Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
August 14, 2000 Regular
CiTY Of COLUMBIA HEIGHTS I/ DO~4OTH _AVENUE N.£.. COLUMBIA~ HEi~;H~TS, e ~te: Ci~ Hall Phone ~ have cn~. ~ fl~rs are: ~a~ ~ (/o~)/~-~o~; ~ (/o~)/u~Joyz ADMINIS~ ~N August 11, 2000 Mayor Gary L. Peterson John Hunter DonaM G. Jolly Marlaine Szurek Julienne Wyckoff 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, AuguSt 14, 2000 in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, Minn ,e~, ota. 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 disabled persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the Deputy City Clerk at 706-3611, to make arrangements. ~TDD/?06-3692 ~r de,al or hearing impaired only) 1. CALL ~ ORDER/ROLL CALL PLEDG~ OF ALLEGIANCE ADDIT[ON$/D~LETION~; 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.) CONSENT AGENDA (These ilems 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.) MOTION: Move tO approve Consent Agenda items as follows: 1) Minutes for Aoproval MOTION: Move to approve the minutes of the July 24, 2000, Regular Council Meeting as presented. 2) Anooint Interim Police and Fire Civil Service Commissioner MOTION: MoVe to appoint Vern Moore as an Interim member of the Police and Fire Civil Service COmmission for a period not to exceed two months from the date of this appointment. 3) Approve Replacement of Unit #238 Groundsmaster Lawn Mower MOTION: Move to purchase one (1) new Toro Groundsmaster 325D, 4 x 4 lawn mower equipped with 72" mowing deck and cab from MTI Distributing Co., of Plymouth, MN, under the State of Minnesota Purchasing Contract, in the amount of $14,754.00, including trade-in of two existing groundsmasters, plus sales tax and delivery, with funds to be appropriated from Capital Equipment Replacement Fund 431-45200-5180. 4) Authorize Staff to Seek Bids for the Demolition and Removal of Huset Park Bandshell MOTION: Move to authorize staff to seek bids for the demolition and removal of the Huset Park Bandshell, based upon the recommendation of the Park and Recreation Commission. THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER City Council Agenda August 14, 2000 Page 2 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) Authorize Purchase of Three Sets of Aluminum 5-Tier Bleachers MOTION: Move to purchase three sets of aluminum five-tier bleachers from Earl F. Anderson, Inc. of Bloomington, Minnesota, in the amount of $8,199.85, including tax and delivery, from fund 412-45200-5180. Authorize Purchase of 24" Gate Valve at Pum_o Station #3 MOTION: Move to purchase one (1) 24" gate valve and appurtenances from US Filter Distribution in the amount of $11,108.98, plus tax, from fund 651-49430-2160. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Innsbruck Parkway Storm Sewer ReDair MOTION: Move to authorize Change Order No. 1, Addition of the Innsbruck Parkway Storm Sewer Repair to the Zone 4 Street Rehabilitation, City Project 0002, to Hardrives, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota, in the amount of $31,161.80, from the Storm Water Utility Fund, 604-50002-5130. Authorize Staffto S~k Bids for Repair and Coating_ of MSC Garage Floor MOTION: Move to authorize staffto seek bids for the spot repair and protective coating of MSC Garage Floor. Approve Pa_vm~nt to th, Ci_ty of Fridley for Columbia Heights' Share of Seal Coating and Taoe Street Markimm of 53r~ Avenue MOTION: Move to accept the work for the City's share of seal coating and tape street markings of 53"~ Avenue and to authorize payment of $9,326.14 to the City of Fridley, payment out of State Aid Maintenance, Fund 212-43190-5130. Approve Change Order No. 1 to Northwest Asphalt MaintenanCe. Inc. MOTION: Move to authorize Contract Change Order No. 1 to Northwest Asphalt Maintenance, Inc. of Goodridge, Minnesota, to compensate for the additional materials used for the crack and joint sealing project, in the amount of $15,678.60, with funding out of 415-50001-5130. Es~bli~h Hearing Dates Re: License Revocation or Suspension of Rental Pro_~rty at 3839 Hart Boulevard MOTION: Move to establish a Hearing Date of August 14, 2000, for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against James Lupient at 3839 Hart Boulevard. A_[l>rovc Variance Request for 4524 Fillmore Street N.E. MOTION: Move to approve the eight (8) inch rear yard setback variance at 4524 Fillmore Street N.E. as the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance, and the proposal has challenges unique to the property in question that would justify a hardship. ADorove Setback VarJ~ce Reouest for 1845 Fairway Drive N.E. MOTION: Move to approve the 8.5 foot rear yard setback variance at 1845 Fairway Drive N.E. due to irregular shape of the lot, and the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. City Council Agenda August 14, 2000 Page 3 14) Approve License Applications MOTION: Move to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for August 14, 2000. Payment of Bills MOTION: Move to pay the bills as listed out of proper funds. 5. PROCLAMATIONS, pRESENTATIONS~ RECOQNITIONS AND GUESTS l)roclamations Declare August 20, 2000, as "Frances Tatting Day" in the City of Columbia Heights B. presentations C. Introduction of New Emnloyees D. Reco_mfition 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS ge l~b!ic Hcarin? Regardin? the Revocation or Susnension of thc Rental License Held bv Nurhan H~ R~garding Rental Property at 1215-17 Circle Terrace MOTION: Move to close the public hearing regarding the revocation or suspension of the rental license held by Nurhan Hasar regarding rental property at 1215-17 Circle Terrace in that the property is in compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. Bo Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Susnension of the Rental License Held by Abdul ]~a~d Regarding Rental Property at 4341 Tyler Place MOTION: Move to close the public hearing regarding the revocation or suspension of the rental license held by Abdul Rashid regarding rental property at 4341 Tyler Place in that the property is in compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. Publk H©arln? Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by F. C. Celtic LLC. Inc. Regarding Rental Pro_~rty at 3849 Central Avenue MOTION: Move to close the public hearing regarding the revocation or suspension of the rental license held by F.C. Celtic LLC, Inc. regarding rental property at 3849 Central Avenue in that the property is in compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Other Ordinances and Resolutions ' 1) Resolution Settin? Public Hear/nj for Establishment of Redevelonment TIF District MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2000-57, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2000-57, being a resolution calling for a Public Heating on the establishment of a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District and TIF Plan therefore, and a modified Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown CBD Redevelopment Project. City Council Agenda August 14, 2000 Page 4 Bo MOTION: Move to award the proposal for preparation of the Redevelopment TIF District and TIF Plan therefore, to Springsted, Inc., based on their proposal dated August 9, 2000, in the amount not to exceed $5,000; and furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Council to enter into an agreement for the same. ltid Considerations 1) Resolution Accepting Bids and Awarding Contract for Monroe Street Storm Sewer llnprovement Project MOTION: Move to waive the reading of the resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION: Move to approve and adopt Resolution No. 2000-56 accepting bids and awarding the Monroe Street Storm Sewer Improvement Project #0007 to Hardrives, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota, in the amount of $394,594.91 based upon their low, qualified responsible bid and, furthermore to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. Qth~r Business 1) M~ter Redevelopment Plan for Downtown Columbia Heights MOTION: Move to adopt the Town Square concept plan of the Columbia Heights Downtown Master Plan to guide future redevelopment efforts with the goals of creating a positive identity for downtown Columbia Heights, strengthen ties among nearby neighborhoods, and to attract appropriate new business opportunities. ALTERNATE MOTION: Move to receive the Columbia Heights Downtown Master Plan and to adopt the following core principles to guide future redevelopment efforts: 1. Mixed-use development will be promoted west of Central Avenue N.E. within the target area. 2. Urban design elements and streetscape improvements will be incorporated along Central and 40~ Avenue N.E. 3. Huset Park will be connected to the vicinity of the Central and 40t~ Avenue N.E. intersection with a greenway or promenade. 4. Increased higher density housing will be encouraged to promote mixed-use concepts. 5. Multi-modal transit use and pedestrian connections will be incorporated into proposed redevelopment projects. 6. Key civic facilities (Library, City Hall, Emergency Services) will be co- located near green/open space and linked to commercial businesses on Central Avenue. 7. Implementation steps will be initiated to solicit developer interest, acquire properties, and perform follow-up City/EDA analysis of funding options for proposed redevelopment(s). 2) Approve Cooperation A~eement for the Transition Block Redevelopment Prelect MOTION: Move to approve the Cooperation Agreement for the Transition Block Redevelopment Project contingent on the addition of the proposed language or language substantially similar and acceptable to legal counsel for the City/EDA; and, furthermore, City Council Agenda August 14, 2000 Page 5 3) to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. Autho~ze Funds for Aea_uisition of 3855 Main Street N.E. MOTION: Move to authorize $54,000 for acquisition of 3855 Main Street N.E. and up to $1,000 for closing costs, with funds to be appropriated from the abatement revolving fund; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the purchase agreement for the same. e ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report of the City Manager B. Report of the City Attorney GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS A. Minutes of Boards and Commissions 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Meeting of the July 5, 2000 Library Board of Trustees Meeting of the July 20, 2000 Telecommunications Commission Meeting of the July 26, 2000 Park and Recreation Commission Meeting of the August 7, 2000, Traffic Commission Meeting of the August 8, 2000, Planning and Zoning Commission 10. .CITIZENS FORUM (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. AD.IOUltNI~ Linda L. Magee, Acting City Manager LLM/cb OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING JULY 24, 2000 cALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Present: Szurek, Jolly, Wyckoff, Hunter, Peterson 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ADDITioNs/DELETIONS TO MEETING AGENDA ® CONSENT AGENDA Fehst added item 4-A-18, Software/Hardware Request MOTION by Szurek, second by Jolly, to approve Consent Agenda items as follows: 1) Minutes for A~_ _oroval MOTION to approve the minutes of the July 10, 2000, Regular Council Meeting as presented. 2) Establish dates for City Council Work Session meetin~ to be held. in August of 2000. MOTION to establish City Council Work Session meeting dates for Monday, August 7, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. and Monday, August 21, at 7:00 p.m. Conference room - all invited to attend. 3) Ado_ot Resolution No. 2000-55. Bein~ a Resolution Designating Election Judges for the 2000 Primary and General Elections RESOLUTION 2000-55 BEING A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING ELECTIONS JUDGES FOR THE 2000 PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTIONS WHEREAS: There are scheduled elections in the City of Columbia Heights and the State of Mirmesota; and WHEREAS: Pursuant to City Charter, Section 30, and M.S.S.204A, the Council shall appoint qualified voters of each election district to be judges of election. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights does appoint the attached list of judges, by precinct, for the Primary and General Elections to be held on September 12, 2000 and November 7, 2000, respectively, with an hourly remuneration of $9.50 for head judge and $9.00 for an election judge. Passed this 24th.day of July, 2000. Offered by: Szurek Seconded by: Jolly Roll call: All ayes. Mayor Gary L. Peterson Columbia Heights City Council Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 2 Patricia Museovitz, Deputy City Clerk ELECTION JUDGES FOR PRIMARY AND GENERAL As of 7/19/00 Precinct l-Murzvl Hill-530 Mill St. HJ Faye Cleasby, Charlotte Zarich, Shirley Browning, Mona Lundholm, Fran Jensen, Gladys Luitjens, Wanda Heining, Darlene Bieljeski, Pauline Pafko, Mildred Peterson Precinct 2-NEll, Collie of Tech-825 41't Ave I-IJ Clara Simttuck, Mark Emme, Joann Kewatt, Lud Patko, Frances Fleisher, Martin Heining, Marge Rosin, Precinct 3 -Pariodew Villa-965 40~ Avenue HJ Muriel Nichols, Betty Spratt, Gladys zernke, Laura Lindahl, Delores Jacobsen, Otto Lausten, John Doan, Ruth Hillestad, Precinct 4-.Hiaitlami Elem Schooi-l$00 49* Avenut~ HJ Marslm Stroik, Averille Lestina, Mavis Sibell, Janis Larson, CliffPelton, Audrey Olund, Charles Helland, Mabel Jackson, Lorfie Nalezny, Precinct S-First Lmthera~ Chureh-l$$5 40t~ Ave HJ Edna Miracle, Mayme Lyons, Joan Kinde, Pat Weber, Nancy French, Irene Ricci, Dolores Roman, Richard Meixner, Sharon Ruettimann, Precinct ~-~i~hlxud Elem. Schooi-l~O 49t~ Ave HJ Judy Lee, N~ncy Foster, Vonnie Seim, Barbara Elrod, Delores Marquette, Kay Mayer, Barb Karol, Eva Pelton, Mary Jensen, Precinct 7-Valley View Elem School--800 49* Ave HJ Kay Handley, Karin Mattson *, Rose Corbett *, Sylvia Weeks, Jeanette LeBlanc, Ann Kronstedt, Fern Kobs, Joan Fuhrman, Precinct S-Vali~v View Elem School--800 49* Ave HJ Pat Jindra, Mary Dowdle, NorandaAnderson, Ken Kronstedt, Ruby Hawkins, Dick Corbett, Margaret Riley, James Davis, * Judges who will serve at Crest View Home voting. MOTION to waive the reading of Resolution No. 2000-55, there being ample copies available to the public. MOTION to adopt Resolution No. 55, Being a Resolution Designating Election Judges for the 2000 Primary and General Elections. Ap_oroval of Leadershin and Management D~vclopr~cnt Trainillg MOTION to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with LeaderSource, at a cost not to exceed $6,500. Columbia Heights City Council Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 3 6) 7) 8) 10) Author/zation to Approvc to Purchasc Plavm'ound E~ui0m~nt at Prest~mon Park MOTION to approve the purchasc of playground equipment at Prestemon Park in the amount of $24,590 from Miracle Recreation of Minnesota, not including tax. Fehst indicated this is an ongoing project to replace park equipment for safety reasons and modernization. Authorization to Award 2000 Street and Parldng Lane Strioing Project MOTION to award the 2000 Street and Parking Lane Striping project to AAA Striping Service Co., of Rogers, Minnesota, based upon their low, qualified, responsible bid in the amount of $5,299.76, with $4,620.45 to be appropriated from Fund 21243190-4000 and $679.31 to be appropriated from Fund 101-43170-4000; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract for the same. Authorization of Finlll Payment for CenW~l Avenue Signal Revisions and Report of Final Acceptance MOTION to accept the work for Central Avenue Waffle Signal Revisions (City Project No 9505) and to authorize final payment of $77,626.84 to Egan-McKay Electrical ConWactors, Inc. Fehst indicated this is for traffic signals on Central Avenue including back lights, LED lights, and change out of traffic controllers. Al~rov~l of Joint Task Force Fundin~ Prooosal MOTION to authorize an appropriation of up to $22,206 for consultant services associated with the Joint Task Force efforts with funding from Fund 226, Special Project Revenue, and remaining funds to be included in the Proposed 2001 Budget. Fehst stated the City wouMjoin with surrounding communities to study the effects of the Medtronic Project, resulting in a consulting service doing marketing research which will benefit our cities and Metronic. Approval of SPIt, Consulting Grout) Supplemental A_m'eement MOTION to authorize up to $13,308.12 for plarming services to be transferred to Protective Inspections fund 201-42400 with funding from the undesignated fund balance of the General Fund. Fehst indicated this is payment to the firm who worked on the Comprehensive Plan and authorizes up to $3,000 for work on the final plan of the zoning ordinance. Approval of Conditional Use Permit Case #2000-0717. for 3700 Central Avenue NE MOTION to Approve the Conditional Use Permit to allow the 0live Tree Grocery and Deli at 3700 Central Avenue NE to provide seating as a restaurant, subject to the following conditions: 1) All required state and local codes, permits, licenses and inspections will be met and in full compliance. 2) The screening requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for fencing and dumpster enclosure shall be in compliance. Columbia Heights City Council Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 4 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) 3) 4) 5) Parking lot site plan shall be resubmitted and be in substantial compliance with the Zoning Ordinance before restaurant seating is allowed, including handicap parking stall. Landscaping of 200 square feet ncccls to be incorporated into the revised site plan. Loading areas shall meet ordinance requirements and be accessible. Approval of a Variance Case #2000-0718. 4328 2~ Strut NE MOTION to approve the .4 foot side yard setback variance, at 4328 2"~ Street NE as the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and the ordinance under Section 9.104(3)0) allows for alternations of non-conforming structures when the alternation will improve the livability thereof, provided a variance is approved. Establish Hearinu Dates Re: License Revocation or S _uspension of Rental Properties at 3849 Central Avenue., 1215-12t7 Circle Terrace ~llld 4341 Tyler Place MOTION to establish a Hearing Date of August 14, 2000, for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against F. C. Celtic, LLC at 3849 Central Avenue. MOTION to establish a Hearing Date of August 14, 2000, for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Nurhan Kasar at 1215-1217 Circle Terrace. MOTION to establish a Hearing Date of August 14, 2000, for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against Abdul Rashid at 4341 Tyler Place. Close Hearinu for Rental License Revocation of 4542 Heiv. hts Drive MOTION to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License held by Gina Kilgore regarding Rental Property at 4542 Heights Drive in that the Property is in compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. Close Hearing for Rental License Revocation of 1~15-1217 Circle Terrace MOTION to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License held by Nurhan Kasar regarding Rental Property at 1215-1217 Circle Terrace until such time that the proper owner of the property can be notified. Close Hearing for Rental License Revocation of 3849 Central Av~ue. MOTION to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License held by F.C. Celtic, L.L.C. regarding rental property at 3849 Central Avenue NE until such time that the proper owner of the property can be notified, Appwve License Applications MOTION to appwve the items as listed on the business license agenda for July 24, 2000. Payment of Bills MOTION to pay the bills as listed out of proper funds. Columbia Heights City Council Minutes July 24, 2000 Page 5 addition: 18) Software and hardware purchase rea_uest . MOTION to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement with PC Solutions for the purchase of anti-virus software licenses, two servers, computer cabinet, and support services at a total cost not to exceed $31,270. Wyckoff clarified that there will not be a work session on July 31~. All ayes. Motion carried. PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND GUESTS A. ~Proclamations - None B. Presentations- None C. Introduction of New Employees - None D. Recognition - None PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Second Reading of Ordinance No. 1416, amending Ordinance 853, City Code of 1977, pertaining to the amendment of certain sections of the wine and beer licensing requirements of the City. Fekst stated Ordinance No. 1416 is for wine and beer sales only, and does not include hard liquor. The committee included the Police Chief, City Attorney and one Building Inspector. It was determined that other communities allow strong beer to' be sold with 3.2 beer and wine. Stipulations require a ratio of at least 60% food and no more than 40°/6 strong beer and wine sales. He noted a survey of eleven cities show a license requirement of 75 seats or higher, so the committee chose to stay at 75 seats. The committee felt this recommendation will best serve the needs of this City. MOTION by Hunter, second by Szurek, to waive the reading of Ordinance No. 1416, there being ample copies available for the public. All ayes. Motion carried. MOTION by Hunter, second by Szurek, to adopt Ordinance No. 1416, amending Ordinance 853, City Code of 1977, pertaining to the amendment of certain sections of the wine and beer licensing requirements of the City. All ayes. Motion carried. e ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION A. Other Ordinances and Resolutions - None B. Bid Considerations - None C. Other Business - None Wyckoff referred to Jean Kuehn, Special Projects Coordinator, who has indicated 1000people have accessed the City web site in July, and 18people have down loaded job applications. