3) Res. No. 98-34, Agreement with Mn/DOT Re: 44th Ave. Temporary Detour Route 4) Res. No. 98-35, Metropolitan Grant Study - Inflow/Infiltration Reduction 5) Award of Plant Mixed Bituminous Materials 6) Award of Road Aggregate 7) Supplemental Agreement No. 1 Retaining Wall Project 8) Res. No. 98-36 AuthorizIng Agmt. with Mn/DOT Re: EVP 9) Approval of License Applications 10)Payment-of Bills RECOGNITION, PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, GUESTS None 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7. ITEMS Iq'OR CONSIDERATION A. Other Ordinances and Resolutions None B. Bid Considerations None C. Other Business 1) Central Avenue and 37th Avenue Area Traffic Study 2) Contract Renewal 3) Referendum Petition 8. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report of the City Manager B. Report of the City Attorney 9. GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS A. Minutes of Board and Commission Meetings 1) Park and Recreation Commission February 25, 1998 Meeting 2) Economic Development Authority February 17, 1998 Meeting 10. CITIZEN FORUM TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA 11. ADJOURNMENT WF/js ADMINISTRATION MARCH 6, 1998 Mayor Joseph ~qtuvdavanl Councilmembers Donald G. Jolly Marlaine Szurek Gary L. Peterson Robert W. Ruettimann City Manager Walter R. Fehst The following is the agenda for the regular meeting of the City Council to be held at 7:00 PM on Monday, March 9, 1998 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, Minnesota. The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 782-2800, Extension 209, to make arrangements. (TDD/782-2806 for deaf only) 1. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA (The Council, upon majority vote of its members, may make additions and deletions to the agenda. These may be items brought to the attention of the Council under the Citizen Forum or items submitted after the agenda preparation deadline.) 4. CONSENT AGENDA (These items are considered to be routine by the City Council and will be enacted as part of the Consent Agenda by one motion. Items removed from consent agenda approval will be taken up as next order of business.) A. MOTION: Move to Adopt the Consent Agenda as Follows: 1) Approval of Council Meetin.q Minutes MOTION: Move to approve the minutes of the February 23, 1998 Regular Council Meeting and the minutes of the February 23, 1998 Public Improvement Hearing as presented. 2) Fluorescent Bulb Collection - Saturday, May 2, 1998 MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor and City Council to enter into a contract with NSP for the collection of spent fluorescent bulbs from residential and small businesses in Columbia Heights and surrounding communities served by N.S.P. Expenses related to this collection will be reimbursed by Northern States Power Company. COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MARCH 9, 1998 PAGE 2 3) Resolution No. 98-34 Beinq a Resolution Approving Cooperative Agreement No. 77081 With Mn/DOT for the Use of 44th Avenue as a Temporary Detour Route MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. MOTION: Move to approve Resolution No. 98-34 and authorize Agreement No. 77081 with the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation which provides payment for the temporary detour of 0.3 miles of 44th Avenue N.E. from University to Main Street for the 1998 construction season. 4) Resolution No. 98-35 Beinq a Resolution Regarding a Metropolitan Grant Study for Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) Reduction MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 98-35 being a resolution authorizing the Director of Public Works to submit a Metropolitan Council Application for I/I reduction and to serve as the City's contact with the Metropolitan Council. 5) Award of Plant Mixed Bituminous Materials MOTION: Move to award the bid and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement to purchase the 1998 Plant Mixed Bituminous Materials and dispose of concrete/asphalt rubble based upon the Iow formal bids received at the unit prices. 6) Award of Road A.qgregates MOTION: Move to award the bid for and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement to purchase Road Aggregate Materials for the 1998 season based upon Iow formal bids received at the unit prices. 7) Supplemental Aqreement No. 1 for Retaininq Wall Proiect #9530 MOTION: Move to authorize Supplemental Agreement No. 1 substituting certain landscaping items for the retaining wall project on the south side of 44th Avenue N.E. to Sunram Construction in the amount of $3,326.75. 8) Resolution No. 98-36 Beinq A Resolution Authorizing Agreement with Mn/DOT MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. MOTION: Move to approve and adopt Resolution No. 98-36 and authorize Agreement No. 76965 with Mn/DOT to improve the intersections and install Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption at traffic control signals on T.H. 65 at 40th Avenue, 41st Avenue, 44th Avenue, 47th Avenue, 50th Avenue and 52nd Avenue. COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MARCH 9, '1998 PAGE 3 9) Approval of License Applications MOTION: Move to approve the license applications as listed and rental housing license applications as listed in the memo dated February 20, 1998 from Fire Chief Kewatt. 10) Payment of Bills MOTION: Move to pay the bills as listed out of proper funds. 5. RECOGNITION, PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS AND GUESTS None 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS None 7. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION A. Other Ordinances and Resolutions None B. Bid Considerations None C. Other Business 1) Central Avenue and 37th Avenue Area Traffic Study MOTION: Move to award the Central and 37th Avenues area traffic study, Municipal Project #9804 to BRW of Minneapolis, Minnesota based upon their Iow, qualified, responsible bid in the amount of $8,736.00; and furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. 2) Contract Renewal MOTION: Move to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to approve the 1998 Training Facility Contract between St. Paul Fire and the Columbia Heights Fire Department. COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA MARCH 9, 1998 PAGE 4 3) Referendum Petition MOTION: Move to reject the request of the referendum petition and schedule a special election for Tuesday, April 21, 1998, and to approve the wording of the ballot as in the attached. MOTION: Move to appropriate funds of $8,000 for the City's election budget from the Mayor-Council Contingency Fund. 8. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report of the City Manaqer B. Report of the City Attorney GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS A. Minutes of Boards and Commissions 1) Park and Recreation Commission February 25, 1998 Meeting 2) Economic Development Authority February 17, 1998 Meeting 10. CITIZENS FORUM TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA (At this time, citizens have an opportunity to discuss with the Council items not on the regular agenda. The citizen is requested to limit their comments to five minutes. Please note, the public may address the Council regarding specific agenda items at the time the item is being discussed.) 11. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Move to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting. Walter Fehst, City Manager WF/js OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING FOR LOCAL IMPROVEMENT FEBRUARY 23, 1998 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL The Mayor called the Public Hearing to order at 6:35 p.m. Present were Mayor Sturdevant and Councilmembers Szurek, Jolly, Ruettimann and Peterson. 2. PRESENTATION OF INFORMATION BY STAFF RE: ALLEY CONSTRUCTION PIR 949, PROJECT #9613 The Assistant City Engineer presented the information for Project #9613 being alley construction for the alley located between 39th and 40th Avenues, Quincy Street to the North- South Alley. The Assistant City Engineer stated that the construction was completed in September, 1997. To be more equitable for the four parcels involved, the assessment was based on a per parcel basis. The estimated costs per parcel were $785.89 and the actual costs were $673.91 per lot. The City absorbed the labor, administrative and engineering costs. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS There were no residents present for questions. 4 o CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION NO. 98-29 Motion by Ruettimann, second by Peterson to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. Roll call: All ayes RESOLUTION NO. 98-29 Adopting assessment roll according to the City Charter for the following local improvement and determining that said improvement has been made and ratifying and conforming all other proceedings, heretofore had: Special Assessments numbered 949. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, met at 6:30 o'clock p.m. on the 23rd day of February, 1998, inthe City Council Chambers, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, Minnesota, being the time and place PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 2 set when and where all persons interested could appear and be heard by the Council with respect to benefits, and to the proportion of the cost of making the local improvements above described, a notice of such hearing having been heretofore duly published as required by law, and a notice mailed to each property owner of record, stating the proposed amount of the assessment; and, WHEREAS, this Council has heretofore estimated and fixed the cost of such local improvements and has prepared an assessment roll therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS HEREBY RESOLVES: Section 1: That this Council does hereby adopt the aforesaid assessment roll known and descibed as "Assessment Roll for Local Improvements numbered 949. Section 2: That this Council hereby finds and determines that each of the lots and parcels of land enumerated in said assessment roll was and is especially benefitted by such improvement in an amount not less than the amount set opposite in the column headed "Total Assessment". And this Council further finds and detemines that the proper proportion of the cost of such improvements to be especially assessed against such lot or parcel of land is the amount set opposite the description of each such lot or parcel of land respectively in said assessment roll. Section 3: That said assessments may be paid in part or in full without interest on or before March 25, 1998, or in annual installments for a period of five years as designated on the assessment roll, payable on or before the 15th of September, annual, with 9.5% interest thereon. Failure to pay the annual installment renders the same delinquent and thereafter a 10% penalty is added and the said delinquent special assessment is certified to the County for collection with the real estate tax. Section 4: That this Council did hereby determine and redetermine to proceed with said improvement, does ratify and confirm all other proceedings heretofore had in regard to this improvement, and said improvement shall hereafter be known and numbered as Local Improvement numbered PIR 949 - Project #9613. PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 3 Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Passed this 23rd day of February, 1998. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll call: Ruettiman Peterson All ayes Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary ADJOURNMENT Motion by Ruettimann, second by Szurek to adjourn the Public Hearing at 6:45 p.m. Roll call: All ayes Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL The Mayor called the Regular Council Meeting to order. Present were Mayor Sturdevant and Councilmembers Szurek, Jolly, Ruettimann and Peterson. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA The City Manager advised that the rental license for 5031 Jefferson Street can be approved in that the owner has complied with the requirements of the Housing Maintenance Code. This item is 6-B. 4-A-3 is the agenda item for Council work sessions in March. It was decided that one date would be changed. A representative of the Reservoir Boulevard Association requested that the acceptance of referendum petitions be added to the agenda. It was added to #5 Presentations. CONSENT AGENDA (Items on the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City Council and are enacted upon by one motion. Items removed from the Consent Agenda are taken up as the next order of business.) A. Adoption of the Consent Aqenda: Motion by Peterson, second by Szurek to approve the Consent Agenda items as follows: 1) ADproval of Council Meetin~ Minutes The Council approved the minutes of the February 9, Regular Council Meeting as presented. 1998 2) Donation of Vehicle to Fire DeDartment The Council accepted the donation of a junk vehicle from Daniel O'Brien, Volunteer Firefighter, for training use. 3) Dates for Council Work Sessions in March The Council established Tuesday, March 10, 1998 at 6:30 p.m. and Monday, March 16, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. as times and dates for Council work sessions. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 2 4) Transfer of Funds from General Fund to Police DeDartment The Council appropriated $1,305, the total fees collected from police officer applicants, from the General Fund revenue to the Police Department's 1998 budget under line #3050 to assist in covering the cost of the written test for entry level police officer. 5) Pavment of Anoka County for Truth in Taxation, Special Assessment Laws and Tax Increment Financinq Laws The Council authorized payment of $15,338.09 for administering the 1997 tax increment financing laws of Minnesota, Truth in Taxation, and Special Assessments, with expenses being charged to the TIF Debt Services Fund and the General Fund. 6) Attendance of the Finance Director at the Annual GFOA Conference The Council authorized the attendance of William Elrite, Finance Director, at the Annual Government Finance Officers' Association Conference from June 28 to July 1, 1998 and authorized that all related expenses be reimbursed from Fund 101-41510. 7) Close Hearinq - Rental License Revocation, 4131 Washinqton Street The Council closed the public hearing regarding the revocation of the rental license held by Carol Topel for rental property at 4131 Washington Street in that the provisions of the Housing Maintenance Code have been complied with. 8) .Payment of Bills The Council authorized the payment of the bills as listed out of proper funds. 9) ADDroval of License ADDlications The Council approved the license applications as listed and the rental housing license applications as listed in the February 11, 1998 memo from the Fire Chief. Roll call on Consent Agenda: Ail ayes 5. RECOGNITION, PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS AND GUESTS A. Introduction of Newly-Hired Employee Joseph Hollman, the newly-hired City Planner, was introduced. B. Recoqnition of Volunteers Engraved clocks were presented to Gary Olson and Richard Schmidt for their service on the Charter Commission. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 3 C. Referendum Petitions A representative of the Reservoir Boulevard Association read from the Columbia Heights City Charter that portion which addressed referendum. She stated the history of charter changes by referencing Ordinance No. 1280 and Ordinance No. 1369 relative to rezoning. Petitions which had been circulated in the City about rescinding the rezoning of two parcels on Reservoir Boulevard were presented to the Council. They will be received by the City Clerk on February 24, 1998. The circulators of the petitions were advised this matter will be on the agenda of the March 9, 1998 Council Meeting. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Local Law Enforcement EquiDment Block Grant Public Hearinq Councilmember Jolly mentioned a letter he received suggesting what could be purchased with this grant money. The City Manager will respond to this letter. The Police Chief felt there would probably be a duplication of equipment if the suggested equipment were purchased. Motion by Ruettimann, second by Peterson to close the public hearing and approve the list of equipment to be purchased with this grant. Roll call: All ayes B. Resolution No. 98-32 Beinq a Resolution A~provinq Revocation of Rental License for Property at 5031 Jefferson Street The resolution was not read as the property owner complied with the Housing Maintenance Code. MOTION: Move to close the public hearing regarding the revocation or suspension of the rental license held by Lisa Kelly regarding rental property at 5031 Jefferson Street in that the provisions of the Housing Maintenance Code have been complied with. Roll call: All ayes 7. ITEMS FOR CONSIDEP~ATION A. Other Resolutions and Ordinances 1) Resolution No. 98-30 Beinq a Resolution Relatinq to a Housinq Proqram for the Benefit of Crest View Corporation and the Issuance of Revenue Bonds to Finance and Refinance the Costs REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 4 The City's bond counsel, John Utley, explained that this resolution will afford the Crest View Corporation preliminary approval to proceed. The Public Hearing was opened at 7:27 p.m. Councilmember Jolly inquired if this activity will have any affect on the City's bond rating. The bond counsel responded there will be no affect and that the City bears no financial responsibility in this transaction. The City's participation is only necessary in that the bonds must be issued by a tax exempt entity. Motion by Peterson, second by Ruettimann to close the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. Roll call: All ayes Motion by Peterson, second by Ruettimann to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. Roll call: All ayes RESOLUTION NO. 98-30 RESOLUTION RELATING TO A HOUSING PROGRAM FOR THE BENEFIT OF CREST VEIW CORPORATION AND THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS TO FINANCE AND REFINANCE THE COSTS THEREOF I3ArDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AS AMENDED: GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL THERETO. APPROVING THE HOUSING PROGRAM AND ESTABLISHING COMPLIANCE WITH CERTAIN REIMBURSEMENT REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986, AS AMENDED BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota (the "City") as follows: Section 1. Recitals 1.01. The City of Columbia Meights, Minnesota (the "City") is a home rule city duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota and the Charter of the City. 1.02. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462C, as amended (the "Act"), the City is authorized to carry out the public purposes decribed in the Act by issuing its revenue bonds to provide funds to finance or refinance facilities located within the City comprised of combined multifamily housing developments and health care facilities. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 5 As a condition to the issuance of such revenue bonds, the City must adopt a housing program providing the information required by Section 462C.03 subdivision la. of the Act (the "Housing Program"). A public hearing must be held on the Housing Program after one publication of notice in a newspaper circulating generally in the City, at least fifteen days before the hearing. On or before the day on which notice of the public hearing is published, the City must submit the Housing Program to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment. 1.03 Crest View Corporation, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the "Corporation") has proposed that the City, pursuant to the Act, issue its revenue bonds in the approximate aggregate principal amount of $10,500,000, in one or more series at one time or from time to time (the "Bonds"), the proceeds of which will be loaned by the City to the Corporation to refinance the current indebtedness of the Corporation with respect to its existing facilities in the City (the "Existing Facilities") and to finance all or a portion of the costs of certain improvements to the Existing Facilities (the "Improvements"). The proceeds of the Bonds will also be applied to fund certain reserves and to pay certain costs of issuance of the Bonds. The Existing Facilities are owned by the Corporation and are comprised of the following: (i) Crest View Lutheran Home, a 122-bed licensed nursing facility ("Crest View Lutheran Home"); (ii) The Boulevard, a 77-unit elderly housing independent living facility ("The Boulevard"); and (iii) Royce Place, a 50-unit elderly housing assisted living facility ("Royce Place"). 1.04. On August 18, 1987, the City issued its Health Care Facility Revenue Bonds (Crest View Lutheran Home Project), Series 1987 (the "Series 1987 Bonds"), in the original aggregate principal amount of 44,400,000 to refinance the outstanding indebtedness of Crest View Lutheran Home and The Boulevard and to finance certain improvements to such facilities. On March 19, 1991, the City issued its Board and Care Facility Revenue Bonds (~LA Insured Mortgage Loan - Royce Place Project), Series 1991A, in the original aggregate principal amount of $2,770,000 and its Board and Care Facility Revenue Bonds (Royce Place Project), Series 1991B, in the original aggregatge principal amount of $560,000 (collectively, the "Series 1991 Bonds"), to finance the construction and related costs of Royce Place. A portion of the proceeds of the Bonds are proposed to be applied to the redemption of the outstanding principal amount of the Series 1987 Bonds and Series 1991 Bonds. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 pAGE 6 . 7 (f) of the internal Revenue code of ~nder Sectl0n. 14.,__~,,~ ~rior to t. he issuance of the 1.05. -- - -~ ,+ne ' ~ou= ,, = ..... t De held by the City 1986, as amen~e.~ ~u.__ ~,,~v noticea Bonds a publiC near~n~ council .... e~resentat ions mad~ ~.. -he corpora ~on ,--= whe folloW~ g P ~e~%ity hereby ma~ .... ' ' declarations: inations, and = ~ ~o~ination dete~ ....... onsist oz = -__ ~=cilities _ ~s~inc Facillt~e~_~ =n~ health car=~.tt .... ~'~ (a) The Ex~_- _~_~ developme~= .- ~wing cona~t~o~o- &]ltifa~ily ~%~s~2~ilities ~eet t~e ~u~ o~ the Existing .... ~s developments ..... ed ~or rental and the Exis~ ~ ~h '" ~s were d=o~=--~:~lv housing ae -~' ~o be used ~cuuF~--~= cilities wer=_=~ . ~ ! handlcap~=u ~ health .... ~t~nc Fa ...... hvszcal Y ~A other . rimarilY DL~ ical, pe~S°~=t vailable on = ~- ~el~le?~=~e residents ~n u~= ~ . __~A to the - -= ~he Bon~S w~z '~ be appllea ,~ The orocee~ ~f=~as of the loan ~z~oOl BondS, ~' '7f~ and the p~L~_ ~d the Set,em_ ~---+ion with C°rP°r~ut~" ~eries 1987 Bo~u~=~'ness o~ the corP~ce the ~. .... ~ertain oun= .... ~acilit~es, =..~A for ..... ~t to the _ _= ~ debt serv~ ___~ ~ncidenu u~ imDrovemenu~, i~.. ~ertain costS =~ ~ ~5+.~ will ent=~ ..... _ h~_ and to p~3 ~ = ~ Bonds. T~e =~3.__ ~an repa~enu~ ~onu=, __A =~le o~ u~ ~n ~ecuir~n9 ~ the loan issuance =f _i7.7 th the Corpora~zu - = or oration in amounts sufficient to repay Loan ~ r oration to pay all costS of from the C_ P iring the ~o ~ ' cluding taxes thereon- --=~n due and requ ..~ the pro3ect' ~n the acquisition, . - - authorizing ----ovement o~ the (C) In prel lm!~r%l~ 1 ~ng and h~n , e~ PP . the C~ty's purpose is, ~onstruction,. f~,,~nce of the Bond~l_~= the publiC welfare proD egu =%'~ hereof w~ ~, - . . . and the e~==~ t zts residentS by retaining and improving for the elderly and otherwise furthering the purposes and policies of the Act. (d) The undertaking of the Housing program and the issuance the Bonds to finance all or a portion of the costS thereof are in the public interest. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 7 Section 3. Notice of HearinG. The City Council authorized the publication of a notice of public hearing with respect to: (i) approval of the Housing Program, as required by the Act: (ii) the required public hearing under Section 147(f) of the Code: (iii) the preliminary approval of the issuance of the Bonds. The notice of public hearing was published in the Focus News, a newspaper of general circulation in the City, on February 5, 1998, eighteen days prior to the date of the public hearing held on Monday, February 23, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall in the City. Section 4. Housinq Program. The Housing Program was prepared and submitted to the Metropolitan Council for its review on February 5, 1998. The preparation of the Housing Program and the submission of the Housing Program to the Metropolitan Council are hereby ratified, confirmed, and approved. A copy of the Housing Program is attached to this resolution and is hereby approved without amendment. Section 5. Preliminary Approval. This Council hereby gives preliminary approval to the issuance of the Bonds in the approximate aggregate principal amount of $10,500,000 to finance all or a portion of the costs of the Housing Program, subject to final approval following the preparation of bond documents, and subject to final determination by this Council that the finacing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds are in the best interest of the City. Section 6. Reimbursement of Costs Under the Code. 6.1 The United States Department of the Treasury has promulgated final regulations governing the use of the proceeds of tax-exempt bonds, all or a portion of which are to be used to reimburse the City or a borrower from the City for project expenditures paid prior to the date of issuance of such bonds. Those regulations (Treasury Regulations, Section 1.105-2) (the "Regulations") require that the City adopt a statement of official intent to reimburse an original expenditure not later than sixty days after payment of the original expenditure. The Regulations also generally require that the bonds be issued and the reimbursement allocation made from the proceeds of the bonds occur within eighteen months after the later of: (i) the date the expenditure is paid; or (ii) the date the project is placed in service or abandoned, but in no event more than three years after the date the expenditure is paid. The Regulations qeneraliy permit reimbursement of capital expenditures and co~ts of issuance of the bonds. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 8 6.2 The City reasonably expects to reimburse the Corporation for the expenditures made for costs of the Improvements from the proceeds of the Bonds in all estimated maximum aggregate principal amount of $2,000,000 after the date of payment of all or a portion of the costs of the Improvements. All reimbursed expenditures shall be capital expenditures, a cost of issuance of the Bonds or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d) (3) of the Regulations and also qualifying expenditures under the Act. Based on representations by the Corporation, other than (i) expenditures to be paid or reimbursed from sources other than the Bonds, (ii) expenditures permitted to be reimbursed under prior regulations pursuant to the transitional provision contained in Section 1.150-2(j) (2) (i) (B) of the Regulations, (iii) expenditures constituting preliminary expenditures within the meaning of Section !.150-2(f) (2) of the Regulations, or (iv) expenditures in a "de minimus" amount (as defined in Section 1.150-2(f) (!) of the Regulations),no expenditures for the Improvements have been made by the Corporation more than sixty days before the date of adoption of this resolution. 