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS A. Report of the City Manager Columbia Heights City Council Minu~s July 24, 2000 Page 6 Fehst stated a building permit for a retail store has been applied for at the Old ,4merica location. This retail chain has 2,400 stores nation wide, with one opening in St. Cloud September 2000. Michelle Chalin, Parkview Villa Housing Coordinator has resigned. National Night Out will be August 1". Interested residents may contact the Police Department for more information. B. Report of the City Attorney - None e GENERAL COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS A. Minutes of Boards and Commissions 1) Meeting of the June 28, 2000 Park and Recreation Commission 2) Meeting of the July 11, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission 3) Meeting of the June 20, 2000 Economic Development Authority 10. CITIZENS FORUM (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.) No one came forward. 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:22 p.m. Patricia Museovitz, Deputy City Clerk CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meetin$ of August 14, 2000 ITEM: Appointment of Civil Scrvice Police and BY: ThomasM. Johnso,0,n 10~N2000 ~ BY: ~~.~0-7~''-~ NO. Fire Commission Member DATE: Au~ust 9, ~ ~t DATIE: A.~ BACKGROUND During July the Civil Service Commission was notified that one of its members, Jack Moore, was resigning because he was moving out of the city. Jack Moore has served the Commission extremely well, and we will miss his skill and expertise. Also in July, the Chief of Police notified the Commission that we need to start a new testing process for police officer, as we have exhausted our current list. The two remaining Commission members-Bruce Magnuson and Bruce Nawrocki-felt that a selection process is better served with three commissioners than with two and approached the Mayor about appointing an interim commissioner. They offered the name of Veto Moore, who had served the Commission for more than thirty years previously. The Mayor directed the Police Chief to contact Mr. Vern Moore to see if he would be interested in the interim position. On July 31, 2000, the Chief of Police contacted Mr. Vern Moore and he stated that he would assist us for up to two months. The Chief of Police also advised Mr. Moore that the Mayor wants the Commission to determine in these two months whether Civil Service is still needed or if the Civil Service Commission should be abolished. ANALYSIS/CONCLUSION Mr. Vern Moore has agreed to assist our city as an interim Civil Service Commissioner for the next two months. Mr. Moore also will assist us with a process to develop an eligible register for police officer and in deterrcdning whether the Civil Service Commission is still needed or if it should be abolished. RECOMI~ENDED MOTION: Move to appoint Vem Moore as an interim member of the Police and Fire Civil Service Commission for a period not to exceed two months from the date of this appointment. TMJ:mld 00-197 COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL I~,ETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA -'q'~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: REPLACEMENT OF UNIT #235: BY: K.Hans ~~ BY GROUNDSMASTER LAWN MOWER DATE: 8/9 Bacggroun : Unit #238, a Toro Groundsmaster Lawn Mower with a 72" mowing deck, was purchased new in 1992 for $16,684, with a projected life expectancy of 8 years. It currently has 2100 hours of operation. The transmission has been rebuilt and it is the mechanic's opinion that the engine will have to be rebuilt in the near future. The overall mechanical condition rating is fair to poor. This mower is used as a complimentary mower to the larger Toro 580-D. It works great for cutting areas where, due to size or terrain, it is unsafe or impossible for the 580-D to cut. The four wheel drive feature is necessary for safely mowing numerous steep hills in the park system. Analysis/Conclusions: The Park Department has been favorably impressed with the mowing capability, maneuverability and durability of the Toro Groundsmaster. Staff recommends replacing Unit #238 with basically the same machine, one (1) new Toro Groundsmaster 325 D 4x4 mower equipped with a 72' mowing deck and Cab. This mower is available for purchase through State of Minnesota contract pricing. The existing Unit #238, a 1992 4x4 Groundsmaster is proposed to be disposed of by trade-in. Additionally, staff recommends trading in existing Unit #227, which was replaced last year, but the dealer did not accept trade-ins. The State of Minnesota Contract vendor, MTI, has offered a reasonable price for that unit: $2,150. Recommemied Motion: Move to purchase one (1) new Toro Groundsmaster 325D, 4x4 lawnmower equipped with 72" mowing deck and Cab from MTI Distributing Co., of Plymouth, MN, under the State of Minnesota Purchasing Contract, in the amount of $14,754.00, including trade-in of two existing Groundmasters, plus sales tax and delivery with funds to be appropriated from Capital Equipment Replacement Fund #431-45200-5180. COUNCIL ACTION: CITy COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA Si~CTION: CONSENT AGENDA ]./~"~/ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: DEMOLITION OF HUSET PARK BAND SHELL BY: K. Hansen __ DATE: 8/9/00 E,;," ...... ,! Background: At a previous Park & Recreation Commission meeting, commissioners discussed the limited use of the Huset Park Band Shell and directed staff to take a preliminary look at its removal from a financial perspective and future park planning. At the regular Park & Recreation Commission meeting of June 28, 2000, staff informed the Commission that Band Shell removal would be in the range from $5,000 to $7,500. The Commission voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council to remove the Band Shell at Huset Park. Analysis/Conclusions: The Band Shell is sparsely used throughout the year. The Jamboree Coronation and one or two summer Recreation programs are held there. The general public, on average, may use it two to three times a year for such activities as a band or other civic groups. Public Works staff would note the existing and future maintenance issues such as cracked concrete flooring, roofing will need to be replaced in about five years, and the building does sustain a significant amount of vandalism. The sound system is only about five years old and like the building, seldom used. The sound system is salvageable for other City uses. The City of Fridley does have a portable Band Shell that may be available for related uses. Recommended Motion: Move to authorize staff to seek bids for the demolition and removal of the Huset Park Band Shell, based upon the recommendation of the Park & Recreation Commission. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA N ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ,,,o, z./_.. A. 0 ITEM: AUI~ORIZATION TO PURCHASE 3 SETS OF BY: K. Hansen BY 5-mR EAC S DAm 8/9/00 Btck~Found: The Bleacher Safety Act was passed by the 1999 Minnesota legislature and went into effect August 1, 1999. The law requires aH cities and other organizations owning bleachers to comply with the Bleacher Safety Act by January of 2001. Due to negative feedback from bleacher owners and lack of a funding source, revisions to the law were made by the 2000 Legislature. The deadline for compliance has been changed from January 1, 2001 to January 1, 2002 and the five-tier bleacher standards have been relaxed. The revision provides that aH existing and new bleachers 55 inches and lower without guardrails are exempt and do not require a Certificate of Compliance. In response to the 1999 law, $20,000 was budgeted in the 2000 Parks Capital Improvements to retrofit or replace bleachers. On March 7, 2000 the Council authorized the retrofit of 6 bleachers for a cost of $8,304. Labor and materials were supplied by Flanagan Sales Inc and the work was completed shortly thereafter. The remaining 5 bleachers were scheduled to be replaced. Aaalysb/Condusiom: The City currmtly owns 11 sets of bleachers. Technically, all of them arc in compliance with the Bleacher Safety Act(revised) due to the fact that none of the bleachers exceed 55 inches in height and that 6 bleachers have been retrofitted with guardrails. The remaining 5 bleachers, all located in Huset Park, are recommended to be replaced to provide a consistent appearance and level of safety for the community. They are not suitable to retrofit because of their poor condition and/or use of wood planking material. This item was reviewed by the Park & Recreation Commission and it was their recommendation to thc Council to replace bleachers in 2000 with remaining funding and complete the replacement in 2001. At this time staff recommends replacement of three (3) sets of bleachers, each 5 row, with two 21 feet in length and one 15 feet in length. Placement would be one (1) set at Huset field #2 and 2 sets at Huset field #3. We have received the following quotes, all quotes include sales tax and delivery. Earl F. Anderson Inc. $8,199.85 Flanagan Sales Inc. $9,551.00 Recreation, Sports and Play $10,535.08 Two (2) remaining sets of bleachers at Huset field #5 are scheduled for replacement in 2001. The estimated cost of replacement is $8,0OO to $12,000. Recommended Motion: Move to purchase 3 sets of aluminun3 five-tier bleachers from Earl F. Anderson Inc. of Bloomington, Minnesota in the amount of $8,199.85, including tax and delivery, from Fund 0412-45200-5180. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ~x ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ] NO: ~ ~-69 PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: AUTHORIZATION TO PURCHASE 24" GATE, BY: K. Hansen VALVE AT PUMP STATION//3 DATE: 8/9/00 lhck~*ound: In thc Fall of 1999, the City of Minneapolis Water Works (MWW) and the City of Columbia Heights worked together to construct an auxiliary/emergency water supply connection that could be used at times when the primary water supply from the Hilltop reservoir in New Brighton is out of service. The MWW was responsible for the design and construction project which was completed late last year. The new connection works very well, system pressure and volume are at or near normal operating levels. Analysis/Conclusion: As a result of ibis connection, staffis recommending an additional modification to be made to the water distribution system at Pump Station//3 to insure uninterrupted service while operating the emergency water supply. Install a 24" gate valve on the upstream side of the Pump Station//3 suction connection. Remove the 24" swing check valve located on the downstream side of Pump Station //3 suction connection. Public Works is recommending the additional valve for the following reasons: ao Staff could operate Pump Stations//2 and//3 under normal pumping conditions while on the emergency water supply. The new valve would provide for isolation of the master meter in the event repair or replacement is necessary. The 24" swing check valve could be removed from the system as it is no longer compatible with the emergency water supply operational plan. Columbia Heights Public Works would be responsible for construction. Work should be completed before the end of September, with a four to six week delivery time on the 24"valve. An additional issue related to timing is that the MWW has notified us that they are tentatively scheduled to switch us from our primary water ~upply to the emergency water supply at the end of September so they can make necessary connections at the new Hilltop Reservoir in New Brighton. We have received the following quotes for 24" gate valve and appurtenances: Minnesota Pipe & Equipment $11,239.00 plus tax U.S. Filter Distribution $11,108.98 plus tax Davies Water Equipment $12,113.00 plus tax Recommended Motion: Move to purchase one (1) 24" gate valve and appurtenances from US Filter Distribution in the amount of$11,108.98, plus tax, from Fund 0651-49430-2160. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA S~CTION: CONSENT AGENDA ~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER N0. 1FOR BY: K. Ham~ BY: INNSBRUCK PARKWAY STORM SEWER REPAIR DATE: 8/9/ DA -~ Background: A problem with the storm sewer system at the intersection of Innsbmck Parkway and Innsbmck Parkway West has worsened recently. The concrete street is undermined surrounding catch basin C-1 and catch basin C-3. At C-l, the concrete street has settled and a 1' deep void is visible between the street and the underlying soils. The existing pipe is bituminous coated corrugated metal pipe, installed in 1960. The interior of the catch basin structure(s) are also beginning to deteriorate. The location of the proposed work is shown on the attached plan. Analysis/Conclusions: Staff requested the Zone 4 contractor, Hardrives to provide an estimate to do the work. The estimated cost to remove and replace the concrete street, 120' of pipe and 3 catch basins, plus concrete street restoration is $31,161.80. The unit prices are consistent with the Zone 4 unit prices for the unit prices bid, plus mobilization costs. Recommended Motion: Move to authorize Change Order No 1, Addition of the Innsbruck Parkway Storm Sewer Repair to the Zone 4 Street Rehabilitation, City Project 0002, to Hardrives, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota, in the amount of $31,161.80, from the Storm Water Utility Fund, 604-50002-5130. Attachment: Proposed Plan COUNCIL ,~,CTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 REPAIR AND COATING OF MSC GARAGE FLOOR DATE: 8/10/~00_~...~~ D --~0 The City has spot repaired the garage floor and applied a protective coating to preserve the slructural integrity of the concrete slab on a regular basis. A protective coating was last applied in 1996. This work is budgeted in the Public Works Central Garage budget. Reeommendell Motion: Move to authorize staffto seek bids for the spot repair and protective coating of MSC Garage Floor. r. I.'jb COUNCIL ACTION: Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA __ "x OlUGmATI~G DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER q) ITEM: APPROVAL OF PAYMENT TO THE CITY OF BY: K. Hansen BY: FRIDLEY FOR COLUMBIA HEIGHTS SHARE OF SEAL DATE: 8/10/00~ COATING AND TAPE STREET MARKINGS OF $3~ AVENUE Background: The City of Frklley has completed 3M Staymark street markings and seal coat on 53~ Avenue between University Avenue and Central Avenue. The cost for street marking was $ 7,652.95 and the cost for seal coating 53~ Avenue was $10,999.33 ($0.61/square yard). In comparison, the City of Columbia Heights is paying about $0.82/S.Y. for seal coat. The street markings were installed by Grove Tech Inc. and the seal coat was done by Allied Blacktop Company. Analysis/Conzlusions: The Columbia Heights share is one half of the cost for a total of $ 9,326.14. Staff is recommending to accept the work for the City's share of seal coat and street markings and approval of payment to the City of Fridley. Recommended Motion: Move to accept the work for the City's Share of Seal Coating and Tape Street Markings of 53ra Avenue and to authorize payment of $ 9,326.14 to the City of Fridley, payment out of State Aid Maintenance, Fund 212-43190-5130. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA -x ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ITEM: CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR NORTHWEST BY: K. I~/14/00w..~ ASPHALT MAINTENANCE, INC. DATE: 8 Baekgrou~d: The Conlracto~ has complete~l the s~t ~ck se~g ~d ~ lot jolt ~d c~ck ~g woj~t. Mo~ ~ck sea~g ~t~ w~ ~ ~ ofig~y e~d. S~ is ~vie~g ~e fe~ibfli~ of c~k sea~g ~e old~ ~ ~d &e me~ for es~ma~g q~fi~ of~te~l ~ed. Analysis/Conclusions: The change order, attached, modifies the con~act to include additional quantities for crack sealing. Staff recommends approval of Change Order #1. Reenmmended Motion: Move to authorize Contract Change Order No. 1 to Northwest Asphalt Maintenance, Inc. of Goodridge, Minnesota, to compensate for the additional materials used for the crack and joint sealing project, in the amount of $15,678.60 with funding o~t of 415-5001-5130. Attachment: Change Order COUNCIL ACTION: CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Street Crack Sealing and Parking Lot Joint and Crack Sealing City Project: 0001(A) City of Columbia Heights 637 38* Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Contractor: Northwest Asphalt Maintenance, Inc. RR2, Box 172 Goodridge, MN 56725 Date of Issuance: August 10, 2000 Engineer: City Engineer You are directed to make the following changes in the Contract Documents: Description: Chartge in original contract price to compensate for additional work added to the contract by the City. Purpose of Change Order: The contract has been modified to include additional quantities to · complete the sehedulod work. CHANGE IN CONTRACT PRICE Original Contract Price: $19,404.00 Previous Change Orders No., ...... to No. None CHANGE IN CONTRACT TIME Original Contract Time: Net Change from Previous Change Order: Contract Price P~ior to this Change Order: $19,404.00 Net Increase of this Change Order: $15,678.60 Contract Price with all Approved Change Orders: $ 35,082.60 Contract Time Prior to this Change Order: Net Increase (Decrease) of Change Order: Contract Time with Approved Change Orders: Recommended Appmved By: ....... By: ,, City Engineer (Contractor) Approved By: Approved By: Date of Council Action Gary Peterson, Mayor Walter Fehst, City Manager CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: August 14. 2000 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT ~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER A /I) NO: .t, ~ . Fire ITEM: Establish Hearing Dates BY: Dana Alexon License Revocation, Rental Properties NO: DATE: Aufust 9~ 2000 Revocation or suspension of a license to operate a rental property within the City of Columbia Heights is requested against the following owners regarding their rental property for failure to meet the requirements of the Housing Maintenance Codes. 1. James Lupient ............................... 3839 Hart Blvd RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Establish a Hearing Date of August 14, 2000 for Revocation or Suspension of a License to Operate a Rental Property within the City of Columbia Heights against James Lu_~ient at 3839 Hart Blvd. COUNCIL A .CTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meetin~ of: August 14, 2000 AGENDA' SECTION: Consent ORIGINATING DEPT.i CITY MANAGER ITEM: Variance BY: Tim Johnson ' ~ ~.