6.3 Based on representations by the Corporation, as of the date hereof, there are no funds of the Corporation reserved, allocated on a long term basis or otherwise set aside (or reasonably expected to be reserved, allocated on a long term basis or otherwise set aside) to provide permanent financing for the expenditures related to the Improvements to be financed from proceeds of the Bonds, other than pursuant to the issuance of the Bonds. This resolution, therefore, is determined to be consistent with the budgetary and financial circumstances of the Corporation as they exist or are reasonably foreseeable on the date hereof. Section 7. Costs. The Corporation will pay the administrative fees of the City and pay, or upon demand reimburse the City for payment of, any and all costs incurred by the City in conection with the Existing Facilities and the Improvements and the issuance of the Bonds, whether or not the Existing Facilties are refinanced, the Improvements are carried to completion, or the Bonds are issued. Section 8. Commitment Conditional. The adoption of this resolution does not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the Bonds as requested by the Corporation. If, based on comments received at the public hearing to be held pursuant to this resolution, or other information made available to or obtained by the City during REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 9 its review of the Project, it appears that the Project or the issuance of Bonds to finance the costs thereof is not in the public interest or inconsistent with the purposes of the Act, the City reserves the right not to give final approval to the issuance of the Bonds. The City also retains the right, in its sole discretion, to withdraw from participation and accordingly not issue the Bonds should the City Council, at any time prior to the issuance thereof, determine that it is in the best interests of the City not issue the Bonds or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the documents for the transaction. Section 9. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, on this twenty-third day of February, 1998. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll call: Peterson Ruettimann Ail ayes Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary 2) Resolution No. 98-31 Beinq a Resolution Re!atinq to the Fees and Expenses to be Imposed Upon Borrowers in Conjunction with Bonds This resolution sets forth the City's policy with regards to recovering costs and establishing fees for all applicants involved in the issuance of Industrial Development Bonds, Housing Revenue Bonds and derivatives of these types of issuances as provided for under Minnesota Statutes. Motion by Ruettimann, second by Sturdevant to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. Roll call: Ail ayes RESOLUTION NO. 98-31 RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE FEES AND EXPENSES TO BE IMPOSED UPON BORROWERS IN CONJUNCTION WITH BONDS ISSUED BY THE CITY UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 469, AS AMENDED, AND UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, CHAPTER 462C, AS AMENDED REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 10 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota (the "City"), is a home rule city duly organized and existing under the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota and the Charter of the City and is authorized to issue revenue bonds as follows: (i) under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.152-469.1651, as amended (the "Industrial Development Act"), to finance industrial, commercial, and health care facilities; and (ii) under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the "Housing Act"), to finance multifamily housing developments for persons and families of low and moderate income and for elderly persons. Section 2. Upon receipt of a request to issue revenue bonds under either the Industrial Development Act or the Housing Act, the City will evaluate the benefits to the City and make a determination as to whether it is in the best interests of the City to issue the proposed series of revenue bonds (the "Bonds"). Section 3. Unless expressly waived by resolution of the City Council, the party or parties receiving the benefits of the Bonds proposed to be issued under the Industrial Development Act or the Housing Act (the "Borrower") shall pay on the date of issuance of the Bonds or agree in the bond documentation to pay on specified future dates the fees and expenses referenced in this Section 3. 3.01 Filin~ Fee. The Borrower shall pay to the City nonrefundabie filing fee in an amount to be determined by the City Manager (but not to exceed $3,000). This filing fee shall be paid prior to the consideration of any preliminary resolution calling a public hearing or preliminary approving the issuance of the Bonds. 3.02 Expense's. The borrower shall pay to the City on the date of issuance of the Bonds, or within five days from the date of receipt of an invoice from the City, the amount of the expenses paid or incurred by the City with respect to the issuance of the Bonds. Such expenses include, but are not limited to, charges for the publication of public hearing notices, legal fees, financial analyst fees, bond counsel fees; and out-of-pocket expenses paid or incurred by City staff. 3.03. Date of Issuance Fee. On the date of issuance of the Bonds, the borrower shall pay to the City a fee equal to one- half percent (1/2%) of the principal amount of the Bonds issued on such date. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23,1 998 PAGE 11 3.04. Annual Administrative Fee. On the first anniversary of the date of issuance of the Bonds (or, if more convenient for the Borrower, on the first day of the month in which the anniversary of the date of issuance of the Bonds occurs), an administrative fee equal to one-half percent (1/2%) of the principal amount of the Bonds outstanding on such anniversary. On the second anniversary of the date of issuance of the Bonds and on each subsequent anniversary of the date of issuance of the Bonds as long as any Bonds remain outstanding (or, if more convenient for the Borrower, on the first day of the month in which each anniversary of the date of issuance of the Bonds occurs), an administrative fee equal to one-tenth percent (1/10%) of the principal amount of the Bonds outstanding on each such anniversary. Section 4. If Bonds are issued by the City as obligations the interest on which is not includable in gross income for purposes of federal income taxation, the administrative fees imposed by this resolution will be adjusted, if necessary, to ensure compliance with any arbitrage limitations imposed by Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Service of 1986, as amended (or any successor statute). The City Manager will determine, in the sole discretion of the City Manager (based uopn the advice of counsel to the City or bond counsel), the necessity of adjusting the administrative fees and the nature and amount of such adjustment(s). At the request of a borrower, the City Manager is also authorized to make adjustments to the amounts and dates of payment of the annual administrative fees, if such adjustments do not reduce the total amount of such fees below the net present value of the aggregate amount of such payments, as determined by the City Manager. Section 5. Effective Date. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. Passed this 23rd day of February, 1998 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll call: Ruettimann Szurek Ail ayes Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary 3) Resolution No. 98-28 BeinG a Resolution to Lev7 Assessment for GaraGe Removal at 4200 Sixth Street, PIR 963 State Statute mandates that on this type of assessment only 8% interest can be charged and the assessment period can only be for five years. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 12 Motion by Jolly, second by Peterson to waive the reading of the resolution there being ample copies available for the public. Roll call: All ayes RESOLUTION NO. 98-28 Adopting assessment roll according to the City Charter for the following local improvement and determining that said improvement has been made and ratifying and conforming an Authorization to Raze (Repair) Hazardous Building, heretofore received: Special Assessments numbered 963. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, met at 7:00 o'clock p.m. on the 23rd day of February, 1998, in the City Council Chambers, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, Minnesota, being the time and place set when and where all persons interested could appear and be heard by the Council with respect to benefits, and to the proportion of the cost of making the local improvement above described, and a notice mailed to the property owner of record, stating the proposed amount of the assessment; and, WHEREAS, this Council has heretofore estimated and fixed the cost of such local improvement and has prepared an assessment roll therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS HEREBY RESOLVES: Section 1. That this Council does hereby adopt the aforesaid assessment roll known and described as "Assessment Roll for Local Improvements" numbered 963. Section 2: That this Council hereby finds and determines that each of the lots and parcels of land enumerated in said assessment roll was and is especially benefitted by such improvement in an amount not less than the amount set opposite in the column headed "Total Assessment" And this Council further finds and determines that the proper proportion of the cost of such improvements to be especially assessed against such lot or parcel of land is the amount set opposite the description of each such lot or parcel of land respectively in said assessment roll. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 13 Section 3: That said assessment may be paid in part or in full without interest on or before March 25, 1998, or in annual installments for a period of five years as designated on the assessment roll, payable on or before the 15th day of September, annually, with 8% interest thereon. Failure to pay the annual installment renders the same delinquent and thereafter a 10% penalty is added and the said delinquent special assessment is certified to the County for collection with the real estate tax. Section 4: That this Council did hereby determine and redetermine to proceed with improvement, does ratify and confirm all other proceedings heretofore had in regard to this improvement, and said improvement shall hereafter be known and numbered as Local Improvement numbered PIR 963. Section 5: This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. Passed this 23rd day of February, 1998. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll call: Jolly Peterson Ail ayes Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary C. Other Business 1) Amend Minutes of January 26, 1998 Reqular Council Meeting Motion by Peterson, second by Ruettimann approval of the minutes of the January 26, Council Meeting. Roll call: All ayes to reconsider 1998 Regular Motion by Peterson, second by Ruettimann to amend the minutes of the January 26, 1998 Regular Council Meeting with the addition of the following language: "A resident from the area of the project recalled discussing with Councilmember Jolly having an annual review of the conditional use permits associated with this project. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 14 Councilmember Szurek stated this is always a consideration with conditional use permits. Councilmember Peterson noted that this condition can be included specifically in the permits. He felt the residents would probably serve as the mechanism to trigger the review. Staff noted it had been a condition of the permit and that property owners within three hundred feet of the property will be notified of the review. It was suggested that rather than having an annual review it should be one year from the date of occupancy review so it does not need to be done each year." Roll call: All ayes Motion by Peterson, second by Ruettimnann amended minutes of the January 26, 1998 Meeting. Roll call: All ayes to approve the Regular Council 8. ADMINISTR3~TIVE REPORTS A. Report of the City Manager The City Manager had nothing to report at this time. B. Report of the City Attorney The City Attorney had nothing to report at this time. 9. GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS The following meeting minutes were included in the agenda packet: January 21, 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission, January 28, 1998 Park and Recreation Commission and February 3, 1998 Planning and Zoning Commission. Councilmember Jolly noted that Sergeant James Kapala was retiring from the Police Department after 28 years of service. He also noted that Vern Rozmark has recently retired from the Public Works Department after 37 years of service. 10. CITIZENS FORUM TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA There was no one present for Citizens Forum. REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 1998 PAGE 15 RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION The Regular Council Meeting was adjourned to an Executive Session at 7:48 p.m. to discuss City of Columbia Heights vs. Stauch and the Council appointed Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary, to keep a written report; to be followed by the continued performance evaluation of the City Manager. RECOAIVENE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING Motion by Sturdevant, second by Ruettimann to reconvene the Regular Council Meeting at 8:05 p.m. from the Executive Session which was called to discuss the City of Columbia Heights vs. Stauch with Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary, keeping a written report and that the continued performance evaluation of the City Manager was continued to Tuesday, February 24, 1998 at 6:00 p.m. Roll call: All ayes 11. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Ruettimann, second by Szurek to adjourn the Regular Council Meeting at 8:06 p.m. Roll call: All ayes Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary Meeting of: March 9, 1998 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING CITY DEPARTMENT: MANAGER'S NO: SPECIAL PROJECTS APPROVAL ITEM: FLUORESCENT BULB COLLECTION BY: JEAN KUEHN BY: May 2, 1998 DATE: Feb 10, 1998 DATE: No: The City of Columbia Heights is planning another fluorescent bulb collection for residents and small businesses of Columbia Heights and the adjacent area being served by N.S.P. The collection will be held at the Columbia Heights Recycling Center on Saturday, May 2, 1998 from 9 am to 1 pm. Attached is the contract with Northern States Power Company wherein, they agree to reimburse the City of Columbia Heights for expenses incurred by this collection. And the City agrees to accept bulbs from residents at no charge and to make all necessary arrangements for collection and transportation of the spent bulbs. The collection will be promoted through city utility bills, city newsletter, press releases to local papers and of course, cable TV. This contract is similar to the previous ones the City has entered into. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize Mayor and City Council to enter into a contract with NSP for the collection of spent fluorescent bulbs from residential and small businesses in Columbia Heights and surrounding communities served by N.S.P. Expenses related to this collection will be reimbursed by Northern States Power Company. COUNCIL ACTION: FLUORESCENT/HID LAMP RECYCLING AGREEMENT This is an agreement between Northern States Power Company (NSP), and the City of Columbia Heights. RESPONSIBILITIES OF NSP NSP agrees that it will abide by all of the following conditions of participation in this program: NSP agrees to pay the City of Columbia Heights for costs associated with the collection and recycling of fluorescent and HID lamps during its Spring (May) and Fall (October), 1998 collection events. These costs to include the cost of labor, supplies, transportation, recycling, disposal, and administrative costs associated with lamp collection and recycling. B. NSP agrees to pay the costs outlined above within thirty days of receiving invoices from the City of Columbia Heights for these services. 2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS The City of Columbia Heights agrees that it will abide by all of the following conditions of participation in this program: The City of Columbia Heights agrees that it will accept fluorescent and HID lamps at no charge from NSP residential customers during its Spring and Fall 1998 collection events. Bulbs will be accepted from residents of Columbia Heights, Fridley, and Spring Lake Park, and from residents of Coon Rapids and Blaine who can verify that they are NSP customers. Bo The City of Columbia Heights agrees to assume all responsibility for the coordination of the following tasks associated with the implementation of the collection events: · Procurement of lamp recycling services for all lamps collected during the events. · Procurement of waste hauling services to insure proper transport of fluorescent and HID wastes to recycling facilities. · Coordination of all efforts to obtain permission to use either public or private properties as the site of the collection events. The City of Columbia Heights agrees to provide NSP with documentation of all lamps collected, including, but not limited to, the total number and type of bulbs collected. 3. TERM The term of this agreement shall be from the date of receipt until October 31, 1998. 4. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE PARTIES Nothing in this Agreement creates or can be construed to create the relationship of agent/principal, employer/employee, or representative between NSP and the City of Columbia Heights. 5. COMPLETE AGREEMENT This agreement is fully merged and can only be amended in writing agreed to by all parties hereto. 6. NOTICES All notices under this agreement will be deemed delivered when mailed, postage prepaid, to the other parties at the following addresses: If to the City of Columbia Heights: Jean Kuehn Recycling Coordinator City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Ave N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421 if to Northern States Power Company: Kathy Chameli Northern States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall (RS-5) Minneapolis, MN 55401 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused their proper officers to execute this agreement on the dates below written: City of Columbia Heights By Title Date Northern StT...~.P ower ,~/e m p~any By ~_'-~,l ~ ;/~' ~ ~-~ Title '1 )',~t_~.., G_~,~.~ ~.~_ Date CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ PUBLIC WORKS _ ITEM: RESOLUTION APPROVING COOPERATIVE BY: K. Hanse~ BY: AGREEMENT NO. 77081 WITH MN/DOT FOR THE USE DATE: 3/4/98'~'~ DATE: OF 44TM AVENUE N.E. AS A TEMPORARY DETOUR Background: Mn/DOT has in its 1998 construction plans road work along T.H. 47 (University Avenue N.E.) from 27th Avenue N.E. to 35th Avenue N.E., under State Project No. 2726-61. The project was let on February 27, 1998 and is entirely funded by Mn/DOT. Discussion: No construction activity is proposed within the City of Columbia heights boundary under this project. The agreement provides for 44th Avenue N.E., from T.H. 47 to Main Street, to be used as a temporary detour route. The time length of the detour is estimated to be 214 days which means the detour would end near the end of October 1998. Based upon Mn/DOT's policy, the City is entitled to a monetary reimbursement from the State which provides for road life consumed on 44th Avenue for the detour period. Using Mn/DOT's calculation, the payment to the City is estimated to be $1,333. 44th Avenue N.E. is a City State-Aid roadway and is designed to carry higher traffic volumes and should not be negatively impacted by the proposed detour route. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the Resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approve Resolution No. 98-,~5/ and authorize Agreement No. 77081 with the State of Minnesota Department of Transportation which provides payment for the tempormy detour of 0.3 miles of 44m Avenue N.E. from University to Main Street for the 1998 construction season. KU~b 98-065 Attachment: Resolution Man/DOT letter dated 1/27/98 Detour Map COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION No. 98- AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT No. 77081 WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PROVIDE TEMPORARY DETOUR OF 0.3 MILES OF 44TM AVENUE N.E. FROM UNIVERSITY AVENUE TO MAIN STREET FOR THE 1998 CONSTRUCTION SEASON WHEREAS, the City Council of Columbia Heights is to provide a temporary detour from University Avenue to Main Street for the 1998 construction season and, WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation stipulates the use 0.3 miles of 44th Avenue as a temporary detour from University Avenue to Main Street for the 1998 construction season, and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota agrees to provide payment for the use of44t~ Avenue N.E. as a detour route during the grading, surfacing and bridge construction and other associated construction to be performed upon, along and adjacent to Trunk Highway No. 47 (University Avenue N.E.) from Main Street (west City limits) to Trunk Highway No. 47 within the corporate City limits under State Project No. 2726-61 (T.H. 47 = 156). NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Columbia Heights enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation, and authorize the Mayor and the City Manager to execute Agreement No. 77081. Dated this Day of ,1998 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By: Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Anoka City of Columbia Heights I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of Columbia Heights at a meeting thereof held in the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, on the 9th day of March, as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession. (Seal) Jo-Anne Student Deputy City Clerk i January 27, 1998 Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Oak. dale Office 3485 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 F-USLIO l'¥ 0 R ?;. h~ Oakdale Telephone (612) 779-5058 Fax: 779-5170 ~Mr. Mark Winson Columbia Heights City EngineerkPublic Works Director 590 - 40t~ Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421-3878 Dear Mr. Winson: Subject: Proposed Cooperative Construction Agreement Number 77081 City of Columbia Heights S.P. 2726-61 (T.H. 47=156) State Cost Compensation for Road Life Consumed by the T.H. 47 Detour Transmitted herewith in duplicate is a proposed agreement with the City of Columbia Heights. This agreement provides for payment by the State to the City for road life consumed on 44~ Avenue Northeast which will be used as a temporary trunk highway detour. Kindly present this agreement to the City Council for their approval and execution, which includes original signatures of the City Council authorized City officers on both copies of the agreement. Also required are two copies ora resolution passed by the City Council authorizing its officers to sign the agreement in its behalf. A suggested form of such resolution is also enclosed. It is requested that the executed agreement and resolution copies be forwarded to this office as soon as possible. A copy will be returned to the City when fully executed. This project is currently scheduled for a February 27, 1998 letting. Sincerely, Design Agreement Coordinator Enclosures: An Equal Opportunity Employer CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A BY: K. Hanse~ BY: GRANT APPLICATION FOR INFLOW/INFILTRATION DATE: 3/4/98'~'~' '~-~ DATE: & i) REvuCT ON ¥. ¥ Background: Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) is offering to Metro communities a grant and loan program to fund studies or projects to reduce excessive Inflow/Infiltration (VI) into the sanitary sewer system. Grant programs are available for studies while low interest loans are available for work programs. Both programs require cities to provide matching dollar commitments. Matching funds may be in-kind services as stafftime, city services such as televising sewer lines or cash for consultant services. Issues and Analysis: In 1983 a City-wide VI study was completed by Professional Services Group (PSG). The PSG study conducted an VI field investigation and analysis. The report recommended various preventive maintenance activities to reduce I/i. The City, over time, has implemented the following I/I reducing activities: Manhole lid replacement (replacing multi-holed lids with single holed or solid lids) Manhole rehabilitation Lining of sanitary sewers Replacement of sanitary sewers As recommended in the 1983 PSG Report, the last item to complete a successful I/i program would be the development and implementation of a cross-connection elimination program. The objective in developing a cross-connection program would be to systematically eliminate sources of inflow and infiltration including sump pumps, foundation drains and roof leaders to the sanitary sewer system. These private property sources were identified as the major source of Vi to our sanitary sewer system, but have not been acted on to date. The purpose of the grant application would be to provide a cursory update of the 1983 PSG I/i Study, develop a cross-connection elimination program in ordinance format, and to provide a complete economic assessment of performing a City-wide program. No physical disconnects are proposed at this time. Conclusions: Initial contact with the MCES indicates that Columbia Heights would have an excellent chance of being awarded a grant. A study would then be conducted in 1998 that would update the 1983 study and establish a program in ordinance format for the COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: RESOLUTION APPROVING SUBMITTAL OF A BY: K. Hansen BY: GRANT APPLICATION FOR INFLOW/INFILTRATION DATE: 3/4/98 DATE: (I & I) REDUCTION Continued - Page 2 elimination of cross-connections to our sanitary sewer system. If a subsequent work program is initiated, this would result in a benefit to the City by reducing peak water flows associated with rainfall or snow melt events, resulting in cost savings for the treatment of unnecessary clear water. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the Resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution No. 98-,J~,~ authorizing the Public Works Director to submit a Metropolitan Grant Application up to $10,000 for Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) reduction and to designate the Director of Public Works as the City's primary contact with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). 98-064 COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION NO. 98- BEING A RESOLUTION TO SUBMIT A METROPOLITAN GRANT APPLICATION UP TO $10,000 FOR INFLOW/INFILTRATION (I/i) REDUCTION AND DESIGNATE THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS AS THE CITY'S PRIMARY CONTACT WITH THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (MCES) WHEREAS, the City Council of Columbia Heights supports the reduction of Inflow/Infiltration (VI) into the sanitary sewer system, and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services has made available a grant program for Inflow/Infiltration reduction, WHEREAS, a matching dollar commitment will be provided by the City of Columbia Heights in the form of in-kind services or cash contributions, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the Public Works Director to submit a Metropolitan Grant Application up to $10,000 for Inflow/Infiltration (I/I) reduction and designates the Director of Public Works as the City's primary contact with the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES). Dated this day of ,1998. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLLrMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA BY: Joseph Sturdevant, Mayor Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Anoka City of Columbia Heights I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of Columbia Heights at a meeting thereof held in the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, on the 9th day of March, 1998, as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession. (Seal) Jo-Anne Student Deputy City Clerk CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO. q PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AWARD OF 1998 PLANT MIXED BY: K. Hansen~ BY: NO. BITUMINOUS MATERIALS ,t DATE: 3/3/98~ DATE: The City advertised and received bids on February 26, 1998, at 1:00 P.M. The City received 3 bids. A copy of the bid tab is attached. The City asked for bids either delivered or picked up. The picked up bid was adjusted for mileage, as indicated in the specifications, to reflect the City's total cost. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the bid and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement to purchase the 1998 Plant Mixed Bituminous Materials based upon low formal bids received at the unit prices and from the vendors as follows: MATERIALS AC Fine Sand Mix 3/8 AC Fine - Max. Agg. 2331 Type 3lB Base 2331 Type 4lB Binder 2331 - Type 4lB Wear 2331 - Type 4lA Wear COMPANY UNIT PRICE Midwest Asphalt $35.00 per ton - delivered Midwest Asphalt $21.45 per ton - picked up Midwest Asphalt $35.00 per ton - delivered Midwest Asphalt $21.45 per ton - picked up Bituminous Roadways Midwest Asphalt $30.00 per ton - delivered $19.55 per ton - picked up Bituminous Roadways Midwest Asphalt $30.00 per ton - delivered $19.55 per ton - picked up Bituminous Roadways Bituminous Roadways $30.00 per ton - delivered $19.50 per ton - picked up Bituminous Roadways Bituminous Roadways $30.00 per ton - delivered $19.50 per ton - picked up Winter Mix x_~ituminous Roadways $57.00 per ton - delivered Bituminous Roadways $50.00 per ton - picked up COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO. PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AWARD OF 1998 PLANT MIXED BY: K. Hanse~ BY: NO. BITUMINOUS MATERIALS DATE: 3/3/98~'~ DATE: Page 2 - Continued DISPOSAL OF CONCRETE/ASPHALT RUBBLE MATERIALS COMPANY Bituminous Midwest Asphalt Midwest Asphalt Concrete with steel Midwest Asphalt Midwest Asphalt Concrete without steel Midwest Asphalt Midwest Asphalt UNIT PRICE $20.00 per ton - picked up by Company $1.00 per ton - delivered by City forces $20.00 per ton - picked up by Company $10.00 per ton - delivered by City forces $20.00 per ton - picked up by Company $ 3.00 per ton - delivered by City forces KU~b 98-063 Attachment: Bid Tabulation COUNCIL ACTION: ITl ITl >. -..t c g 0 ~ 0 0~. 0 7.o o~ o~ _~ o o o~ o o o 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ ' ~ ~ ~ 0 g ~ ~_~ ~o 0 ~ 0 0 omb o ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 0 ~ ~ o ~ o 0 0 ~ ~ m 0 m ~m CITy COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO. ~g PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AWARD OF 1998 ROAD AGGREGATES BY: K. Hanse~ BY: NO. ~ ~- t~ "~ DATE: 3/3/98 ~z--~v DATE: The City advertised for formal bids and held a bid opening on February 26, 1998, at 1:00 P.M. Six bids were received and a copy of the bid tabulation is attached. The bid is for an annual contract on a unit price basis. Picked up prices are adjusted to indicate our total cost to obtain the material as was indicated in the specifications. The adjustment comes into play when labor and operating costs to haul the material are calculated on top of the picked up bid price. Staff is recommending award to the low bidder for each bid (type of material). RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the bid for and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement to purchase Road Aggregate Materials for the 1998 season based upon low formal bids received, at the unit prices and from the vendors as follows: MATERIAL COMPANY UNIT PRICE Bid A - FA-3 Aggregate Meridian Aggregates Midwest Asphalt $15.10 per ton - delivered $16.00 per ton - picked up Bid C - Sanding Sand Barton Sand & Gravel Barton Sand & Gravel $ 5.95 per ton - delivered $ 3.85 per ton - picked up Bid D - Class 2 Aggregate Bryan Rock $ 8.22 per ton - delivered Bryan Rock $ 4.75 per ton - picked up Bid E - Class 5 Aggregate Bryan Rock $ 8.22 per ton - delivered Bryan Rock $ 4.75 per ton - picked up Bid F - Alternate Class 5 Aggregate Barton Sand & Gravel Midwest Asphalt $ 6.45 per ton - delivered $ 4.95 per ton - picked up Bid G - Select Granular Borrow Barton Sand & Gravel Barton Sand & Gravel $ 5.65 per ton - delivered $ 3.35 per ton - picked up Bid H - Crushed Rock Hassan Sand & Gravel Bryan Rock $ 9.56 per ton - delivered $ 6.75 per ton - picked up KH:jb 98-062 Attachment: Bid Tabulation COUNCIL ACTION: '~ ___. 03 rn 3> O z ~ IT! O3 Z Z Z ;:0 --I 03 03 O GO rn m ~.o 0~· o- o. o~ 00 c0 o~ ~ m o m o o o o o ° °° °° °° °° °° ° z zz ioz z z o o o o o o-, o ' ~ o o z z ~ z z z ~~ z z ~ ~ z z ~~ ~m o o ~~ o o ~ o o ~~ o z z ~ z z z 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 ~zm CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/9 8 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AUTHORIZE SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BY: K. Hanser~) BY: NO. 1 FOR RETAINING WALL PROJECT #9530 DATE: 3/4/98 '-- DATE: Background: The contract to construct the retaining walls on the south side of 44t~ Avenue was awarded to Sunram Construction Inc. on September 8, 1997. In accordance with City Code, a fence or shrub barrier must be installed at the top of any retaining wall over 30" in height. Upon completion of the retaining walls on the south side of 44th avenue N.E., the property owners requested changes in landscaping materials. Analysis/Conclusion: The attached Supplemental Agreement reflects the property owner's choices in landscaping fence and shrubs. The additional costs will be available in State Aid Funds. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize supplemental Agreement No. 1 substituting certain landscaping items for the retaining wail project on the south side of 44t~ Avenue N.E. to Sunrarn Construction Inc. in the mount of $3,326.75. 98-066 Attachment: Supplemental Agreement No. 1 COUNCIL ACTION: MN/DOT TP-02134-03 (5/88) STATE OF ~INNESOTA DEPARTMENT Oi~ TRANSPORTATION SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT 1 Contracto¢. Address: SUNRAM CONSTRUCTION, INC. 20010 75TM AVENUE N. CORCORAN, MN 55340 Purchase Terms I Asset No. O00NET I Supp. to Contract No, - Sheet 1 of ~ smmpm~=~.:ll3_104_11 113-112-06 [F~emlPmject: 44TH AVENUE N.E. 40TH AVENUE N.E. DeptJDN' I S luence N°' ~1SurF"x01 llOb l' c.co.~ I c.co~ 1 c. co.3 1316, 1320 AND 1328 4001 ARTHUR STREET TYPE OF A40 ( ) A41 ( ) Dined Number TRANSACTION: A44 ( ) A45 ( ) A46 ( ) Dated Entered by Vefldo¢ Number Entered by. 44TH AVENUE Amount This contract is amended as-follow~-~ WHEREAS: this contract provides for, among other things~ replacement or construction of retaining walls on 40th Avenue at 4001 Arthur Street and on"44th Avenue at 1316, 1320, and 1328 44th Avenue, and WHEREAS: the sprinkler system on 40th Avenue at 4001 Arthur Street required to be modified more than what was originally shown on the plan, and WHEREAS: the retaining walls are taller than 30" in height, and WHEREAS: the adjacent property owners modified the proposed landscaping schedule needed to provide ~ a barrier at the top of the wall, NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD THAT: The Contractor shall furnish the labor, equipment, and materials required to repair the sprinkler system and install landscaping at the top of the retaining walls as directed by the City Engineer. 2. Payment shall be at the negotiated unit prices as shown in the Estimate of Costs. Contract time will not be revised except as may be provided for under the contract provisions of Mn/DOT 1806. '" The Contractor shall not make any claim of any kind or character whatsoever for any other costs or expenses which he may have incurred or which he may hereafter incur in performing the work or furnishing the materials required by this Agreement. APPROVED: APPROVED: OfiginaJ Contract Commissioner of Commisisoner of $ 46,573.60 Dated . Administration Finance - Approved as to form Dated __ By By and execution Contr'a~r Dated __ Dated .... Dated District Er~neer AssL~nt A[tomey General Dated __ Original to State Auditor -- Copy to Agency MN/DOT TP-02134-O3 (5/88) STA~E OF ~,,,qNNESOTA DEPARTMENT OI~ TRANSPORTATION Col-ltl'actor: Address: SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT No. SUNRAM CONSTRUCTION, INC. 20010 75T~ AVENUE N. CORCORAN, MN 55340 =ro. No. I F.Y. I Account I.D. =urchase Terms I Asset No. 000NET I Sequence No. IC.CO.2 44TM AVENUE N.E. 40TH AVENUE N.E. Supp. to Contract No, Sheet 2 of 2 TYPE OF A40 ( ) A41 ( ) Dated . State Pmje<= No.: TRANSACTION: A44 ( ) A45 ( ) A46 ( ) Dated 113-104-11 113-112-06 1316, 1320 AND 1328 44TH AVENUE 4001 ARTHUR STREET Number Irt Amount IC.C0.4 I C.CD.5 Entered by Number Entered by This contract is amended as-foliow~-'; -- ESTIMATED CHA~NGE IN COST Estimated Cor~tract Item No. Item Description Unit Quantity .Unit Price. Amount 0504.603 Relocate Sprinkler System Lin Ft 45 $7.65 $344.25 0557.603 Ornamental Iron Fence Lin Ft 56 $40.00 $2,240.00 2571.504 Arborvitae, Globe 15" Ht Shrub 11 $38.50 $423.50 2571.504 Daphne, Carol Mackie 15" Ht Shrub 2 $49.50 $99.00 2571.505 Lilac, Miss Klm 18" Ht Shrub 1 $44.00 $44.00 2571.505 Viburnum, Comp Amer Cranb 12" Ht Shrub 4 $33.00 $132.00 2571.507 Black Eyed Susan Plant 2 $22.00 $44.00 Total Increase This Supplemental Agreement $3,326.75 APPROVED: APPROVED: Original Contract Commissioner of C°mmisisoner of $ 46,573.60 Dated Administration Finance Project Er~in~- Approved as to form Dated By By and execution c<m~c~r Dated Dated Dated District Enginee~ AssL~mnt A~tomey SeneraJ Dated __ Agency Hesd Original to State Auditor -- Copy to Agency CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: ~ PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AUTHORIZE AGREEMENT WITH Mn/DOT TO BY: K. Hanse~ BY: IMPROVE INTERSECTIONS AND INSTALL EVP ON DATE: 3/4/98 O~ DATE: T.H. 65- q ,p Background: At the Council Meeting of October 27, 1997, Council authorized staff to continue with plans for the construction of Phase II of the intersection improvements and EVP installations on T.H. 65, from 40th Avenue to 52na Avenue. The project involves minor intersection improvements including red LED indicators and EVP installations on T.H. 65 at 41st, 44t~, 45t~, 47% 50th, and 52nd Avenues. In addition, the project at 40t~ Avenue and 49t~ Avenue also involves signal reconstruction to provide for protective-permissive left tums. Each intersection will have backlit street name signs, as requested by Council. Columbia Heights is the lead agency for this project. Phase II is tentatively scheduled for letting in April with construction during the 1998 season. The cost of the project is estimated to be $368,000.00. The funding sources are shown below: Mn/DOT Funds State Aid Construction Funds State Aid Maintenance Funds $192,335.00 $166,165.00 $ 9,500.00 Analysis/Conclusions: The attached agreement states Mn/DOT's requirements for the signal modifications. This is a standard agreement for this type of work and does not change any current operational procedures. Mn/DOT requires the Council pass a resolution approving the agreement. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to approved and adopt Resolution No. 98-3 ~ and authorize Agreement No. 76965 with Mn/DOT to improve the intersections and install Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption at traffic control signals on T.H. 65 at 40th Avenue, 41st Avenue, 44t~ Avenue, 45th Avenue, 474 Avenue, 49th Avenue, 50t~ Avenue and 52na Avenue. 98-067 Attachment: MN/DOT Agreement No. 76965 COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION No. 98- AUTHORIZING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO REVIEW THE EXISTING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNALS ON T.H. 65 WHEREAS, the City Council of Columbia Heights is improving the traffic signal systems on T.H. 65 from 40~ Avenue to 52na Avenue, and WHEREAS, the City of Columbia Heights is improving the traffic signal systems on T.H. 65 from 40th Avenue to 52na Avenue, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Department of Transportation Agreement No. 76965 stipulates the requirements for said installation, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City of Columbia Heights enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: To revise the existing traffic control signals with street lights, emergency vehicle pre- emption, interconnect and signing on Trunk Highway No. 65 (Central Avenue) at 52na Avenue Northeast - Commercial Entrance, 50th Avenue Northeast, County State Aid Highway No. 4 (49~ Avenue Northeast), 47t~ Avenue Northeast, 45th Avenue Northeast, 44th Avenue Northeast, 41st Avenue Northeast and County State Aid Highway No. 2 (40t~ Avenue Northeast) in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 76965, a copy of which was before the Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute the Agreement. Dated this ~ Day of ,1998 Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By: Mayor Joseph Sturdevant Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Anoka City of Columbia Heights I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the City Council of Columbia Heights at a meeting thereof held in the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, on the 9th day of March, as disclosed by the records of said City in my possession. (Seal) Jo-Anne Student Deputy City Clerk CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: March 9, 1998 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ,! CONSENT APPROVAL NO: Fire ITEM: Approval of Rental Housing License BY: Charlie Kewatt BY: Applications NO: ay/ -' tq - ~ DATE: February 20, 1998 DATE: Approval of the attached list of rental housing license applications, in that they have met the requirements of the Housing Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Froth: Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 02/23/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: November 1997 Occupany I.D. 30109 Property Owner Name Common Bond Management Property Address Permit # 3850 Stinson Boulevard F2631 Charlie Kewatt, Firb Chief 02/23/199 09:21 Page 1 To: Froth: Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 02/23/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: November 1997 Occupany I.D. 12159 Property Owner Name David Moran Property Address Permit # 4305 University Avenue F2632 Charlie Kewatt, Fire Chief 02/23/199 09:26 Page 1 To: From: Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 02/20/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: July 1997 Occupany I.D. 30053 Property Owner Name Lester Chies Property Address Permit # 980 44th Avenue F2393 Charlie Kewatt, I~ire Chief 02/20/199 11:03 Page 1 From:' Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 02/20/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: May 1997 Occupany I.D. 30112 Property Owner Name Lester Chies Property Address Permit # 4347 Tyler Place F2168 Oharlie Kewatt, i=ire Chief 02/20/199 11:04 Page 1 Froth: Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 02/23/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: July 1997 Occupany I.D. 20333 Property Owner Name John Utke Property Address Permit # 3849 Jackson Street F2364 Charlie Kewatt, F~e Chief 02/23/199 10:04 Page 1 To: From~ Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 03/04/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code, I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: July 1997 Occupany I.D. 2O232 Property Owner Name Gerald Anderson Property Address 5049 Jackson Street Charlie Kewatt, Fire Chief Permit # F233 03/04/199 10:58 Page 1 To: From': Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 03/04/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: June 1997 Occupany I.D. 2O387 Property Owner Name Stanley Larson Property Address Permit # 3726 3rd Street F2265 Charlie Kewatt, Fire Chief 03/04/199 10:23 ;~age 1 To: Fron~: Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Charlie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 03/04/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: July 1997 Occupany I.D. 12096 Property Owner Name Joel Anderson Property Address 403 46th Avenue Permit # F2353 Charlie Kewatt, I~ire Chief 03/04/199 10:38 Page 1 To: Fro~: Re: Date: Walt Fehst, City Manager Chadie Kewatt Rental Housing Licenses 03/04/1998 The owners of the following rental properties have complied with the re-licensing and/or licensing requirements of the City of Columbia Heights Housing Maintenance Code. I am requesting that they be placed on the next council agenda for approval. Columbia Heights Fire Dept Re-Licensing Month: October 1997 Occupany I.D, 12108 Property Owner Name Carol Topel Property Address Permit # 4131 Washington Street F2622 Charlie Kewatt, ~Fire Chief 03/04/199 09:55 F~ge I TO CITY COUNCIL MARCH 9, 1998 *~j~g ~a~ F~m ~c~mpa~i~ ~pp~ication 1998 BUSINESS LICENSE AGENDA APPROVED BY CONTRACTORS LOCATED AT FEES BUILDING OFFICIAL Airco Heating *Boiler Services, Inc. *Minnesota Development, Inc. *Team Mechanical, Inc. 4020 Central Ave. N.E. 7570 N.E. Hwy. 65 3989 Central Avenue 3560 Shelling Ave 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 TREE SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR *Allstate Tree Service 7510 Jackson St. N.E. 50.00 license.ag -A.IO BF,'C F' ]: I"lAlqC ]: Al... S¥ST['i:M 03/05/98 i'Z~ 10:02 Check Iq i,:.x to ry F:'UI,ID F~IECAF:': F:'UNI) I>ESCR ]: F:"¥' ]: ON :1. 0:1. 20.1. 203 204 205 ~'?. :L 2 2!3 225 235 240 '". %¢5 277 278 ~:.~76 405 406 412 4.1.5 601 602 6O="; 609 6 '.::', :1. 701 7:1.0 720 884 GIE N['i:F;,'AI... COMI~II..JIq]:TY DEVIEI-OF:'Mli']qT I:=UIq:0 F'AI:;~I<V ]: EW V I I...I...A N(]I:UI"H ECONOM.'I;C Dli.r. VIFI..OF'MIEIqT AIJTH ,~i~lii:CT I C)N 8 S'TA'TIE A :1: D I~'l~ :1: I'l'¥'lEl'h::d'l(:;E PAF::KV]:E:W V II...L.A SOUTH C A):'?,I.. Ii!: 'f'lii:l...Iii:V :1: S :l: 0 !'1 F;.:IEIqTAI... t"IC)US ]: FIG I... ]: BRARY CC)L. I"I(:')FITS AF:'TE:F;,' ,SCHC)OL. E:IqF;,']: COF:'S MC)F;,'E: 96 F"'EDEF(AL GRAI'I'f' ELfVIEI',I I t...tZ Jt. JST I C'E GRANT TAX ]:NC.F~EME]qT )bONDS DOWI',I"f'OWN IdlEDTROIq ];C DEVELOF:'MENT CAF:']:'Y'AL. :!: MF:'F;,'OVEMIEN"f' F'AF;: C~I::':I: TAI... ]:tdF:'I:(OVEME]qT ---' F:' WA'TE:I:;,' UT ]; I... ]: "I"Y 'SEWIEF;,' U T :[ I._ :1: T'Y RIE I::'U,~!~tE F:'LJND I... :1: QUOI:( WATE:F;: CONSTF(UCT]:ON FUND Cli':lq'¥ F;,'AI... C')A F;,'A GE Et'tE F;:C'.iY MANAGE:HE]'I'T DATA F'ROCE,SS I I'IC'; PIEF;,"M ]: T SURCHAR[31E I Iq S U R A 1'-I CIE tE ,"i; C.': F;.' O W F"l. Ji:'X Y.')EI'4E:F:']:T TF;,'!JST F'"UIqD 'TOTAL. AI...I... FUNDS ID l ,S B LJ F~,S E M E N T','.i~ 76,939 ,, 20 526. :L 1 14,233 ,, 40 7:, 5:1.7 ,. 93 61,385,. 36 .1. :, :'.144 .. 02 8 :, 520.4 5 .1. :. 851 ,, 4-6 430 ,, 38 3:,21.9.62 9:1.3.4:5; 16,,29 2-'::1. ,, 2':7 :L :.".'; :, .1.8:.':; ,, 52-'. 4,614.75 61 ,, 2:0 2'". 1 :, 000 ,. 00 837 ,, 40 1::'.{, 795.6:t. 4:, :I. 5:.':';. 52 3,,65 158:, :~62': ,, '.:':', 5 7.'.{ :, 00].. 47 7 :, 499.92 28 :, 825 ,, 47 5:, 514. D3 10].. 92 93. O0 ].97,69:L. 84 S69. :L 4 636,228., 4:1. BANI< FqECAF': BAN I<.' NAMIE BAIqI< (31"IE:C: K ]: Nfl ACCOLJNT TOTAL AI..L B~I,IKS D ]: SBU F;,','-i; E FI[.i:N T,'.3 636 :, 228., 41 636,228 .. 4! BRC t:"]]IqANCZA!... SYSTEM 03?05/98 17: 0 Check History 3/9/98 COUI,IC:t:t... BAN K VEIqDOF;,' BAhl !< CHlii:C K ]: NC..i ACCOUN'/" ABI...E: HOSE: 8:: F;,'tJBBE:R I NC A C C 0 U 1'4 '¥ E M F" S A]:D EI...E:CTI:~]:C SERV]:CE I NC AIqOKA COI..JNTY F'ROF:'ERTY RE AT & T BARTOIq SAND & GF~AVEI._ BIEI._L.BOY BAR SUPF:'I...Y BE]...I._BOY COtRF'OF;¢A'I- ]:ON C A R O"f' FIE R S / K A T E N A CH :t: SAGO I...A KES D I STR :[ BUT ]: CONNE:Y '"'* ' ......... '" o,--d" !::. 1 ~ DARBY 0 'G:I:t..I... ]:NC DIE S S 0 tJ K ]: /M 0 !"I E;IE N E:AGL. E W:[NE COMF:'AIqY GE]gU]:I,IE: t::'AF~TS/NAF:'A AUTO GI:b~:~YBAI:~ IEI...ECTF;;:[ C 1'401-'IE;NSTE;IIqS ]:NC JOHNSON BROS,, L]:QUOR CO. JOLLY/DONAL. D KUETI-.tE]:;: DIST, CO,, L.A COUN'f'/NAI,ICY MATH MASTIERS OF' MINNtESOT M :[ NIqE:GASCO M ]; tq T E: R- W E: ]; S M A N MN DEF:'T OF:' F'UBI...ZC SAFE'f'Y Mlq DE:PT OF:' F;E:VE:Nf...ItE MN I:;~IECF;ItEAT;t:Cilq & F:'ARK ASS N S F' IqlEEDHAId D I STR l BUT ]:NG CO IqE:]: COI...LIEGE OF' TECHNC)L. OG F'E:TEF;~S F:'LACIZ ]:NVIERSTME]qT F:'ET"f'Y CASH .... GARY BRAATE F:'H :1: !..I.. :[ F:'S W :[ NE & SF:" Z RTS F:'F;~ ]: OR W :1: NIE F:'IRYOR RESOURCES, INC QUAL.];TY WINE; & St::'IRITS S]:GN I...ANGUAGIE & GOL. DEN A U ~; WEST COMMONICAT]:ONS Vi]SS L :[GHT :[ NG WE:ST WIEI...D ABt...E PF~OI='IERTY b'IANAGEIqlEIqT ACCAP AIqDIEIRSOIq/MAF~CUS W AI,IDE:RSON/ROL. AN E: ASHTON/MYRON BAI..I...E:NT:[IqlE/BI:;;UCIE G (]I--IIFC K NI. JMBIEI:~ 70258 70259 70260 70261. 70262 70263 70264 70265 70266 70267 70268 70269 70270 70271 70272 70273 70274 '702'7 !5 70276 70277 70278 70279 7O280 7028.1. 70282 70283 70284 70285 70286 70287 70288 70289 70290 70291. 70292 70293 70294 70295 70296 70297 70298 70299 70300 7030.1. 70302 70;;~03 70304 CI"I"Y OF COI...UMB]:A I-'tE]:C']d--ITS GL5401:;,'-V05.20 PAC';E] .1. AMOUNT 278.66 :L :, 299 ,, 65 54 ,, 70 15,338 ,, 09 337.47 .1. :, 004 ,, 04 .1. 66.84 2 :, .1. 99.90 5.1.. 00 .1. :, 842 ,, 60 76.77 37 :l. 50 !, 690 ,, 00 :1. ,, 1.1. 3 ,, :t 5 .1. :1.7.97 500 ,, 79 .1. 0 :, 888.4.1. 7 :, 728 ,, 90 2, i96.49 8.50 .1.7 :, 409 ,, 85 3 .1. ,, 00 720.00 .t, 2 :, 856 ,, :1.6 2,828.05 .1. 50 ,, 00 8 :, 609.00 .1. 2 .1. ,, 00 30,009.33 67 ,, 50 402.45 443 ,, 00 .1.24 ,, .1.7 .1. 1 .,, 374.68 4 :, 425.5:t 125 ,, 00 2, .1. 98.07 28.22 9,502. :1. 8 36.42 358.87 340.00 4 :, 52'7 ,, 00 5;~9.00 2';6 ].. 00 5 .1. 5.00 524,,00 B R C F Z N A N C Z A L., S Y`<3'F E M 03/05/98 17:0 Check. History 3/9/98 COLJNC]:I... BANK VENDOR BANK CHECK:lNG ACCOLJNT BATH/JAMES L BE:I::.:G PF:,'OPI.=:RT:[ES ;(-? Iii: F:,' t":: / L. 0 ]: .S ):i~O E: '¥'TCHEF~/L. ARRY C A :0 ]: E i: l.J ;4 / R 0 t',1A L.. [:;1"1 I='I~OI:'IFF~T I li:.,<'3 C H I'-IA I':':R A / S UD E S FI C, H H A):.:d:b:-'. / `<'3 U 13 E S H C 1"1 ]: L. L_ D S / I... 0 R A ]: N iii: CI"IR :[ S'I"E N`<~ E]q / FL' :[ C,H A R D CF:,'E,".=:;T V]:E:t,g LLJTHE]:;,'AN HOME: C R [] C K E'1"'1"/J A M E S D A L`<:; E T H /M A R :[ I... Y N D A I',![3/'I"H 01'-~[3 D Ii!: S S 0 U K ]: / M [] l-'{ S ii!: N ]}0 I:]._ 2:/W A L.. T El:;,' E I) Z :1: [-E :0 Z ]: C ;" F:' A LJ L. E(3GE/JAMt!i:S E]...M[;!UIST/AF;,'bK]L.I) C F'E N Iqi:.: / A V EF:,'Y F' ]: N:O E]..L/:00NA L I) F: ]: S C H E R /M :[ C H Iii: L L. E: F:'L (It)]: N/MARV :[ N G F;,'O M E: K/'I"H 0 M AS HANSE]',I/E:DW ]: N & :OOF,'O-FH'd H A N f.'~[] N/C L ARlii:N Cli.': H A 1'! S 0 N/):) Iii: I"! N ]: S HO ]: LJM/Vli':F;,'NON S J A I',1S 0 N / [3 IZ F;,' A L D J 0 T)'"~LAD/DW :[ f.3H T KHAN/MLJJTABA K :[ N [3 S R ]: '1' IF R/)':~ R :1: A N KL.E:]:I-IMAN REAL..TY CO K [3 R D I A K / D A iq ]: lii:l... K 0 S T Ei:R / Kli!:l',lN E:TF{ KOWALZI.=: K/H AI':,'VE:Y I...ANGE:/t)AVE & KATHY L..ARSON/SUSAN LAS I<.'Y/:0 A V ]: :0 L.]!i:W I S/MAR K I...OEWE:NTHAL/KURT LUDE]'IAN/:EVAN D 1... LJ U /F:' ]: t'-I (3 M A N G U H / Y V 0 N N Ii.': & W :[ L L. :[ A H M E: ]: E: F;,' I"! 0 F:' I!i: F:,' / R [] B ]: I"-I M Z LL.E:F~/LYLE !'t I I... I... E t:~ / M I C I..IE L I... Iii: CFIE:C K NUMBER 702~05 70306 70307 70308 70309 70~10 7031.1. 70312 ,' 0,.., .L ,.., '70.3:L 4 70315 703:1.6 70 ="; 17 70:.5:1. 8 70319 703::=.yD 7032:1. 703:::?.2 70323 ;:' 0 ='.; g:': 4 ? 0::."; 2:5 '70:5::/~6 -?0327 70 ?.'g~?.8 70329 702~30 70331 70:.'532 70333 7033.q- 70335 70:::::6 702';:'.";7 70338 70339 70340 7034]. 70342 70343 70344 70345 70346 70347 70348 70349 70350 70351 C.'I: TY OF:' COI..I.]IqB :I:A HIE :1: GH'T'S GL540R-V05.2'_'O PAGE 2 AMOUN'T 165 .. 00 1 :, .1.37.00 375.00 69 :t ,. 00 3:1. 9 ,, 00 106., 00 705 ,, O0 2.93., 00 2.5:.'5.00 I ;, 396 ,, 00 :L 67.00 476 ,, 00 517.00 3 :L 5 ,, 00 845 ,, O0 ?::56 ,. 00 486 ,. 00 :'.";96 ,, 00 ! :, 371 ,, 00 650 ,, 00 ~ ~ "" 00 603.00 239.00 I :, 092 ,, 00 4 :I. 5 ,, 00 428.00 · -...~:: .. 0~.-~ 248 ,. O0 355., 00 1 :L 8 ,, 00 487 .. 00 341.00 485.00 419.00 434.00 1 :, :t 16 .. 00 :l., 044 ,. O0 65:5 ,, 00 240.00 2G'~7 ,, 00 750.00 977.00 1 :, 199 ,, 00 314 ,, 00 386., 00 556 ,, 00 229.,00 03/05/98 .1. 7: 0 Check l.-I:i. ?~ ±o ry 3/9/98 []OUNCZI... CIT'Y OF:' COI_t..IMB]:A HIi:]~GH'T',S GL..540R--V05,20 PAGE'.". 3 BAN I< VIii:l',lI) 0 F:,' CI-.E: C I< NUMBER AMOLJN]" BANK CHECK]~NG ACCOI..JN'T' M 0 D l~i]... L. / F' A I...11... I"-I ]] XOIq/JEAIq NOVAI</"f'Hli:C/DC~F~Iii] & NAI,ICY V F:'ETIi"'I'".:S F:'I._ACE I NVEi:;,'STT'1EIq'I" I::',<i; HOI...I) I NGS F;,'AI"'II'-I A F:~ ][ I"-IE]/G AI"-!GA I:;,' ]: F:'A I / MA H M[]I...II'II) (,~ATI"IRE:/AL.. ]: C :[ A M SATHRE/L..L..OYD H S C H L.. Olii:S Slii:R ? R O1'4 S t"!O K E :1: F;t /M (:] FI A M Iii: D ,S K A L .. :[ C K Y / J A M Iii: S S'T' A L.I[:::H / L.. E L.A I',t]:) S W AIq &3 O1'.1/B FA'::~D L E Y J 'I"HOM F:'SO N/JE:F;tOME K 'T' :I: L. I... Iii: R / ,:.T A M Ii:-' S 'i" O W N H O U,"ii;E:'"' A F'T blANA0)EME:NT '1"1:~ :[ S K O,'" F' R A N K U'l"l'{tii: F I',[. F I:: t".MANAGEME:I'IT VALT' :1: Ii: R F;~E Z/M A F': ]: O VAI"I BL.AF;t]:CON/STANL. EY W F' BAUli']:;,' CONSTF~UCT]:OIq WAZWAZ?AMY WEAVEF;t/]3OIqlq :f:li:' & MAUF;,' :1: CE ~ Al'IL'.,,' J[.. o1::.1" H Y O U N G R E Iq / D A W I'1 A F:' ,"i; C: M E AI".IO KA COUI't'I"Y SOC:[ Al._ SIi"'RV I)CA :[NC,, D Iii: N '1" I C A 1'2 E:' F':I:RST COI~iMLIN]:TY CRiED]:T U GF;tli'ZAT Wli"'ST L]:F:E & ANNU]:T' ]:[:;MA RI!i:T ]:I:;,'E:Mlii:NT TF,'LJST 45 I SAN'I" ]: COLJNT'Y FAM ]:LY SEF;.' M]:NNE,~!~OTA MLJ'T'LJAL.. L..IFE MI'I STAT'L:.' RET:[F~EMEIqT SYST I'IOF~WEST BAI"-IK -" PAYF.'C]L.L.. A F:'lii]:;.' A F:'lii:l:~A - DE:F' ]: NED CONTF;,' ]:BL.IT I::'lii:F~A I... I F'E I NSUI:,'ANCE F:'EIR'.A POL..]: [:)Iii: RE:L. I I:F' CONSO I::'F~U):)I.:.]q'I" :[ AL.. I... :1: F:'E I IqSURAI'tC RAMSDEL..L.. SCHOL..AF.',C.~H ]: P FUN ,S'T'AI'IDARD :[NSLJF(ANCE COMF'A STATE: CAF:']:TOL.. CREDIT LIN]: UN:ION 49 UN]:TE:D WAY 70352 3 :, 259.00 70353 71-?.:L ,, 00 70354 548 ,, 00 70355 4 :, 722.00 70356 298.00 70357 62.1. ,, 00 -',rr:", ..... ~r)4 ,, 00 7035<2 883 ,, 00 702';60 962 ,, 00 7036 .1. 582. ,, 00 70362 50':?. O0 7036:::7 484 ,, 00 70364 2 :, 942 ,, 00 70365 .1. :, 07:2. ,, 00 70366 459 ,, 00 70367 530 ,, 00 70368 :1. :, 284 ,, 00 70369 48 :L ,, 00 70370 ]. :, 027 ,, 00 7037 :L 258 ,, 00 70372 :L :, 456.00 70373 20.1... 00 ~:' ' .,00 70374 .... L 1 70375 44:L ,. 00 70376 624 ,, 00 70377 270 ,, 00 70378 695 ,. 90 70379 65 ,, 00 70380 2,462.86 7038.1. 207 ,, 05 70382 .1., 835 ,, 00 70383 5, :L00.00 70384 8 :, 6:L2 ,, 24 70385 .1.63.44 70386 .1. :, .1. 78 ,, 00 70387 2,236 ,. 50 70388 145,60:t.. 36 70389 24 :, 670 ,, 98 70390 94.62 7039 :L :L 38 ,, 00 70392 .1., ..)-"~" ..~,-.~. ,, ~,9" 70393 618 ,, 90 70394 54.25 70395 761 ,, 91 70396 .1., 470 ,, 00 70397 609 ,, 00 70398 :L 12 ,, 00 B R C F:' Z N A Iq C Z A L S Y.(i; T lie M 0:.':~/0'.::',/98 :t. 7: 0 Check History 3/9/98 COUI',IC]:I... CZTY OF:' COLUMB]:A I-.IIET. GHT,~ GL..540R-V05,120 F'AGIE 4 )B A I'1 I( VIE I'1 l) C)R CHE:C K NLJMBEI:( AMOLJt',I'/" BAIq I< [:;l"llii:[:; K:I:IqG ACCOUI"I'T WYAI'..II)O"f"T'[.~: COLJN'f'Y COLJRT H AARP A:BI...Ei: HOS;IE & FL'I..JECSE:R ]:lqC Al:F:.' TOUCH CELI_UI...AF:.' AT' & T E~IELI...E~OY ).'.)AIR ,~UF:'F:'I.~Y :81E L I...I..::OY C 01::.'1::' 0 I::.' A T 101',1 L~I:;,'ADLi!EY F;,'EAL IESTATtF.":!~ ]:IGC CASH I::,'li!X3 ]: :ii)'i"lii]:L' Eh:-~t...IES ]: NC CH :[ Ii, AGO I...A KIF,t[; COI...LIMB :1: A HIE :t: C'.OMMUI'..I :["t"Y F:,'E,c3OUI-~:CtE I::',-:,t:;."i"1,t ):)AF:.'][.:.~Y [] ' [:-)]:1...t... ZI',IC DEI...I!.".[3AF:.').') '1"[]C)1... CO,, .'0 L.I[3 I) A 1... Ii!: / M A F;.' Y EAGI...tE W:[I'~ttE COMF'AIqY EtZI!i:C:TROI',I]:C I)ATA li'::lqlE R S 01'.1Y AI'--I [31Z L A F:' Iii: H ~,~i[ T / W A I... TIE I:;,' F:'F:tAI'.II(S NUF:,'SIEY t:~;: CF;:AF:'T.'.:i~ [31i!]'qLI]:f-ll!i: I::'AF;,"T':~i~/Iq(::d::'A AUTO [:.)F:,' ]: [:')GS-COOF:'EF:~ 8: CO I'-IOHli~:NSTI!~: ]: I',iS ]: IqC J H LAF;:S[]Iq EI...EC'T'F:,']:C'. C':OMF:' JOI..ll',l~i:;Of,! I.':[R[]S~:,, I...I[;~LJOI:L' CO. KUETHli:_'F:,' D T. ST, CO ,, I..AI:;'.S:;C !',l/q::.'O Y MAC [L~UI.EE:_'Iq IEQI. J]:F'MIZIqT CO,, MAI:~tK VI: ]: I)IST,, M :I:IqI',IESO'I'¥.~ SAI::ETY COUIqC ]:t... M ]: I',1T ER-.-W E: ]: S FI A t',I MIq A,~F:'HALT F:'AVii-]'lli:~N'I" ASSO M 0 Iii: I... I... ['i: R / K A I:;,' E FI MUD[31i~./'JOHI'-I ML.tt... L. :[ G A N/I... Y Nt',I Iq S F:' F:'A F:,'T,'.i; F'L. US I::'AU:~T' I ~,~ ~. SONS F:'ETTY CASH --- GAF;:Y BF:,'AATE I::'H]:I.J_IF',fi~ W:ENIE ,~: SF'IIRT.~i~ F:' ]: I,INACL. lii: :() I S'i"FL' F:'I..UN KETT ' ,S :, :[ tqC F:'I:~ ]: OR W :[ I'-IIE QUAL :[ TY W Z IqlE ~.: ,~F" RE:TA]:L. i)ATA SY,C..:;TtEMS OF:' FI ROAD RUNI'-IE]:L' TFL'ANSF'Ot::CI"AT]: S ]:1 IONSC;I',I~ I,ARIEI'.-I 70399 :1. 50,00 7040:1. 232 ,, 00 70402 193 ,, 28 70403 302.',26 70404 63 ,, 01 70405 159 ,, 40 70406 14 :, 156 ,, 18 70407 :1. :1. :, 4:1. 5., 75 70.'-'~()',.ii: 500. O0 70409 1 :, :1.94 .. 74 704:1.0 4 ,, 363 ,, :t. 6 '2041 ! 7 :, .500 ,, 00 70412:: 306 ,, 00 70413 42': 1 ,, 40 704:1. 4 ~..,."-" ':~ ,, 99 7041 S 30Z-: .. 91 704 :t: 6 1 :, 837 ,, 33 7041. 7 15 ,, 00 70418 697.72 704-.1.9 79 ,,67 7042'.'0 78 ,, 41 70421 ::L .1. :, 047.00 70422 5 :, 277 ,, 70 '204:::'..':Z~ .1., :t. 1:1. ,, 2.¥-? 70424 3 :, 092 ,, 78 7042 5 15 :, 345 ,, 75 70426 950 ,, 00 70427 210.00 70428 2,624.23 70429 ,60 ,, 00 7047~0 Z';, 569.41 70431 495.00 7047';2 92., 14 704:'~3 .T 00 ,, 00 7()434 :t. :1.4 ,, 3:1. 70435 :1., 386.17 70436 215.24 70437 145.70 70438 67.72 704:39 13 :, 420.37 70440 ].7 ,, 60 70441 67.10 70442 :t., 902 ,, 85 70443 566 ,, 84 70444 :1.06.50 70445 2::'; ,, 60 70446 .I. ~..,-;, .. ,, o (X'.';/05/98 .1. 