~/' i/]/'-E///0 NO: Case # 2000-0820, 4524 Fillmore S~eet NE DATE: August 10, 2000 Issue Stiter~nt: This is a request for an eight (8) inch rear yard setback variance to allow the construction of a 20 foot by 30 foot detached garage facing the alley at 4524 Fillmore Street NE. Backar~,and: Section 9.104(5) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that any accessory smacture maintain a minimum twenty (20) foot setback when the entry doors face a street or alley. The request is to allow for the new addition to encroach eight (8) inches into the required twenty (20) foot setback area. Analysis; Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following: "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or where by reason of exceptional topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the rules of the zoning district." In order for a variance to be granted, hardship needs to be established. There appear to be unique circumstances in question to justify granting of this variance as there is a slight change in topography that presents challenges in placement of the garage on the property. Some other circumstances unique in question would require the owner to remove the existing sidewalk as well as removal of an existing patio area in order to meet the ordinance. According to the definition of hardship from the ordinance, there would appear to be some legitimate hardships for granting this variance, as the applicant could meet the ordinance if the garage and entry doors were faced to the north. Reeomn~ndation: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing for the request on August 8, 2000. They voted unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the eight (8) inch rear yard setback variance at 4524 Fillmore Street N-B due to topographic hardship and maintaining existing sidewalk and patio, and the proposal would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Reeomn~nd~d MotiOn: Move to approve the eight (8) inch rear yard setback variance at 4524 Fillmore Street NE as the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance and the proposal has challenges unique tothe property in question that would justify a hardship. Attqchments: Staff Report; Completed application form; Survey; Site Plan; and Public Notice COUNCIL ACTION: H:Tim'sFil~CCVarRalphP O~ner: Address: Phone: Barb Reed 452,~ Fillmore Street NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 (612) 597-2074 Applicant: Ralph Pautsch Construction 17363 Guadalcanal Street Ham Lake, MN Parcel Address: 4524 Fillmore Street NE Zoning: R-2, Single and TWo- Family Residential Comprehensive Plan: LDR, Low Density Residential ' and Land SoUth: R-2 Land Use North: 'Residential South: Residential East~ R-2 East: Residential ~est: R-2 gee. vt: Residential BACKGROUND Explanation of Requeat: Theapplicant had originally proposed to build a garage measuring 22 feet by 30 feet as outlined in ~he original request, which exceeded the maximum lot coverage. This request has been downsized to meet the maximdm 30°4 lot coverage in place. The applicant is now proposing to build a~letached garage measunng 20 feet by 30 feet (600 square.feet) at the location above. The vananC~'ii:[$~eing requested to~.~al!oW f~r~ a proposed garage to be built nineteen feet arid four. i~h~s il 9;.74")' fro~'thb ~'i~Pert~ l~e abutting the alley.~Th~P~P°Sed t0Ward ali . rdinance in qa tion 9.104(5), which back a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet from protmrty line when the garag6 doors face a strut or alley. The proposed garage would infringe eight inch~s (8") into the setback area. The existing house occupies 1,691 square feet of property, with the proposed detached g~¢ occupying an additional 600 square feet. The total amount of lot coverage proposed with the addition of the detached garage would be 2,291 square feet. Ordinance 9.104(5) allows for a maximum lot coverage of 30% The lot measuring'approximately 7,744 square feet has a ,:~maximum lot coverage °f2,323 squa~ feet. This p~po~al meets lot, As stated on.the application, me p~uPo~e of the ~t'i~t8~pr6v ~ for existing ienants.'Tbe tenants cUr~entiy park On~ ~'~8~i~. slab , There are no per~cnt zoning cases on the lot or'in the surrounding area. ANALYSIS The surrounding property to the north, south, east and west is zoned R-2, Single and Two-Family Residmtial, and is u~ed residentially. Technical Review: Accessory structures are regulated lmder Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. Requirements are as follows. · No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal structure or fifteen (15) .feet, whichever is less.- the height of the garage should be within these limits. .-, .No accessorY'~uc~"°~Combination of accessory structur~ shall exceed:~l~000 ~uare . '?~fe, et'- the' prOposed~ deta~lied:~e cove600 square feet - meetin~ re~~tS This proposal would cover 2,291 square feet. This proposal meets lot coverages. · Detached accessory structures must be six (6) feet or more fi:om the principal structure the proposed detached garage will be approximately six (6) feet away from the principal structure. · Whenever a garage is designed so that the vehicle entry door is facing a street or alley, the distance between the door and the lot line shall be 20 feet or more,- the pwposed detached two-car garage will be placed nineteen feet four inches (19'4") from the rear lot line, with the garage doors facing the alley. The proposal requires an eight inch (8") variance. St,~ffhas visited the site and believes that a slight hardship exists with relationto the topography of the site, which limits wherd and how a garage could be built without reasonable difficulty. ' There ai, e als8 existing concrete blocks surrOunding the current slab area that are ~tt~oi: below: grad~:'::B~u~ of the~e issuesStaffhas looked at possible options for building sized garag~ to fit within the Setbacks. The pwposed garage could be placed on meet setbacks if the garage doors were faced to the north. However, this proposal require the owner to remove the existing sidewalk that leads up to the house on the south p~p,~ ~e~. ~..line, as well as removing an existing patio area for the tenants. However the outcome, the ~p/'0~X~sed two + car garage would intend'to complement the property and would' also provide covered and secured parking facilities for the tenants. This would be a great improvement for the property. , ~' , . . . .. · ,~ . · .. · .~ ... ~ ".;'~.~,. -', . .... 5~As mentioned above, hardship needs to be established ( cxrcumstancg~/mique to the Pm1 ' 'C~ [ ~;~ questxon need to be estabhshed m order for a variance t be' m'ant~:t~(~ 9 105(3~(d/~f'h~ ~ Zoning Ordinance also states that the Cornm,ss,on Shall hear reque~)r variances from ·. ~,~? ~!-literal provimons of this OrdinanCe mrinstances where then' ,'strict erd'or~ement would cause '~.~' · .,//~: ' undue ~p.becanse of ctrcumstances umque to the individual prop~ under co~derat/on ' :i~" and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action:will be in keeping voth the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". ~*~: C. ~ . ? ..<~:. Section I of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified below: ' -- ~, · protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; · dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regula~,.therein the location, height, number oratories, size Ofbuildings and other stmctums~ii~'Per~entage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open ~aces, and the domity and distribution of population; ~ ':.'--'.<:" ~-~- · : ~':~'~-~ ':~'~' ' · ' _providing adequate light, air, and convtmience of access to prope~'7; and, · preventing oVercrowding of land and undue concentration of s~. ctures by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land and buildings · ~,~-: .:~ ~'~,.rf ' '~.': ,~,,:,.' .".~' .'~.' Development~ The~posal does not impact the goals and objectives of thc City Comprehensive ?lano -~ · :' The positiv'6'~e(~ts of this proposal are as follows: " ' 1. The proposal will create covered and secured off-street parking for two + vehicles,.which will help to enhance the character of the residential neighborhood and pwvide needed storage space for the two-family structure. The negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: ,~ ~,',~i~ -' 1. The proposal woUld infringe 8 inches into the setback area for garages with doors facing an alley. .. ' ii:'..' ,,;:,, f. :~-: ?. . ' ~> '~. "' ~' ' - < ~':' "? ,' ';~a'~.'~.~:'>':~'~:~.";~ ..... ? ~:- ,:"i':i!'i~i;.~ CONCLUSION Sta__ff Rec°mmendation: Staffrecommends approval of the request because there does appear.to be a hardship on which to base 'approval of the variance. The proposal appears to be in keeping Witli'~ Spirit and intent of the ordinance. It is sta~s opinion that because the lot coverages will be me~, the property will not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property will be maintained and improved upon. There is also an existing garage with doors facing the alley of the'8" varianL¢ ~uest 30'foot detached g~ge facing the alley'at 4524 FillmOre Street"NE d~ie to 'and exis~ ~ sidew~alk and patio, anal the proposal iS' ~i~e~ping With thc spirit and intent of o~b~:~.~?~::~. ~,~.!~i~!'~. ~ . . ~..:. ~ .. -Complected application £on~ $it¢ Survey ?lan~ and Public No~ice ~sol~cat£on ~orf~ CITY OF COLUI~IA HEIGHTS '~ .,~ ~',..; ~ ' . Privacy Fence :'~:' . ,, _ Case No~ O~er ' ~: ...... ' TM ':; ' ~ecefpC No s 2. Le~al Description o~ Subjec~ Proper.~7= Applicant Address = Phone.. 6. Zoning: Applicable City Ordinance Number Section Present Zontn~ Present Use ProPosed Zonin& Proposed' Use 8. Exhibits Subm£tted (maps, Acknovledslent and Si~nature~ The ~dersigned hereby represents upon all °f'the penalt£es of law. for the purpose of inducing ~he City of Colmabia He£ihts to take the action herein requested, that all statements herein are true and that all work herein ment£oned will be done in accordance with the Ordinances of the C~ty of Columbia Heights and the lays of the. State of lf~m/~. ~ Signature of Applicant~~~--~~~~"~ Date= ",'~- ~O~ ~ Taken By:_~/'-~-'~ .-__ · 000627 25/30/24 V~G$CttBID, JERRY SUlt VE & Lot 8 and the bl'anh Half of Lot 9, Block 7, Shc~eld's Second Subdivision, Anolm County, LIMITATIONS & NOTES: - ~ -"" 1. Showing the !ensth md directiai ofbotm~ lines of the above lesal description. The sc'ope of our services doesnot inch]dedetemli~whatyou~ whichis ale~alm _m'~. Please check the sure tha~ it is correct, a~ h%~t any m,,.,'q of record, such as easements, ti:mt you. ~ shown on the 3. v. I I- 4,. ~ ~o~i_ ~the site at selected !~,~,~ive some ~~Oi:'the topOgraphy o:f :~ I ,:': If __ , ~ '..~ ' · . 9~.~ I' . I l'l. ..,:~?.:~ ."": ..... . ..... ~.,l~ :...l .: ~?~?<:,...::: .,.:-~ . '"'il '~,: ~ . ' CEN~UNE OF A~Y- I ~1,~1 E~VA~ON=947'69 ~ ] ~~ ,~; ,.,, :~ .... ..~,,4.'~, ~ 4627 4626 ~ . ~ 46,2~1 4620 ~ ~0~ ~0~ ~ 460]~0~ 4624- ~09 4607' 4605 '~06 . - AVE 4532 ~31 4529 ~' 45 1/2 j AVE 4530 4518 4519 4.519 , 4.515 \ 4-516 4.513 4.514. 10~ , ~.0 ~ 111§ 11~ " ' ' '"'"-.~STH ' '~VE · GRAPHIc ~ SC,,.Af.R ' :;':' 0 I0 20 FOUNO 9~.9.$ s'r~E /-RETNNING WALL. 955.0 1 inch - 20 rt.. '2' FENCE 0.2 N. OF PROPERTY UN~, N~'89-59'41" w . 4. FT. ~ll21..t CH~N r ,. ~ ' ~ LINK FENCE ON UNE 1 STORY BRICK & STUCCO D~rLUNG NO. 452~- 958.1 958.7 958.7 Z8.7 !8.9 - - % % GARAGE -- 4 Fl' CHAIN / UNK FENCE 959.1 ,./ 4 Fi' CHAIN. UNK FENCE 950.5 -;--129.23-- ' ::~'Fii:l,,lCE'o.4. N. oF' pROPERTY L~ ~ S 89'59'53" E / ~,THE SOUTH UNE OF THE NORll-I HALF OF' LOT 9 I JOB NO. 0006271 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meetin[~ of.' August 14~ 2000 AGENDA SECTION: Consent 1~..3 ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER ~{ A,'-.~/ Community Development~ ~- AP, P.R.OVAL ITEM: Variance BY: Tim Jolm~on NO: Case # 2000-0821, 1845 Fairway Drive NE DATE: August 10, 2000 0 Issue Ststement: This is a request for an 8 ~ foot rear yard setback variance to allow the construction of a 13 foot by 24 foot addition to an attached garage at 1845 Fairway Drive NE. Back~ro~nd: Section 9.107(4) of the Columbia Heights Zoning Ordinance requires that any part of a principal structure be set back a raininlum distance of thirty (30) feet from the rear property line. The request is to allow for the new addition to encroach 8 ½ feet into the required thirty (30) foot setback area, bringing the new addition 21 ½ feet from the rear property line. Section 9.105(3Xd) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following: "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or where by reason of exceptional topography, soft conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the roles of the zoning district." In order for a variance to be granted, hardship needs to be established. The primary purpose of the request is to gain a second usable covered parking space. There appear to be unique circumstances in question to justify granting of this variance as the shape of the lot prevents the owner from building the addition to meet setbacks. There appear to be no other locations on the lot that could reasonably accommodate this addition. If the addition were built to meet the ordinance, the addition would have to be reduced from 13 X 24 to 13 X 15. Th/s size addition could not accommodate anything other than a compact vehicle. According to the definition of hardship from the ordinance, there would appear to be circumstances unique to the property in question upon which to base approval of this variance. Also the ordinance allows for alterations of non-conforming structures when the alteration will improve the livabflity thereof, provided a variance is approved. This addition would appear to improve the livability of the property. Ree0mmendation: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a Public Hearing for the request on August 8, 2000. They voted unanimously to recommend City Council approval of the 8 ½ foot rear yard setback variance at 1845 Fairway Drive NE due to irregular shape of the lot, and the proposal would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. R~:omn~nded Motion: Move to approve the 8 ~ foot rear yard setback variance at 1845 Fairway Drive NE due to irregular shape of the lot,' and the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Attachments: Staff Report; Completed application form; Survey; Site Plan; and Public Notice COUNCIL ACTION: {:Tim'sFii~sCCV~rKevinD Case: 2000-0821 Page: I STAFF REPORT TO TNE~ ~G AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR ~ AUGUST 8, 2000 PUBLIC ItEARI~G Case #: 2000-0821 Kevin Doty 1845 Fairway Drive NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 574-9606 Address: .. Phone: Parcel Address: 1845 Fairway Drive NE Zoning: R-l, Single-Family Residential Comprehensive Plan: LDR, Low Density Residential GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: San2e Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: Zoning North: R-1 South: R-1 East: R-1 West: R-1 Land Use North: Residential South: Residential East: Residential West: Residential BACKGROUND Exvlanation of Request: The applicant is proposing to add additional attached garage space measuring 13 feet wide by 24 fee~ deep (312 square feet) at the location above. The variance is being requested to allow for the proposed addition to be built 21 ½ feet from the rear property line. The proposed addition would be on the east side of the house. The ordinance in question is 9.107(4), which requires principal structures to be set back a minimum distance of thirty (30) feet from the rear property line. The proposed garage would infringe not closer than 21 ½ feet to the rear property line. Attached garages are considered as part of the principal structure and subject to the same setbacks as the house. The existing house occupies 1,066 square feet of property, with the existing attached garage occupying an additional 424 square feet, and the proposed addition occupying 312 square feet. The total lot coverage of the house with the additions will be 1914 square feet, well within ordinance requirements. The purpose of this request is to gain additional covered garage parking and storage. The applicant currently has a two-car garage, but one stall was partially converted into extra kitchen space by previous owners, thus leaving only one usable covered parking space. Case: 2000-0821 Page: 2 Case Histo~: There ~ no previous Planning and Zoning Commission cases on this site. However, a variance case 9~12=56 for the property at 1850 49~ Avenue, abutting 1845 Fairway on the north, was approved by the Commission and Council in December 1995. A variance of thirteen feet (13') was approved for an addition onto the rear of the house. Refer to plat and address map for applicable lot layout. ANALYSIS Surrounding Prover(v_: The surrounding property to the north, south, east and west is zoned R-l, Single-Family Residential, and is used residentially. Technical Review: Residential structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance. Requirements are as follows. · Minimum lot size shall be 8,400 square feet - the subject property is 9,838 square feet which meets this requirement. · . Minimum lot width is 70 feet - the subject property is 105 feet wide which meets this requirement. · Front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet from property line - the existing house is approximately 28 feet. · Rear yard shall be at least 30 feet - the existing house is approximately 26 feet from the rear property line at its closest point. A majority of the house meets the 30 foot setback from the rear property line as the lot configures at an angle on the north lot line. (See plat map). The existing deck is also within the 30 foot setback area, and is approximately 15 feet from the rear lot line. The house and deck are considered legal non-conforming. · Side yard shall be a minimum of 7 feet - the existing house and proposed addition will be placed at no closer than 7.5 feet.from the side yard, which meets this requirement. · .. An accessory structure shall be considered to be an integral part of the principal building if it is connected to ~.e principal building. · For single-family homes, no accessory structures or any combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet - the existing garage is 424 square feet and the propOsed addition is 312 square feet totaling 736 square feet which meets this requirement. · Any lot over 5,500 square feet may have a lot coverage of up to 30% - the maximum lot coverage on the property is 2,951 square feet - the applicant has proposed 1,912 square feet which meets the requirement. With the exception of the rear yard setback requirement, the proposal meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. As mentioned above, the existing attached garage and the C~se: 2000-0821 Page: 3 proposed attached garage do not meet thc setback requirements. Note that the structure, was built .in 1965, prior to the adoption of these regulations, so it is considered legally non-conforming. Section 9.104(3)' of the ordinance states that normal maintenance of a non-conforming structure is permitted, pwvided it does not extend or intensify the non-conformity. The proposal will further encroach into the setback area, as the garage will be expanded on the east side oftbe lot. Considering that the non-conformity will be intensified, a permit cannot be granted without thc approval of a variance. This addition matches up with the.existing attached garage but is closer to the lot l/ne because of the shape of the lot. Section 9.105(3)(d) states the following "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or where by reason of exceptional topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within thc rules of the zoning distr/ct." Staff has visited thc site and believes that a hardship exists with relation to the shape of the lot, which restricts an addition onto the east or north of the house because of the setbacks. Because of these issues staffhas looked at possible options for adding additional attached garage space within the setbacks. There appear to be no other locations on the lot that could reasonably accommodate this addition or a similar addition to meet setbacks, if the lot were square or rectangular shaped, the addition would meet setbacks. If a detached structure were built to meet setbacks, the depth of thc garage would be appwx!mately 1:5 feet, which could not accommodate a normal sized vehicle. Whatever thc outcome, the proposed garage addition would intend to complement the property and would also pwvide additional covered and secured parking for thc owners. This would be a nice improvement to the property. The proposed addition would appear to match up with adjacent homes and their properties. However, there is only one other home on thc same block that has the appearance of a three-car garage. Is the second stall necessary or docs it create an undesirable precedent for future garage additions not meeting setbacks? As mentioned above, hardship needs to be established for a variance to be granted. Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance also states that the Commission shall hear requests for variances from thc literal provisions of this Ordinance in instances where their "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". .. Section 1 of thc Zoning Ord/nancc identifies thc intent and purpose of thc Ordinance. Four of the purpose staC,-ments:arc identified below: · protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; · dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein thc location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; · providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to prope~3,; and, · preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating thc Case: 2000-0821 Page: 4 use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in rel~ion to surrounding land and buildings. Comvliance with City Comvrehensive Plan: The City Comprehensive Plan designates this area for future Low Density Residential Development. The proposal does not impact the goals and objectives of the City Comprehensive Plan. Summary_: - The positive aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The proposal will create additional covered and secured off-street parking for two vehicles, which will help to enhance the character of the residential neighborhood and provide needed parking space for the single-family structure. 2. The addition will follow an established building line that matches the exisffug structure. The negative aspects of this proposal are as follows: 1. The addition will intensify and extend a non-conforming structure and infringe into the rear yard setback area, and could set a precedent for approval of other similar type proposals. CONCLUSION StalT Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the request because there does appear to be a lot shape hardship on which to base approval of the variance. The proposal appears to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Considering that the proposed 21 ½ foot rear yard setback is consistent with the adjacent properties in the surrounding area, and because the in'egular shape of the lot is not conducive to future garage additions meeting setbacks, staff recommends approval of the variance. Also, a prior variance granted to the neighbor at 1850 49'~ Avenue was five feet closer than the proposed variance requested. It is staff's opinion that because minimum lot coyerages will be met, the property will not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property will be maintained and improved upon. The proposal seems consistent with the spirit and fiatent of the Ordinance. Staffhas received no objections to this request as of yet. However, staff does Mve some concerns about this.site and some possible future additions that would also need variance approvals. Staff would recommend the Commission discuss the ramifications of similar type variance approvals and their potential to dictate and set precedence in the future. Does allowing one variance potentially create the possibilities for more variances? Case: 20000820 Page: 5 Recommended Motion: Move to recommead City Council approval of the 8 ½ foot variance request due to the irregular shape of the lot, and the proposal is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Attachments: · Completed application form; Site Survey Plan; Plat Map; and Public Notice CITY OF COLUHBIA HEIGHTS Application Rezonin$ Var£ance PrivacyFence Conditional Use permit Subd£v£sion Approval S~e Plan Approval Other S treet Address of Subject Property, 2. Lesal Description of Subject'Proper~y: Applicant~ Name OwneT: Description of Request: setback Variance 6. Zoninpi: Applicable City Ordinance Number Present Zoning' Present U.e ~ (c~f~_ ~ReasoR for Request: attached garage Section Proposed Zoning EA~ Proposed Use ~---~5~-.- to al,low the construction of an add[~fon-.!on east side of Acknovledsme~t and Signature: The undersigned hereby represents upon all. of the penalties of lay. for the pUrpose of ~nduc~ns the City of Columbia Heights to take the action here~n requested, that all statements herein are true and that all york herein mentioned rill be done ~n accordance vi,h She Ordinances of the Ci,y of Columbia Heiih, s and the lews of the S,ate .f. Luneso's.X~~ /~,/¢ $£,natur-e of Applicant :.~~ ~' Da,e, 7 ~ Taken By:_ ?/ F~ CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY BEL .~AR 8~'ILDERS, ' II~,,t ;' ... 105.o DESCRIPTION: Lot [2, .Block 2, HILLTOP THIRD UNIT · .;..~...-- . ., . · · . ~ ,:,,. :. :.. :~.~'::.--',...:.~ ... . Ye hereby certi.fy thai t~|is is a true and correct representation of.a survey of the boundaries of the .land alcove described and.. of :the ·local.ion of ail b. ulJding~ f any, thereon,'and ail vislble".encro;~chments, if.any, fr~n or on. said and.' 1965. ' EGAN, FIELD & NOW^K )ated this.. 1.st clay of,.....^Dril · -... . i I · No ~862 No 1694-2 ,50, R. 24 1600 1610 1620 1630 KORDIAK ."- 665 1675, 1705 1~,.15 1725i 1735 1805 1825 FAIRWAY 4.848 4838 . 4,832 4'826 '1'820 FAIR CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: August 14, 2000 AGENDA SECTION: CONSEli, IT ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO:~' License Department ~r~ __ APPROW~,L ITEM: License Agenda BY: Kathryn Pepin ~[v"'DAT~~ ....o: Attached is the business license agenda for the August 14, 2000 City Council meeting. The applications for Contractors are new applicants and are recommended for approval. In addition, there is an application for a new cigarette/tobacco license for the store at 2325 N.E. 37th Place due to proposed change in ownership. At the top of the license agenda you will notice a phrase stating '*Signed Waiver Form Accompanied A~plicatioW'. This means that the data privacy form has been submitted as required. If not submitted, certain information cannot be released to the public. REC(]~DED MOTION: Move to approve the 2000. items as listed on the business license agenda for August 14, COUNCIL ACTION: TO CITY COUNCIL August 14, 2000 *Signed Waiver Form Accompanied Application BUSINESS LICENSE AGENDA BUILDING OFFICIAL ge CONTRACTORS *American Fence *Crosstown Sign *Ebert Plumbing *Fred's Plumbing Larson Plumbing, Inc. *Sundance Construction, Inc. TJP Construction, Inc. *Timco Construction, Inc. *Twin City Furnace Co. * R. Wetterlund & Sons ADDRESS 3546 N.E. 3" St. 10166 Central Ave. N.E. 7613 Bacon Drive 1324- 1" St. N. 3095- 162" Lane 8922- 42" Ave. N. 4175 Lovell Rd.,//134 14700- 28~" Ave. N. 1464 Selby Ave. 8432 Able St. N.E. FEES S50.O0 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 POLICE DEPT. CIGARETTF./T~ACCO SALES *Taleb Wazwaz dlbla Discount Tobacco 2325 N.E, 37~ Place 100.00 license.ag BF;,:C F:' 1' NANCIAI... SYSTEM 08/10/2000 14:12:00 F:'UND DESCR I F'T I ON 101 201 202 203 204 205 212 213 225 235 240 250 265 270 276 278 387 401 402 415 601 602 603 604 609 631 632 634 65:L 70:1. 720 880 881 883 884 885 887 GE:NEF;:AL COMM[JNI'rY DEVELOPMENT FUND ANOKA COUNTY CDBG PARKVIEW VII..I_A NORTH ECONOM.IC DE:VELOPMENT AUTH SECTION 8 STATE Ail) MAINTENANCE F'ARKVIEW VILLA SOUTH CABLE TELEVISIOW RENI'AL HO~J8 ING L. IBRARY COl_ HGHTS AFTER SCHOOL. ENRI CONF'I 8CATED/FORFE I TED PROP DARE PROJECT LOCAl_ LAW ENFORCE BLK GRANT JUVIENIL.E JUSTICE GRAN'r G.O. IMF'ROVMENT BOWl) 1999A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS STATE Ail) CONSTRUCTION CAPITAL. IMPROVEMENT - PIP WATFR UTILITY SEWER U'rlLITY REFUSE F'UND STORM SEWER UTILITY L. I QUOR WATER I:UND DEBT SERVICE SEWER FUND DEBT SERVICE STORM SE. WER DEBT SERVICE WATER CONSTRUCTION FUND CENTRAl~. GARAGE DATA PROCESSING F'ERMI T .?~JI~CI.~ARGE [;ONTRI BUI'ED PROJE£;TS--.RE[.~ CONTRIBUTED F'ROJECTS-"-GEN INSURANCE ESCROW INVESTMENT TRUST FLFX BENEFIT TRUST FUND 'I"O'I"AL. ALL. FUhlI)S BANI< RECAP: BAW I< NAME: /-/. ,4./5) C. he ck History DI SBURSE:ME:NTS 66,382.33 587 .. 36 251.28 3,813.25 1 .~, 603.62 43,634.. 13 22.6:1. 1 :, 085.07 6,521.81 427.69 16,917.2.5 3,957,,34 245.10 21 ,, 57 187,,01 26 ,, 78 16,821.25 I , 504.42 108,135.94 413,605.59 7,044.42 54,169.95 I ,055.74 2,558.. 65 264,476.06 19,956.41 757.13 17,485.21 47,017..03 22 .,, 246.29 I ,310.09 410..78 I, 786.11 I ,430.71 8,623.83 439,382 ,, 29 I , 500,000.00 1,895.88 3,077,357.. 98 D I SBURSEMENTS BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF COL. LJMBIA NEIGHTS 08/10/2000 '1.4 GL540R-V06.27 F'AGE .1, Check History 8/14/00 COUNCIL. LISTING BAN K VENDOR CHE:'C K NUI'IBEI;~ AMOUNT BAN K CHEC' K I NG AC'C'OUI, I'T' NORTHEAE;T STATE BANK AI...BEI~T I NE/ROT I M I AI...L SAINT8 BRAND DISTRIB AT & '¥ CONSUMER I_EA.<~E BE:EL. BOY BAR SUF'F:'LY BEI...LBOY COIBF'ORATION CARL. SON OFFICE PRODLJCTS CHISAGO LAKES DISTRIBLJTI CHR I STENSEN/RI CHARD CITIES ~7 CITY PAGES CITY WIDE WINDOW SERVICE COCA-COL. A BOTTLING MIDWE CONVERGIENT COMM~JNICATION CI:{OSBY/KATHERI NE S DAVES SPORT SNOP IEAGL. E WINE COMPANY EAST SIDE BEVERAGE CO EGAN-.MCKAY EL. ECTRICAL. CO F:'I...OD I N/MARV I N GENUINE PARTS/NAPA AUTO GRIGGS---COOPIER & CO HOHENSTEINS INC HOSF'ITALITY SUPPL. Y COMPA HOUSE/AN I TA IKON OI:F'ICE SOL{JTION ISD ~192 i.;OI'JN~ON BROS. LIQUOR CO. JCINNSON F:'APER & SUPPLY C JOHNSON/GERALD JUL. KOWS K I/CHERYL. KL. AUSHANN/JOYCE KLJIETHER DIST. CO. LAI=EBER/JOD l E LANI)WEHR/KEL. L.Y LANGE/DAVE & KATIqY HARK V]:I I)IST. MEDICINE I_AKIE TOURS ME ~ SSNER/R ~ CHARD METROCALL '- ATT MESSAGIN M I N N E G A 8 C C) MINNESOTA GI=OA - TOM KIEl.. MINNESOTA YOUTFI ATHLE:TIC MN CI'JIEI=S OF POL..ICIE EDUC MOEL..L. ER/KAREN N S F' I'IE:EDHAM DISTRIBUTING CO 87404 I , 500,000.00 87405 726.00 87406 487.00 87407 47 .. 82 87408 677.98 87409 6,302 ,. 56 87410 198.00 8741. 1 518 ,, 30 87412 280. O0 8741. 3 .1., 560 ,, 00 87414 4;:;0,00 874.1. 5 i?.4 ,. 50 87416 608,45 87417 66. 817. 87418 867.00 874 .1. 9 56 ,, :~6 87420 2,154.50 87421 30,930.45 87422 77,626.84 87423 269 ,. O0 874;::4 57. O0 87425 .1., 540.16 87426 3,856.70 87427 4.1...92 87428 5,00 87429 14.69 87430 30.00 87431 11, .1. 76 .. 52 87432 5,404..1. 1 87433 25 .. 00 87434 209.81 87435 25 .. O0 87436 5,146.20 87437 36.00 87438 18.00 87439 356.00 87440 12,989.75 87441 .1. :, 755 ,, O0 8744;:: 30,00 87443 66.55 87444 I, 233.73 87445 200 .. 00 87446 200.00 87447 120.00 87448 50.00 8744<? 4,726.79 87450 128.75 BRC FINANCIAL ,~YSTEM 08/10/2000 14 Check Nisto~y 8/1.4/00 COUNCIL L. ISTING CITY OF COI_UMBIA HEIGHI'.~ GL. 540R--V06.27 F'AGE 2 BAN K VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BAN I< CHIEC K ~r. NG AC. COUNI' NORTH STAR ICE NOI~'I'I4EI:(N All:( 0 ' L..IE~:ARY/H I CFIEL. I_E OI-,~ON/KAREN PAUSTIS & SONS F'IEF:'S I'-COI_A"-7 UF' F'ETTY CASH "- MARY DUGI)AL F'HILI..IP~,S WINE & SF'IRT,C.~ F' I N KEF~TON SF.i:RV I CE GI'~OUP I='R I OR WINE C-}UAL.:£TY WINIT & SF'IR:I. TS I~:AD I,c.-3~,~[3N ARROWWOOD 8EH 81='OI~:TIN[3 GOODS INC SWAI~I~ON/L.EE U ,~ WIE,~'[' COMMUNICATIONS VOSS k I GHT.I: NG AF'I=INITY F'LIJS F'-EDI.=:RAL.. CF( AF'SCI~IE=. DE=.':I._ T A DENTAl_ F:IR8T £,~OMMLJNITY CREDIT LJ ICMA RETIREMEN'Ir' 'T'l=(I. JC,~'T' 45 MN CHII...D ,c.~I..JF. PORT PAYMENT NCI='ERS GROLJF' I...II=E INS NORWEi:E~T BANK -' PAYROLL. A OF(CHARD TRI..J8T COMI='ANY F'ERA I='RLJDENTIAL. LI:I="E INSI. JRANC RAMSDIEL. L.. ~CHOLARC~HIr=' F'I..JN 8TANDAI~D INSUI~ANCE COMI"A UN:£ON 4c~ UNITtED WAY I,IORTHEAST STATE BANK ABEl=: I='I=(OI='F=I~TY MANAGEMENT ACCAF' AL BIEI=(T I NE/ROT I M AI,IDE R~c~ON/F;~OL.AN E AF'ACI--IE V.T. LL.A[31E AI='T--COI~I,<~O BAL. L. ENT.I:NE/BRLJCE G BE:RG PROI='ERTIES BI...AHN :1: K/VANCE:: [:;HATRE I/MO8TAI=~A CI--IR I ST E NSF.~ N/R.1.' C;I-IAF;~D CRE8T VIEW L..UTI4ERAN HOI~IE [:;R0,S; B Y / KATF{ER I NE: DAI...~ETH/MAR ILYN L.':: £.] G E~ / ,.1A H E ,c.~ 87451 824. il2 87452 ?.¢?2 ,, 88 8745il 10.00 87454 215.01 87455 ~'.~4.00 87456 501 ,, 87457 1 ;.': Jl. OJ:l 87458 1~, 710 ,, 8745~ ;:100. ~4 87480 704 ,, ~4 87461 I. 8~7.0~ 87462 188.00 8746~:i 700.00 874~4 i, 486 ,, ~0 87465 12~. 0~:I 87466 1!. ~)52.07 874~7 40. ~ 1 87468 ~] 50 ,, 00 874~ I, 005.74 87470 4. ;i!J:i8.10 87471 1 ~ ~10.00 87472 10,71~0 ,, 80 87475 808.1~ 87474 506 ,, 00 87475 150~740.47 87476 &. 41~!. 87477 ~!4,185.7~ 87478 575. ~5 8747~ 58 ,, ;:! 5 87480 85~ ,, 57 87481 ~0~.00 87482 47.00 8748~i 55~020.00 87484 0.00 87485 Jl, ;:!81.00 87486 726.00 87487 ~!~0 ,, 00 87488 &~B8. O0 8748~ 471 ,, 00 874~0 477.00 874~1 428.00 874~1! 806.00 874~I ~04.00 874~4 16~:~ ,, 00 874~) 5 8~7 ,, 00 874~6 1.25~ ,, 00 874~7 44;:!. O0 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 08/10/2000 14 Check History 8/1.4/00 COUNCIL LISTING CITY OI= COLUMBIA HI'.-.ZI(31.~T,S GL540R..-.V06.27 PAGE BAN K VENi) OR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BAI,tK [~;HECKING ACCOLJI,IT FANG/KWEI-WU I:'ENNE/AVEI~Y I= I NDE[LC/DONALD I"l...OD I N/MARV I N GROI~IE[ K/THOI~IAS I'~NKTON/I_EDOR~ HANSEN/E:'.DWIN & I)OROTHY HANSON/DENN I,~ HINE~S/[3ORI)ON E HOIUM/VERNON S JOHNSON/CONN I E KHAN/MUJTABA KI...EINMAN REALTY CO KOSTER/KENNIETH KOWAL. ZE K/HARVEY L_ANGE/DAVE & KATHY I...ARSON/DAN I EL W I._A~ KY/DAV I D I...E W I S/MAR K MCNUTT/I~ARY JO MDC 2000 ME 18SNER/R I CHARD M I I...L. ER F E RRE I RA/M I CHELL. E~ I~ODELL/PAUL F'EARSON/KEN I::'EI~I~Y/C I NDY F'ETE~RS Pl..ACE INVESTMENTS F:' I NG/I_UU R I F'A I/MAHMOUND ~ATHRIE/ALICIA M SHOKE I R/MOHAMEI) 8KALICKY/JAMES 8TAUCH/LE~L. AND oWANSON/BRADL. E.Y J THOMPSON/JEROME K TOWNHOUSE-.AF'T MANAGEMENT TR I S KO/FRAN K UTKE F'ROPEIBTY MANAGEMIENT VAN BLARICON/STANLEY YOUNGREN/DAWN Z I C KE~RMANN/L. OR I Z I C KIERMANN/WAI_ TIER ACCAP AWWA BEC K/DARYL. BEI...LBOY BAR SUF'PLY BELL,BOY CORPORATION 87498 452. O0 87499 602.00 87500 740. O0 87501 406 ,, 00 87502 552. O0 8750~l 659 .. 00 87504 544.00 87505 658 . O0 87506 465.00 87507 i'::67 ,, 00 87508 804 . O0 87509 52.8 ,, 00 87510 123.00 87511 66 ,, 00 87512 2:, 302. O0 87513 356.. 00 87514 228.00 87515 408 ,, O0 87516 442.00 87517 305. O0 87518 316.00 87519 34 ,, 00 87520 375.00 8752.1 2., 147.00 87522 329..00 87523 43,, 00 87524 4,293.00 87525 146.00 87526 515,00 87527 779.00 87528 449.00 87529 252 ,, 00 87530 2,083. O0 8753 ]. 806 ,, 00 87532_' 78.00 87533 1,427,, 00 87534 294. O0 8'7535 440 ,, 00 87536 1,016.00 87537 1. 65., 00 87538 48.00 87539 461 ,, 00 87540 588. O0 87541 155 ,, 00 87542 9.00 87543 68 ,, 06 87544 6,751.05 BRC F'INANCIAI... SYSTFM 08/10/2000 14 Check History 8/.1.4100 COUNCIl... LISTING CI'FY C)F (]OLUMB IA HEIGHTS GL 540R--V06.2.7 PASE 4 BAN K VENDOR CFIECK NUMBI:]R AMO(JNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNI' BRADLEY REAL ESTATES INC BRAY/L I Z COLIJMBIA HEIGHTS I (]OF'El_AND/JUL. I A DAVE8 SPORT SHOP 8ENUINE F'ARTS/NAF'A AUTO HANSE N/KEVI N INSI DIE CORNER [JMF'IRES ITl_ PATCH COMPANY INC JOHNSON BROS. LIQUOR CO. I...UND % CINDY CFIRISTENSEN MENARDS CASHWAY LUMBER-F' M I DGL. EY/CRA ~ G MINNESOTA BRASS INC DR~JM MI NNESOTA COACHES N S F' NORTFI METRO MAYORS ASSOC NUNEMAKER/RACHIEI_ C)L.SON/KEL. I...Y J I::'ETTY CASH '- CINDI WII...LF' PETTY CASFI -' GARY BRAATE PETTY CASH - KAREN IqOEI..I... F'FIIL. L. IPS WINE & 8F'IRT8 PITNEY BOWES I...OU 18V I LI...E QUALITY WINE & SPIRIT8 IEeE I MANN/HARR I ET SCHI EF'FER/BARBARA TAYLOR/KEN THOMPSON/CFIAR1... ~ E TROU'r/CHERYL TRUF'E/DEL. ORES U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS UNGL. AUB/JEROME VAN WYCK/SUE VERI ZON WIREL. ESS WILLAMETTE INDUSTRIES IN VAL. L. EYFA~ R AAA AWARDS AL..EXON/DANA APACHE VILLAGE AF'T--CONSO BEL. L.BOY CORPORATION CHR I STOF'HERSON/L I SA CITY OF EAGAN CLARK FOODSERVICE INC COCA-{)OI...A BOTTLING MIDWE EMERGENCY MEDICAL F'RSDUC IE~XF'L.ORER POST ~554 87545 10,848.85: 87546 40 ,..1. 5 87547 4,506.83 87548 30.00 87549 249.2:1. 87550 7.1.. 26 87551 74.71 87552 .1., 5~'~9., O0 87553 69.40 87554 3,790 .. 01 87555 25.94 87556 47.56 87557 230.58 87558 500.00 87559 59;..'.. O0 87560 225 ,, 45 87561 120. O0 87562 9 .. 00 87563 8.68 87564 154.48 87565 60.88 87566 96..1.7 87567 4.1. 1.47 87568 2 .1. 4 ,, 00 87569 :1,839.69 87570 250 ,, 00 87571 18.00 87572 .1. 5.00 87573 28.00 87574 9. O0 87575 48.50 87576 427 ,, 80 87577 ;::7.31 87578 9 ,, O0 87579 43.38 87580 581.74 87581 2,1;::6. ;::5 87582 247 ,, 70 87583 8.20 87584 2.13 ,, 00 87585 4,840.17 87586 283 ,, 86 87587 754.00 87588 762 ,, 01 87589 485.55 87590 2.58.61 87591 1,650.00 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 08/10/2000 14 BAN K L~ENDOR CITY OF COI_UMBIA HEIOHT.~3 Check Hist. ory GL540R-V06.27 PAGE 5 8/.1.4/00 COLJNCII_ LISTING CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANI< CHIECK IN(3 AC;COUNT FELEGY/DARI..ENE I= I RCHOW/I~ACI4EL 8ENERAI_ PARTS & 8UPF'LY C L~IENUINE F'ARTS/NAI='A AUTO HAEG/O'UDY HAYNUSXKRIST INE I-IOME DEF:'OT #2802 HOSPiTaLITY SUF'I='LY COHI='~ IKON OF:F'ICE SOL. LJTION :I:NS[DE CORNER UHI='[~IES ~OHNSON ~R()S. L.I(~UOR CO. CTOHNS(3N P~F'E~ ~ SUPPLY C ,~OL..L.Y/DON~LD K~STEN/H~Y KR~CHT/BETTY KRAMER/BONNIE KROL. L./LORRA I NE LEF' I STO/RUSS MAGEE/L I NDA MA~NUSON/,)ANIET MEDICINE I_.AKE TOURS MENARDS CASHWAY LUMBER-F M I DCO MINNIESOTA COACHES Iq S F' NORI_EIN/KIM ~ I_ORI IqUNEMA KER/RACNEL I='EI='SI-COI_A-7 UP F'ETERSON/CAROL I='HILI..IPS WINE & SPIRTS F'OOL.E/,]OANN {~UALITY WINE ~ 8F'IRITS RADIO SNACK RODDY/W I LC I AM SE K I ZOV I C/MUAMER STAN'S DOOR SERVICE INC 8TAUCH/L.EI_.AND ~TLIRDEVANT/~IOIE A T I<ACH/PATR I C I A U 8 WEST COMMUNICATION8 VAN HAUEN/ESTHE~R VERIZON WII~EI_.ESS V I S A WINE MERCHANTS AFFINITY PLUS FEDERAL CR I=IRST COMMUNITY CREDIT U ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST 45 875~22 1~5. 87593 8.49 875~4 102.24 87595 4.35 87596 40. O0 87597 .1.00., O0 875~8 54.04 87599 1~ ~ 766.87 87600 128.80 87601 266 ,, 00 87602 11 ~ 894.78 87603 402 .. 56 87604 25.47 87605 90.00 87606 16. O0 87607 16 ,, 00 87608 39. O0 87609 130.00 87610 450.00 87611 15 ,, 00 87612 5~ 298..00 87615 145.50 87614 372.93 87615 639.00 87616 50. 87617 100.00 87618 16.00 87619 407.50 87620 46.00 87621 5 ~ 123.38 87622 16.00 876~3 946 ,, 52 87624 11.15 8761~ 5 ~6.00 87626 308. 87~27 0.57 87629 950.71 87630 1 87631 117.24 87632 123.50 87~34 966.5~ 87635 70.89 87636 87637 1 ~910.00 87638 10 ~ 868.34 BRC F-INANCIAL SYSTEM CITY OF' COLUMBIA I'~I'.".".IGI'~I',S 08/:1. 0/2000 .1.4 GL540R-.V06.27 F'AGE 6 Check History 8/14/00 COUNCIl_ LISTING BAN K VENDOR CI-IEC K NUMBER AMOUNT BANI< CI.~IECK ING ACCOUNT LM[;IT I..MCIT .... NF' MEDI CA SENI GR MN CI~ILD SUPF'ORT F'AYMENT IqORWEST BANK -" F:'AYROLL A ORCI~AI:~D 'TRUST COMF'ANY PERA F'LJBLIC MANAGERS ASSOCIAT I. JN I ON 320 UNITED WAY WI DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE~ A & C SMALL ENGINE ACE HARDWARE ADT AID E~L. ECTRIC SERVICE INC ALBINSON AMER I F"R I DE ANGKA COUNTY AT'[ORNEY ANOKA COUNTY LIBRARY ARAMARK ARIES INDUE;TRIES INC BAKER & TAYLOR BAKER & TAYLOR ENTERTAIN BAI'TERY CITY INC BAUER BUILT TIRE & BATTE BIFF 'S, INC. BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS~ INC BLUE RIBBON CHEM-DRY BLUEMEL. S TREE SERVICE BOOK WI~OI_ESAL. ERS INC BOOKMEN INC/I'HE BOI~tB[]UGHTS CORF'ORAT ION BOYER TRUCK PARTS BRAKE & EQUIPMENT WAREI-IO BRODART BRW INC BUSINESS REF'ERENCE SERVI CENTRAL ROOFING COMF'ANY CHET'S SNOES CNISAGG CAI<E8 DISTRIBUTI CITY PAGES CITY WIDE I_OCKSMITHING CLARK F'OODSERVICE INC COCA-COL. A BOTTLING MIDWE COI...UMBIA HEIGHTS RENTAL. COLUMBIA HGTS""I=RIDL. IEY KI COMP USA INC 87639 20,888.06 87640 15,592.47 87641 431.50 87642 808.16 87643 155,761.00 87644 6,337.20 87645 24,321.33 87646 50..00 87647 931.00 87648 47.00 87649 115.59 87650 9.92 87651 510.61 87652 90.53 87653 428.97 87654 40.06 87655 148.01 87656 163.40 87657 2,086.85 87658 54.56 87659 193.08 87660 3,881.03 87661 116.00 87662 363.67 87663 161.71 87664 2,316..32 87665 2,121.55 87666 164.75 87667 7,526.67 87668 232.23 87669 126.38 87670 2,196.92 87671 56.41 87672 158.63 87673 125.01 87674 30,363.38 87675 523.25 87676 287..00 87677 480.90 87678 2,599.78 87679 840.00 87680 224.00 87681 290.48 87682 900.78 87683 15.98 87684 235 ,, 91 87685 122.41 BRC FINANCIAL SYSTEM 08/:10/2000 .1.4 Check Nistory 8/14/00 COUNCIL LISTING CITY OF' COLUMBIA I"IEIOHTS GL540R-'V06.27 PAGE 7 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BAN K CHIEC, K.l: NG ACCC)tJN'f' CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIP CORF'OF(A'f'IE EXF'RIESS CRE:IGHTON,BRADLE:Y & 6UZZ D ROCK CENTER DANKA OF:'F:'FICE IMAGING CO DAVIES WATER EQUIF' CO. DEFIN OIL. DEI...IEGARD l(]OI... CO. DEMCO DEMCO MEDI~ DOUGS TV ~ ~PPI_.I~NCE DRAIN DOCTOR E:~GL.E ~INE COMPANY lEaST SIDE BEVERAGE CO E:BE:RT PLUMBING ELECTION SYSTEI~S & SOF'T~ E]...E:CTRIC SERVICE COMPANY IEXF"ER I ~N F'~CTS ON FILE I=EDEI~L SIGNALS CORF" F:'IDEL. ITY SERVICES INC FIRST I=IN~NCI~I_ TITLE ~G I::'L.E~X COMF:"ENS~TION ~ INC I=O(]US NIE~SF"~F"EI~S F'R I DL. EY--COL. UMB I ~ HE I Gl-ITS (~ & K SERVICES GALE GROUP/THE (~:NER~L BOOK COVERS GENUINE P~RTS/N~F"~ [~LIEN~OOD IN~LE~OOD GOODIN CO. (~[]F"I.JER ST~TI~ GNE.