7: 0 Check History 3/9/9`.3 COUNC]]I... C][TY OF:' COI_UMBZA HEIGHTS Gl... 5"SOF.'.-'V05. :;ii() P .A(:';IE 5 B A N K V Iii] N D 0 F:,' E)I--IE:[] K blUMDEI::: AMOLJl'-F/" BANK CHECI<]]t'.IG ACC:OLJi',I'¥' S"f'AF;.' TR ]] BUNE S'/"U R DIEV A N'¥' / JO SliE F:'I-~ '1" H 0 M F:'S 0 N / F:'A'/- '¥F:.' Z ARCO AI'"(T'S & CITAF:'T.~ LJ :B L'JE:,~i;'i" COMMUI',I I CA"f' IONS UI'-I I VIZR,S Z T'Y OF'" M ]1] I'II'-IIE:i.~OTA V[]S~J~ L. ! GH"I" ]]NG WAF;,'I',t]:NG t...]]TliE.,~ OF:' M]ENI"-I. YANG/F:'A A]BF:,"AS ][ VIE SYS't"!iE.M ][ IgC ,'.':,(:)iii: l-'h::d::,' D W A F;,' IE A]:R BAG F:,'E]::'A ]: F:,' ZI'-!C A ]: F;,' I::'I',IIEL.I .... TF:,'ON ]: C CO A :[ R ]"OUCH C'.IELi...UL..AF:: ALI... F ]: F:.'.IE TIZST ):NC AMtii]::: ]: CAN L.. :[ t'-11.'<!'-I .~i)I. JF:'F:'t...Y CO AMlii]:L' ]: CAN MGM'T' ,::,SSOC I I:ITliE AI'.I:O 0 I"-I AI',IO KA COLII'-I"F Y .... ASF:'EI'.I M.'[ I..I..S .,, :[ Iq(.',. AUTOMA"f']:C GAF:,'AGE: t)OOF:: CO )'::tAI'(IEI7 & TAYt_OF~ BAt:;:I"h:'] [S[.]ZY & STli!]::'F:'!!!]"I LTD B IE A C 0 N ]B A t.. 1.- F:' ]] Iii]l_ D S B O Y ['E F:." T R U C': !< F:"AI:('i" S BF:,'AI. JN I IqT'EF¥¥'iEC B F;,' 0 D A F;.'/I" CA"t"CO I'""AR't"S Sti:'F(V ][ (])liE. Clii]qTRAL I..OCK & ,~AF:'E CliE.I"-1'I"I7 Al._ S'¥ (.') ITI~E,~L~ []HAS I'(A CI-'IIEM ]: (:;Al... CO ]: t',IC CHEF;.'O KIEIE F:'OWER I!"'QU ]]:'MIEI'-I'¥' CI--tliET ' ~.; SI'-IOE:,~i; C :[ ]"Y W :[ ):)lie I._OC K',"3M ]: TH Z NG CI...AI:;.'I( F:'OO}():~i;E]:;:V I CE I t'-IC COI...I..JMB lEA F:'AR K MED ]: CAE GF:,' COMM CE]',t]"E]::: COMMERS COI"ID][]"I[3NED WA'¥'E COMF:' !..J~i!;A I NC COF:'Y IEQU :[ F:'Mli']'-I'I" I NC []:F;:IEST VIEW I...UTHE]:;,'AN HOME DAI'-! KA OF'F:'F." I [:::Iii) ][ MAG :[ lq[}} C'.O ]}AV!ES t4A"f'IEt::: IEQLI]:F:' CO,, }OEMC:O :Ol..JO (]:HIE:M ]: I'tC: EI...V ZI'I SAF:'ET'Y SUF:'F"L..Y F:'AI::,'BER BAG & SLtF:'PL.Y COMF' 70447 71 ,, 54 70448 t 37.00 70449 .1. 0.00 70450 50 ,, 62 7045 :t. 202.83 70452 680.00 70453 3.1.8.54 70454 .1. 60 ,, 00 70455 5 ,, 00 70457 77.00 704~ ,.. ...,-.., ,..o / ,.., .. 34 704 '.is':.;: .1. ,-:37 .. 00 70460 i7;6 ,, 56 70461 56 ,, 03 70462 ~", '::, '" ....... 6 ,, 01 70,g-63 6 ~.?. ,, 9:::':': 70464 556 ,, 00 70465 17.04 70466 :1.76 ,, 80 70467 856.00 70468 78 ,, 00 70469 .1. :, 377 ,, 79 70470 .1. 5 ,., 490 ,, `.ii:() 7047 .1. 68 ,, 90 70472 67;. 95 70473 708 ,, 74 70474 2".2.90 70475 .1. 58 ,, .1. 0 70476 60 ,. 00 70477 39.49 70478 69.02 70479 .1. ,, 32 70480 :!."... 00 70481 .1. 98 ,, 46 70482 100.45 70483 4 :, 614., 75 70484 672.02 70485 .1..1..1. ,, 51 70486 618 ,, 20 70487 .I. ~S3 ,, 07 70488 .1. 1 :, 382 ,, 74 70489 682 ,, 31 70490 2 :, 930.56 7049.t. 70 ,, 82 70492 468 ,, 18 70493 43 ,, 4:".~ 70494 .1.79 ,, 22 03/05/98 17: 0 Check H:i. story 3/9/98 CC)UIqC]:I... B A F! K V E: I',1D 0 I::,' BANK [;I..II~:C,I<]:NG A[;COLJIqT F A,'.:.; T E:I'-I A L. COMPAI',IY I:.":[RE :[IqSTRUCTORS 01::' MI:Nlq F:'I...ANAGAN SAI...ES INF.; I::'l..li-:X COMI:'IFI'-4SATIOIq ..~ I::'1::~ ]: ][)I...E:Y/£; I TY OF' GEIqli"'I~AI.. BOOK COVIZI";,'S H & I.. Mf:i:SA.B]: I"1. :() .. :[ t'qDUS'TF:,' ]: E.'".[-3 ]: NC I"tA t'-11',,:.~ SI::'E:C ]: AI..."I" ]: li~: S HAF;,'MOI,I I:.']L.A,~i;:E; 8'. Cq..AZZlqG I"IE: ]: FI[;.':t: [:::1"t l~]',lVl~i:l...OPIE: COI:;.'.F' HOME DEF:'O]" I-'IOIqE:YWEI...I... I I'-IC :[ I<01'-I OI-F':[C;E SOI..U'T ]:ON ]:I,I):)EF'EI',t):)Iii:tqT SCHOOL. D I ST :[ I::'C F:'t::,' ]: lq']" JOHI',ISC)N I::'Al::qii]:L' & ,'-i;Ui::'F:'I...YC: K M ART l<l[i]'a.l',l E D Y & l...lii:li~:t::' BF;.'OS ,, I...lii]::.'.l',ll~[:l:;,' PL.I)BL ]: (]A-I" ]: .Ol',l~,i; COMP I... :1: TTI...E: FAI.J...S MACH ]:I'IE ]:I"IC t...OC:ATOt:;~ & I"IOI'-t]:TOR SALES I...OWEI._I... ' S L. OWF.:Y CE:NTI:;,'AI... }[':~OWI...ER,~i; MAC: ([,~l. Jli[E-]q li']QU]:F:'IMi:il'IT CO,. I"tA S Y,fiil C:OI:::I::', MCC )Blii]'-tAV]:ORAL CARIF IFI(:: I"IE:D :1: AT I ON ~3E:RV, F' OR AI'-IO I<A ME :[ E F;,'H 0 F:Ii']R/F;:C) B :f: Iq ME]qAR][)S - CC)Ot',I F:,'AP ]: DS MIi~]'-IAR)}S CASHWAY I..UM}81.T. IR--'-F' MIii:TF,'O AREA MANA(3!E:ME:NT AS METIRO Wli'"LD :l:lq(.") SUF'F:'I...Y M ]:):)WE:ST AF;,'"I" I::'A I~I]:DWE:ST ASF:'HAI..T CO.. MINAR F'ORD M]:I,I]:TEX I...IBRAI~:Y II'.IF:'O.. Nli:' M ]: I',11',1 BLUE: D ]: G I TAL. Iq :[ I,tl'llii:At:'OI... :t: S F' I NAI'.ICE DIF'F"T M ]: Iql',I[i:APOI... ]: S SAW CO, Iq :[I'.INlii:SOTA COACHI.:."S M ]: NNE:,"i;O"f'A SUN I::'UBL. I CAT I 0 MIq STATE 'TREAS )'.'d.J Z I...D MODE:[.. CI:;,'A!::'T Et...lii:CTI:;~ ]: C: MT '.~: DI. STRII:.~UT ING NCIRTH ME:TI:;,'CI HUMAt'-IE: C :1: TY OF' COLUMB ]: A I-'IE: I GH'/"S GL540R-V05,20 PAGE 6 CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT 70495 38 ,, 68 70496 53 ,, 70497 21 , 000 ,, 00 70498 175.00 70499 32"~8.80 70500 539.23 7050:1. 385,15 70502 729 ,, 00 70 503 302. ,, 2 70504 400, :L6 70 506 328 ,,,., '= 70507 15,8'73 ,, 25 70508 89 ,, 67 70509 36.00 70510 33 ,, 0 705:t. 1 466.36 705:1.2 97 ,, 2:1. 70513 61.20 70514 44.17 ~ 0 ~., 1 ~. 14.2:1. 70516 157,,35 70517 184 ,, 70518 4.42 70519 57.94 70520 2,476 ,, 08 7052:1. !, 040.78 70522 488 ,, 88 70523 I, 494 ,, 48 70524 386 ,, 00 70525 78 ,, 20 70526 44 ,, 68 70527 ]. 6.00 70528 54 ,, 32 70529 11 ,,95 70530 1,417,,62 7053:t. 102 ,, 0:1. 70532 254.00 70533 849.07 70534 3,00:!.. 47 70535 33:1.. 50 70536 960 ,, 00 70537 154 ,, 00 70538 :[ 01 ,, 92. 70539 45 ,, 64 70540 46 ,, 55 7054 :I. 5:t. 0.40 BI:(C I:']I]lqAI'IC Z Al... ,~i~YS'T'Ii[M 0:.3/05/'98 .1.'? ~ 0 Check H:i. story 3/9/98 [:;OUNC]:I... B A N K Vlii:l',lI) 0 R BAN K CHlii:C K :[ I',IG AC[:.':OUIq'T NORTH SI'AR PA]:I',tT & BOI)Y I,I[]F~]"H ,~-3UBURBAIq MUTUAl.. AI IqOF¥'['HERI',I F'OWEI:~ F'I:~ODL]CTS I,IOF/TI'.II~]RI,I SAN I T~RY SI. jF'F'I..Y IqORTHL.AIqD EI...E:CTR]:C SUPPl... I,IYSTF/C)Iq F'UBI_ISH:[IqG COMF:'A 01::'1::' I CIZ DE]::'OT OI...D DOM Z Iq :[ C)Iq BRUSH F:'ATTOI'-! ]:lqD. I::'I:~X]DUCTS I::'C MA[3AZ:I:IqE F:'E:F;;E;ONNI~]... DE:C I S:[ ONS ]:NC F:' E: T E R S 0 N / T A M M Y P ]: OI',II~:E]:~ E]qG I IqEE]:~ I NG PA I::' ]: Olql~:l~]:/ I::'I:~I~:SS F:'OI... :1: CE: :1: FIE;T :t: 'T'U'T'E F:'F~'.IZC :[ S :1: 01'-I CI...EAIq :1: IqC-) :[ IqC I::'ROEX PHOTO SYSTE:M F:'F~YOt:~ I:~ESOUF~CES, :i:I'.IC RAI::' :I: TPR ]: I'..IT ]: FIG - I::'R ]: DI...EY I:~I~]::'F~ I GEF~A T ]: C)lq SI~RV :ICES I:~1~:t... ]: ABI...I~: RAC ]: NG SUPPI...Y I~X]OI::' DIZS IGlq ROSE:V]:I...I...E CHF::YSt...EI:~ PI...YMO SARATOC~A CO. S C 0 T T / V[[: R N 0 N SEF~CO LABS SHARP HE:AT]:NG ~ A]:R COND SOI::'TWAI:~I~E T'A:[t..[]I:~S S[;~UEE[:~EE[: PRO WIIqDOW CL.E~ SROGA ' S AUTOMOTIVE: SEI:~V:I: SYSTEMS SUPF:'I...Y INC,, 'T'~RGEiT' - 'TCT I"IETWOI:t K TR:[ C]:T'Y ~MERZCAIq LEG:EOIq UIq :I:F'OI:~MS UNI... Z M t'T'E:D I NC US F' :I:I..TIF:R/WATEIR F'RO V ]: Z ]: A :1: NC VOSS I... I [~I.-IT I WA[3ER ' S ]:lqC,, WW GRAIIq[3EI:~ WYBR:I: TE: I I',IC C :['¥Y OF:' COI._UM)31A HI!i::[ [31"l'T',~i; GI...540I:;,'-V05.20 PAGE 7 CHECK NUMBER AMOUN'T' 70542 3:."; ,, 79 70543 300 ,, 00 70544 433.47 70545 423,,77 70546 .1.77 ,, 86 70547 5 :, 263 .. 23 70548 439.21 70549 992, :LO 70550 .... " "~ ,,~::,~ ,, (. :L 70',5','.-',.1. :':~':;;' ,, "? ? 70552 .1. ,., 555 ,, 00 705 t::',:.':~ :~6 .. 00 70554 300.00 70555 :.:12. :LO 70556 .1. O0.00 70557 325.00 ?0558 7.64 70559 297.00 70560 3 .1. 0.64 7056 :L 498.00 70.6~. ziox, 00 70567:: 2,999.00 Y0564 2! 1.67 Y0565 50. Y3 Y0566 112.00 ?0567 :L 47.00 70568 90.00 70 569 4 :, 8 56 .. 40 ?0570 53.25 7057.1. 58.00 70572 570 ,, :1.6 '7057Z~ ~"~6 ,, 99 70574 37.1. ,, :.";3 70575 57,, 72 ?0576 650.30 70577 431':'. ,, 98 70578 35 ,, 95 70579 :L89 ,, 57 70580 :I. 2:1. ,, .I..1. 70581. o..~._,'" '"":". 40 70582 46:.";. 28 636 .,, 228 ,, 41 *** CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 3/9/98 AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUS I NESS'. ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: q PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AWARD TRAFFIC STUDY ON 37TM AVENUE BY: K. Hansen~j~ BY: AND CENTRAL AVENUE AREAS ~ - ff. - ] DATE: 3/4/9~-.~'~ DATE: Background: On January 12, 1998, City Council authorized staffto seek proposals for professional services for a traffic study in the 37~ Avenue and Central Avenue areas. Proposals were received from three consulting engineering firms on February 27th. Discussion: Staff has reviewed each of the proposals. The text narrative of each proposal is attached for review. A spreadsheet is attached summarizing the project tasks and costs for comparison. The lowest cost was submitted by BRW. The most detailed and highest cost was submitted by SRF at $13,000-$16,000. Data collection by other agencies such as Mn/DOT and the City of Minneapolis shall be required to be utilized rather than repeating work already accomplished. The RFP broke the scope of work down into three phases: Data collection, existing conditions, analysis, future condition analysis, development of alternatives and analysis of alternatives. Agency coordination and streetscaping design concepts. Signal justification report at 39th and Central Avenues. All proposals met the requirements of the RFP prepared by staff. On the basis of scope of work, meeting a 60-day working schedule and estimate of cost, staff would recommend award of the project to BRW. BRW has worked for the City in the past providing our 1992 Comprehensive Plan update and are currently working on the University and Central Avenues signal improvements. Other phases of the work scope may be added at a later date dependent on the analysis and outcome of the initial phase. Project funding would be provided by the City's State Aid Maintenance Fund, City of Minneapolis, and private sources (Bobby & Steve's Autoworld). RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to award the Central and 37~ Avenues area traffic study, Municipal Project #9804 to BRW of Minneapolis, Minnesota based upon their low, qualified, responsible bid in the amount of $8,736.00; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. K~:jb 98-068 Attachments: Summary Comparison Consultant Proposal(s) Narrative (3) COUNCIL ACTION: A Proposal CENTRAL AVENUE/ 37TH AV~.NUE AR A TRAFFIC STUDY Prepared for: City of Columbia Heights Prepared by: BRW, Inc. Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, MN 55415 (612) 370-0700 February 27, ~998 February27, 1998 B RW INC. Planning Transportation' Engineering Urban Design Thresher Square 700 Third Street sO. Minneapolis, MN 5541'5 612/370-0700 Fax 612/370-1378 Milwaukee Minneapolis Newark Orlando Phoenix Portland San Diego Seattle 1Vtr. Kevin Hansen, PE Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Columbia Heights 637 38th Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Proposal for TRAFFIC STUDY Central Avenue and 37th Avenue Area Municipal Project No. 9804 Dear Mr. Hanson: BRW is pleased to submit this proposal to conduct a traffic study in the Central Avenue/37th Avenue area in Columbia Heights. This proposal is organized exactly as requested in the RFP. A'brief summary of each section is included in the three page proposal, and additional information is provided in the Appendix. A. Project Approach The purpose of the traffic study is to develop and evaluate design alternatives for the Central Avenue/37th Avenue intersection area. The study will consist of three phases. The initial phase consists of documenting existing conditions and analyzing potential design alternatives. Central Avenue in this area is currently four lanes with a median, but no left turn bays. There are several breaks in the median, allowing vehicles to turn left out of the. through lanes, causing potential safety.problems. Alternate roadway typical sections ' will be explored for Central Avenue which either prohibit tums or provide left turn' lanes, including a five lane section, a four-lane divided section, and maintaining the existing section and closing the existing median. The Central Avenue/37th Avenue intersection is currently a five legged intersection, with the fifth leg being Reservoir Boulevard. Several operational and safety problems are associated with five-legged intersections, including increased delay and potential safety conflicts. Alternatives will be developed that result in the closure of Reservoir Boulevard. The study will document the impacts to traffic operations, safety, and access if Reservoir Boulevard is closed. The second phase will include streetscaping alternatiVes to emphasize the area as a gateway entrance to the Columbia Heights community, and agency coordination to determine the potential for cooperative funding for the proposed project. The third phase consists of the preparation of a signal justification report for the intersection of Central Avenue and 39th Avenue NE. Mr. Kevin Hansen, PE February 27, 1998 '. ' Page 2 : A detailed work scope is included in the Appendix. B. Schedule The proposed project schedule is illustrated in the Appendix. BRW does not anticipate' any problem in meeting the desired project completion (Phase I) of 60 days. BRW is committed to making the staff listed under the Project Personnel available for the Columbia Heights traffic study. However, in the event of unexpected circumstances, the Minneapolis office has the resources to make additional staff available for the project. A complete description of the Minneapolis office is included in the Appendixl C. Project Personnel Resumes for the key personnel that would be assigned to the traffic study project are included in the Appendix. A brief description is provided below. Jon Horn, PE, Project Director - Mr. Horn is a Senior Associate and Client Manager/Project Manager in BRW's Development Group. He will serve as the Project' Director for this project. His responsibilities will include the assurance of the timely . assignment of the appropriate personnel to the project and the timely completion of the work program. He will also assist in the development of alternatives, cost estimating and agency coordination for this project. Mr. Horn has over 12 years of experience in the design and management of public improvement projects. He has served as a Client Manager/Project Manager for a number of local municipalities including previous work in Columbia Heights. Bob Green, PE, Project Manager - Mr. Green will serve as the Project Manager and will be responsible for the traffic operations analysis, development of alternatives, and the day to day coordination with the City. Bob is a senior traffic engineer in BRW's transportation group with more than eight years of experience in the area of traffic ~ ' operations, traffic signal design, and traffic impact studies. Mr. Green is very familiar with the project area, in part due to his experience on the Columbia Heights Emergency Vehicle Preemption project that will be completed this summer. D. Relevant Experience BRW's project team have recently completed traffic studies for a number of municipalities, including projects in the City of Richfield, City of Waseca, and the City of Burnsville. Descriptions of similar projects are included in the Appendix. E. Performance BRW will provide a quality product in a timely and cost-effective mariner by assigning experienced staff to the project. In addition, biweekly meetings will be held with City staff to discuss project progress and to discuss interim project results. Discussing interim results provides the City with a chance to provide input before the final report is finished.. Mr. Kevin Hansen, PE February 27, 1998 Page 3 F. References References for the projects listed in the relevant experience section are included in the~ Appendix. ., G. Schedule of Rates and Charges The current 1998 billing rates by job classification are provided in the Appendix. The estimated cost not to exceed to complete each phase is listed below. Detailed information is included in the Appendix. Phase I - $ 8,736.00 Phase II - $ 5,036.00 Phase III - $ 2,748.00 Project Total - $16,520.00 H. Benefits to Columbia Heights BRW is a multidisciplinary firm which can provide the necessary skills and expertise that the City needs for this project. BRW has experienced staff that can provide a full range of professional services including traffic engineering, final design, streetscaping, and construction administration. BRW will provide an experienced staff that have worked on similar projects, allowing us to apply what we have learned on other jobs to the Central Avenue/37th Avenue traffic study. The project team is familiar with the project area, having recently completed the EVP project for the City. In addition, BRW is familiar and has worked with staff from other agencies, including Anoka County, City of Minneapolis, and Mn/DOT. BRW would be very pleased to assist the City of Columbia Heights with the Central Avenue/37th Avenue NE area traffic study. Please call me (373-6359) or Jon Horn (373-6396) with any questions or if you need additional information. Thank you for providing us with the opportunity to submit this proposal. Sincerely, BRW, INC. Robert J. Green, PE Senior Consultant, Traffic Engineering RJG/srb #25O25 cc: Jon Horn, BRW, Inc. Project Approach Phase I Task 1.1 Data Collection Schedule a kickoff meeting early in the process to discuss City expectations and project goals. Invite representatives from other interested agencies, including City of Minneapolis, Anoka County, and Mn/DOT to inform them of the upcoming study and to obtain from them current traffic volume or as-built information. Collect traffic volume and roadway geometric information in the · study area. Traffic volume information will be gathered for a daily basis and for the AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts at the locations discussed in the RFP. It is expected that most of the daily traffic volume information can be obtained from the City of Columbia Heights, City of Minneapolis, and Mn/DOT. Therefore, the work involved on this task includes six AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts (three intersections and three key access drives) and four daily tube count locations (to be determined). Base mapping will be prepared in an AUTOCAD format from as-built information provided by the City of Columbia Heights and Mn/DOT. The base map will illustrate the existing conditions, including roadway widths, lane designations, intersection 'and access drive locations, right-of-way, median breaks, bus stop locations, and the location of on-street parking. The base mapping will incorporate any planned improvements, including the proposed development in the northeast corner of Central and 37th Avenue. Deliverables: Daily and peak hour traffic volume information, AutoCAD base mapping showing all existing and planned features. Task 1.2 Existing Conditions Analysis An intersection capacity analysis will be conducted for the key intersections on Central Avenue in accordance with the methods of the Highway Capacity Manual. Recent accident data (last three years) will be obtained from Mn/DOT. Intersection and roadway segment accident rates will be calculated and compared to similar facilities to determine if a safety problem currently exists. A preliminary traffic signal warrant analysis will be condt~cted for the intersection of 39th Avenue NE and Central Avenue. Deliverables: Intersection level of service, accident history and rates, preliminary signal warrant analysis BRW, Inc. City of Columbia Heights Central Avenue/37th Avenue Area Traffic Study Project Approach Continued Task 1.3 Development of Alternatives Up to three alternatives will be developed for the Central Avenue/ 37th Avenue intersection, all including the closure of Reservoir Boulevard. In addition, alternative roadway segments will be developed for Central Avenue, including a five-lane section, four-lane divided section, and the closure df the existing median. Deliverables: Alternative typical sections and concept level layouts showing potential alternatives Task 1.4 Analysis of Alternatives An analysis of each of the alternative§ will be conducted. The effect of closing Reservoir Boulevard will be documented, including impacts to access, neighborhoods, and potential traffic diversion routes. Potential right-of-way impacts will be identified for each of the Central Avenue alternatives. The alternatives will be compared based on their impacts to traffic operations, safety, and feasibility. A "draft" technical report will be prepared documenting the results of the analysis, including conclusions and recommendations. The "draft" report will be presented to the City and will be revised b~sed on the City's comments. A preliminary construction cost estimate will be prepared for the preferred alternative and included in the final report. Deliverables: "Draft" Traffic Study, Final Report based on City's comments Phase II Task 2.1 Agency Coordination Schedule a meeting with the interested agencies to discuss the results of the traffic study. Document the other agencies concerns. Explore the agencies' interest in participating in the proposed improvements. Contact the Mn/DOT State Aid office and discuss the project's potential for cooperative agreement funding. This proposal does not include the formal request for cooperative agreement funding, since the scope of the project is currently uncertain. If the project is considered a likely candidate for cooperative agreement funding, BRW would be pleased to assist Columbia Heights in the preparation of the necessary documents. BRW, Inc. #25025 2 City of Columbia Heights Central Avenue/37th Avenue Area Traffic Study Phase III BRW, Inc. #2502~ Project Approach Continued Deliverables: Meeting Minutes, Potential for Cooperative Agreement Funding Task 2.2 Streetscaping Meet with City to discuss anticipated level of investment in streetscaping features. Develop a concept level design based on the' preferred intersection and roadway alternative. The concept design should take into consideration the City's desire to make the Central Avenue/37th Avenue intersection the "entry" into the community. Develop preliminary cost estimate. Deliverables: Concept Level streetscaping design, preliminary cost estimate Task 3.1 Signal Justification Report A signal justification report for the Central Avenue/39th Avenue intersection in accordance with the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and current State Aid guidelines. The report will take into account the effect the diversion of traffic likely if Reservoir Boulevard is closed at 37th 'Avenue. A "draft" report will be prepared and will be submitted to the City and Mn/DOT for review. A final report will be prepared based on comments from the agencies. Deliverables: "Draft" and Final Signal Justification Report City of Columbia Heights Central Avenue/37th Av. enue Area Traffic Study Traffic Study - Central Avenue at 37th Avenue Columbia Heights, Minnesota Municipal Project No. 9804 February 27, 1998 SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. ~"~ LI LTl D I S C I P LIN E D. SINGLE SOURCE. 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 ARCHITECTURE · ENGINEERING · ENVIRONMENTAL 612 490-2000 800 325-2055 · TRANSPORTATION February 27, 1998 Mr. Kevin Hansen Director of Public Works/City Engineer City of Columbia Heights 637 38th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421 Dear Kevin: We appreciate the opportunity to submit a proposal for the Central Avenue Area Traffic Study. We thank you for the time you took to discuss the study and the area with us. We also have done a rather extensive field review and collected some preliminary data on the traffic in the area. We put together a very complete and comprehensive work program. We have summarized that program in the proposal. With your request that the proposal not exceed three pages, most of our proposal is dedicated to the specific project rather than to past experience and other studies that SEH has undertaken. We provided data sheets and a summary of additional projects in the Appendix if you need to review these. The best appraisal of our abilities would come from contact with our existing clients who will confirm our philosophies of providing quality services and implementable solutions for our clients. Our work program consists of collecting as much existing data as possible to both decrease the cost and the data collection time. We also believe that our work program indicates a philosophy of developing alternatives based on careful development of operational needs rather than merely drawing a few lines on paper and then analyzing them. We believe that development of the alternatives is extremely important so that in the review process, people will not find fault with the process or request additional alternatives be studied. We also believe that the analysis should be to provide not only a recommendation, but an implementable solution. The Request for Proposals indicates a relatively short timetable. We have the experienced staff capable of undertaking the study and meeting your schedule. As you review our work program, recall our past experiences and relate our philosophies of service, we believe that you will find that SEH is best prepared and positioned to provide the service that Columbia Heights needs in the analysis. We look forward to the opportunity to work with you and Colombia Heights staff and to specifically assist you with the Central Avenue Area Traffic Study. Respectfully submitted, Glen Van Wormer Manager, Transportation Engineering Group SHORT ELLIO TT HENDRICKSON INC, MINNEAPOLIS, MN ST, CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON, WI EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER LAKE COUNT'd, IN Table of Contents Project Approach ..................................... 1 Phase I Phase II Schedule and Fee ..................................... 2 Project Personnel ................................ ' ..... 2 Experience and References ............................. 3 Performance and Benefits .............................. 3 Appendix Billing Rates Minnesota Transportation Group Resumes Similar Project Experience Project Data Sheets References © 1998 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. The information contained in this Proposal was prepared specifically for you and contains proprietary information. We would appreciate your discretion in its reproduction and distribution. This information has been tailored to your specific project based on our understanding of your needs. Its aim is to demonstrate our ideas and approach to your project compared to our competition. We respectfully request that distribution be limited to individuals involved in your selection process. Central Avenue Area Traffic Study Project Approach SEll has very carefully reviewed the request of the City. We have undertaken a field review of the entire area and discussed the desired results with the City. A summary of our project approach follows. Phase 1 All pertinent available data will be obtained. Traffic volume information will be sought from Mn/DOT for Highway 65, Anoka County for CSAH 2, and Columbia Heights and Minneapolis for Municipal State Aid Street counting and other special counts. We will review the SEH files which have 20 years of general traffic volume dala. A base map of existing volumes will be developed and adjusted as needed. Missing counts will be dc~erlnined. Turning movement counts and additional traffic tube counts can be made, if necessary, by SEH or Dy an agency. A base map will be deyeloped using aerial photos and GIS information. Columbia Heights has a 1997 aerial photo and limited GIS .~,hile Minneapolis has complete GIS information. Base data will also be collected to ascertain right-of-way widths, street widths, lanes including restrictions and widttis, driveway locations and widths, existing land use, and type of business based on a window survey. Traffic controls, including signal timing, and bus information will be obtained. The proposed development plans will be obtained, including Bobby and Steve's Auto World and the Transit Hub. Potential development will be reviewed .with the City. Existing and past studies from Mn/DOT, including recent signal tinting and speed zoning studies, will be obtained. A parking inventory will be made on Central Avenue and on cross streets with information placed on the base map. Off-street parking information will be obtained from the aerial photos. An analysis of the existing conditions will be made. It will consist of an operational review based on observations of traffic and patterns and a review of past data and reports. Intersection capacities will be checked from past studies or from traffic volume information. Level of service deficiencies for intersections, approaches, or even specific movements will be noted. Capacity will again be checked with theoretical modifications made to deficient approaches or movements to improve the level of service. This will provide a landmark for ultimate development. Parking will be reviewed primarily to determine what the Use of existing parking is and what the adjacent land use demand is, but this will not be parking study. An alternate supply will be identified. Comments will be made on land use changes, specifically for the Auto World. Vacancies in office buildings will be assessed and their impact on lower traffic volumes determined. Traffic volumes and impacts from the land use changes will be assessed. Finally, a review of bus operations, including the on-street stops, Transit Hub volumes, and access to the Hub will be made. Alternatives will be developed in a sequential basis. Intersections will first be reviewed to determine the desired additional capacity or change in operations. The 37th Avenue intersection will be reviewed with Reservoir Boulevard as a part of the intersection, closed, or as a one-way section. Lane changes at 40th Avenue will also be reviewed. Because 41st Avenue is adjacent to the major study intersections, a partial review of the operation of that intersection will also be made. Once the intersections are reviewed, street section options will be developed. On Highway 65, closing existing medians or adjusting existing medians will be reviewed. A change from the existing lane concept to both four lane divided section with left turn lanes and a five lane section with a two-way left turn lane will be reviewed. Driveway relocation, turn lane storage requirements, two-way left mm conflicts, and transitions at intersections will all be reviewed and incorporated as the alternatives are developed. Additionally, the potential closing or one-way designation for Reservoir Boulevard and development of left turn lanes on cross streets will be considered. These will then be assembled to develop alternatives. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page I Central Avenue Area Traffic Study quality control. If design is needed, Dick Luhrsen, with 40 years experience, will be utilized. Base mapping will be compiled with the assistance of SEH's separate GIS section. Craig Churchward will provide urban design and landscaping services. SEH has' a staff of over 300. One hundred sixty are located in the St. Paul office. The Transportation Group has over 30 individuals in the St. Paul office. Thus, the Central Avenue Area Traffic Study can be adequately and completely staffed. Experience and References SEH has extensive experience in municipal traffic studies and planning. Several project data sheets are provided in the Appendix to indicate the scope and depth of the studies which SEH has undertaken. Many are quite similar to the study for Columbia Heights. More importantly is the fact that when SEH undertakes a traffic study, the recommendations are frequently implemented. SEH has one of the highest implementation records among consultants. As an example, SEH has undertaken 21 downtown traffic studies, and all 21 have gone to construction. Also important is the fact that SEH continues to work in virtually every community in which it has made a traffic study. This indicates the high degree of client satisfaction with the work of SEH. The Appendix contains a list of references. We would suggest Mark Maloney of Shoreview, where we just completed a traffic study for a large parcel, and John Gretz of Apple Valley, where we do numerous traffic studies, would be individuals to contact. Please feel free to contact not only the two specific references requested, but any of the references listed in the Appendix or any of the communities listed in the data sheets in the Appendix. Performance and Benefits The SEH Transportation Group has grown from two to over 50 employees in three offices in the past 20 years. A list of the Minnesota Transportation Group members is provided in the Appendix. This growth can be contributed primarily to the satisfaction of clients. The primary reason for SEH's success has been the sincere interest which SEH has for the studies and designs it undertakes for clients. The focus is on providing a service or meeting a need rather than developing a desigfi or completing a report. We make a commitment to the community to provide complete and accurate analyses and implementable recommendations. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Page 3 ONSULTING GROUP, INC. Transportation · Civil · Structural · Environmental · Planning · Traffic · Landscape Architecture · Parking February 27, 1998 Mr. Kevin Hansen, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer 637 - 38th Avenue NE Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421 Dear Mr. Hansen: SUBJECT: PROPOSAL FOR TRAFFIC STUDY F, OR CENTRAL AVENUE AND 37TH AVENUE AREA MUNICIPAL PROJECT NO. 9804 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Please accept three copies of this proposal to conduct a traffic study for the Central Avenue area in Columbia Heights. We appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to your decision. Sincerely, SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. Ferrol O. Robinson Principal FOP./jal Enclosures One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 Telephone (612) 475-0010 · Fax (612) 475-2429 · http://www, srfconsulting.com An Equal Opportunity Employer t] A. PROJECT APPROACH Our approach has been designed to achieve the purpose of the project, namely, to perform an analysis of existing and future conditions and to assess the resulting impacts; to develop and evaluate alternative solutions; and to recommend roadway, traffic and transit operations improvements, access changes and traffic signal needs, and landscape and urban design concepts and features that help identify Central Avenue as a "gatewaY entrance" to the City of Columbia Heights. We understand that there are three phases to the study and that the City may proceed with the first phase or a combination of phases. We have kept the tasks, schedule and estimated budget separately for each phase. We have built upon the task outline contained in your RFP. However, we have expanded both the tasks and the content to reflect our approach to achieving the desired project purpose. Specifically, we have added Task F - Public Participation - to inform the public of the project, to obtain public input and to review the alternative solutions. Our proposed Scope of Work is as follo~vs: Phase I a. Data Collection We propose that a project mobilization meeting with the City of Columbia Heights, Mn/DOT and the City of Minneapolis be held to discuss data availability, additional data needs, and responsibility for' collecting the additional data. In the attached figures the intersections listed in the RFP for a.m. and p.m. peak hour turning movements, including driveways are shown. We are suggesting that the Central/Gould Avenue intersection be added. Also shown are the daily count locations listed in the RFP. We are suggesting that you consider that the counts on 37th, 39th and 40th Avenues be taken both east and west of Central Avenue; and on Central Avenue, both north and south of 39th Avenue. This will help to better understand diversion issues and neighborhood impacts. We are suggesting that accident data for the most recent three years be obtained. This data will be helpful in understanding current operations, its effect on safety and how future operational, geometric and signalization changes may improve safety. We have assumed that the City will provide us ~vith an as-built layout showing road~vay widths and geometrics and right-of-way widths. We will conduct a field survey to understand and document on- street parking supply and demand, signal operations, bus stops locations and general traffic operations. We will also obtain proposed development plans from the City; transit hub location plans from Anoka County; existing bus routes, frequency and planned changes from Metro Transit; and any programmed road changes from all jurisdictions involved. b. Existing Conditions Analysis An analysis of existing conditions, with and without the proposed develoment will be conducted. This analysis will include: 1. Intersection capacity analysis - Perform capacity analysis of the key intersections to determine the existing level of service for baseline conditions. 2. Bus routes/stop locations - Identify bus routes, bus stop locations and bus operations within the Central Avenue study area. 3. On-street Central Avenue and Reservoir Boulevard parking - Identify parking demand and restrictions on these two roadways. 4. Accident Analysis - Perform an accident analysis to identify intersections or other locations with accident problems. c. Development of Alternatives (Concept Level) 1. Central Avenue/37th Avenue NE/Reservoir Boulevard Intersection - Retain existing configuration. 2. Close Reservoir Boulevard - Cul-de-sac Reservoir Boulevard to eliminate 5th leg of intersection. 3. Central Avenue segment - 37th to 40th Avenue NE - Evaluate three design concepts: Five-lane section · Four-lane divided with left-mm lanes · Closure of existing center median opening 4. Bus Routes/Stop Locations - Evaluate potential changes as well as the proposed transit hub for Central Avenue/39th Avenue. 5. On-Street Parking: Central Avenue and Reservoir Boulevard - Evaluate potential changes. d. Analysis of Alternatives Revie~v an evaluation of the alternatives developed i~ Task C will be based on the follo~ving criteria: 1. Traffic operations 2. Pedestrian activity 3. Safety 4. Right-of-Way impacts 5. Feasibility 6. Other impacts · Neighborhood traffic · Access changes · Increased traffic on residential streets if Reservoir Boulevard is closed. e. Selection of Alternatives Using the evaluation results, we would assist the City in selecting a preferred alternative. This alternative will be used, if so directed, to prepare a Signal Justification report for 39th Avenue. Streetscape concepts would also be developed for this alternative. f. Public Participation Il It has been Our experience that the types of changes being proposed for the study area will generate a great deal of interest on the part of residents and area businesses. We believe that it is very important to involve these and other affected groups to promote a solution that benefits all. For these reasons, we are proposing a Public Participation Task that would involve meeting with affected groups early in the process to receive input; mid-point to discuss alternatives; and, towards the end to discuss the recommendations. g. Draft and Final Report A report documenting all input, assumptions, analysis results, and recommendations will be submitted for revie~v. After review is complete we will prepare a final report (20 copies). Phase II A. Agency Coordination (including Cooperative Agreement process) - We will assist the City coordinating all work in this phase with Anoka County, Mn/DOT and the City of Minneapolis. The objective of this task is to work with the City of Columbia Heights to create a vision and theme for Central Avenue as it relates to the recommended roadway alternative. The overall theme will be developed with creative yet programmatic design solutions incorporating the traffic and parking management strategies associated with the recommended roadway alternative. Specific tasks include: 1. Discuss level of investment ~vith City 2. Develop landscaping sketches clearly illustrating the proposed design concepts within the context of the environment that the preferred alternative xvill provide. 3. Promote the concept of 37th Avenue/Central Avenue as the "gateway" to the community. Phase II! A. Signal Justification Report for 39th Avenue and Central Avenue B, SCHEDULE Our proposed schedule is shoxvn in the attached figure. We will deliver Phase I in eight weeks as shown. C. PRQJECT PERSONNEL An organizational chart identifying key personnel and their roles in this project is shown in the attached figure. D. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE The request for proposals emphasizes the need for experience with studies of similar scope and magnitude to the proposed study. SRF has a significant body of experience in Traffic Impact Studies, Alternatives Analysis and Urban Design. The firm and project team members have completed similar studies for .the cities of Minneapolis, Eagan, Plymouth, Minnetonka, Woodbury, Maple Grove and Champlin, among others. SRF has extensive experience integrating streetscape and urban design with transportation facilities within neighborhoods. Similar studies involving this area of work include 3rd Street, and Glenwood Avenue in Minneapolis, Shepard Road in St. Paul, and the Plymouth City Center. Neighborhood participation and agency coordination is an intricate component of this project's success. Central Avenue's neighborhood groups and other interests must be engaged by the process and provided with timely information to share their priorities and perspectives. SRF Consulting Group, Inc. has successfully incorporated public input in a wide variety of assignments. Job capsules describing some of our related projects are attached. E. PERFORMANCE We at SP,_F are committed to meeting our clients' expectations regarding product quality, schedule and budget. We have the experience, personnel and resources in-house that are required to efficiently complete the traffic study, the Signal Justification Report and the Urban Design/Landscape Architecture phases of the study. The depth of our staff (over 40 transportation/traffic/transit engineers and planners) allows us to guarantee on-time delivery of quality products, at the agreed-upon budget and scope of work. ' F. REFERENCES Tom Colbert Director of Public Works CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Mike Monahan Director of Transportation and Special Projects CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS 211 City Hall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 G. SCHEDULE OF RATES AND CHARGES A schedule of 1998 hourly billing rates for each category of professional, technical and clerical employee is sho~vn in the attached figure. We estimate that the range of costs to complete each phase of this study is as follo~vs: Phase I -Traffic Analysis $13,000 to $16,000 Phase II - Agency Coordination/Streetscaping $6,500 to $8,500 Phase III - Signal Justification Report $1,500 to $2,000 These estimates are based on the proposed Scope of Work including the Public Participation Task. The upper value of the ranges shown represent the not-to-exceed budget. H. BENEFITS TO COLUMBIA HEIGHTS We believe that the City should select us to perform this project for the following reasons: · We will do a very good job for the City as our references and reputation can attest to. · We have a great deal of experience performing similar work. Not only have we done many similar projects, we bring creative ideas to the solutions we recommend to our clients. · We are recognized for our ability to develop solutions that are acceptable to all parties affected, and we deliver. - STUDY AREA AND TRAFFIC COUNT LOCATIONS © 1997 by Rand McNally & Company. Ali rights reserved. Meeting of: March 9, 1998_ CiTY MANAGER AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS ........... ORIGINATING DEPARt: APPROVAL NO: e~ ........ F~ro ........ ITEM: Contract R~aowal BY: Charles Kewatt BY: /~., ~ o ~. DATE: Mar 3~ 1998 DATE: NO: The 1998 Fire Training Facility contract between the City of Saint Paul Fire and Safety Services (St. Paul Fire) and the Columbia Heights Fire Department is being amended. The amended contract outlines fees for use, _s~and.by per~nn.el, and for.?ncell~aoc~I The usage fee is $100.00 per hour. The fee structure meets with our approval and we plan to renew mo con a . We use the facility for our annual physical agility test. RECOMMENDED MOTiON: Move to Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to Approve the 1998 Training Facility Contract between St. Paul Fire and the Columbia Heights Fire Department. 98-29 ICouNCIL ACTION: DEPARTMENT OF FIRE AND SAFETY SERVICES Timothy K. Fuller, Fire Chief CITY OF SAINT PAUL Norm Coleman, Mayor 100 East Eleventh Street Saint Paul, MN55101 Telephone: 612-224-7811 Facsimile: 622-228-6255 January 23, 1998 TO: FROM: Training Facility. Cus~mers ~irin~e ~lilee/ ~~ SUBJECT: 1998 Contracts This letter shall serve as official notice of this department's intent to amend all of our 1998 Fire Training Facility contracts with all of our customers using the training facilities at 1683 Energy Park Drive. Effective April 1, 1998, the hourly rate for the use of the facility shall be $100.00 per hour of use or fraction thereof. In addition, there will continue to be a $50.00 per hour cost for Fire personnel standby if needed. Effective April 1, 1998, there will be a $100.00 cancellation fee if the contractor does not notify the Training Center at least 10 days in advance of the scheduled commitment day should the contractor wish to cancel the planned session. All affected parties will be sent an amended contract which shall be signed and returned to the City of St. Paul Department of Fire and Safety Services no later than April 1, 1998. It has been our pleasure to work with you in the past and we are confident that our facility will continue to be a benefit to you in the future. Any questions should be referred to our accountant Mr. John Swanson at 228-6256. Thank you. jmb "PROUD TRADITIONS ...... FOCUS ON THE FUTURE" · " AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the City of Saint Paul Department of Fire and Safety Services (hereat~er Saint Paul Fire) and the Columbia Heights Fire Department. WHEREAS, Saint Paul Fire and the Columbia Heights Fire Department wish to detail the terms of use of Saint Paul Fire's training facility at 1683 Kasota Street, Saint Paul, MN by the Columbia Heights Fire Department. WHEREAS, the parties have hereinafter set forth the terms of said use by the Columbia Heights Fire Department. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties as follows: By prior arrangement with Saint Paul Fire Chief, the Columbia Heights Fire Department may use the training facilities for fire fighters located at Saint Paul's Fire Training Center located at 1683 Kasota Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota. Saint Paul Fire will make such training structures and devices available to the Columbia Heights Fire Department during evening and weekend hours on the dates requested by the Columbia Heights Fire Department subject to Saint Paul Fire's own prior commitments. The Columbia Heights Fire Department will pay Saint Paul Fire the amount of one hundred dollars ($100) per one (1) hour of use or fraction thereof for the use of the training facilities. The Columbia Heights Fire Department will pay Saint Paul Fire the amount of fifty dollars ($50) per one (1) hour session or fraction thereof for standby service of Saint Paul Fire personnel if required. Sessions will be determined by mutual agreement between the parties and approved by Saint Paul Fire as to the precise dates and times. If a training session is canceled less than ten (10) days prior to the session's scheduled time, a cancellation fee of one hundred dollars ($100) will be paid to Saint Paul Fire. Facilities designated for the Columbia Heights Fire Department's use shall be the Drill Tower, the Bum Simulation Building, the Haz/Mat Training Pads, the Pump Test Pits, Training Props, and a Classroom. o The Columbia Heights Fire Department agrees to defend and hold Saint Paul Fire harmless from any claims which may be made against Saint Paul Fire in any way resulting fi:om the use of the structures, devices, and apparatus described above by the Columbia Heights Fire Department except for any claims resulting from negligence on the part of Saint Paul Fire. The Columbia Heights Fire Department will pay Saint Paul Fire's reasonable attorney's fees, costs, and disbursements incurred as a result of any claims brought arising out of said use. This agreement will continue in full force and effect until such time as it is canceled by either party by giving sixty (60) days written notice to the other party of cancellation. The Columbia Heights Fire Department will be responsible for any and all required cleanup required as a result of this usage. The Columbia Heights Fire Department will clean the training facilities to the satisfaction of Saint Paul Fire including the removal of all debris. IN WITNESS WHEREOF we have hereunto set our hands and seals this day of ,1998. City of Saint Paul Timothy K. Fuller, Saint Paul Fire Chief Columbia Heights Fire Department CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meetin~ of: March 9, 1998 AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUS I NESS ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: t7 FINANCE APPROVAL ITEM: REFERENDUM PETITION BY: WILLLAM ELRITE BY: NO: ~-~, ~ DATE: 3/4/98 DATE: On February 23, 1998, the City Council was presented with an 80-page petition regarding Ordinance No. 1369. Staff has verified 58 pages of the petition, and verified that the number of registered voters is in excess of 700. Attached is letter from the City Attorney outlining the alternatives that the City Council has. Also attached is a sample ballot that was prepared by City staff under the instruction of the City Attorney for layout and for format. Should the Council accept the petition on March 9th, the Charter states that the election can be held no sooner than thirty (30) days or no later than forty-five (45) days, or no sooner than April 9~h and no later than April 23fa. The estimated cost for a special election is between $7,000 and $8,000. As a special election was not included in the budget, it is staff's recommendation that appropriations for this expenditure come from either the Mayor-Council contingency fund or General Fund fund balance. As the City Attorney's letter explains other akernatives, the following motions may need some modification. The following motions are written on the basis of the petition bearer's request being rejected and the City holding a special election. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to reject the request of the referendum petition and schedule a special election for Tuesday, April 21, 1998, and to approve the wording of the ballot as in the attached. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to appropriate funds of $ 8,000 for the City's election budget from the Mayor-Council contingency fund. WE:dn 9803043 COUNCIL ACTION: MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS JIM HOEFT, CITY ATTORNEY COUNCIL VOTING OPTIONS RE: ORDINANCE NO. 1369 MARCH 4, 1998 As indicated in the attached council letter, the referendum petition regarding Ordinance No. 1369 meets the requirement of the Charter in that it contains more than 700 signatures of registered voters (it was also submitted prior to the expiration of the applicable 30 day time period). Accordingly, the Charter provides the Council with three options: "The Council shall thereupon reconsider the said ordinance at its next regular meeting, and (1) either repeal the same, or (2) repeal the sections thereof to which objection has been raised by the petitioners, or (3) by aye or no vote reaffirm its adherence to the ordinance as passed." If the Council voted to repeal the ordinance, the issue would not go to a special election because the reconsideration would result in the denial of the original rezoning request. Option 2 would allow the Council to maintain the zoning change for all of the CBD property, but repeal the section of the ordinance pertaining to the rezoning of the residential property. If this was done, the issue would not go to a special election because under the Charter the Council would have repealed "the sections thereof to which objection has been raised by the petitioners." If the Council votes to reaffirm its adherence to the ordinance, the issue proceeds to a special election. As with the previous votes, a 4/5tbs vote is required to reaffirm. If there is less than 4 votes to reaffirm, that would be considered a "repeal" as set forth above. JUDGE JUDGE SPECIAL ELECTION BALLOT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1998 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS To vote for a proposed question, completely fill in the oval~l next to the word "YES". To vote against a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "NO". QUESTION SHALL THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ADOPT ORDIN,~NCE NO. 1369, BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 853 PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY: Section 1: That certain property legally described as Lot One (1), Lot Two (2), Lot Three (3), Lot Four (4), Lot Five (5), Lot Six (6), Lot Seven (7), Lot Eight (8), Lot Nine (9), Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Lot Thirteen (13), Lot Fourteen (14), Lot Fifteen (15), Lot Sixteen (16), Lot Seventeen (17), Lot Eighteen (18), Block 87, Columbia Heights Annex to Minneapolis, Anoka County, Minnesota Outlot C, and Lot Eight (8), Lot Nine (9), Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Lot Thirteen (13), Lot Fourteen (14), Lot Fifteen (15), Lot Sixteen (16), Lot Seventeen (17), Lot Eighteen (18), Central Avenue Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota Lot One (1) and Lot Two (2), except the northeasterly fifty (50) feet thereof, of Block Eight (8), Reservoir Hills, Columbia Heights, Anoka County, Minnesota, all of which are currently zoned CBD, Central Business District, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. Section 2: That certain property legally described as Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Spains Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, which is currently zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. Section 3: To authorize and direct staff to amend the official zoning map to reflect the change in zoning to RB, Retail Business District. Upon the effective date of said ordinance. Section 4: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and thirty (30) days after its passage. YES NO 'CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS $90 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS WILLIAM ELRITE, CITY CLERK PROPOSED BAL~'/~T"~RMA~ ~ Attached are five proposed ballot formats numbered Draft #1 through #5. Drafts #3 and #4 include an explanation of the effect of a yes or no vote. Draft #5 is to only repeal Section 2 of Ordinance No. 1369 and the explanation of yes or no is slightly different. These have been reviewed with the City Attorney and he recommends using Draft #!, #3 or #5. attachments WE/js THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON tHE BASIS OF D]SABIL]TY IN EMPLOYMENT or THE ProvIsION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER , OFFICIAL BALLOT JUDGE JUDGE SPECIAL ELECTION BALLOT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1998 DRAFT #1 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS To vote for a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "YES". To vote against a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "NO". QUESTION SHALL THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGFITS ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1369, BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 853 PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY: Section 1: That certain property legally described as Lot One (1), Lot Two (2), Lot Three (3), Lot Four (4), Lot Five (5), Lot Six (6), Lot Seven (7), Lot Eight (8), Lot Nine (9), Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Lot Thirteen (13), Lot Fourteen (14), Lot Fifteen (15), Lot Sixteen (16), Lot Seventeen (17), Lot Eighteen (18), Block 87, Columbia Heights Annex to Minneapolis, Anoka County, Minnesota Outlot C, and Lot Eight (8), Lot Nine (9), Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Lot Thirteen (13), Lot Fourteen (14), Lot Fifteen (15), Lot Sixteen (t6), Lot Seventeen (17), Lot Eighteen (18), Central Avenue Subdivision, Anoka County, Mi~n_nesota Lot One (1) and Lot Two (2), except the northeasterly fifty (50) feet thereof, of Block Eight (8), Reservoir Hills, Columbia Heights, Anoka County, Minnesota, all of which are currently zoned CBD, Central Business District, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. Section 2: That certain property legally described as Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Spains Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, which is currently zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. Section 3: To authorize and direct staff to amend the official zoning map to reflect the change in zoning to RB, Retail Business District. Upon the effective date of said ordinance. Section 4: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and thirty (30) days after its passage. CD YES CD NO ~ OYYICI.