-C~I_L. IN [~F:'IX SHOPPE (3RIGGS-COOF"ER & CO H~RDRIMES INC H~RMON GI_~SS & GL.~ZING H~RVEST P~INT HEINRICH ~NVIELOF"E CORF" HEURUNG/MI KE HIGI~SMITI~ ~NC "- UF:'ST~I~T HOHENSTEINS INC NOME DEF'OT ff2802 HOOVER WHEEl... ALIGNMENT HOUCHEN BINDERY LTD HUgSON MAP8 ICMA PRODUCT I:rULI=ILLIqlENT INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCN IN 87686 55.73 87687 34.09 87688 5,902.50 87689 80.89 87690 342.42 87691 604.59 87692 10,107.73 87693 148.98 87694 45.26 87695 279..45 87696 49.57 87697 385.25 87698 1,046.34 87699 25,774.45 87700 74.75 87701 3,140..00 87702 1,442.00 87703 263.95 87704 41.27 87705 33.35 87706 4,590.49 87707 25..31 87708 120.75 87709 1,565.17 87710 235.90 87711 428.99 87712 630.00 87713 349.90 87714 177.52 87715 76.21 87716 10.09 87717 195.20 877.1.8 77 .. 50 87719 5,225.65 87720 407,103.48 87721 298 ,. 13 87722 1,123.00 87723 500.56 87724 100.00 87725 334.00 87726 5,890.67 87727 181.11 87728 34.95 87729 77.20 87730 26.30 87731 94.45 87732 143.75 BRC FINANCIAl_ SYSTEM CITY 01-- COI_UMBIA NEIGHTS 08/10/;'..:000 14 GL540R-V06.27 PAGE S Check Nistory 8/14/00 COUNCIl_. LISTING BAN K VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BANK CHECKING ACCOUNT INTEGRATED LOSS CONTROL. IF:'C F'RINTING J I NDRA/PATR I [; I A JOE SCNMITZ BOOKSIELL. EIB JOHNSON BROS. LIQUOR CO,, K MART KANZ &/TIMOTHY KATH FUEl.. OIL SERVICE KENNEDY & GRAVEN KUETHER DIST. CO. KUSTOM SIGNALS INC LANO EQUIPMENT CO. LAUBE PHOTO & DIGITAL IM L. IEN/JEANETTE t...OCATORS & SUPPLIES I..OFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEM8 I...YI_.E SIGN8 INC MAC QUEEN EQUIF'MEN'[ CO. MARK VII I)IST. MCM INC MEDTOX LABORATORIES, INC MENARDS CASHWAY I..UMBER--F METROCALL. -.' ATT MESSAGIN I~ETROF'OI_.ITAN COUNCIl._ WAS MIDWAY FORD MIDWEST ASPNALT CO. MINITEX .... ATTN MARY GARC MINNEAF'OLIS OXYGEN CO. MINNEAPOLIS SAW CO. MINNESOTA CITY/CNTY MGMT MINNESOTA MAYORS ASSOCIA MN DEPT OF ADMINISTRATIO MN NURSERY & L. ANI)SCAPE A MN STATE TREAS BUILDING MTI DISTRIBUTING MUI...T ICHANNEL NEWS I'1 S P NOBLE NUI~SIERY NORTH CENTRAL. AMBULANCE NORTN METRO NUMANE 80CIE I,IORTH METRO MAYORS ASSOC NORTI-4 STAR ICE NORTHERN AIR OFFICE DEPOT ONVOY F'ARK SUF'PLY INC I::'C SOL. UT IONS 87733 591.00 87754 i?.25 ,, 77 87755 70.00 87736 130.14 87757 11 .,, 537.62 87738 52.75 87759 100.00 87740 7 ~ 417 ,, 37 87741 1~418.50 87742 45. 597 ,, 51 87743 159.45 87744 55 ,, 50 87745 540.00 87746 100.00 87747 57.77 87748 255.85 87749 505.29 87750 567.18 87751 12,902.55 87752 817 ,, 01 87753 43.00 87754 404.70 87755 17.09 87756 52,552.00 87757 843.65 87758 4,899.84 87759 546.00 87760 4.79 87761 80.. 85 87762 83.79 87763 20.00 87764 405.08 87765 60.00 87766 410.78 87767 122.28 87768 59.50 87769 75.22 87770 10.65 87771 347.00 87772 955.56 87773 120.00 87774 879.30 87775 876.71 87776 1,921.30 87777 74.85 87778 51.24 87779 1,703.50 BRC FINANCIAL. SYSTFM 08/:l 0/%.'.000 14 Check History 8/14/00 COUNCIL LISTING CITY OF COI_.UMBIA I~EIGHI'S GL. 540R-..V06.27 PAGE: 9 BANK VENDOR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BAI,I K CH.F.]CK I NG ACCOUNI' PE'".ACHTREE BUSINESS F'RODU F:'NILLIF'S WINE & SPIRTS F'IONF.=.ER RIM & WHEEL CO. F:'LEASAN'F CO PUBLICA'FIONS F'L.E:TCFIE:F~8 F'LLJNKETT ' 8, INC F'OOL.S I DE F:'RENT ICI= HALL I::'F~ I OR W I NE: F:'ROEX - WOLF CAMEF(A RADIO SHA[;K RAMSEY COUNTY ATTORNI=Y/T RAPIT PRINTING - FRIDLEY RCF' INDUSTRIES RECOREiD BOO KS RIETAIL DATA SYSTEMS OF M ROSEI)AL.E~ CHEV RUET l I MANN/ROBEir(T SCHEI..E:'.N GRAY ELECTRIC ~,~;CNINDL. ER ELEVATOR COF(P SCOTT/VERNON ~.~ERCO L. AB,~ SIGN I..ANGUAGE & GOLDEN A 80CIETY OF MUNICIPAI._/TI"IE SQUE~E~[')EE PRO WINDOW CI...EA ST I='AUL-DED/TNE ST PAUL.-WC/THE .t~TAR TR I BUNE STATE TREASURERS OF'F'ICE STIElii]... TECH INC STRATE~GIC INSIGHT COMF'AN · ~i¥¥F~FZICI"IER GUN'S INC/DON SUN PUBLICATION SY,SI'EMS SUF'PLY INC. TAUTGES, REDPATFI, & CO.., TEiCHII=AX BUSINESS SYSTEM TELEPHONE ANSWERING CENT TENNANT COMF'ANY TOLl.. COMPANY TRACY PRINTING TUBBS/MARSI"IA UN I FORMS UNL IM I TIED INC UNI TED RENTAI...S UNIVERSITY OF MINNE'."SOTA US F'IL.T~-i~R/WATER PRO VERIZON WIRELESS WAGER ' S IN[;., 87780 86.00 87781 5 :, 851 .. 95 87782 14.61 87783 17.78 87784 I, 628.99 87785 70 ,, ::lO 87786 2.72.43 87787 49,,44 87788 1,608.56 87789 34 ,. 98 87790 13.83 87791 22., 6.1. 87792 162.41 87793 I , 848.05 87794 220.90 87795 197.20 87796 71.09 87797 35 ,, 00 87798 61.77 87799 178..62 87800 2,564.80 87801 4,204.77 87802 34.08 8780,3 50 ,, 00 87804 195.85 87805 500 ,, 00 87806 8,123.83 87807 .1., 8;::4.02 87808 81.70 87809 282 ,, 23 87810 800.00 87811 2,087.83 87812 218 ,,05 87813 12;~.61 87814 3,999.25 87815 8 ,, 00 87816 169.50 87817 .1.80.77 87818 21.57 87819 200 ,, 53 87820 75.73 87821 849 ,, 44 87822 50.48 87823 305.00 87824 47,101.03 87825 :~28 ,, .1.7 87826 14~:~. 88 BRC. F-INANCIAL SYSTEM 08/:l 0/%.'.000 14 Check Himtory 8714/00 COUNCIL LISTING CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHT,~ GI_..540R-.V06.27 F'AGE 10 BANK VENDGR CHECK NUMBER AMOUNT BAN K CHECKING AC[;OL~NT WARNING LITES OF MINN. I WESTEI2N BADGE & TROF'HY C WHI.:.]EL.ER CGN,SiGL. I DATED WII...I_AMIETTE INDUSTRIES IN WINE CC)MF'ANY/THE WW ~RAIN~ER Z:I: E:(3L.E:R I NC 87827 585.43 87828 38.09 878,"!~ I, 477.2:8 87830 i?.68.91 87831 69.68 87832 132.. 96 87833 157. ~4 3,077,357.98 *** CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of Au_mast 14. 2000 AGENDA SECTION: PUBL I C HEAR I NG S ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER Fire APPROVAL NO: ~, A, ITEM: Close Hemring BY: Dana A1 exon~~./~ BB ~~ gY~D Rental License Revocation DATE: August 2, 2000 NO: The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against Nurhan Kasar regarding rental property at 1215-17 Circle Terrace for failure to meet the requirements of the Housing Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of August 14, 2000. The public heating on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code and paid all fees and penalties. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by N~arhan Kasar Regarding Rental Property at 1215-17 Circle Terrace in that the Property is in Compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Il/ Close Hearing Council Letter CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of August 14, 2000 AGENDA SECTION: PUBL I C H£AR I NGS ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER ~ ~ Fire APPROVAL NO: t ITEM: Close Hearing BY: Dana Alexon Rental License Revocation DATE: August 8, 2000 NO: The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against Abdul Rashid regarding rental property at 4341 Tyler Place for failure to meet the requirements of the Homing Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to commence at the City Council meeting of August 14, 2000. The public hearing on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code and paid all fees and penalties. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by Abdul Rashid Regarding Rental Property at 4341 Tyler Place in that the Property is in Compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Close Hearing Council Letter CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of Au~st 14, 2000 AGENDA SECTION: P U BL I C H EAR I NG S ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER Fire APPROVAL NO: ¢, C. ITEM: Close Hearing BY: Dana Alexon B '~' ~ _ Rental License Revocation~~.~O JZ)~) DATE: August 8, 2000 NO: The matter of the revocation of the license to operate a rental unit(s) within the City of Columbia Heights against F.C. Celtic LLC, Inc. regarding rental property at 3849 Central Avenue for failure to meet the requirements of the Housing Maintenance Codes was previously scheduled to conunence at the City Council meeting of August 14, 2000. The public hearing on this property may now be closed in that the owner has brought the property/building into compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code and paid all fees and penalties. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to Close the Public Hearing Regarding the Revocation or Suspension of the Rental License Held by F.C. Celtic LLC, Inc. Regarding Rental Property at 3849 Central Avenue in that the Property is in Compliance with the Housing Maintenance Code. COUNCIL ACTION: Close Hearing Council Letter CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS lviecun ~ o~: ~u~usr i% zuuu AGENDA SECTION: ~ ~n~ces O~G~AT~G DEP~TMENT: CITY ~AGER ~d Resolutions ~ Co~W Development ~PROV~ / ITEM: Adopt R~olution 2000-57, To set a BY: Ke~e~ R. ~de~on ~ ~[~ Public He~g for Esmblis~ent of DATE: Au~st 10, 2000L' g ~ R~evel~ment T~ Disffict ISSUE STATE~: This a request for City Council adoption of Resolution 2000-57, which is a Resolution calling for a Public Hearing on the establishment of a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District and TIF plan therefore, and a modified Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown CED Development Project. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: We have attached for Council review and adoption a copy of Resolution 2000-57 which was prepared by the City and EDA's Legal Counsel, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered. The purpose of the Resolution is to call for a Public Hearing for the creation of a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District and preparation of a Tax Increment Financing Plan for the proposed Transition Block Redevelopment Project. The Resolution identifies the creation of one redevelopment district which will encompass the proposed site of the twenty two unit affordable rental town homes, the fit~y unit assisted senior housing development, to be located at the comer of 42nd and Central Avenue NE., the existing home at 4157 Jackson Street, and the NEI College of Technology at 825 41't Avenue NE. The Resolution specifies that a Public Hearing will be held by the City Council on September 25, 2000 at approximately 7:00 p.m. The establishment of this new redevelopment TIF District will involve the modification of the existing 1997 Downtown CED Revitalization District and 1984 Modified Downtown CED Revitalization District. Staff and consultants will reviewing the implications of modifying these two existing TIF Districts and TIF Plan. RECOMMENDAI'ION: Staff recommends the City Council approve Resolution 2000-57 calling for a Public Hearing for Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District and TIF Plan and modification of the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown CED Redevelopment Project. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to waive the reading of Resolution 2000-57, there being ample copies available to the public. RECOMMENDEI[} MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 2000-57 being a Resolution calling for a Public Hearing on the establishment of a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District and TIF Plan therefore, and a modified Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown CBD Redevelopment Project. RE(~OMMENDEI) MOTION: Move to award the proposal for preparation of the Redevelopment TIF District and TIF Plan therefore, to Springsted Inc., based on their proposal dated August 9, 2000 in the amount not to exceed $5,000; and furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Council to enter into an agreement for the same. Attachments: Resolution 2000-57, and August 9, 2000 Springsted Inc. proposal letter with attached time schedule. COUNCIL ACTION: 1: \Consent\Resolution 2000-57 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Resolution No. 2000-57 RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FIN~C~G DISTRICT AND TIF PLAN THEREFOR, AND A MODIFIED REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE DowNTOWN CBD REDEVELOPMENT PROIECT WHEREAS, the. City of Columbia. H~l'ghts ("City") and its Economic Development Authority ("Authority") have contemplated using tax increment financing CTIF") in order to facilitate construction of housing for senior citizens and persons of low and moderate income pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.179 (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined to consider a modification of the redevelopment plan for the Downtown Central Business District RedeVelopment Project ("Project"), and establishment of a redevelopment TIF District ("TIF District") within the Project area, and to hold a public hearing regarding those actions in accordance with the Acts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE rr RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, that: 1. The Authority, and its staff and consultants, are hereby authorized and directed to cause to be prepared a modification to the redevelopment plan for the Project and a tax increment financing plan for the proposed TIF District, and to file a copy of such documents in City Hall. 2. The City Clerk-Treasurer is authorized and directed to prepare a notice for publication in the City's official newspaper setting a public hearing before the City Council on September 25, 2000 at approx. 7:00p.m. in the council chambers on the Project plan and TIF Plan. The notice shall be published in the newspaper at least 10 but not more than 30 days prior to the public hearing, and shall include a map of the modified Project area and proposed TIF District. 3. The City Manager is authorized and directed to notify the County Commissioner representing the area proposed to be included in the TIF District regarding the proposed district, in accordance with the Act. 4. The City Manager is authorized and directed to transmit a copy of the modified Project plan and the TIF Plan to the County Board and School Board at least 30 days before the date of the public hearing and to take all other actions necessary to bring the Project plan and TIF Plan before the City Council at the time of the public hearing. CL205-11 Approved by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights this 14t~ day of August, 20O0. ATTEST: Mawr City Clerk-Treasurer DIG- 1 $ 4424v 1 CL205-11 2 c H A R 'I' E D 470 Pillsbu .ry Center 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612} 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax http://www, kennedy-graven.¢om DANIEL J. GREENSWEIG Attorney at L~w Direct Dial (612) 337-9231 e-mail: dgmensweig~kennedy-graven.com August 9, 2000 Ken Anderson City of Columbia Heights 590 40* Avenue, NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3835 BY U.S. MAIL Dear Ken: Enclosed is a resolution for adoption for the city council. The resolution calls for a public hearing on a tax increment financing district for the Real Estate Equities project and envisions one redevelopment district. The appropriateness of this depends, of course, on whether the property in question will qualify as a redevelopment district under state law. I understand your building official is assisting you in making that determination. Please let me know if you have any questions. Daniel J. Greensweig DJG: cc: Nick Skarich (w/encl) DJG - 1844291,1 CL205-11 8S E. SEVENTH PLACE SUITE 100 SAINT PAUL, tvbN $$101.2887 651-223-3000 FA,K: 651-223- 3002 AUG SPRINGSTED Pub~ Finana A~Lsors August 9, 2000 Mr. Ken Anderson Community Development Director 590 40~ Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 Re: CrestviewlReal Estate Equities Housing TIF Proposal Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment) District Dear Mr. Anderson: The City of Columbia Heights has requested a proposal for the establishment of a "redevelopment" TIF District for the above referenced housing project. Springsted proposes an hourly billing, not to exceed $5,000, without pdor written authorization of the City. This pdce is based on completing the items listed on the enclosed timeline and anticipates up to two on site visits by Springsted staff assigned to the project. It also assumes the project proceeding under the current assumptions. Should the scope of the work change, Springsted and the City can negotiate adjustments to the proposal at such time. Please feel free to call me with any questions at (651) 223-3053. Thank you. Sincerely, Nick M. 8karich Pr6]ect Menager /St. Paul Office Enclosure SAINT PAUL, MN · MINNEAPOLIS, MN · BROOKF[ELD, WI · APPLETON, WI · OVERLAND PARK, KS · WASHINGTON, DC · DES MOINES, IA F:\DATA\H-Ed\Timeline Minnesota. DOC City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota Tax Increment Financing (Redevelopment) District (CrestviewlReal Estate Equities Project) Time Schedule August 14 (Mon)@ 7:00 p.m. date (day) @ time City Council calls for public hearing (resolution p,,rovided by Kennedy & Graven) On/Before August 15 (Tues) date (day) County Commissioner reCeives notification letter (sent by SPRINGSTED) On/Before August 25 (Fri) date (day) County and School District receive impact letters & draft TIF plan (sent by SPRINGSTED) September 5 (Tues) @ 7:00 p.m. date (day) @ time City Planning Commission reviews TIF documents (TIF documents provided by SPRINGSTED) (resolution provided by Kennedy & Graven) September 11 (Mon) date (day) September 14 (Thurs) Deadline: Sept. 8 (Fri) City Council reviews TIF documents Publication of notice of public hearing (F/CH Focus) (arrangements made by SPRINGSTED) September 19 (Tues) @ 6:30 p.m. EDA adopts resolution establishing TIF District date (day) @ time (resolution provided by Kennedy & Graven) Se~)tember 25 (Mon)@ 7:00 p.m. date (day) @ time After September 25 date (day) City Council holds public hearing, and adopts resolution establishing TIF District (resolution provided by Kennedy &' Graven) State filing and request for county certification (completed by SPRINGSTED) 8/9/00 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 8/14/00 AGENDA SECTION: BID CONSIDERATION ~N ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER I/ ITEM: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND BY: K. Hansen~ BYd AWARDING CONTRACT FOR MONROE STREET DATE 8/10/00 ~ D STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Background: On April 10, 2000, thc City Council ordered the street and utility improvements in Zone 4, including the Monroe Street Storm Sewer lmpr, ovement Project. Plans and specifications were prepared and advertised for bids in the Focus on April 27, 2000 and in the Construction Bulletin on April 21, April 28 and May 5, 2000. Twenty-four contractors or suppliers requested copies of the bidding documents. Two bids were received and publically read aloud at the May 17, 2000 bid opening. A copy of the complete bid tabulation and bid opening minutes are attached. Analy~is/Conelu~ions: The low base bid was submitted by Hardrives, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota. Thc low bid was under the engineer's estimate presented at the improvement hearing by 10.4%. Alternate bids were received for 1) Monroe Street storm sewer project from 49- 1/2th to Sullivan Lake, 2) substituting HDPE for 12", 15", and 18" RCP storm sewer pipe material, and 3) residential driveway construction on private property. The base bid, along with alternates 2 and 3 were previously awarded by the City Council at their May 22, 2000 meeting. The Monroe Street Storm Sewer project is partially funded with a DNR Flood Mitigation C_rrant, which requires an executed agreement prior to the construction contract award. Therefore, the bidding documents provided for a separate award for project 0007. Staffhas received the required DNR Agreements and authorization to advance the project. Based upon the low bid from Hardrivcs, Inc., staff is recommending the following funding sources: Stree~ Comtn~c~ion Infrastructure Fund: Capital Improvements Projects Fund: (Assessments) Utility Comtruc~ion DNR Grant: Storm Sewer Fund: Sanimy Sewer Fund: Al~mate 1 $ 20,235 $ 19,050 $170,550 $170,550 $ 14,210 Recommended Motion: Move to waive the reading of the resolution, there being ample copies available to the public. Reeowanended Motion: Move to approve and adopt Resolution No. 2000-56 accepting bids and awarding the Monroe Street Storm Sewer Improvement Project 00007 to Hardrives Inc. of Rogen, Minnesota, in the amount of $394,594.91 based upon their low, qualified responsible bid and, furthermore to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. Attachments: Resolution, Bid Opening, Bid Tabulation COUNCIL ACTION: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Minutes of Bid Opening on Tuesday, May 17, 2000 at 11:30 a.m. City Project No. 0002 and 0007 2000 Street Rehabilitation Projects in Zone 4 Pursuant to an advertisement for bids for City Project No. 0002 and 0007, an administrative meeting was held on May 17, 2000 at 11:30 a.m. for the purpose of bid opening. Bids were opened and read aloud. Attending the meeting were: Jim Thompson, Hardrives, Inc. Neil McLeod, Midwest Asphalt Corp. Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engineer Joanne Baker, Public Works Secretary Bids were opened and read aloud as follows: Bid Bond Base Bid Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 Addendum 1 Bidder Hardrives, Inc. X $812,504.08 $1,196,207.84 $808,534.43 $4,510.00 $1,209,125.84 (Incl. base bid) Midwest Asphalt X $841,346.25 $1,246,294.50 $1,243,170.00 $2,729.50 $1,253,085.00 (Incl. base bid) Respectfully submitted, Public Works Secretary RESOLUTION NO. 2000-56 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR MONROE STREET STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CITY PROJECT No. 0007 TO HARDRIVES, INC. OF ROGERS, MINNESOTA WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for City Project No.'s 0002 and 0007, Street Rehabilitation Projeets In Zone 4, bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. The following bids were received complying with the advertisement: Bid Bond Base Bid Alternate 1 Alternate 2 Alternate 3 Addendum 1 Bidder $% (adds 00007) (deduct) (add) (add) Hardrives, Inc. Ok $809,776.28* $1,193,480.04' $805,806.63* $4,510.00 $1,206,398.04' (Incl. base bid) Midwest Asphalt Ok $841,245.90' $1,250,994.15' $838,121.40' $2,729.50 $1,264,148.55' (Incl. base bid) * denotes corrected bid WHEREAS, it appears that Hardrives, Inc. of Rogers, Minnesota, is the lowest responsible bidder. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA: The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Hardrives Inc., 14475 Quiram Drive, Rogers, Minnesota, in the name of the City of Columbia Heights, for Monroe Street Storm Sewer Improvement Project, City Project No. 0007, according to plans and specifications therefore approved by the Council, accepting alternate bid No. 1. The City Engineer is hereby authorized and directed to return, forthwith, to all bidders, the deposits made with their bids except the deposit of thc successful bidder and the next lowest bidder shall be retained until the contxact has been signed. City Project ~)007 shall be funded with DNR Grant, General Funds (Infrastructure and Assessments), and appropriate Utility Funds. Dated this 14th day of August, 2000. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS By: Gary Peterson, Mayor Pair/ch Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk BASE BID - PROJECT NUMBER 0002 No. Item 1 Traffic Control 2 Mobilization 3 Pavement marking removal 4 Remove concrete curb and gutter 5 Remove concrete alley/apron 6 Remove concrete driveway/apron 7 Remove concrete walk 8 Remove bituminous pavement 9 Remove bituminous alley 10 Remove bituminous driveway/path 11 Remove water main 12 Remove hydrant lead 13 Remove gate valve and box 14 Remove pressure reducing valve 15 Remove sewer pipe 16 Remove catch basin 17 Sawcut concrete 18 Sawcut bituminous 19 Mill bituminous pavement 20 Salvage hydrant 21 Salvage MH or CB casting 22 Salvage timber wall 23 Salvage fence 24 Temporary water service- Jackson 25 Temporary water service- 49th 26 Temporary water service- 51st 27 12" DIP water main 28 10" DIP water main 29 8' DIP water main 30 6' DIP water main or hydrant lead 31 12" Gate valve and box 32 10" Gate valve and box 33 8" Gate valve and box 34 6" Gate valve and box 35 10" Pressure reducing valve 36 Hydrant 37 Water main fittings 38 1" Corporation 39 1' Type K copper pipe 40 Reconnect sen/ica 41 1" Curb box 42 1" Curb stop 43 Relocate curb box and stop 44 4" PVC sanitary sewer wye 45 4" PVC sanitary sewer service 46 18" RCP - Class III 47 12' RCP - Class III 48 4" Perforated drain pipe 49 48" MH Type B with casting 50 Z x 3' CB Type X with casting 51 48" CB Type Y with casting 52 Modify catch basin 53 12" DIP sanitary sewer Class 52 54 8' PVC sanitary sewer 55 Subgrade excavation 56 Granular borrow (CV) 57 Common excavation 58 Aggregate pipe bedding 59 Aggregate be~e class 5 60 Bituminous wear course 61 Bituminous binder course 62 Patch bituminous street 63 Patch bit. - Extra depth 64 Patch bituminous alley 65 Patch bituminous driveway/path 66 Sawed/sealed joint 67 Tack coat 68 Concrete c~rb.and gutter 69 Concrete alley/apron 70 Concrete driveway/apron 71 Concrete walk 72 concrete step 73 Reinstall salvaged timber wall 74 Reinstall salvaged fenca 75 4" solid line paint - yellow 76 4" solid line paint - white 77 Sod with topsoil TOTAL BASE BID Unit L.S. L.S. L.F. L.F. S.F. S.F. S.F. S.Y. S.Y. S.Y. L.F. L.F. Ea. Ea. L.F. Ea. L.F. L.F. S.Y. Ea. Ea. L.F. L.F. L.S. L.S. L.S. L.F. L.F. L.F. L.F. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. L.F. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. L.F. L.F. L.F. L.F. Ea. Ea. Ea. Ea. L.F. L.F. C.Y. C.Y. C.Y. Ton Ton Ton Ton S.Y. S.Y. S.Y. S.¥. L.F. Gal. L.F. S.Y. S.F. S.F. S.F. L.F. L.F. L.F. L.F. S.Y. ~ITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BID TABULATION - 2000 STREET REHABILITATION CITY PROJECT NUMBER 0002 AND 0007 Harddrives Midwest Asphalt Quantity Unit Price Total Unit Price Total 1.00 $9,700.00 $9,700.00 $12,500.00 $12,500.00 1.00 $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 5,000.00 $0.54 $2,700.00 $0.56 $2,800.00 3,428.00 $3.30 $11,312.40 $4.60 $15,756.80 330.00 $1.40 $462.00 $2.00 $660.00 4,188.00 $1.19 $4,983.72 $4.10 $17,170.80 324.00 $1.40 $453.60 $2.00 $648.00 14,572.00 $1.50 $21,858.00 $1.45 $21,129.40 78.00 $5.50 $429.00 $3.45 $269.10 350.00 $5.35 $1,872.50 $4.00 $1,400.00 3,175.00 $5.78 $18,351.50 $6.00 $19,050.00 40.00 $5.78 $231.20 $6.00 $240.00 11.00 $86.35 $949.65 $90.00 $990.00 1.00 $540.00 $540.00 $560.00 $560.00 53.00 $12.30 $651.90 $12.80 $678.40 2.00 $290.00 $580.00 $300.00 $600.00 833.00 $4.75 $3,956.75 $4.00 $3,332.00 3,536.00 $2.00 $7,672.00 $3.00 $11,508.00 4,383.00 $2.50 $10,957.50 $1.30 $5,697.90 3.00 $290.00 $870.00 $300.00 $900.00 5.00 $86.35 $431.75 $115.00 $575.00 10.00 $20.00 $200.00 $60.00 $600.00 40.00 $10.00 $400.00 $30.00 $1,200.00 1.00 $2,045.00 $2,045.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 1.00 $2,045.00 $2,045.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 1.00 $2,045.00 $2,045.00 $2,200.00 $2,200.00 450.00 $30.80 $13,860.00 $32.00 $14,400.00 10.00 $30.30 $303.00 $31.50 $315.00 2,725.00 $23.45 $63,901.25 $24.35 $56,353.75 107.00 $24.95 $2,669.65 $25.90 $2,771.30 2.00 $1,620.00 $3,240.00 $1,530.00 $3,060.00 1.00 $1,330.00 $1,330.00 $1,225.00 $1,225.00 12.00 $975.00 $11,700.00 $860.00 $10,320.00 4.00 $745.00 $2,980.00 $620.00 $2,480.00 1.00 $9,590.00 $9,590.00 $9,600.00 $9,600.00 4.00 $1,680.00 $6,720.00 $1,750.00 $7,000.00 3,045.00 $3.10 $9,439.50 $3.25 $9,896.25 23.00 $58.85 $1,353.56 $61.00 $1,403.00 390.00 $13.35 $5,206.50 $14.00 $5,460.00 23.00 $165.00 $4,255.00 $195.00 $4,485.00 1.00 $44.85 $44.65 $46.55 $46.55 1.00 $53.50 $53.50 $55.55 $55.55 1.00 $390.00 $390.00 $410.00 $410.00 1.00 $310.00 $310.00 $320.00 $320.00 30.00 $22.50 $675.00 $23.50 $705.00 393.00 $27.70 $10,886.10 $28.75 $11,298.75 48.00 $23.65 $1,135.20 $24.55 $1,178.40 210.00 $12.00 $2,520.00 $12.45 $2,614.50 1.00 $1,630.00 $1,630.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 3.00 $1,350.00 $4,050.00 $1,200.00 $3,600.00 1.00 $1,565.00 $1,665.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 3.00 $1,080.00 $3,240.00 $1,100.00 $3,300.00 25.00 $37.65 $941.25 $39.00 $975.00 33.00 $26.00 $858.00 $27.00 $891.00 3,634.00 $11.00 $39,974.00 $9.65 $35,068.10 3,618.00 $14.00 $50,652.00 $16.00 $57,888.00 3,295.00 $11.00 $38,245.00 $9.80 $32,291.00 104.00 $20.00 $2,080.00 $16.70 $1,736.80 6,561.00 $9.00 $59,949.00 $11.10 $73,937.10 2,501.00 $37.00 $92,537.00 $33.45 $83,658.45 2,010.00 $35.00 $70,350.00 $31.85 $64,018.50 505.00 $18.00 $9,090.00 $33.45 $16,892.25 132.00 $10.00 $1,320.00 $49.50 $6,534.00 16.00 $20.00 $320.00 $33.40 $534.40 349.00 $15.00 $5,235.00 $24.55 $8,587.95 3,997.00 $1.23 $4,916.31 $1.40 $5,595.80 1,265.00 $1.25 $1,561.25 $1.70 $2,150.50 4,611.00 $12.55 $57,868.05 $15.20 $70,087.20 498.00 $50.00 $24,900.00 $46.75 $23,281.50 5,349.00 $4.65 $25,942.65 $4.90 $26,210.10 782.00 $3.75 $2,932.50 $3.90 $3,049.80 8.00 $53.50 $428.00 $73.00 $584.00 10.00 $25.00 $250.00 $70.00 $700.00 40.00 $15.00 $600.00 $29.00 $1,160.00 1,300.00 $0.45 $585.00 $0.50 $650.00 2,600.00 $0.44 $1,144.00 $0.50 $1,300.00 2,590.00 $3.95 ~ $5.10 $13.209.00 $809,776.28 $641,245.90 Page I of 3 ALTERNATE 1 - PROJECT NO. 0002 AND 0007 Harddrives No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Pdce I TOTAL BASE BID Total $809,776.28 Midwest Asphalt Unit Price Total $841,245.90 Add: 2 Mobilization L.S. 1.00 $10,000.00 $10,000.00 $4,400.00 $4,400.00 3 Clear and grub Inch 44.00 $20.00 $880.00 $70.00 $3,080.00 4 Remove concrete curb and gutter L.F. 2,005.00 $2.75 $5,513.75 $3.95 $7,919.75 5 Remove concrete driveway/apron S.F. 60.00 $1.50 $90.00 $2.00 $120.00 6 Remove concrete walk S.F. 105.00 $1.40 $147.00 $2.00 $210.00 7 Remove concrete step S.F. 230.00 $2.00 $460.00 $3.50 $805.00 8 Remove bituminous pavement S.Y. 3,565.00 $1.50 $5,349.00 $1.45 $5,170.70 9 Remove bituminous driveway/path S.Y. 55.00 $5.00 $275.00 $4.00 $220.00 10 Remove water main L.F. 40.00 $12.30 $492.00 $12.80 $512.00 11 Remove sewer pipe L.F. 1,005.00 $9.65 $9,698.25 $10.00 $10,050.00 12 Remove manhole Ea. 4.00 $290.00 $1,150.00 $300.00 $1,200.00 13 Remove catch basin Ea. 12.00 $290.00 $3,480.00 $300.00 $3,600.00 14 Sawcut concrete L.F. 127.00 $4.75 $503.25 $4.00 $508.00 15 Sawcut bituminous L.F. 222.00 $2.00 ?.~..00 $3.00 $666.00 16 Mill bituminous pavement S.Y. 898.00 $2.50 $2,245.00 $5.00 $4,490.00 17 Salvage CB casting Ea. 4.00 $65.35 $345.40 $115.00 $450.00 18 6' DIP water main L.F. 40.00 $40.75 $1,630.00 $42.35 $1,694.00 19 Water main fittings Ea. 300.00 $2.55 $765.00 $3.00 $900.00 20 48" RCP apron Ea. 1.00 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 $1,600.00 $1,600.00 21 48" Trash guard Ea. 1.00 $525.00 $525.00 $545.00 $545.00 22 2" Insulation board S.Y. 108.00 $6.85 $739.50 $7.10 $766.80 23 48" RCP - Class III L.F. 556.00 $103.00 $57,268.00 $110.00 $61,150.00 24 48' RCP - Class IV L.F. 261.00 $132.00 $34,452.00 $137.00 $35,757.00 25 48" RCP Arch - Claes III L.F. 48.00 $127.00 $6,096.00 $132.00 $6,336.00 26 42" RCP - Class III L.F. 291.00 $88.00 $25,608.00 $91.50 $26,626.50 27 42" RCP - Class IV L.F. 30.00 $105.00 $3,150.00 $110.00 $3,300.00 28 18" RCP - Claes III L.F. 96.00 $28.55 $2,740.80 $30.00 $2,880.00 29 15" RCP - Class III L.F. 65.00 $25.50 $2,176.00 $26.55 $2,256.75 30 12" RCP - Class III L.F. 266.00 $23.65 $6,290.90 $24.55 $6,530.30 31 72" MH Type D with casting Ea. 4.00 $4,290.00 $17,160.00 $4,300.00 $17,200.00 32 96' MH Type F with casting Ea. 2.00 $7,415.00 $14,830.00 $7,550.00 $15,100.00 33 72" MH Type D - Extra depth L.F. 6.00 $235.00 $1,410.00 $245.00 $1,470.00 34 96' MH Type F - Extra depth L.F. 6.00 $445.00 $2,670.00 $465.00 $2,790.00 35 48' MH Type B with casting Ea. 2.00 $1,565.00 $3,130.00 $1,500.00 $3,000.00 36 2' x 3' CB Type X with casting Ea. 11.00 $1,250.00 $13,750.00 $1,200.00 $13,200.00 37 48" CB Type Y with casting Ea. 4.00 $1,600.00 $6,400.00 $1,600.00 $6,400.00 38 Z x 3' CB Type X Ea. 3.00 $855.00 $2,555.00 $890.00 $2,670.00 39 48" CB Type Y Ea. 1.00 $1,230.00 $1,230.00 $1,300.00 $1,300.00 40 Install salvaged casting Ea. 4.00 $200.00 $800.00 $155.00 $620.00 41 Riprap class 2 C.Y. 10.00 $70.00 $700.00 $72.00 $720.00 42 Granular filter C.Y. 10.00 $31.80 $318.00 $33.00 $330.00 43 12" DIP sanitary sewer L.F. 20.00 $52.00 $1,040.00 $54.00 $1,080.00 44 Subgrade excavation C.Y. 1,538.00 $11.00 $16,918.00 $9.65 $14,341.70 45 Granular borrow (CV) C.Y. 1,538.00 $14.00 $21,532.00 $16.00 $24,508.00 46 Common excavation C.Y. 540.00 $11.00 $5,940.00 $9.80 $5,292.00 47 Aggregate pipe bedding Ton 20.00 $20.00 $400.00 $20.00 $400.00 48 Aggregate ba~e class 5 Ton 1,542.00 $9.00 $13,878.00 $12.70 $19,583.40 49 Bituminous wear course Ton 381.00 $37.00 $14,097.00 $33.45 $12,744.45 50 Bituminous binder course Ton 381.00 $35.00 $13,335.00 $31.65 $12,134.85 51 Patch bituminous street S.Y. 129.50 $18.00 $2,322.00 $33.40 $4,308.50 52 Patch bituminous driveway/path S.Y. 16.00 $20.00 $320.00 $24.50 $392.00 53 Sewed/sealed joint L.F. 1,257.00 $1.23 $1,546.11 $1.45 $1,822.65 54 Tack coat Gal. 215.00 $1.25 $268.75 $1.70 $365.50 55 Concrete curb and gutter L.F. 2,005.00 $8.55 $17,142.75 $11.00 $22,065.00 50 6" Concrete driveway/apron S.F. 1,113.00 $4.85 $5,398.05 $4.90 $5,453.70 57 4" Concrete walk S.F. 105.00 $3.50 $399.00 $3.90 $409.50 55 Concrete step S.F. 230.00 $65.00 $12,650.00 $70.00 $16,100.00 59 Sod with topsoil S.Y. 1,881.00 $3.95 $7.429.~ $5.10 $9.593.10 $1,193,480.04 TOTAL BASE BID WITH ALTERNATE 1 $1,250,994.15 ADDENDUM1 No. Item Unit ~u~ntitv I TOTAL BASE BID WITH ALTERNATE 1 Harddrives Unit Price Total $1,193,450.04 Midwest Asphalt Unit Pdca Total $1,250,994.15 2 Relocate water service Ea. 4.00 $465.00 $1,860.00 $480.00 $1,920.00 3 8" PVC SDR 35 sanitary sewer pipe L.F. 260.00 $26.00 $6,760.00 $27.00 $7,020.00 4 6" PVC SDR 35 sanitary sewer service L.F. 40.00 $22.35 $894.00 $23.25 $930.00 5 6" PVC sanitary sewer wye Ea. 4.00 $68.50 $274.00 $71.10 $284.40 6 48" MH Type B with casting Ea. 2.00 $1,565.00 $3.130.00 $1,500.00 $3.000.00 TOTAL ALTERNATE 1 BID WITH ADDENDUM $1,206,398.04 $1,264,148.55 Page 2 of 3 ALTERNATE 2 - HDPE STORM SEWER PIPE No. Item I TOTAL BASE BID Dedu~: 2 1~ RCP 3 1~ RCP 4 12"RCP Add: 5 1~ HDPE 6 1~ HDPE 7 1~ HDPE TOTAL BASE BID WITH ALTERNATE 2 Unit L.F, L.F. L.F. L.F. L.F. 489.00 &5.00 314.50 489.00 85.00 314.00 Harddrives Unit Price Total $809,776.28 $25.90 ($12,665.10) $23.90 ($2,031.50) $22.10 ($5,939.40) $21.50 $10,513.50 $18.95 $1,610.76 $17.65 ~ $8O5,806.63 Midwest Asphalt Unit Price Total $841,245.90 $25.90 ($12,665.10) $23.90 ($2,031.50) $22.10 ($6,939.40) $22.50 $11,002.50 $20.00 $1,700.00 $1 8.50 $5.809.00 $838,121.40 ALTERNATE 3 - RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAYS No. Item Unit Harddrives Unit Price Total Midwest Asphalt Unit Price Total I Remove bituminous driveway S.Y. 10.00 $10.00 $100.00 $3.45 $34.50 2 Remove concrete driveway S.F. 10.00 $2.00 $20.00 $3.45 $34.50 3 Remove concrete sidewalk S.F. 10.00 $1.50 $15.00 $2.00 $20.00 4 Remove concrete step S.F. 10.00 $2.00 $20.00 $30.00 $300.00 5 Aggregate base class 5 Ton 100.00 $35.00 $3,500.00 $14.00 $1,400.00 6 Bituminous driveway S.Y. 10.00 $16.50 $165.00 $14.00 $140.00 7 Concrete driveway S.F. 10.00 $5.00 $50.00 $5.60 $56.00 8 Concrete sidewalk S.F. 10.00 $4.50 $40.00 $4.45 $44.50 9 Concrete step S.F. 10.00 $60.00 ~30.00 $70.00 $700.00 TOTAL BID ALTERNATE 3 $4,510.00 $2,729.50 Page 3 of 3 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: August 14, 2000 AGENDA SECTION: Other Business 'N ORIGINATING DEPT: CITY MANAGER NO: 7, ~ ~ [) Community Development APPROVAL ITEM: Master Redevelopment Plan for BY: Ken Anderson AGENDA SECTION: NO: Downtown Columbia Heights DATE: August 9, 2000 ~-~.~0 ~'~ 0 Issue Statement: The City has been in the process of preparing a Master Redevelopment Plan to improve' image and vitality of downtown Columbia Heights. Request Council action to approve the Downtown Master Plan with a decision made as to the preferred concept plan, i.e. Town Square or Urban Green. Alternatively, the Council could approve the Plan and adopt the core downtown development principles without selecting a preferred concept plan. Back~round: In response to Minnesota Design Team recommendations made in May, 1998, the City applied for and received Livable Communities Demonstration Account funds from the Metropolitan Council to prepare a Master Redevelopment Plan for the downtown area. Staffhas been working with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. and a 22 member task force in the preparation of this plan. A town meeting was held on November 17, 1999, to provide an opportunity for interested citizens to review and comment on the proposals (see attached comment tabulation). Task force recommendations were discussed at the work sessions scheduled for January 17, and August 7, 2000. The version dated April, 2000 and received August 2, 2000 includes a reformatted market analysis section and expanded streetscape section with a suggested list of trees to be planted. Analysis: Two redevelopment scenarios (Town Square Concept and Urban Green Concept) have been recommended by the task force along with streetscape design recommendations. As you may recall, there were three possible redevelopment scenarios presented at the town meeting in November (Town Square, Urban Green, and Civic Center). The Town Square and Urban Green concept have been recommended for City Council consideration by the planning task force. It is generally believed by members of the task force that these two proposals will have a more positive impact on Columbia Heights than the Civic Center concept. A market analysis that was prepared for the Plan indicated that redevelopment occurring in the downtown area will be most successful in the form of smaller-scale, mixed-use retail, service, office, and residential uses. The Town Square concept focuses on the area west of the intersection of 40~ Avenue and Central Avenue. The intent is to create a new mixed-use district on 4ffh Avenue west of Central which combines new centralized civic uses, new public open space, commercial development, and new downtown multi-family residential development into a revitalized center. The Urban Green concept also provides new public open space on the south side of 40t~ Avenue and provides a pedestrian connection from that open space to Murzyn Hall. This concept places more emphasis on existing commercial buildings along Central Avenue at the 40th Avenue intersection with new public open space extending to this intersection, providing a direct visual and pedestrian connection to Murzyn Hall. The proposed civic uses are decentralized in the Urban Green concept. The Master Redevelopment Plan also provides streetscape design recommendations for lighting, street trees, sidewalk markings, furnishings, and gateways. Also attached, please fred two site plans prepared by Buetow and Associates from the Space Needs Study which illustrate a possible scenario for City Hall, Public Safety, and a future library to be located in I-Inset Park. Please note that this concept is very similar to the Civic Center Concept that the task force decided not to include as a recommendation in the Master Redevelopment Plan. The second site plan diagrams potential realignment ofballfields in Huset Park. There are certain core principles that are common to both concepts and are listed in the alternative motion below. Should the Council not wish to select one concept over the other, then the alternative motion will allow the plan to be received and the core principles to be accepted to guide future redevelopment efforts. Recommendation: Staff is requesting that the City Council consider the Downtown Master Plan concept proposals and select the preferred concept in the recommended motion. The alternative motion receives the report and adopts the core principles of the study to guide future redevelopment. At the August 7, 2000 Work Session, the City Council expressed a preference for the Town Square Concept Plan. Recommended 1V~otion: Move to adopt the Town Square Concept Plan of the Columbia Heights Downtown Master Plan to guide future redevelopment efforts with the goals of creating a positive identity for downtown Columbia Heights, strengthen ties among nearby neighborhoods, and to attract appropriate new business opportunities. AGENDA SECTION: Other Business /'~/ ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: '~: ~ Community Development APPROVAL IrEM: Master Redevelopment Plan for BY: Ken Anderson AGENDA SECTION: NO: Downtown Columbia Heights DATE: August 9, 2000 NO: Page 2 of 2 Alternative Motio~r Move to receive the Columbia Heights Downtown Master Plan and to adopt the following core principle's to guide future redevelopment efforts: Mixed-use development will be promoted west of Central Avenue N.E. within the target area. Urban design elements and streetscape improvements will be incorporated along Central and 40~ Avenue N.E. Huset Park will be connected to the vicinity of the Central and 40~ Avenue N.E. intersection with a greenway or promenade. Increased higher density housing will be encouraged to promote mixed-use concepts. Multi-modal transit use and pedestrian connections will be incorporated into proposed redevelopment projects. Key civic facilities (Library, City Hall, Emergency Services) will be co-located near green/open space and linked to commercial businesses on Central Avenue. Implementation steps will be initiated to solicit developer interest, acquire properties, and perform follow-up City/EDA analysis of funding options for proposed redevelopment(s). Attachments: Downtown Master Plan, April 2000; open house comment tabulation; and site plans from the Space Needs Study. COUNCIL ACTION: H:\ConsenthMaster R~¢v.Plan City Of Columbia Heights Downtown Master Plan Community. Open House Comment Ta~uladon 11/19/99 Total number of written response: ,2~ b the property tlmt you own, do business or reside at directly affected by these concept plans? YgS o , NO Z '.. Please check all that apply: 15 Columbia Heights resident ... 