~L B,A.LLOT DRAFT JUDGE JUDGE SPECIAL ELECTION BALLOT COLUMBIA HEIGHTs, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1998 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS; To vote for a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "YES". To vote against a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "NO". QUESTION SHALL THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1369, BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 853 PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY: which, in substance, is as follows: That certain property legally described as Lot Ten (10) [3802 Reservoir Boulevard], Lot Eleven (11) [3740 Reservoir Boulevard], Lot Twelve (12), Spa/ns Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, which is currently zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. CD YES CZ> NO OFFICIAL IgALLOT DRAFT JUDGE. JUDGE SPECIAL ELECTION BALLOT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1998 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS To vote for a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "YES". To vote against a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "NO". QUESTION SHALL THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1369, BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 853 PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY: Section 1: That certain property legally described as Lot One (1), Lot Two (2), Lot Three (3), Lot Four (4), Lot Five (5), Lot Six (6), Lot Seven (7), Lot Eight (8), Lot Nine (9), Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Lot Thirteen (13), Lot Fourteen (14), Lot Fifteen (15), Lot Sixteen (16), Lot Seventeen (17), Lot Eighteen (18), Block 87, Columbia Heights Annex to Minneapolis, Anoka County, Minnesota Outlot C, and Lot Eight (8), Lot Nine (9), Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Lot Thirteen (13), Lot Fourteen (14), Lot Fifteen (15), Lot Sixteen (16), Lot Seventeen (17), Lot Eighteen (18), Central Avenue Subdivision, Anoka County, Minnesota Lot One (1) and Lot Two (2), except the northeasterly fifty (50) feet thereof, of Block Eight (8), Reservoir Hills, Columbia Heights, Anoka County, Minnesota, all of which are currently zoned CBD, Central Business District, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. Section 2: That certain property legally described as Lot Ten (10), Lot Eleven (11), Lot Twelve (12), Spains Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, which is currently zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, shall hereafter be zoned KB, Retail Business District. Section 3: To authorize and direct staff to amend the official zoning map to reflect the change in zoning to RB, Retail Business District. Upon the effective date of said ordinance. Section 4: This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and thirty (30) days after its passage. A "YES" vote will allow rezoning and the expansion of retail business in this area. A "NO" vote will not allow rezoning and will limit the expansion of retail business in this area. © YES CD NO .OFFICIAL BALLOT DRAFT #4 JUDGE JUDGE SPECIAL ELECTION BALLOT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1998 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS To vote for a proposed question, completely fill in the oval O next to the word "YES". To vote against a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "NO". QUESTION SHALL THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 1369, BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 853 PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY: which, in substance, is as follows: That certain property legally described as Lot Ten (10) [3802 Reservoir Boulevard], Lot Eleven (11) [3740 Reservoir Boulevard], Lot Txvelve (12), Spains Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, which is currently zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, shall hereafter be zoned RB, Retail Business District. A "YES" vote **'ill allow rezoning and the expansion of retail business in this area. A "NO" vote will not allow rezoning and will limit the expansion of retail business in this area. YES © NO OFFICIAL BALLOT JUDGE JUDGE SPECIAL ELECTION BALLOT COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA APRIL 21, 1998 DI~T #5 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS To vote for a'proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "YES". To vote against a proposed question, completely fill in the ovalO next to the word "NO". QUESTION SHALL THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ADOPT SECTION 2 OF ORDINANCE NO. 1369, BEING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 853 PERTAINING TO THE REZONING OF CERTAIN PROPERTY: which, in substance, is as follows: That certain property legally described as Lot Ten (10) [3802 Reservoir Boulevard], Lot Eleven (11) [3740 Reservoir Boulevard], Lot Twelve (12), Spains Addition, Anoka County, Minnesota, which is currently zoned R-3, Multiple Family Residential, shall hereafter be zoned R_B, Retail Business District. A "YES" vote will allow rezoning to RB, Retail Business. A "NO" vote will keep the zoning R-3, Multiple Family Residential. CD YES CD NO TO: FROM: DATE: MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS WALT FEHST, CITY MANAGER MARCH 6, 1998 ATTACHED IS ADDITIONAL MATERIAL WHICH ADDRESSES STATE LAW PRE- EMPTION OF CITY CHARTER PROVISION PERMITTING REFERENDUM OF ZONING DECISIONS. THIS INFORMATION SERVES TO CLARIFY A CONCERN HELD BY SOME WHICH QUESTIONED WHETHER THERE CAN BE A REFERENDUM ON ZONING DECISIONS IN A HOME RULE CHARTER CITY. SOME OF THIS CONCERN WAS BASED ON AN OPINION PREVIOUSLY RECEIVED FROM A LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES' ATTORNEY. THE MEMO FROM JIM HOEFT, CITY ATTORNEY, TO ME ADDRESSES THE SPECIFICS OF THE CONCERNS AND INCLUDES HIS OPINION AND RECOMMENDATION FOR COUNCIL ACTION. R, Ic.~rqARD A. MERRILL DAP~ELL A. JENSEN JEFFREY S. JOHNSON RUSSELL H. CROWDER JON P. ERICKSON LAWRENCE R. JOHNSON DAVID A. COSSI THOMAS P. MALONE MICHAEL E HURLEY VIRGIL C. HERRICK HERMAN I~ TALLE BGS Barna, Guzy & Steffen, Ltd. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 400 Northtown Financial Plaza 200 Coon Rapids Boulevard Minneapolis, MN 55433-5894 (612) 780-8500 FAX (612) 780-1777 MEMORANDUM CHARLES M, SEYKORA DANIEL D. GANTER, JR. BEVERLY K. DODGE GREGG V. HERRICK JAMES D. HOEFT JOAN M. QUADE SCOTT M. LEPAK ELIZABETH A. SCHADING WILLIAM E HUEFNER BRADLEY A. KLETSCHER SUSAN A. ROEHRICH MALCOLM E TERRY KRISTI R. RILEY ROBERT C. HYNES 1935-I993 TO: FROM: Walt Fehst Jim Hoeft ~ State Law Pre-emption of City Charter Provision Permitting Referendum of Zoning Decisions DATED: March 2, 1998 This memo is in response to your question of whether the State zoning laws pre-empt the City's charter provision permitting a referendum on zoning decisions. It is my understanding that this request came as a result of your conversation with Ms. Heyl at the League of Minnesota Cities. At your request, I also spoke with Ms. Heyl regarding the City's current referendum petition. While I do not know the specifics of your conversation with Ms. Heyl, when I spoke with her as to the specific issues of this referendum, she concurred that the law as it currently stands does allow for a referendum on zoning decisions in a home rule charter city. Let me digress a bit to current changes that were made in the Columbia Heights charter. Prior to the recent changes, the charter allowed for a referendum on "measures" taken by the Council. This raised the issues of what a "measure" was (since there was no definition in the charter) and therefore, just what decisions did that open up to a possible referendum? The Minnesota Supreme Court has long held that the power of referendum is limited to acts which are legislative in character. Hanson v. City of Granite Falls, 529 NW2d 485 (Minnesota Appeals 1995). In order to determine whether a Council's action is legislative, the court distinguishes between legislative, administrative and quasi judicial acts. "General legislation lays down some permanent and uniform rule of law, administrative acts relate to daily administration of municipal affairs, and quasi judicial acts are the product of investigation, consideration, and deliberate human judgment based upon evidentiary facts of some sort." Oakman v. City of Eveleth, 203 NW 514 (1925). Application of this analysis led the Supreme Court in Denney v. City of Duluth, 202 NW2d 892 to hold that "Where a municipality.., embarks upon a policy of zoning for the purpose of regulating and restricting land use in the construction of buildings within a fixed area, it is exercising legislative power." Accordingly, the court in Hanson notes that "Although the resolution itself is not legislative [approving a site plan for a ah'port], according to the City An Equal Opportunity Employer March 2, 1998 Page 2 Council, a zoning ordinance will need to be passed in order to establish the new airport. The voters of Granite Falls may have an opportunity to repeal that ordinance by referendum." That is the status of the law as it currently exists. I enclose a copy of Ms. Heyl's memo to Mr. McCauley dated April 17, 1992. While the entire memo is not relevant to our situation, Ms. Heyl does correctly set forth the argument that Minnesota Statute 462.351 et. seq. may pre-empt a charter referendum provision. However, because this is only a theoretical argument at this point, she intentionally prefaces her comments xvith "Arguably", "One can argue", and "It could be argued". I agree entirely with the way Ms. Heyl lays out the argument, but I draw your attention to her statement that "It should be remembered that the Supreme Court has not reached the issue as to whether the state zoning laws pre-empt city charter provision permitting initiative and referendum of zoning decisions." I could not agree more with this statement. In our recent conversations, you expressed some concern about potential litigation on this matter. I agree that this situation is ripe for litigation from either side. However, it is my opinion that the Council needs to make its decisions within the framework of existing applicable law, and should not act in speculation as to how the law may be changed or amended in the future. Accordingly, it is my opinion that based upon the law as it currently exists, the charter provision allowing for a referendum does extend to this zoning ordinance as it is a legislative act of the Council. Enclosures: - Copy of Denney v. City of Duluth - Copy of Hanson v. City of Granite Falls - Copy of Ms. Heyl's letter to Michael McCauley dated April 17, 1992 16134 1 89~. lVfinn. 209. NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d S'ERItIS James A. DENNEY, et al., Respondents, V. CITY OF DULUTH, Appellant. No. 43541. Supreme Court of Mimmsota. NOV. 24, 1972. Ilohearing Denied Jan. 9, 1973. Action brought to enjoin city building inspector from issuing a permit authorizing the construction of multiple-family dwell- ings within rezoned acreage. The District Court of St. Louis County, C. L. Eckman, J., entered judgment in favor of plaintiffs, and city appealed. The Supreme Court, Rogosheske, J., held that governing body of a municipality acts in a legislative and not an administrative capacity when by or- dinance, as required by its zoning code, it amends the boundaries or land use classifi- cations of its comprehensive zoning plan. Affirmed. 1. Zoning A municipality's power to regulate land nsc by zoning exists by virtue of au- thority delegated to it by the state. M.S.A. § 462.357. 2. Zoning Where a mnnicipality in thc exercise of delegated authority e~nbarks upon a pol- icy of zoning for the purpose of regulatiug and restricting land use and the construe- 3. Zoning ~==159 Governing body of a municipality acts in a legislative and not an administrative capacity when by ordinance, as required by its zoning code, it amends the boundaries or land use classifications of its compre- hensive zoning plan. M.S.A. § 462.357. 4. Municipal Corporations ~::=108.6 Since city council was under a duty to amend the boundaries of single-family resi- dential zone by means of an ordinance, and since such act was legislative in nature, the amending ordinance was subject to refer- endum provisions of city charter. M.S.A. § 462.357. Syllabus by the Court A governing body of a municipality acts in a legislative and not an administra- tive capacity when by ordinance, as re- quired by its zoning code, it amends the boundaries or land-nse classification of its comprehensive zoning plan. \Villiam P. Dinah, City Atty., Duluth, for appellant. Fryberger, Buchanan, Smith, Sanford & Frederick, Duluth, for respondents. Heard and considered en bane. ROGOSHESKE, Justice. Defendant, city of Duluth, appeals from a judgment of the district court enjoiniug its I)uildi,~g inspector from issning a permit authorizing the construction of multiple dwellings upon the property which is the subject of Ordinance No. 7787, a recently tion of bnildings within a fixed area, it is. passed amendment to Duluth's comprehen- exercising legislative power, sire zoning ordinancefi nntil such amend- Ordinan(:e No. 7787, entitled "AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CE[APTER 50 OF DULUTII CITY CODE, 1959 ZONING DISTRICT MAPS NO. 34 AND N0 35, AS CONTAINED IN TItE APPENDIX TO CIIAPTER 50, TO PRo%rIDE FOR TIlE REZONING OF PROPEItTY CONSISTING OF 21.7 ACRES AllU~i~I'ING 0N AND LYING EASTERLY OF KEN~V00D AVENUE, Sou.q~E[ERL¥ OF CE[ES- [PER PARIC AND NORTIIERLY OF PI,UM STREET EXTENDED," was adopted by the city council of the city of Duluth on May 11, 1970. lng ordina the city o Home Ru sue prese~ Duluth ac ' istrative nance No the bourn comprehe lative ac~ the judgn The fit be surer, Company a corpor building Desiring complex City acq ed withi The lan, glo-f ami the 195~ no%v co( c. 50. permits or mcr, 2. The Dulu~ in D, "NO shall days rich. the ~' visio, "If tion, C. ity last prat, ordi~ tho from be t enti~ ~ion e~e~ su('l DENNE¥ v. OITY OF DULUTI~' ing o~dhmnce ~s ~pp~ovcd by the voters o~ the city of Duluth pursuant to § 52 of its Home Rule Charter.'~ ~The dispositive is- sue presented is whether the city council of Duluth acted in its legislative or its admin- istrative capacity xvhen it adopted Ordi- nance No. 7787.4 We hold that amending. the boundaries of a particular zone of a comprehensive zoning ordinance is a legis- lative action,,; and accordiugly we affirm the judgmeut of the district court. The facts, submitted by stipnlatiou, may be summarized. Capitol City Holding Company, Inc. (hereinafter Capitol City) is a corporation engaged in the business of building and operating apartment houses. Desiring to construct an apartment-house complex consisting of 685 units, Capitol City acquired a 40-acre tract of land locat- ed within the city of Duluth in early 1970. The land at that time was zoned for sin- gle-family residential dwellings Imrsuant to the 1958 comprehensive zoning ordinance, now codified as Duluth Legislative Code, c. 50. Section 50-37 of that zoning code permits any owner seeking to redevelop 20 or more acres of land as a "community ~inn. 893 unit" to deviate from zoning restrictions otherwise applicable, provided the city council approves and certain procedures are followed and specified conditions are satisfied..a Among other limitations, § 50- 37(c) provides that apartment units must be not less in area than the lot area re- quired for single-family residential pur- poses. Since Capitol City's 40 acres were within the single-family classification, which required at least 5,000 square feet per family, it was limited in construction hy § 50-37(c) to approximately 240 apart- meat units. Not satisfied with the density permitted, Capitol City petitioned the city council to rezone the middle 21.7 acres of the -10-acre tract to an apartment house zone which would . require only 1,500 square feet for each family. If the council granted this rezoning request, which was accompanied by Capitol City's application for approval of a "commuuity unit" devel- opment plan, the average density require- ment of the entire 40 acres would be re- duced to allow a maximum construction of 697 apartment units. Also, both Mina. St. 462.357, subd. 5,4 and Duluth Legislative Tile Home Rule Charter of tile City of Duluth, § 52, sets forth tile requirements necessary for the hohling of a referendum itt Duluth and in pertinent lmrt reads: 3. "No ordinmn.e passed by tim Coum:il shall go into effect before thirty (30) days from the time ot~ its last lmblica- tion, ex¢.ept when otherwise required by' the general luws of the State or by pro- visions of this charter. "If, during said tblrty (31)) duys a peti- tion, signed by qualified electors of the City equal in number to at least ten (10) per cent of the total ballots east at the last preceding gener:fl municipal election protesting against the passage of such ordinance, be presented to the Council, tlm same shall thereupon be suspended from going into operation: and it shall be the duty of the Council to reconsider 4. such ordinance, and if the same be not entirely repealed, the Council shall sub- mit the ordinance, as provided in Bee- Lion 51 of this charter, to a vote of the electors of the City, either at the next general municipal election, or at a spe- cial election called for that purpose, anti such ordinance shall not become operative unless a majority of the qualified elee- tots voting on the same shall vote in favor thereof." Duluth Legislative Code, § 50-37, in essence empowers the council by simlfle resolution to approve such a developer's lflan for tlm oonstruction of a community unit c. ombining homes, nlutrtments, a sbOl~- ping center, und other allied uses in an area zoned for single-family residences. The plun must be referred to the city plmming commission for study, public hearing, and report. Numerous condi- tions are specified to ensure tlmt the area is adaptable to a "eomlflete community development" and tbut the plan is con- sistent with tim intent and purpose of the city's comprehensive zoning plan. Minn. St. 462.357, subd. 5, provides in part: "The provisions of this subdivi- sion apply to cities of tile first class. In such cities amendments to a zoning ordi- nance shull be made in conformance will, this section but only after there shall have been filed in the office of the city clerk a written consent of the owners of two-thirds of Lhe several descriptions of real estate situate within 100 feet of $93. Minn. 9.02 NOttTH WESTEI~N Code, § 50-1177 requiring the written con- sent of two-thirds of the owners of the separate parcels of real estate lying withiu 100 feet of the 21.7 acres, xvere satisfied because Capitol City was itself the consent- ing owner of the 100-foot "buffer" strip around the 21.7 acres, xvhich was all of the property within the 100-foot consent areafi In response to Capitol City's petition, the city council of Duluth adopted Ordinance No. 7787, by virtue of which the 21.7 acres of Capitol City's 40-acre tract was rezoncd to an apartment house zone. Simulta- neously, the city council, by resolution, ap- proved Capitol City's proposed development plan.: Within the 30-day period before Ordi- nance No. 7787 could hecome effective un- der the city's charter, a petition was filed with the city clerk protesting the passage of the ordinance and demanding that it suhmitted to a referendum of the voters of Duluth. The city clerk, after examining the petition, found it proper in all respects, but the city council, acting upon the advice of the city attorney, determined not to call for a referendum vote. This action was then 1)rought to enjoin defendant's huilding lhe re;ti estate affected, tllltl after lhe firmative vote in fax'm; thert,of hy a jority of the members ~*f th. governing body of any su,'h city." 5. l)tduth lx, gislalive ('ode, ~ 50-117, rides: "Ext'el~t as othorwiso provid.d hy shall be made only after there shall filed in the office of the city ~.h,rk written consent of lite owners of two- thirds of the several des{.riptions of real estate situated within one hundred feet of the real estate.,affected, and after the affirmative vote in favor thereof by a jority of the city council; provided, that less than forty heres and shall have found the nmnber of descriptions of rind estate affecte31 by su{:h amendments renders thc obtaining of such written consent imprnc- tieal nnd shall have affirmed in writing that the proposals are reasonably related to the overall needs of the community to existing land usc or to a plan for future t%EPOI{TI~.I{, 2d SEi%IES inspector from issning a permit authorizing the construction of multiple-family dwell- ings within the rezoned 21.7 acres. The trial court concluded that the process of amendiug Duluth's comprehensive zoning ordinance was subject to the same proce- dures as amending other ordinances of the city and granted the relief sought. [1] It is fundamental that a municipali~ ty's power to regulate land use by zoning.} exists by virtue of authority delegated to it~ by the state. 8 McQuillin, Municipal Cor- porations (3 ed.) § 25.35. In Alexander v. City of Minneapolis, 267 Minn. 155, 125 X.W.2d 583 (1963), this court held that the power to amend a comprehensive zoning ordinauce nmst also arise from legislative delegation. As to the defendant city, suchi delegation is provided by Mina. St. 462.-~ 357fi which empowers all municipalities to adopt hy ordinance comprehensive zoningl regulations and thereafter to amend such3 ordinances. Siuce ~ 462.357, subd. 4, does not require that amendment be by ordi- nance, we are confronted with the narrow question decided by the trial court of whcthcr the amending ordinance is merely all administrative act not subject to the referendum provisions of the city charter,s land use, the (.ity m,unvil, by :t two-thirds v~}te of all its memhers in favor there- sIl('h writ{on {'OllSellt." %Ve (lo not det.i(le whether sit(q) :t d(~veh)lJ- lilt'lit S('htqlle fl'llstrllt('S [lie I'OllSell[ re- qllirt,lnellt of Minn.St. -1(12.}~57, subd. 5, or l)uluth l.egishttix'e ('ode. ~ ~6-117, sim.e this issue was neither raised nor presented in this ln'ooeedin~. 7. Minn. St. 462.357 supersedes and modifies Minn. St.1961, ~ 4{12.18, under whk'h mu- nicilmlities formerly deprived their legisla- tive authority to regulate, and to ameml the regulation of, land rise by zouing. 8. Defendant, for the first time, raises in its appeal to thls court the issua of, whether Minn.Bt. 462.851 to 462.8~ prei empts the field of zoning re~dation amla thereby invalidates the referendum provl- stoas of the Duluth elmrter. See footr, note '5, mtpra.' We have held on numer-~ ous occasions'that nn unlitlgated issue ~ may not be asserted for the first time on ¢ It is tb referendu that ame~ dinance i: therefore, 7787 does the Dulul port this upon Kel W.2d preme Ct 324, 75 N "F0~ dinano thc pr~ dence( cation Defendm neapolis- dasdy, (1956), ~ previous the Kelh The a, ever, is later de Frauk, (1969). Nebrask raised grounds, Neb. 723 lutes I legish :tlll)eltl to res the is: time. 134 niff, ( 19(;7 York Motol Y, 490 ( 9. Defm to nd ipali- ming to it ler v. , 125 ~t the ming .afire such -t62.- ¢$ to ,ning such does ordi- trow ~ of crely · the ,-ter. S DlqNNE¥ v. 0ITT OF DULUTH Cite as 202 N.~,V.2d 892 It is the city's contention that use of a referendum is limited to acts of legislation; that amending a comprehensive zoning-or- dinancc is an administrative act; and that, therefore, enactment of Ordinance No. 7787 does not invoke utilization of § 52 of the Duluth Home Rule Charter. To sup- port this assertion, the city relies heavily upon Kelley v. John, 162 N~b. 319, 75 N. \V.2d 713 (1956). In that case, the Su- preme Court of Nebraska held (162 Neb. 324, 75 N.W.2d 716): "For the reasons herein stated, the or- dinance changing the classification of the property here involved from a resi- dence classification to a business classifi- cation is administrative in character Defendant city further suggests that Min- neapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co. v. Na- dasdy, 247 Minn. 159, 76 N.W.2d 670 (1956), is of value to show this court's previous adherence to the rule expressed in the Kelley decision. The authoritative value of Kelley, how- ever, is highly questionable in view of the later decision in In re Application of Frank, 183 Neb. 722, 164 N.\V.2d 215 (1969). Although the Supreme Court of Nebraska was able to dispose of the issue raised in that case on jurisdictional grounds, it did state the following (183 Neb. 723, 164 N.W.2d 216): "* * * A zoning ordinance consti~ tutes the exercise of a governmental and legislative function and a city council appeal, anti accordingly we do not attempt to resolve either this preemption issue or the issue attended to in footnote 6 at this time., lladke v. Brenon, 271 Minn. 35, 134 N%V.2d 887 (1965); Strupp v. Can- niff, 276 Minn. 558, 150 X.W.2d 574 (1967); Americau Surety Co. o£ New York v. Greenwald, 223 Minn. 37, 25 N.W.2d 681 (1946); Allen v. Central 51[otors, Inc., 204 ,Minn. 295, 283 NAV. 490 (1939). Defendant city also urges this court to adopt the view stated in Opinion At- Minn. 895 adopting a rezoning ordinance which amends a general zoniug ordinance acts in a legislative capacity." To assert, as defendant city does, that the Nadasdy opinion reflects this court's previous adherence to the rule expressed in Kelley is to misconstrue Nadasdy. Our de- termination in Nadasdy dealt solely with the statutory interpretation of Minn. St. 1953, § 462.0l, which was repealed by L. 1965, c. 670, § 14. Tiros, this court was not confronted there with the issue presented here, namely, xvhethcr amend- ments to comprehensive zoning plans are legislative or administrative in nature.° [2] Where a municipality in the exer-./ cise of delegated authority embarks upon aj policy of zoning for the purpose of regu% lating and restricting land use and the con-., struction of buildings within a fixed area,~ it is exercising legislative power: As this court decided in Kiges v. City of St. Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 530, 62 N.\V.2d 363, 369 (1953): "Zoning statutes have become common and zoning ordinances which are fair in their requirements are generally sus- tained as an exercise of the police power * * * The action of a city cotmcit in the zoning field, and the exercise of the police power by the city council, is legis- lative.'' [3, 4] Moreover, Duluth Legislative Code, § 50-114, provides that amendment~ to the zoning plan can only be accomi torney General, No. 59a-32, Oct. 7, 1968, wherein it was detemnined that amend- ,nents to a zoning ordinance were ad- ministrative in nature. This court, how- ever, is only bouud to give such opinions "careful consideration," aml they are not compelling precedent and do not control. See. Village of Blaine v. Independent School Dist. No. 12, 272 Minn. 343, 353, 138 N%V.2d 32, 39 (1965); Mattson v. Ii'lynn, 216 ,Minn. 354, 13 N.W.2d 11 (1944); County of Ilennepin v. County of Houston, 229 Minn. 418, 39 N.W.2d 858 (1949). $96 mint. 202 NOi~TH WESTEi~N I~EPOi~TEi~, 2d SEI~IES plished by passage of an ordinance)° The trial court correctly determined that when the city adopted its comprehensive zoning code, it intended that amendments chang- ing the boundaries of the districts were en- titled to the same dignity and protection as the original enactment of the comprehen- sive pla[}: In accord with the great weight of authority, a governing body acts in its legislative capacity when it amends the boundaries or the district classifications a comprehensive zoning plan.3} Since the city council was under a duty to amend the; boundaries of the single-family residential~ zone by means of an ordinance, and such: act is legislative in nature, the amending¢ ordinance is subject to the referendum pro:~ visions of the city charter. Affirmed. 10. I)uluth Legishttive Code, § 50-114, sets forth the following: "~Vhenever jnstified or required by tim Imblic nocessity, con- venienee, general welfln'e or good zoni~lg practice m~d after lmblio hearing, report and recommendatkms of the city plan- ning ,.ommission thoreon, the city coun- cil may, b~ ordina.t'c, .me.d the regula- tions set ]orth in thi,~ vhapter ]or thc dis- trlcts established o. the zo.in9 district mal} ill aeeordauee with the pro~.ednt'e set forth in this article," (Italivs SUlqflied.) I1. Johnstou v. City of Chtremont. 49 Cal. 2d 8213, 323 l'.2d 71 (1.qSS); In re Ap- plication of I~'rank. 183 Neb. 722, ](14 N.'~V.2d 215 (1.qG9); MeQuail v. Shell Oil Co.. 4(} Del.Ch. 396, 183 A.2d 572 (1962); D'Angelo v. Ifnights of Colum- hus Bldg. Assn. of Bristol, 89 R.I. 76, 1.51 A.2d 495 ('1959); Anthony v. City of Ifewanee, 79 Ill.App.2d 243, 223 2,1 738 (1907); l,]piseolml 1.'oundation of Jefferson County v. Willia~ns, 2S1 Ala. 303, 202 So.2d 720 (1907); Stiles v. q'own Council, 159 Conn. 2~2, 2(18 A. 2d 395 (1970); Lund v. City of Turn- water, 2 Wash.Apl}. 750, 472 P.2d 550 (1970); Strandberg v. 1,7.ansas City, 415 S.V~r.2d 737 (Mo.1967); Smith v. q'own- ship of Livingston, 1013 N.J.Super. 444, 250 A.2d S5, affirmed, 54 N.J. 525, 257 A.2d (198 (19139); Donnelly v. City of Fair~'iew Park, .13 Ohio St.2d .1, 233 N.E.2d 500 (196S); 1 Yokley, Zoning Law nnd Practice (3 ed.) c. 7. John STATt De cult Co J. Stef conduct error , Robert court d denyinl ue or i~ I. Crln that p preven tinue ( to an( publici 941.30. 2. Crh h abuse chang to ma stauct 3. Orl V charg house that ! on th, 4. Crl t to be 388 ~hreats, Stat. § ~vacy, ' ' § 609."/'9 )ne calls, ~he term ,havior make . than prove a t show that in the e. In this listinguish ~tal. Under induct, the ~n Orsello the acts alle ~ become )9.749, two ,,. met. Firsf. : on the of acts mt would d, or vic~rn. The accused, vhat types e reasonable' a s~mdard he accused's / using igated the i~le preserving'! ;peeifie intent: :Hne to ~llo urges. are affected scope of ~ claim, that~ ial for the he district I' the ,~ charge. )f a specific HANSON:~/:!' CITYi OF.: GRANITE FALLS CitruS29 N.W.2d 485 (Mlnn.App. 1995) nor has he demonst2a~ed., ac~,al prejudice. See Minn. R.Crim.P. 31.01..0rsello acknowl- edged that he did not r~eques~ t~emriissi6n to present additional evidence after the district court made ite'fin~il d~cision' on ho~ to' in- 's~uct bn inten~../'Alfluo'ukh 'me cRIM3IGs provide guida~.ce .o.n the elements of afl of- lense, a defendant is not entitled to a new [rial when :the' dist~ct court departs from ~hem in its jury 'instrucfi~)n so long as [he instructions accurately state the applicable law. See State v. Williams, 324 N.W.2d 154, 158-59 (Minn.1982). [9] Second, Orsello argues that the dis- trict court improperly admitted a restraining order, as Spriegl evidence because the order's prejudicial effect outweighed its probative value. The district court admitted the evi- dence to show intent to harass under the Minn. R.Evid. 404(b) exception, but that ele- ment of the state's burden of proof was eliminated by the changed jury instructions. Nonetheless, the restraining order was rele- vant to assess the effect of Paul Orsello's intentional conduct on a reasonable person under the circumstances. The clear jury instructions eliminated any possible jury con- fusion about its role in adjudicating the harassment charge, and we conclude there was no reversible error in admitting it. Or- se[lo did not raise this argument as a sepa- rate issue in his brief to this court and did not include it as a basis for his motion for new trial. At oral argument 0rsello also argued that the district court erred in admit- ting evidence of a conviction for violating the restraining order. Because the admission of the conviction was not raised or even dis- cussed in the brief, we do not address it. [10] Finally, on appeal the state objected to Paul Orsello's arguments relating to the statute's constitutionality because that issue was not raised to the district court. In light of that objection, we apply the "fundamental rule" that appellate courts will not decide issues raised for the first time on appeal, even those presenting constitutional dimen- sions. State v. Kremzr, 307 Minn. 309, 312- 13, 239 N.W.2d 476, 478 (1976); see also State v. Odenbret~ 349 N.W£d 265, 269 (Minn.1984) (even though underlying factual issues raised at trial relate to right to privacy Minn. 485 challenge, issue not expressly or indepen- dently raised at district court). The record is clear that the i~sue of constitutionality was not properly raised or fi~gated in the district court. DECISION The distrj'ct cour~ did not err when it interpreted "intentional conduct" in Minn. Stat. § 609.749 to require general rather than specific intent. Affirmed. R. Doris HANSON, et al., Appellants, V. CITY OF GRANITE FALLS, Minnesota, Respondent. No. C6-94~-2104. Cour~ of Appeals of Minnesota. April 4, 1995. After city council passed resolution ap- proving airpor~ layout plan that would dis- place landownem and renters of farmland, citizens group sought writ of mandamus against city to obtain formal referendum on the resolution. The District Court, Yellow Medicine County, Randall J. Slieter, J., granted munmar7 judgment in favor of city, and citizens group appealed. The Court of Appeals, Klaphake, J., held that: (1) under Minnesota statute allowing home rule char- ters of cities to provide that ordinances be subject to referendum, "ordinance" is limited to legislative acts involving permanent or uniform rule of law, and (2) city eoundl's resolution approving airpor~ layout plan was not legislative act entitled to referendum. Affirmed. 486 1. Appeal and Error ~=~863 On appeal from sununary judgment, re- viewing court must ask (1) whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and (2) whether lower courts erred in their .applica- tion of the law. 2. Appeal and Error ~=~842(1) Construction of statute is clearly ques- tion of law and thus fully reviewable by. Court of Appeals. 3. Municipal Corporations ~=108.$ Power of referendum is limited to acts which are legislative in character. 4. Municipal Corporations ~108.8 Under statute allowing home rule char- ters of cities to provide that ordinances be subject to referendum, term "ordinance" is limited to legislative acts involving perma- nent or uniform rule of law. M.S~ § 410.20. 5. Municipal Corporations ~108.8 City council resolution approving airport layout plan was not legislative act entitled to referendum, but was more in nature of ministrative act relating to daffy administra- tion of municipal affairs. M.S.A. § 410.20. Minn. 529 NORTtI ~VESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES Syllo2us by the Court 1. Under Minn. Stat. § 410.20 (1992), which allows home rule charters to provide that ordinances be subject to referendum, the term "ordinance" is limited to legislative acts involving a permanent or uniform rule of law. 2. A resolution approving an airport lay- out plan is not a legislative act entitled to referendum. Geoffrey J. Hathaway, Nelson 0yen Tor- vik, Montevideo, for appellants. Gregory L. Holmstrom, Holmstrom and Kvam, Granite Falls, for respondent. Considered and decided by HUSPENI, P.J., K_LAP~ and FOLEY,* JJ. * Retired judge o£ the Minnesota Court of Appeals, serving by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. OPINION KLAPHAKE, Judge. Appel]ants, R. Doris Hanson and others, challenge the grant of summary judgment to respondent City of Granite Falls, Minnesota (Granite Falls). They claim that the district court incorrectly interpreted the Granite Falls City Charter and Minn. Stat.§ 410.20 (1992) as authorizing voter referendums on ordinances only. We affirm. FACTS In 1988, Granite Falls decided to build a small grass-strip airport on farmland outside its city limits. Because the project would displace landowners and renters of farmland, many people opposed the plan. Neverthe- less, in June 1993, the city council passed 5 Resolution No. 93-65, approving a layout l plan for the new airport. On July 27, 1993, a group of six Granite Falls voters formed a committee to circulate a petition seeking a formal referendum on the resolution. The committee collected sig- natures and presented the petition to the city council. The city council rejected the petiv tion on the ground that the city charter l/mits voter referendums to the approval or repeal, of "ordinances." Appellants, a group consisting of some Granite Falls residents and lando~vners and renters of land proposed for the airport, sought a writ of mandamus against Granite Falls in district court. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The district court concluded that the resolution w~ ~n adminis-i trative act rather than an ordinance and that; there was no right of referendum with spect to the resolution, This appeal followed the grant of summary judgment to Granite Falls. ISSUE Did the txial court err by granting sum- mary judgment to Granite Falls? art. VI, § 2. :" [1,2] On ap the reviewing ( there are any g and (2) whethe their applicafi( French~ 460 N.~ lants claim that interpreted the § 410.20 (1992) ~0rdinances only ute is clearly a. ~-eviewable by ti Ass'n v. Public 369 N.W.2d 52' ~ Granite Falls See Minn. Stat. ~harter city" is 'home rule char -and laws). M Charter commis: that no ordi? · _ * * * shall t :: time after its '~" such tLme, a [ r percentage of v. testing again~ .::' na~e until ti v election held .:: such ordinan, i determined b; '(Emphasis adde ~ Consistent wi Granite Falls c. voters the pov ;31ssed by the e voter: Granite Fa] 6.01 (1987) (el that the )asses o! charter aisc Referendm ,r...eferendum to o ~If prior to th takes effeet'a cite ~Ass'n, 282 Minn. their pos a resotu supreme cou .tended to include "laws or ~ son and other~, n-y judgment ~.: ,~alls, Minnesota that the district' ~.d the ~rani~.~, n.Stat. § 410.20 referendums on :ided to build arrnland outside .~ project would ers of farmland, lan. Neverthe- council passed · ovinga layout , of six Granite ~tee to circulate referendum on ~e collected sig:: cition to the cit:y ected the peti.-I t charter 1/mits )roval or isting of some landowners and or the ag~inst , parties movd~' e district cou~ was an ad_min~~-' qnanee and ,'ndum with re,' appeal aent to Granite -0:: granting sumv '~alls? ., ~'. HANSON v.' CITY OF. Cite a~ 529 N.W.2d 485 ANALYSIS [1, 2] On appeal from summary judgment the reviewing cotmt must ask: ."(1) whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and (2) whether the lower coar~ erred in their application of the law." State v. French, 460 N.W,2d 2, 4 (Minn.1990). Appel- lants claim that the district court incorrectly interpreted the hity charter and Minn. Stat. § 410.20 (1992) to permit referendums on ordinances only. The construction of a stat- ute is clearly a question of law and thus fully reviewable by this court. See Hibbing Educ. Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations Bd., 369 N.W.2d 527, 529 (Minn.1985). Granite Falls is a home rule charter city. See Minn. Stat.§ 410.015 (1992) ("home rule charter city" is any city that has adopted a home rule charter pursuant to constitution and laws). M_inn.Stat. § 410.20 allows a charter commission to provide that no ordinance passed by the council * * * shall take effect within a certain time after its passage, and that if, during such time, a petition be made by a certain percentage of the electors of the city pro- testing against the passage of such o~i- nance until the same be voted on at an election held for such purpose, and then such ordinance to take effect or not as determined by such vote. (Emphasis added.) Consistent with Minn.Stat. § 420.20, the Granite Falls city charter reserves to the voters the power to "req.uire measures passed by the council to b~ referred to the registered voters for approval or disapprov- al.''. Granite Falls, Minn., City Charter ch. 6, § 6.01 (1987) (emphasis added). Appellants contend that the term "measures" in § 6.01 encompasses ordinances and resolutions. The charter also contains a section entitled '"rhe Referendum," which specifically limits referendum to ordinances: If prior to the date when an ordinance takes effect a petition * * * be filed with 1. Appellants cite Renner v. Ne~ Ulm Police Relief Ass'n, 282 Minn. 411, 165 N.W.2d 225 (1969) to sUpport their position that there is no difference between a resolution and an ordinance. There, the supreme court held that the legislature tended to include "resolutions" when it used the phrase "laws or ordinances" in a statute provid- GRANITE FALLS . Minn. 487 (Mlnn.App. 1995) the city .clerk requesting that any such proposed ordinance * * * be repealed or be submit.ted to a vote of the registered voters, the said proposed ordinance shall thereby be prevented from going into op- eration. · * '* fir the council Mffvms its adherence to the proposed ordinance as passed], the council shall immediately or- ' der an election to be held thereon. Id. § 10 (emphasis added). Appellants nevertheless argue that the power of referendum is not limited to the repeal of "ordinances," and that the term "ordinance" is virtuaily indistinguishablfi from the term "resolution.',l Regardless of whether a resolution is included in the term "ordinance," we hold that the term "ordi=; hence" in Minn. Stat.§ 410.20 and the city charter is limited to legislative acts: and that Resolution 93-65 is not a legislative act. [3-5] The supreme court has long held~ that the power of referendum is limited tej acts which are legislative in character.. In Oakman v. City of Eveleth, 163 Minn. 100, 203 N.W. 514 (1925), a taxpayer sought a writ of mandamus to require the city to hold a referendum on an ordinance which autho- ri.zed the settlement of a lawsuit against the city. The city charter gave voters the power to "enact appropriate legislation." Id. at 104, 203 N.W. at 516. Noting that referendums are generally directed at the "evils of legisla- tion,'' the supreme court emphasized: To allow Ia referendum] to be invoked to annul or delay executive conduct would destroy the efficiency necessary to the suc- cessful adn:Jnistration of the business af- fairs of a city. * * * In the absence of a very clear declaration to the contrary, it must be presumed that the power of refer- endum was intended to apply solely to the legislative powers of the city. Id. at 107, 203 N.W. at 517 (quotation omit- ted). .. ing for the establishment of police relief associa- tions. Id. at 419, 165 N.W.2d at 230. Rennet is inapposite, however, because it involved inter- pretation of an entirely different statute and ex- mined only the procedures for adopting ordi- nances and resolutions. 488 Minn. 529 NORTH WESTERN To determine whether the ordinance was legislative, the Oakman court distinguished between legislative, administrative, and qua- si-judicial acts. Id. 163 Minn. at 106-08, 203 dW. at 516-17. General legislation lays wn "some permanent and uniform rule of law," administrative acts relate to daily ad- ministration of municipal affairs, and quasi- judicial acts are the product of investigation, consideratioh, and deliberate human judg- ment based upon evidentiary facts of some sort. Id. Application of this analysis led the ~0akman court to hold that the proposed ordinance was quasi-judicial rather than leg- islative in character, and that the voters therefore were not entitled to a referendum. Id. at 109, 203 N.W. at 518. A more recent case, Housi2zg & Redev. Auth~ v. City of Minneapolis, 293 Minn. 227, 228, 198 N.W.2d 531, 533 (1972), involved the interpretation of a city charter and Minn. Stat. § 410.20. In Housing & Redev. Auth., Minneapolis residents obtained an injunction preventing the city from holding a referen- dum on a charter amendment, and two sup- porters of the amendment appealed. One provision of the charter amendment con- ferred the right of referendum on "any ac- tion'' taken by the city council, not limited to the adoption of ordinances. Id. at 234-35, 198 N.W.2d at 536. Making a distinction similar to that made in Oakman, the su- preme court reasoned that, if allowed to stand, the charter amendment would create a "'chaotic situation' in city government" and allow referendum on such "actions" as the settlement of lawsuits, entering of con- tracts, acceptance or rejection of bids, sale of municipal bonds, appointment of city officials, levying of taxes, granting of li- censes and permits, and the adoption of budgets. Id. 163 Minn. at 235, 198 N.W.2d at 536. The supreme court noted that the restric- tions in Minn.Stat. § 410.20 "express a legis- lative intent to limit referendum to ordi- nances:'' and held that the charter amend- 2. Although the resolution itself is not legislative, according to the city council, a zoning ordinance will need to be pa~sed in order to establish the new airport The voter~ of Granite Falls may have an opportunity to repeal that ordinance by REPORTER, 2d SERIES ment was invalid. Id. at 235, 198 N.W.2d at 537. Thus, Oakman 'and Housing & Redev.~ Auth. instruct us to examine whether the city~ council's action in this case was legislative in: character. Resolution 93-65 states in rele- vant part: BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY couNCIL OF GRANITE FALLS, MINNESOTA, to approve the airport lay- out plan as prepared by City Engineer * * * and accepted by the Airport Com- mission at its April 14 meeting. The resolution clearly is not an act laying; down a permanent or uniform rule of law~.. It~ simply approves a layout plan for the pro: posed airport, and is more in the nature of an, administrative act relating to the daily ad- ministration of municipal affairs. We there- fore conclude that the resolution is not a legislative act entitled to referendum.2 DECISION The district court did not err in granting summary judgment. The court properly de- termined that Resolution 93-65 is not subject to referendum. Affirmed. Richard SAGSTETTER, et al., Appellants, V, CITY OF ST. PAUL, a Municipal Corporation, Respondent. No. C8-94-2170. Court of Appeals of Minnesota. April 4, 1995. City requested variance to build domed softball field. The Board of Zoning Appeals referendum. See Denney v. City of Duluth, 295: Minn. 22, 29, 202 N.W.2d 892, 896 (1972) (zon-". lng ordinances are legislative acts subject to erendum). grant~ merit bufldinl ?appealed. T BZA's decisi and ['~vners appe: ( appe h, · its discretion, .variance was and ( ]~ Affirmed g ar ' .~i~ .,, In reviev 'Court of district court' !i'~.~ Municipal Where m complete, 'the municipal ~]~;'/reluctant ~ of mun Zoning an Reviewin in zoning is unreasonab g an Reviewin and wi~ it by sta~ basis. )Zoning an )it, s au cannot M.S Git7 ordi ,~grant va if w per League of Minnesota Cities April 17, 1992 3490 Lexington Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55126 (612) 490-5600 Michael McCauley Manager City of Waseca 508 South State Street Waseca, MN 56093 RE: ~nitiative Ordinance Question Dear Mr. McCauley: This letter is in response to your question regarding whether the proposed initiative ordinance prohibiting the establishment of a prison within the city is a matter properly subject to initiative and referendum under the city charter and the laws of Minnesota. I previously faxed to you my initial draft opinion on this matter. Today's letter is my final opinion which considers several more cases. In summary, I believe the proposed initiative ordinance is~ improper under Minnesota law for several reasons., ........... This letter Will not be redundant of your memo to' %h~'maYor a~" city council. However, I also concur with your analysis that the definition of prison is so broad so that it could include a nursing home or school. I also concur with your conclusion that the City has. no authority to recreate state tort law, which would essentially~be! the effect of the proposed petition. It should be remembered that a Rome rule charter must be in harmony with, and subject to, the~ constitution and laws of the state. Att'y Gen. Op., 59 A-36i September 24, 1957.. The legislature has the express power to enacC ~eneral~laws, which are paramount to the provisions contained in.home %rule charters of cities. Att'y Gen. Op., 218 G5, April 4, 1956.; Finally, whenever home rule charter provisions are inconsistent with~ state law, which declares a policy intended to have generalJ application, state law supercedes such charter provisions. Att'y~ Gen. Op., 430, April 25, 1949. By statute and case law, the state~ has provided for tort law creating liability and damages. Therefore,~ ~e city could not enact a provision to overrule state law.~ In prohibiting a prison, whether it is state or Federal, city~ zoning laws would not have automatic force and effect as they would against private users of land. For example, in many states the rule is that the state is immune from application of local zoning laws. See Anderson, American Law of Zoning 3d., §12.06. Some courts have expressly held that the state may build a correctional facility without complying with local codes. Evans v. Just Open Government, 251 S.E.2d 546 (Ga. 1979); New Orleans v. State, 364 So.2d 1020 (La. 1978) (Permitting prison in residential district); Snohomish County v. State, 648 Po2d 430 (Wash. 1982) (county ordinance prohibiting use was unenforceable against state reformatory). There is no case in Minnesota which adopts this holding. The only case in this area deals with two local units of government, and the court applied a balancing of public interests test to resolve the conflict which arises between the exercise of powers by two governmental agencies. See Town of Oronoco v. City of Rochester, 293 Minn. 468, 471, 197 NoW. 2d 426 (1972). However, the court never said if this standard would apply to local zoning laws when the state is the other party. We are guided by the court's reasoning that, "in order to support the principle of enlightened land-use control, we decline to adopt in Minnesota the general rule of governmental exemption from zoning regulation." Id.~ see also Att'y Gen. Op. 59a-32, October 24, 1980 (discussing other possible tests to determine applicability of local zoning laws such as controlling statutory provisions, superior sovereign test, and governmental or proprietary use; but applying balancing of interests test). Arguably, in Minnesota, a court would balance the need for a prison against the need to enforce a land use law. Because the City of Waseca would essentially be outlawing all prisons within the city, it would be considered too broad in scope. The city may have a valid reason in excluding a prison in a particular part of the city. However, a prison would be a valid use of land and a necessary government function which should be permitted in some portion of the city. If a Federal prison were to be located in Waseca, the city's zoning ordinances would have absolutely no effect upon the Federal prison. Federal law expressly provides for the consultation of the Federal government with local officials. See 40 USCA §619. Officials of the state or local government may make recommendations to the head of the appropriate Federal agency; however, the agency only has to give "due consideration" to any such recommendations. No action may be brought against the United States for not complying with the local laws, nor may there be any liability on the part of the Federal government for not complying with local zoning laws. am enclosing this law for your review. Even if the city passed an ordinance prohibiting prisons, the federal government could still create one in the city. The case of State ex rel.Foster v. City of Minneapolis, 255 Minn. 249, 97 N.W.2d 273 (1959) cites valid authority for holding that a consent provision would violate the constitutional due process rights of a homeowner. The court recognized that it is an unreasonable exercise of police power to rest control of property uses in the hands of owners of other property. Foster, 255 Minn. at 252.~ The court quoted from 37 Am. Jut., Municipal Corporations, §162: ~ . where an ordinance attempts to confer~ power on some property holder~ ~irtually to control~ and dispose of the property rights of others, and creates no standard bY which the power thus given, is to be exercised, so that the property holders~ who desire and have the authority to establish the/ regulations may do so s61ely for their own~ interests, or even capriciously, constitutional limits have been violated .... The consent provision is an unlawful delegation of legislative~ authority and discretion, with no rule or standard~ to guide those whose decision will control.~# Id. at 252-253. The court further stated that the~consent provision! in substance grants to adjoining property owners the right to empower the council to act to impose property restrictions where otherwise it would have no such authority. Id. at 253. Arguably, the holding of Foster would still be valid under today's standards of reviewing zoning decisions in cities. Minnesota courts have for years ruled that a zoning decision may not be arbitrary and capricious, and may not be based solely on neighborhood opposition; but must have a factual basis for any conclusions on public safety and health effects. See St. Croix-Development~ Inc. v. The City of ApDle Valley, 446 N.W.2d 392, 398 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). One can argue that an initial zoning decision may be a valid~ reserva~'ion of legislative decision-making under a city charter provision. However, the recent case law would seem to impliedly overrule that individual property owners can arbitrarily withhold consent of a project merely based on their own opposition without any supporting facts or documents that a zoning proposal is detrimental to the~health and safety of the neighborhood~ .............................................. It should also be remembered that the supreme court has not reached~the issue as to whether the state zoning laws pre-empt a city charter provision permitting initiative and referendum of zoning~ decisions.~ As to matters of municipal concern, the people of a city, in adopting a charter, have all the power possessed by the legislature, save as such power has been expressly or impliedly withheld by the legislature. State ex tel City of Minneapolis v. ~rickson, 157 Minn. 200, 206, 195 N.W. 919 (1923). In enacting the ~municipal planning provisions, the legislature expressly stated that the purpose of the law was to provide municipalities "A single body of law, with the necessary powers and a uniform procedure for~ adequately conducting and implementing municipal planning.~ ~Minn. Stat §462.351 (1990). In a couple of provisions, the legislature specifically provides that a charter provision may have a contrary procedure than is provided for in statute. See Minn. Stat. §462.355, subd. 3 (charter may provide for other procedure than 2/3 approval of governing body for adoption of comprehensive plan); Minn. Stat. §462.354 (charter may provide for planning agency with other powers than provided for by statute). However, throughout the rest of the statutory provisions, there is no authority where the legislature expressly says that a charter provision may be contrary to the statutory provisions. It could be argued that in amending a zoning~ ordinance, the statutory provisions of Minn. Stat. §462.357 must be. applied. And, under this section, there is no provision for~ initiative and referendum. Statutory interpretation is guided by.~ Minn. Stats. §645.16 and §645.17, which provide that legislative ~ intent controls~in determining the application of statutes and that, every provision of the statute is supposed to have meaning, if, possible. The legislature clearly and expressly stated that it was. implementing a uniform procedure for conducting municipal planning. Additionally, it is clear tht the legislature expressly permitted~ contrary charter provisions in some circumstances, without expressly. providing for charter deviations in all respects of the statute.