9 $~dy are~ resident .1 t Owner of property in study area Owner of business in study area Appointed public offidal _.L£1ec~ed public oftleial for f~amres people liked: idemity for Columb/a Hd~m, ia geaa'al ~.~...A~tio~ green slx:e, especially wher~ a slxon~er comt~gon is ~ ~ ~ellc P~ ~ou ~ C~ Av~, ~ on C~ or on ~* ~ C~ · Additiohal ira-ms t/~ received positive wrinen or verbal co-v,~-uts included any scenarios d~ make a ~a'ong. centraliz~ stata, ments for the city;, and features t~az ~ved w~kahle ace.s to both co--iai Responses for features people disliked: } A br/dg~ crossing over Ce~uxal Avenu~ ~ Large clmter areas ofkiahtr dm~ity hou~iag ~ Removal ofr~sidences along Central Avenue Items tlmt generamd other wri~m or verbal concerns included potential for low-quafity developmenu in hi,h-density residengal areas; any public amenkies that ~ additional =mmenaace: disturbaac=s caused by fire equipment ifmoved nearer Central: and th~ loss of existing businesses on 40" Items people felt should have been addressed/addressed in greater detail: 4 .Cos= usoci~ with each scenario ~, Patkiug allocations, ml~'ially ia relation to th~ .'¢EI Site 2 Plans for r=locatio~compensation of existing res/dences or businesses ~, Maintenance issues a.tsociat=d wiga s~r~tscape and open space amenities Suggestions offemi for Task Force consideration included zone parkiag permks t'or the ,'VEl area; and el~himcnwal control/for new residemi~ clismccs. Scenario most preferred overnlh 1O ."Urbsn Green"- focus on Central Avenue as a gateway to Columbia Heights. $ "Town Square"- organize civic, commercial & rcsid~tial activity around a community square on 40n adjacent to Central Avenue. 4 "Civic Center"'- encourage commercial activity on 40* at Mill Street, retaining the current City Hall location. ! Opposed - to all three alternatives. .1 .,. No response. LIS~M LU 19 ./ \ 19eJIS LIl~ G uos~toep ; ~ou!no LU / / / / '-i ! ; uosJellel' CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS lVleelln.~ 0I: ~kugusI lz4, ZUUU AGENDA SECTION: Other Business ~ ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: '~7. ~,- ~) Communit~Development APPROVAL ITEM: Approve the Cooperation BY: Kenneth R. Anderson ~ ~~,l/~ Agreement for Transition Block DATE: August 11, 2000 Redevelopment Project ISSUE STATEMENT: The City Council is requested to approve the Cooperation greement for the Transition Block Redevelopment Project to allow Real Estate Equities Development Company (Developer) to secure development funds fi.om the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority (MPHA) as part of the Metropolitan Housing Opportunities Program (MHOP). BACKGROUND: We have attached for Council review and approval a copy of the Cooperation Agreement shown in draft form and dated March 3, 2000. The Initial Agreement is also included with the same drafted date. Also attached is a letter dated August 9, 2000 fi.om the City and EDA's legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven, Chartered. You will note in the letter they are recommending that, "...if the City Council and EDA wish to approve the two agreements they do so 'contingent on the addition of this language or language substantially similar and acceptable to legal counsel for the City/EDA.'" Attached to the letter is proposed language to add to the Initial Agreement and the Cooperation Agreement. With the addition of these two language changes, the City and EDA will have the flexibility necessary to address any contingencies that may arise in the future. In other words, the City will have the opportunity to terminate the Agreements without further obligations to the City or the EDA if the project does not move forward. The Developers are requesting the City and EDA adopt the Cooperation Agreement and the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority adopt both Agreements. These Agreements will be forwarded to the Minneapolis Public Housing Agency by August 21st, in order to be placed on the MPHA Board Agenda for August, 2000. The Agreements must be approved by all the affected parties and reviewed and approved by HUD prior to construction commencing on the project. RECOMMENI~ATION: With the addition of the language suggested by the City/EDA legal counsel, staff recommends the City Council approve the Cooperation Agreement and that the EDA approve the Cooperation Agreement and the Initial Agreement. RECOMMENI~ED MOTION: Move to approve the Cooperation Agreement for the Transition Block Redevelopment Project contingent on the addition of the proposed language or language substantially similar and acceptable to legal counsel for the City/EDA; and furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. Attachments: COUNCIL ACTION: \Consent\Initial-Cooperation Agreement August 9, 2000 {Om ~n City of Columbia Heights 590 40' Avenue, Col~nbia Heighls, MN ~421-3835 BY U.S. MAIL ~ FACSI~dLE - (763) 706-36'~1 K~th lam Real Estate Equities Development Company 325 Cedar Street Suite 400 St. Paul, MN 55101 BY U.S. MAIL AI~D FACSIlVlILE - (651) 22%9001 Dent Ken and Keith: Attached ~ proposed additions to the MI-lOP agreemenls. IT is my recommendation drear, if the City Council and EDA wi~h to approve the two agreemeuts they do so "contingent on the addition ot' dais language or language substantially similar and acc~mble to legal counsel for the City/£DA." With the additmn of this langual~, I am comfortable that the city and the EDA will r~tatn the flexibility needed to address future comingeuc~es. Based on my conversations wiUm Steve Bubul, it does uot appear th~ Jim Ho~es has my obj~ion w ~e ~U~ of ~is ~ of l~g~e. I do ~o~d ~l R~ Estate Eq~ties app~ch tls MHOP ~n~t m ~s ~e ~i~on of ~ I~g~e ~ ~e c~ng d~ts, ~ ~s ~11 ~ely ~lt in a fast~ ~ t~e. The city ~ ~e ~A ~, ~wevcr, ap~ove ~ ~ ~~s wi~ my ~ ~agc ~fo~ a ~ ~sw~ is received ~m ~HA, H~, or myone el~ w~ ne~s m ~pmve the c~ge from ~at di~gon. I do want to remind both of you ttuu the ctmpera~ion agreem~t envisions the Nollman units as exempt from mxation but subject to PILOT agreements, If you have not alr~tdy done mo, please check ~o confirm ti~ t~ does not impair ~he n~c~ssary cash flow for the project. {){G-llgllO~lv I ~8-~.-0~ gZ:44 Fro~-KEffI~EDY & G~AVEN *61Z357~31~ T-144 P.~3/04 F-516 ,',n&rsGn/]a~s Pa~2d-~ If you have any other questions or comments, do not hesitate To let me know. Sincerely, DJG: Eric! Cc: Michael D. Zalk (BY FACSIMILE - {612} .607-7100) (w/encl) ]P~)-zS2601 KG4~fl.~ 06-0~-00 2Z:44 Fren-KENN£DY & GI~,VEN +61H370310 T-144 P.04/04 F-615 ADDITION TO INITIAL AGREEMENT Norwi~hs~cli~g anything to ~he conu~u'y herein, ~he EDA ~ have no obli~on ~ ~ ~s ~~m ~ iL ~ C~ of Co~b~ ~, ~o~ or ~. ~ve enm~ ~o, with ~ c ~, ~ ~ ~~t fi~g ~ for ~va~ ~1o~ ~ ~ ~t ~lo~ent p~t ~ ~ ~~ m ~ ~A in iu ~ ~fion, ~ ~ ~ ~e ~e ~A may ~epl ~ e~ly ~ tb~ ~m. ~ing ia l~s A~ent ~ ~ cons~ m A~I~ON TO C~~~ON Notwi~l ~ m ~ c~u~ ~em, ~i~ ~e City n~ The ~A ~ have ~e~ ~d ~ o~ a~n[ ~ ~ by ~ ~A ~ ~ C~ty ~ ~ ~s~ve ~ d~ion ~d ~t to te~s ~f~ m ~ EDA ~d ~ Oty ~ ~ir res~ve ~le d ~ion, ~ ~ul s~ ~ ~e ~A, ~ CtW, ~ ~ may t~ ~ Ag~emmt wi~out ~ obligation on ~e~ ~ i~iaely u~n pmvid~g no~ to Except a~ exl~ssly set Ibrth herein, nothing in ~ Agreement shall be conslru~ to create ~y right in the Owner ot any other p~rsoa not a party to tins Agreement. ~.~ DRAFT: 03/03/00 COOPF, RATION AGREEMENT · This Agngment made and entered into this ~ day of ,2000, bY and between the /VFmneapolis Public Housing Authority in and for the City of MinneapOlis (the ~MPHA~), the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and the City of Columbia Heights, State of Minnesota (the "Municipality"). WITNESSETH: In consideration of thc mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Whenever used in this Agreement: The term "MHOP .Units" means three. (3) units of Iow-rent housing hereafter to be developed with the financial assistance of the United States of America acting through the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (the "Government") and located within a twenty-two (22) unit townhome development (the "Development") to be owned by Columbia Heights Limited Partnership I ("Owner") and located in the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota. The term "Taxing Body" or "Taxing Bodies" means the State of Minnesota and any and all pOlitical subdivisions or taxing units thereof in which the MHOP Units are situated, and which would have authority to assess or levy real or personal property taxes, or to certify such taxes to a taxing body or public officer, to be levied for its use and benefit with respect to the MHOP Units if they were not exempt from such taxation. The term "Shelter Rent" means the total of all charges to all MHOP Unit tenants for dwelling rents and-nondwelling rents (excluding all other income of the MHOP Units) less the cost of all dwelling and nondwelling utilities. 2.' The MPHA shall ~ndeavor: to secure a contract with the Government for capital grants and annual contributions for the MHOP Units; (b) to cause the development of the MHOP Units; and to assign to the MetropOlitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority its responsibilities under this and other agreements relating to the MHOP Units for purpOses of ongoing administration thereof. D:'dviNN 12-~/)29~OC~t~)OP~ COOPF. i~ATION AGRI/I/MIiNT Pursuant to Minnesota statUtes, Section 469.040, thc MI-lOP Units are exempt from 'all real and personal property taxes levied or imposed by any Taxing Body for so long as either (i) the MI-lOP Units are owned by a public body or governmental agency and are used for loW-rent housing purposes, (ii) the MHOP Units are subject to the requirements of Section 5 of the. United States Housing Act .of 1937, (iii) the 'contract between the MPHA and the Owner in connection with the MI-lOP Units continUes to obligate the Owner to operate the MI-lOP Units as a low income housing project, or (iv) any obligations issued in connection with the MI-lOP Units or any moneys due to the Government in connection with such MI-lOP Units remain unpaid, whichever period is the longest (the '~xemption Period"). During the Exemption Period, the Municipality, on behalf of the Taxing Bodies, agrees that'it will not levy or' impose any real or personal property taxes upon the MHOP Units or upon the MPHA with respect thereto. Because thc MI-lOP Units consists of three (3) units located within and under common private ownership with 19 additional housing units which compris~ the Development, the property taxes and pwperty tax exemption shall be determined as follows: (i) thc tax capacity of the total Development shall be multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which equals the total number of MI-lOP Units and the denominator of which equals the total number of housing units in the Development and (ii) the product thereof shall be diducted from said tax cap~city. During the Exemption Period, the MPHA shall cause to be included agreements with the Owner the obligation of the Owner to make annual payments in lieu of taxes ('PILOT") in payment for the public services and facilities furnished from time to time without other cost or charge for or with. respect to the MHOP Units. Each PILOT shall be made at the time when real property taxes on the MI-lOP Units would be paid if it was subject to taxation, and shall be in an amount equal to either (i) five percent (5%) of the Shelter Rent actually collected but in no event to exceed five percent ($%) of the Shelter Rent charged with respect to such MI-lOP Units during. the preceding calendar year, or (ii) the amount permitted to be paid by applicable State law in effect on the date such payment is made, whichever is lower. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.040, subdivision 3, the County of ~shall distribute the PILOT among the Taxing Bodies in the proportion which the real property taxes which would have been paid to each Taxing Body for such year if the MHOP Units were not exempt from taxation; provided, however, that no payment for any year shall be made to any Taxing Body in excess of the amount of the real property taxes which would have been paid to. such Taxing Body for such year if the MHOP Units were not exempt from taxation. In the event the PILOT is not paid, no lien against the MHOP Units or assets of the MPHA or EDA shall attach, nor shall any interest or penalties accrue or attach on account thereof. D:~MI~rNI ~OOP.DOC 2 COOPIiRA.TION A~ During the Exemption Period, the Municipality, or other appropriate Taxing Body, without cost or charge to the MPHA, EDA Or tenants of the MHOP Units (other than PILOT) shall: Furnish or cause to be furnished to the MHOP Units public services and facilities of the same character and to thc same extent as are furnished from time to t/me without cost or charge to other dwellings and hfl~abitants in the Municipality; (c) Vacate such streets, roads, and alleys within the area of the MHOP Units as may be necessary in the development thereof, and convey without charge to the MPHA, EDA or Owner of the MHOP Units such interest as the Municipality, or other Taxing .Body may have in such vacated areas; and, in so far as it is lawfully able to do so without cost or expense to the MPHA, EDA and the Owner of the MHOP Units or to the Municipality or other Taxing, Body, cause to be removed from such vacated areas, in so far as it may be necessary, all public or private utility lines and equipment; In so far as the Municipality or other Taxing Body may lawfully do so, (i) grant Such deviations from the building code of the Municipality or other Taxing Body as are reasonable and necessary to promote economy and efficiency in the development and administration of the MI-lOP Units, and at the same time safeguard health and safety, and (ii) make such changes in any zoning of the site and surrounding territory of the MI-lOP Units as are reasonable and necessary for the development and protection of the MHOP Units and the surrounding territory; Accept grants of easements necessary for the development of the MHOP Un/ts; and Cooperate with the MPHA and EDA by such other lawful action or ways as the Municipality or other Taxing Body and the MPHA may fred necessary in connection with the development and administration of the MI-lOP Units. In the initial development of the MHOP Units, the Municipality further agrees, on behalf of all Taxing Bodies, that within a reasonable time aider receipt of a Written request therefor from. the MPHA or EDA: that it will accept all interior streets, roads, alleys, and adjacent sidewalks ~vithin the area of the Development, together with all storm and sanitary sewer mains in such dedicated areas, after the Owner of .the MHOP .Units, at its own expense, has completed the grading, improvement, paving, and installation thereof in accordance with specifications acceptable to the .Municipality or other Taxing Body; that it will accept necessary dedications of land for, and will grade, impwve, pave,' and provide sidewalks for, all streets bounding the Developments as ar~. necessary to pwvide adequate access thereto (in consideration whereof the Owner shall pay to the Municipality or other Taxing Body such amount as are or could be assessed against the Development); and D.~NN~~mOC 3 COOP~nON ACJ~mM~NT (c) that it will provide, or cause to be provided, .water mains, and storm and sanitary sewer mains, leading to the Development and serving the bounding streets thereof (in consideration wbereofthe Owner of the MI-lOP Units shall pay to the Municipaiity or other Taxing Body such amount as are or could be assessed against the Development). If by reason of the Municipality's or other Taxing Body's failure or refusal to fiu'nish or cause to be furnished any public services or facilities which it has agreed hereunder to furnish or cause to be furnished to the MPHA, EDA, the Owner or tenants of the MHoP Units, and the MPHA, the EDA or the Owner Of the IV[HOP Units incurs any expense to obtain such services or facilities, then the MPHA or EDA may cause to be deducted the amount of such expense fi'om any PILOT due or to become due to the Municipality or other Taxing Body in respect to the MI-lOP Units. No Cooperation Agreement heretofore entered into between the Municipality and the MPHA or EDA shall be construed to apply to any MHOP Units covered by.this Agreement. No member of the governing body or any other public official of the Municipality or other Taxing Body who exercises any responsibilities or functions with respect to the MI-lOP Units during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in the MHOP Units or any property included or planned to be included in the MHOP Units, or any contracts in connection with the MI-IOP Units or property. If any such governing body member or such other public official of a Taxing Body involuntarily acquires or had acquired prior to the beginning of his/her tenure any such interest, he/she shall immediately disclose such interest to the MPHA. During the Exemption Period this Agreement shall not be abrogated, changed, or modified without the consent of the Government. The privileges and obligations of the Municipality and other Taxing Bodies hereunder shall also remain in full force and effect with respect to the MI-lOP Units so long as the beneficial rifle to the MHOP Units is held by the MPHA or by any other public body or governmental agency, including the Government, authorized by law to engage in the development or administration of low-rent housing projects. If at any time the beneficial title to, or possession of, the MI-lOP Units is held by such other public body or governmental agency, including the Government, the provisions hereof shall inure to the benefit of and may be enforced by, such other public body or governmental agency, including the Government. 10. The Government, the Municipality and the EDA hereby consent to the future assignment of the MPHA's interest in this Agreement to the Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority. D.'~ 1 iLVdlI9~OCS~OOP.DOC 4 CC)OPERAIION AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHE~0F the Municipality, the MPHA and the EDA have respectively signed this Agreement and caused their seals to be afl'reed and attested as of the day and Year first above written. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY IN AND FOR TH'F. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS By.' Comer L. Moore Its Cha/rman And by.' Corn McCorvey Its Executive Director CITY OF .COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA By. And by Its COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By, · Its And by Its D:.~qN12:SW29~OCS~COOP.DOC COOPERATION A~ EXECU~ON PAGE D~: 03/03/00 THIS AGREEMENT,. 