~ Consequently, it would appear that the legislature did not want to ~ permit charter deviations in all respects. Regardless of whether zoning ordinances may generally be subject to initiative and referendum under Waseca's charter,~ it is important to remember, in the specific case of prisons, that if it is a Federal prison, the city would have no authority to prevent the prison; and if it were a state prison, that a balancing of the governmental need and benefits would be weighed in applying any zoning ordinance to the necessity of a prison. There is a stron~ argument that a proposed ordinance which would be invalid is not a. proper item to be placed on a ballot for citizen approval. The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that where a proposed charter amendment would have the effect of creating an unconstitutional impairment of contract, the City Council correctly refused to call an election on the matter, Davies v. City of Minneapolis, 316 N.W.2d 498, 504 (Minn. 1982). When a proposed charter amendment appears to be manifestly unconstitutional, the City Council must have the authority to avoid what would amount to a futile election and a total waste of taxpayers, 'money. Id.' citing HRA v. City of .................... Minneapolis, 293 Minn. 227, 198 N.W.2d 531 (1972). This proposition would also be applicable to the proposed ordinance in your city which would have no effect because of Minnesota tort laws and federal and state law concerning application of local zoning laws to government property and necessary governmental functions. Since an ordinance prohibiting a state or federal prision would be invalid, any vote on the proposed initiative prison ordinance, arguably, would be a "total waste of taxpayers' money" and therefore improper for the Council to permit it. If you need further information, or have any other questions, please contact me. Sincerely, Carla Heyl Staff Attorney 4 City of Columbia Heights Park and Recreation Commission February 25, 1998 The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dick Petkoff at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Members present: Eileen Evans; Jerry Foss; Bruce Magnuson; James Nelson; Gary Peterson; Bob Ruettimann; Keith Windschitl, Recreation Director; Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Members absent: Dick Petkoff Also present: Marti Madsen, Program Coordinator; Tim Lund, Park Foreman APPROVAL CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Foss, second by Peterson to approve the consent agenda. All ayes, motion carried. LETTERS AND REQUESTS HOCKEY RINK CONCERNS/MARY MARTIN Members discussed the letter and the issue of building a community center. Rink attendance has been down when compared to years ago. We are still putting a lot of money into rink maintenance and upkeep. Citizens voted against building a multi-use community center when it was brought up several years ago. OLD BUSINESS UPDATE ON DAMAGE TO WOOD FLOOR/WOMEN OF TODAY The Recreation Director reported that the Women of Today have gotten two estimates on repair of the wood floor and will be discussing the issue at their March meeting. Members will be updated next month. INTRODUCTION OF TIM LUND, PARK FOREMAN Members were introduced to Tim Lund, who has replaced Vern Rozmark as Park Foreman. PAGE TWO SULLIVAN PARK SIGNS The Public Works Director/City Engineer discussed the signage problem at Sullivan Park. Members viewed a photo display showing multiple signs that are confusing to people who are using the bike and walking paths. Members discussed possible options for correcting the situation. Staff informed members that Sullivan Park has a high incidence of vandalism. Members suggested that staff discuss this issue with Medtronics since many of their employees use the path and they will be expanding in the near future. Members directed staff to determine a simple method of dealing with the problem and try it on a trial and error basis over the next several months. The Design Team will also be consulted on this issue. COMPREHENSIVE PARK PLAN Members discussed the plan which was developed in 1996 by Intern Matt Brinza. Members reviewed the SRF Consulting Group proposals listed on page 14. It was determined that this topic required a special meeting to thoroughly discuss the matter. Members and staff agreed that the March meeting would be devoted to discussion of the Comprehensive Park Plan, and the meeting will begin at 6:00 p.m., instead of 6:30 p.m. COMMUNITY GARDEN PLOTS Members reviewed maps of possible sites for an additional community garden. A second garden would require installation of a hydrant and restoration charge at an estimated cost of $4,000 to $6,000. The water source also should have back flow prevention. The current community garden has 48 plots. Members fek it was not cost effective to pursue the matter at this time due to the relatively small number of citizens using the community garden and to evaluate installing back flow prevention in the current community garden water source. NEW BUSINESS SECURITY CONCERNS/CONOCO CONCERTS The Recreation Director discussed the upcoming public concerts sponsored by Jeff Bahe of the Conoco Station. Staff have concerns regarding security at these free events. Police Chief Tom Johnson has indicated that there is a need for a CSO and two police officers at the fa'st concert on March 1, 1998. Staff will then be able to determine what the security needs are for the next two concerts. Mr. Bahe has agreed to pay for the additional security at his events. Tickets will be used to monitor the number of people who are attending the event so the fire code capacity is not exceeded. PAGE THREE JPM POLICY ON RESTRICTED USES The Recreation Director discussed the current policy on restricted uses. Staff has received an inquiry regarding rental of the main hall for a boxing match. Members stated that the policy does not forbid boxing matches in the main hall. There is a concern regarding possible damage to the wood floor. Admission can be charged if no alcohol is served. OTHER NEW BUSINESS. Youth Program Coordinator Marti Madsen discussed a situation regarding use of umpires for adult softball this season. Last year the city hired Tim Matters to provide umpires; however, there were some problems with umpires not showing up and not controlling altercations. Our facility supervisor, Tom Tremmel, has reported many complaints regarding the umpires. Staff determined to use Dave Purtle's umpires this year. Mr. Matters was unhappy with this decision. Members were advised of the matter on an informational basis. REPORTS RECREATION DIRECTOR As a follow-up to last month's meeting, members were given samples of distinguished service awards provided by IPC Printing. Members and staff discussed giving a more substantial award to show appreciation to coaches/volunteers who have devoted ten years or more of their time to the city. Members asked staff to consider whether the Park & Recreation Commission should continue to include two council members, or if it would be more appropriate to have another citizen on the board. The Recreation Director advised members that the spring newsletter has been mailed out. The main hall and adjacent hallways are being painted by custodial staff. The lower level linoleum floor has been stripped and waxed. Members discussed the upcoming fireworks display scheduled for June 27, 1998. The Recreation Director will begin soliciting businesses for donations toward the fireworks display. The city has budgeted $2,000 for fireworks, and the estimated cost is $6,000. Members indicated perhaps the city should get a discount tbr an off-peak fkeworks display. Members also discussed the need for alternative dates tbr the fireworks display in case of rain. Marti Madsen stated he would like to hold a softball tournament during the Jamboree. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER No report at this time. COMMISSION MEMBERS No report at this time. Motion by Foss, second by Magnuson to adjourn. All ayes, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. lanice McOhee-Fetzer, Park & Recreation Commission SecretaryP&RCOMMmmm~g8 Not- COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 17, 1998 CALL_TO__QRDER The Regular Meeting of the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (EDA) was called to order by President Gary Peterson at 7:00 pm, Tuesday, February 17, 1998, at Parkview Villa Community Room B, 965 40t~ Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, Minnesota. ROLL_CALL Board Members Present: Staff Present: Gary Peterson, Marlaine Szurek, Robert RuettimaIm, and Don Jolly (7:15 pm). Waiter Fehst, Executive Director Kenneth Anderson, Deputy Executive Director Jennifer Bergrnan, Housing Coordinator Jennifer Stoopes-Mokamba, Parkview Villa Housing Admin. Also present were various Parkview Villa residents. P_LED_GE_OF ALLEGIANCE APPOINT RKC MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Szurek, to appoint Shelley Hanson to serve as Recording Secretary for this meeting. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. z~}DJ. TiO~S/DELETIONS TO MEETING AG~EIS!IZ~ There were no additions or deletions to the agenda. C_ON~ (These items are considered to be routine by the EDA Board of Commissioners and will be enacted as part of the Consent Agenda by one motion). A. Move to adopt the consent agenda items as listed below: 1) Approval of Minutes a. Regular Meeting of January 20, 1998 Gary Peterson said he wanted the minutes amended to reflect the Board's desire to notify the citizens in the area of 39th and Central Avenue where the proposed Transit Hub will be located. He believes the residents of the area should have the opportunity to express their opinions at a Public Hearing regarding the proposed plans of Anoka County and Metro Transit. MOTION: Move to adopt the minutes of the January 20, 1998 regular meeting as presented in writing with the correction noted above. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 2 2) Financial Report and Payment of Bills ao Financial Statement - None Payment of Bills MOTION: Move to approve Resolution 98-02, Resolution of the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (EDA) approving the Payment of Bills for the month of January 1998. MOTION by Ruettimarm, seconded by Szurek, to approve the consent agenda items as presented in writing. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. REPORT OF THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY A. Jennifer Stoopes-Mokamba, Parkview Villa Public Housing Administrator Ms. Stoopes-Mokamba's report was enclosed in the agenda packet. She reviewed the following items with the Board members: *MountainStar is reviewing the three bids they have received for the fire alarm system and the repairs to the intercom system. They will be making a recommendation within the next two weeks and the Board will be addressing this at the March meeting. *Captain Olson has received a copy of the Security Camera System specifications and she needs to meet with him to discuss the options available. *The back entry alarm system has been installed. It is equipped with keyed on/off capabilities so it can be activated at night and on weekends. *Circulation pumps were rebuilt in January. *Bill, Reuben, and Jennifer are developing a storage area where supplies will be kept which will be accessible to those on duty. *Mice have been a problem at Parkview Villa over the last several weeks. Ms. Stoopes- Mokamba has been in contact with the pest control contractor and they are using sticky boards and poison pellets in the garage and throughout the building. Because of the mild winter, it seems mice have been a problem throughout the Twin Cities area. She will continue to monitor this situation and do whatever possible to eliminate the pests. *She reported that Parkview Villa North has one vacancy in February and one in March. There also is a handicapped unit on the south side still available, as well as two move- outs scheduled for March 1st. She also informed the Board that an ad will be placed in the Star Tribune for vacancies in the 4-plex. No one on the waiting list is interested in moving into the 4-plex at this time. Mr. Anderson suggested we advertise the openings in the Focus Newspaper also. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 3 R E -C-O_GJ 5II Ti O~ ,_ P~O_~ A M ~O~, ~ SE ~O ~., _G_U~E S_T S None P_U_BI,LC HEz~RIXG_S_ None ITEMS__F_O_R_CD~.mERA T 1 _O_I5[ A. Other Resolutions None B. Bid Considerations None C. Other Business 1) Approve Utility Monitoring Agreement with SM Engineering. Ken Anderson reported that he had contacted tlu'ee firms that have previously engaged the services of SM Engineering Company. He said that all three were happy with the results and felt the people at SM Engineering Company were responsive and knowledgeable. Two of the firms reported they experienced significant savings as a result of their contract with SM Engineering. Mr. Anderson reminded the Board that half of the savings would be shared with SM Engineering for only 30 months, not five years as is standard in their other agreements. Bob Ruettimarm is still unsure what it is they provide. He feels our staff should be reviewing bills for errors and correct rates. Mr. Anderson explained that he has already informed the company the Board does not want any of the services compromised or altered as residents are in the building 24 hours a day. He informed the Board that SM Engineering has sent him a tape explaining the program. It was decided the Board will listen to the tape at the end of the meeting, so this item was tabled. 2) Section 8 Report Jennifer Bergman reviewed the report that was enclosed in the agenda packet. She explained the administrative fees received for the Section 8 vouchers and certificates that we process. She stated that we have added four more participants so far in February to bring the total to 46 out of the 50 possible vouchers and certificates we have available locally. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 4 3) Disposition of Property at 4519/21 Taylor Street NE Mr. Anderson explained that the EDA currently owns a vacant duplex at 4519/21 Taylor Street. The EDA purchased the property in January 1994 for $53,000. Since that purchase, a total of $22,840.43 has been incurred for rehabilitation. This means we have approximately $75,000 invested in this property to date. Mr. Anderson questioned the Board to obtain some direction on whether the EDA wants to remain in the rental business or not. Several options were discussed as the building is now vacant and the EDA could avoid relocation costs at this time depending upon the disposition of the property. The Board all concurred that we should not be in the rental business. All the members would like to see the property owner-occupied, and would prefer that it be remodeled into a single family residence. Other options discussed included selling the property to a developer for a new single family home, selling 'the property at a reduced rate so conversion to a single family home could be done, putting deed restrictions on the property and selling it, or find some other sources of funding so we can convert to a single family residence before we sell it. Mr. Anderson will look into some of these options and bring this item back to the Board at the next meeting. There also was a discussion regarding the property at 4642/44 Taylor Street NE, a duplex that was originally purchased as the "Way To Grow House". This duplex was purchased for $85,000 and approximately $2,000 in remodeling was done. This duplex, however, is generating revenue through rents that help offset the cost to the City. Both units in this particular duplex are currently occupied. 4) Community Development Block Grant Housing Rehabilitation Grant/Loan Application, Project No. C98-01 Jennifer Bergrnan reviewed the history of the CDBG grant/loan application made by Florence Dziuk at 4088 Stinson Blvd. Mrs. Dziuk had previously applied for this deferred loan in 1995 and 1996, but changed her mind, and never went through with it. However, in October 1997, she decided to go ahead with the rehabilitation work and is requesting $14,530. A list of work that needs to be done was established for an approximate cost of $28,000. However, $15,000 is the maximum loan amount available so the homeowner and EDA staffhave selected the most essential repairs needed. Ms. Bergman reviewed the draft Repayment Agreement on behalf of Anoka County and Florence Dziuk. The question was raised what happens to the loan if she would go into a nursing home. Mr. Anderson explained the agreement is then terminated and at least 50% of the loan would have to be re-paid if one of the following occurs: Sale of the property, death of the person, or if the house is not used as the principal residence of the applicant. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 5 MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Szurek, to approve the CDBG Housing Rehabilitation Grant/Loan application for Florence Dzuik at 4088 Stinson Blvd. totaling $14,530 for housing rehabilitation to William Mattson Construction, and furthermore, to direct staffto submit the loan application to Anoka County and to authorize all related expenses to be reimbursed from fund 202-46350-4600. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. 5) 1998 HOME Application Ken Anderson reviewed a letter from Anoka County received in January identifying eligible projects, income limits, and matching requirements for the HOME program funds that are available to eligible organizations who submit applications by February 27, 1998. These funds require a 25% match from the EDA and there is an amount of $17,500 budgeted for 1998. Therefore, the maximum amount of funds that may be requested in the application is $70,000. Because of the time constraints, Mr. Anderson is looking for direction from the Board for projects they would like these funds used for. There was a discussion concerning some of our options such as using the money to rehab the property at 4519/21 Taylor Street before selling it, or whether we should identify up to 6 or 7 properties in the scattered site TIF district for acquisition and removing the structures before selling them to an organization such as Habitat for Humanity. Peterson felt we should list both of these options on the application so we are not locked into any one thing that may not work out. Don Jolly thinks we should contact some of the property owners in the scattered site TIF district to inquire whether anyone is interested in having their property acquired by the City. We do not want to force people out of their homes, but we have no idea which properties would be receptive to this acquisition plan until we contact them. Mr. Anderson will see that a letter is sent out to some of the properties in the scattered site TIF district that require the most attention. 6) Review Proposed Mission Statement Mr. Anderson stated that staff has been working on a mission statement for the EDA since February of 1997. The Board members looked over the two options that were enclosed in the agenda packets and all those members present preferred Option #1. MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Jolly, to approve the adoption of the mission statement for the Columbia Heights EDA as written in the attachment as follows: The mission of the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority is to provide financial and technical assistance and resources to residential, commercial, and industrial interests to promote health, safety, welfare, economic development and redevelopment. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. 7) Approve Appointment to Business Revolving Loan Fund (BRLF) Loan Review Committee MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Peterson, to table this to the next meeting as several EDA Board members are absent tonight. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 6 8) Consider Business Revolving Loan Fund of $25,000 for F.C. Celtic, LLC Board members had reviewed the materials enclosed in the agenda packet. MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Jolly, to approve the BRLF loan application submitted by F.C. Celtic LLC in the amount not to exceed $25,000 in accordance with the recommendation of the Business Revolving Loan Fund Committee, with said funds to be paid from fund 29%46320-4600. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. 9) Authorize RFP for Financial Advisory Services At a previous meeting the Board took action to request that the Request for Proposal (RFP) process be initiated to solicit proposals fi.om interested firms to provide financial advisory services to the EDA. Staff, therefore, has prepared a draft copy of the RFP to be distributed to firms providing these services in the Twin Cities area. Mr. Anderson reviewed the details and the time lines that have been set. He will be sending the Request for Proposals to at least four firms. MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Szurek, to authorize staff to seek proposals for financial advisory services and to schedule interviews for the regularly scheduled meeting on March 17% 1998. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. ADMIISJSTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report of the Deputy Executive Director Mr. Anderson reported on the following items: *Old America will be closing due to bankruptcy. This will create more empty commercial space along Central Avenue. *Rayco wants to raise the roof on their building as they need more storage space. Mr. Anderson is working with them as there are some old issues that need to be addressed before allowing a permit for such work. *He recently spoke with Gerry Herringer about the little kiosk building on the Apache Theater lot. So far there has been no interest in it. Gerry also discussed his lease with Mann Theaters and said he may be considering adding theaters at this location. *Mr. Anderson reported the balloon payment for the Tyler Heights project is due 12/8/99. This information was requested at last month's meeting. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 7 Bo Co Report of the Executive Director *Walt Fehst reported an offer has been made by St. Timothy's Lutheran Church to Mary T Inc. for the sale of the church property. Mr. Fehst met with Mary T., Bruce Nedegaard, Tom Torreson, and Ken Anderson. He explained that to purchase the property, they will have to finance through a Bank Institution or Piper Jaffray as HUD does not want to finance a commercial kitchen establishment. To do this they need to have specific dollar amounts to get the financing. Mr. Fehst said they are looking at a 15 year Redevelopment Contract with the City. Bob Ruettimann made it clear he wants to stick to the parameters that were previously established. If they come to the City with the same, or better proforma than previously discussed, we will go with it. Otherwise, if changes are requested, a special Board Meeting will have to be called. Mr. Fehst felt they would have a similar or better proforma than was presented previously. The Board did not feel much time or money should be spent on this until the sale of the property is finalized. We could ask for a letter of intent from them to clarify some of the details. Don Jolly reported that the sale should go through as soon as a meeting of the congregation is called to vote on this matter. *Sale of Park Property to Medtronic--Kennedy and Graven has prepared a Limited Warranty Deed which will be sent to the Title Company so the sale of the park land to Medtronic will be completed with a closing by mail. *The property owner at 4441 Central Avenue NE has contacted the City and wants the City to buy her property. It seems she is having problems selling the property as it is a non-conforming use in a commercially zoned area. She claims that mortgage companies are requiting a 30% clown payment because of the non-conforming status. Mr. Fehst reported the market value of her property (80 ft x 128 ft) is at $67,000. The house to her south (80 ftx 128 ft) is valued at $59,000 and the pink garage (formerly the Flower Market-20 ft x 128 ft) is valued at $31,000. To purchase these three properties would require approximately $160,000 for a piece of property 180 ft x 128 ft. The Board members discussed what could be done with the property if it was acquired. Mr. Fehst said he would contact the owner at 4441 Central Avenue and let her know the City is not interested in purchasing the property at this time. He also thought it would be advantageous to prepare some type of informational brochure and solicit potential buyers for the property. Committee/Other Reports Bob Ruettimann reported he had received some information from Ehlers regarding the impact of our TIF monies due to legislative changes that have been made. This information was distributed at the meeting. It seems we maY be $850,000 in debt even though monies are being received each year. In March we will have a better idea of the total impact. The Legislature has made a few adjustments to try and compensate for the loss. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 8 Commissioner Ruettimann also inquired whether ~ve had received the money that was past due for the building at 3989 Central Avenue. They were delinquent for the second half of 1995, plus penalties and interest. We are to receive $80,000 in tax increment money after the tax, penalties and interest are paid. The payment was made to the County, however, Mr. Anderson does not know specifically when we will get our payment. Normal taxes are distributed in December and these TIF funds should have been received with the tax settlement. Ruettimann stated that we should not have paid $25,000 for expenses recently incurred until we had received the delinquent tax money due us. Bob also asked if our TIF funds are being separated by district as required by the State. When he checked into this, it was not being done by our Finance Department, and it should be. It was noted that University Heights is one of our strongest TIF districts and Sullivan Shores has been de-certified in 1997. President Peterson asked the status of the building at 4150 Central Avenue. Mr. Anderson stated that two parties are currently interested in the building. One of the parties is going through the building on Friday and will submit a proposal to the City. We can then accept that offer or send out the RFP for the sale and rehabilitation of the building. _ O_~D_D_RESS EDA MATTERS A resident from Parkview Villa asked about the Intercom System that's been out in the north building for quite some time. Mr. Anderson stated that this is scheduled to be repaired in the bids that were recently received by MountainStar. Another resident inquired what branch of government is responsible for building maintenance. Ken said the Columbia Heights EDA is ultimately responsible for both buildings. He said the EDA is in control, but does not have the funds to do all the necessary work. The EDA has to go through HUD and the Federal Government for grant funding to do any upgrades or repairs to the property. We apply for certain amounts and usually get only a portion of what we requested. Another resident reported that the cupboards in some of the units are in bad shape. The building is getting old and some things are in need of repair. Mr. Anderson encouraged the tenants to talk with Jennifer Stoopes-Mokamba so these items can be addressed. ITEMS F_OR_CONSIDERATON (_C~ Reconsider Utility Monitoring Agreement with SM Engineering The Board listened to the tape that was sent by SM Engineering regarding the Utility Monitoring Agreement. On the tape, the company states that 8 out of 10 firms do not take advantage of the lowest utility rates available. These rates can be adjusted without changing usage or service. They recommend three steps to reduce utility charges. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY MINUTES February 17, 1998 Page 9 #1 They perform a utility bill analysis for electric, gas, water and sewer, and oil. They check for demand charges, fuel adjustments, state charges, taxes, and miscellaneous fees that may be charged to the account. They also monitor meter readings to see if the meters are accurate. #2 They perform a rate option analysis. #3 They recommend cost saving equipment purchases. The agreement is for the two Parkview Villa buildings and the 4607 Tyler Street property. It was suggested we run the agreement by Jim Hoeft to see if he sees any reason not to enter into it. This item will be tabled until the next meeting, but a final decision will be made at the March meeting for sure. MOTION by Ruettimann, seconded by Szurek, to adjourn the meeting at 9:55 pm. All ayes. MOTION CARRIED. Respectfully submitted, Shelley Hanson Recording Secretary