'made. this ~ day of , 2000 by and between the ~¥flnneapo~is Public Housing Authority in. and for the City of ]~finn~pOliS, a public body corporate and politic (the ~MPHA") and the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic (the "EDA") is entered into pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, § 471.59 and §.469.012, Subds. l(ll) and 3. WHEREAS, the MPHA has entre'ed into an Annual Contributions Contract ("MPHA ACC") with the United States Department of Homing-and Urban Development ("HUD") for funding the capital and'operating costs of Iow rent public housing un'ts and projects throughout the MiNneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area; and . WHEREAS, the MPHA has established the Metropolitan Housing Opportunities Program CMHOP") p~t to which it will cooperate with suburban counties and municipalities in the construction and operation of qualified housing units (the "MHOP Units"); and WHEREAS, Columbia Heights Limited Partnership I, a Minnesota limited partnership (the "Owner") has applied to the MPHA to locate three (3) MHOP Units within its development of a 22-unit multifamily housing project to be knoWn as Columbia Heights Limited Partnership I Development (the "Development") to be located in the City of Columbia Heights; and WHEREAS, the MPHA and the City have agreed to cooperate in the location of three O) MHOP Units in the Development; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Agreement is to define the relationship of the MPHA and EDA with respect to the planning, construction, oWnership and operation of the MHOP Units. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by the parties hereto as follows: L PROPOSAL. A. The MPHA will prepare and submit to HUD a proposal for development funds in the approximate amount of not to exceed $315,900 (excluding administration funds) and ongoing operating subsidy under the MPHA ACC for the construction and operation of 2 replacement units ("MHOP Replacement Units") and 1 incentive units ("MHOP Incentive Units''). B. Upon completion of MHOP Units, the MPHA may, without further action by the EDA, assign all documents related thereto to the Metropolitan Council Housing and Redevelopment Authority ("Metro HRA') for ongoing administration of the operating subsidy and grievance procedures as well as management of the waiting D:~4]qNI2~ II; lists (the "Assi~ment and Reformulation"). In that event, MHOP Units shaLl be removed from the MPHA ACC and added to the ACC of the Metro HRA (the "Metro ACC").'. Subsequent to the Assignment and Reformulation: 1. All of the duties of the MPHA described herein that are yet to be performed shall be performed by the Metro HRA; All of the rights of the MPHA described herein shall be rights of the Metro HRA; and The Operating Subsidy described in Section VII will be determined or re- determined in accordance with the Metro ACC and based upon the Metro I-]HA Fiscal Year. C. The MPHA shall: Gather and assemble all required Development information, including financial pro formas and design and. construction documents. Prepare required documentation, including initial operating budgets, in conformity with federal regulations and HUD requirements. ¸. Administer the processing of the Proposal'and obta/ning their approval by HUD. Provide liaison with the Metropolitan Council and the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency ("MHFA') with respect to all other funding effecting the Developments. Monitor the application of federal Davis-Bacon wage requirements that shall apply to the Developments, provided that the Housing Development Agreement between the MPHA and the Owner shall require' the Owner and construction 'contractors to provide the MPHA such information as it may reasonably require in order to meet its obligation hereunder DEVELOPMENT. The MPHA shall enter into a Housing Development Agreement ' with the Owner which will: Establish the design and construction specifications of the three (3) MHOP Units as one (1) two-bedroom, one (1) three-bedroom unit and one (1) four-bedroom unit; B. 'Confirm the amenities to be provided within and around the Development; Ce Provide that the level of MttOP funding for the Development will equal certified construction costs (pro rata based on bedroom size); D:L~I 12.~0J~iK)CS~'tlAI,.DOC 2 ~ ^t:~/M]/I~T Provide that the operating subsidy reserve fund be drawn upon in the event operating subsidies paid by the MPHA ~re inadequate to pay the difference between MHOP Unit income and exp~, as defined below; Provide for the draw-down of public housing development funds on a ~o rata basis with other Development funding sources; Establish a system by which the MHOP units within the Deve. lopment will not be physically identified, but rather will. "float" throughout the Development depending upon vacancies and availability; Identify the system for construction inspections, cost certifications and development audits; Require execution by the Owner of the Regulatory and Operating Agreement and a Declaration of Restrictive Covenants creating a covenant running with the land obligating the Owner and all successors in interest to maintain and operate the MHOP Units in compliance with all applicable requirements of Section 5 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 and the ACC; and MANAGEMENT. The Regulatory and Operating Agreement shall provide that the Owner or its agent (the "Managing Agent") shall manage all the units at the Development, including the MHOP Units and: A. shall comply with all federal law, regulations and policies and the MPHA ACC. shall provide the MPHA, the EDA and/or ffUD with access to all books and records maintained by the Managing Agent with respect to the MHOP Units. shall be ~ubject to termination and replacement as to the entire Development if it is determined by the MPHA, subject to. appropriate judicial review by any court of competent jurisdiction, that the Managing Agent or any successor has materially violated, breached, or failed to comply with any provision of federal law, regulation, policy, or the MPHA ACC. shall receive fxom the MPHA the names of persons and families who meet the income and waiting list criteria for admission into the MHOP Units and shall cant out such administrative functions as (but not limited to) applicant interviews and screening, verifications, determination of .suitability for admission, ,,nit assi~mament, execution of leases, terminations and evictions. WAITING LIST MANAGEMENT. The MPHA shall maintain the waiting lists for those applying for housing in the MHOP Units, using applicable federal, MHOP and local priorities. D:~qN i 2 ~02MIX~S~,~rlAL. DOC 3 INITIAL Applicants for the two (2) MHOP Replacement Units will be selected from waiting lists based upon the following priorities: -1. First, to families displaced by the demolition of Minneapolis public housing units pursuant to that cern__ in Consent Decree entered in settlement of Hollman et al. vs. Cisneros et al., U.S.D.C. '(Minn_ Dist., 4th Div.) Civil Case No. 4-92-712. Second, to families on the MPHA waiting and transfer lists who live in minority or poverty concentrated.areas in the metropolitan area. Third,'to families on the MPHA waiting list. This will include all families wishing to participate in MI-lOP, including both Minneapolis waiting Hst families and applicants from the City. The MPHA will automatically place all applicants from the local waiting list on its list, thus making both Minneapolis and City of Columbia Heights residents equally eligible for this priority.. The one (1) MPHA Incentive Units will be filled pursuant to local waiting lists that will also be administered by the MPH_A. The MPHA will have full and complete control over the management of the waiting list, and the Managing Agent will have complete control over the selection of residents, so long as the MI-lOP priorities and all federal and state laws are followed. The MPHA will promptly and continuously place all Minneapolis applicants for placement on the MHOP waiting list. If the referral system results in no eligible and suitable tenant with Consent Decree priorities, the unit can be filled' with other applicants on the waiting list._. The MPHA shall provide HUD a certitieafion, in the form attached hereto.~bW'-A; certifying that its waiting list procedures will conform with .applicable law and POST CONSTRUCTION DUTIES. As a part of the HUD close-out requirements with respect to the MHOP Units, the MPHA shall: Designate the End of the Initial Operating Period ("EIOP") and shall coordinate the inclusion of the MHOP Units in the MPHA Annual Operating Budget. Within 12 months of EIOP, gather information and provide HUD with the Actual Development.Cost Certificate ("AZ)CC"). Cause the preparation of an audit by an independent public accountant ~ a part of its submission of the Al)CC. Monitor the Managing Agent's procedures and results in screening applicants provided from the MPHA waiting lists and report the results thereof to HUD as may be requested or required. O:~ll2~ 4 IN1TIAL A~ Vie TAX CERTIFICATIONS. The MPHA shall provide in its agreements with the Owner that the o'Wner, or its Managing Agent, shall annually prepare and present to-the City a certification to ~e appropriate assessing officials of the number of MHOP units located within the Development. The City shall execute and forward such certification pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.040, subdivision 4. OPERATING SUBSIDY. Under the lVIPHA ACC, HUD contracts.to provide an operating subsidy to the MPHA'for all' units subject to the MPHA' ACC, which will include these MHOP Units. It is therefore necessmy to establish a methodology by which the MPHA will 'pay operating subsidy to the Owner, of the MHOP Units. That system, to be described more fully in a Regulatory and Operating Agreement between the MPHA and the Owner, will be generally.as follows: As used in this Section VII, the following terms Shall have the'following meanings: ., "Allowed Project Expenses" means all necessary and reasonable operating expenses of the Development for any period, including: (a) all ordinary and necessary expenses, of operations of the Development shown as line items on Form HUD-92547-A (Budget Worksheet), exclusive of real estate taxes and debt service requirements of any lender and exclusive of utility expenses which are the direct responsibility of tenants; provided, however, that if the Owner shall be required to borrow funds for repairs, replacements or improvements not funded from a Development reserve fund for replacements, debt service requirements for any such borrowing approved by the MPHA (which approval shall not unreasonably be withheld) shall be included in Allowed Project Expenses; provided, further, that MHOP Unit Expenses (as hereinafter defined) shall be reducexi by any. amounts contributed by the MPHA or EDA, on a grant basis, for repairs, ' rePlacements or improvements; management fees payable pursuant to the Property Management -Agreement; legal expenses associated with the operation of the Development as well as accounting and audit .expenses, including tax return preparation expenses, permitted to be charged as project expenses pursuant to HUD Handbook 4370.2 REV-l, Financial Operations and Accounting Procedures for Insured Multifarnily Projects, or any successor thereto; and D:~tlq'N 125~29~DOCS~INITIAL. DOC 5 I]q'ITIAL A~ Bo reserves for replacements and for any other purposes, as required by any lender and approved by the MPI-IA~ 0 "MHOP Percentage" shall mean the higher of (i) the number of MHOP Units, divided by the total number of units at (he Development, or (ii) the net rentable square feet of the MHOP Units (assnm~ng one (1) two- bedroom unit, one (1) three-bedroom unit and one (1) four-bedroom divided by the net rentable square feet of all the units at the Development. go "MHOP Unit Expenses" shall .mean (A) Allowed Project Expenses, multiplied by the MHOP Percentage, plus (B) the payment in lieu of real · estate taxes made in respect of the MI-IOP Units, if any, plus (C) amounts paid to MHOP Unit occupants as. utility reimbursement (i.e., "negative rent"); provided, however, that if any line item expense shall be included in Estimated MHOP Unit Expenses on the basis of a percentage other than the MHOP Percentage pursuant to the second sentence of Section VII.B.(1) hereof, such expense shsl! be included in MHOP Unit ExpenSes on the basis of the same percentage; · "MHOP Unit Income" shall mean all income received in respect of MHOP Units, including tenant rents ("Tenant Rent" as defined in 24 CFR § 913.102) and any other sources of income received in respect of MHOP Units, including all types of revenue shown as line items on Form HUD 92547-A, but exclusive of operating subsidy. "Estimated Allowed Project Expenses," "Estimated MHOP Unit Expenses," and "Estimated MHOP Unit Income" shall mean the estimated amounts of such. items for. any period determined in accordance with subsection (B) hereof. Not later than 90 days prior to the anticipated Date of Full Availability ("DOFA") for occupancy of any unit of the Development, and not later than 150 days before the first day of any subsequent MPHA Fiscal Year, the Owner shall prepare and submit to the MPHA a proposed operalillg.~g~ for the following MPHA Fiscal Year (or, in the case of the year in which DOFA occurs, the rewslnder thereof) ("Operating Budget"). The Operating Budget shall project Estimated Allowed Project Expenses, Est/mated MHOP Unit Expenses, and Estimated MHOP Unit Income for the subject period, subject to the following conditions: Estimated Allowed PrOject Expenses shall be as reasonably estimated by the Owner. The MPHA may comment upon and propose changes to the Estimated Allowed Project Expenses as provided by the Owner and set forth in the Operating Budget submitted to the MPHA, but the Owner shall not be required to reduce any estimated expense below the Development-wide amount for such expenditure reasonably anticipated by the Owner for the period. However, the portion of any line item within the D:Uam~12~aX~C 6 n~rrt~a,A~ Estimated Allowed Project Expenses included in Estimated MHOP Unit Expenses shall be altered from the MHOP Percentage if the MPHA demonstrates satisfactorily that allocation of such item to the MHOP Units on the basis of the MHOP Percentage is inappropr/ate (e.g., marketing and advertising costs, if such relate solely or preponderantly.to the non MHOP units). Until the completion of initial rent-up of the MHOP Units, Estimated MHOP Unit Income shall be determined on the bas/s of assumed tenant rent collections for each unit ~size equal to the average tenant rent collections for ail units of comparable size owned and administered by the MPHA in the most recent annual or semiannual period for which such statist'cs are available at the time of the Owner's submission of the Operating Budget for such period to the MPHA For each subsequent MPHA Fiscal Year, Est/mated MHOP Unit Income shah be determined on the basis of the, aggregate tenant rents actually collected for all MHOP Units during the first six months of the preceding MPHA Fiscal Year. Notwithstanding the foregoing, with respect to any MPHA Fiscal Year, the MPHA may agree to project Estimated. MHOP Unit Income at a level different from that which would otherwise be established pur~ant to the preceding sentence, taking into account (a) the reasonably anticipated level of incomes of tenants anticipated to be admitted to the MHOP Units during such per/od, based on anticipated turnover and the aamlssions policies, and Co)'reasonably anticipated increases in income levels of existing tenants based on tenant participation in employment training and other supportive services programs. During each MPHA Fiscal Year commencing with the first MPHA Fiscal Year after DOFA, and subject to any limitations arising from application of Section 20 (e) of the Act and operation of the Development Operating Subsidy Cap, the MPHA shall pay to the'Owner an amount equal to (1) Estimated MHOP Unit Expenses for such period, less (2) Estimated IvIHOP Unit Income for the period (the "Operating Subsidy Requirement"). The MPHA shall pay to the Owner, on the first day of each month of an MPHA Fiscal Year, one-twelfth (1/12) of the Operating Subsidy Requirement for such MPHA Fiscal Year, provided, however, that the Owner and the MPHA may agree, upon determination of the Operating Budget and Operating Subsidy Requirement for any MPHA Fiscal Year, to provide for unequal monthly payments for such year. REGULATORY AND OPERATING AGREEMENT RESPONSIBILITY. Regulatory and Operating Agreement provides for.ongoing joint monitoring decision-making by the MPHA and HUD. The RESERVE FUND. 'An operatin res' by the Owner from its funds. The reserve will equal .tl!rce~e ~ears' estimated operatin~idy for the lvlHOP Units, but will be allowed to gro"W-tlmml!/r-lh-t~/est earnings and certain operating subsidy D:kMNN125~02~)C~qI'O-~t. DOC 7 INITIAL AG~ reimbursements, if any. Shortfalls, either because of the recalculation o£ three years' estimated operating subsidy or because of necessary withdrawal from the reserve may be made up by the MPH~ but it is not obligated to do so. ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. The MPHA and EDA shall each bear the costs associated with their' respective obligations and responsibilities described herein or otherwise related to the construction and operation of the MHOP Units. T RMI ATIOI Al rn/OR ..ASSICNMENX. A. In the event the EDA wishes to terminate this Agreement it may do so as follows: Ninety (90) days' notice of its intention to terminate shall be served upon the MPHA by the EDA in writing; The EDA shall assume and undertake all of the obligations and responsibilities of the MPHA as set forth in all written agreements relating to Development between the MPHA, on the one hand, and the Owner, the MI-IFA HUD or any other contracting party, on the other; The EDA shall become the contracting party with HUD with respect to the annual contributions contract governing the construction and operation of the Development; 4. HUD shall consent in writing to such termination; and The MPHA shall be released from all future liability arising from and responsibility for the ongoing construction or operation of the Development. B, All agreements executed by the MPHA with respect to the Development shall' provide for the eventualities described in this paragraph XI. MISCELLANEOUS. he No member, official, or employee of the MPHA or EDA shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to this Agreement which affects his or. her personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he or she is, directly or indirectly, interested. No member, official, or employee of the MPHA or EDA shall be personally liable to a party to this Agreement, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by any party or for any amount which may become due a party or successor or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. O:~12~ 8 INITIALA~ Co The parties hereto, for' themselves and their successors and assigns, agree that during the term of this Agreement they will comply with all atTcrmafive actiOn and non-discrimination requirements of applicable federal, state or local laws or Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and Sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions. Except as otherwise expressly provided.in, this Agreement, a notice, demand, or other, communication under the Agreement by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally; and in the case of the MPHA, is addressed to or delivered personally to the MPHA at 1001~ North Washington Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55401, Attention: ExecUtive Director, and in the'case of the EDA, is addressed to or delivered personally to thc EDA at 590 40t~ Avenue Northeast, Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3835, or at such other address with respect to either such party as that party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the other as provided in this Section. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrmnent. D:~fi'4lq125~ 9 ~ A(3REEMI~qT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the MPHA has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf and its seal to be hereunto duly affixed and the EDA has caused this Agreement to be duly executed in its name and behalf on or as of the date first above written. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS By. Comell L. Moore Its Chairman' By. Corn McCorvcy Its Executive Director COLUMBIA I~IGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By I~s .By. Its D:~NN i 2 ~I~29~DOC$~NITIAL. DOC INITIAL A~ EXECUTION COPY EXI~IT A Waiting t.ist Certifiention We h~rcby certify that. the waiting list of the IVIPHA for the Metropolitan Housing .Opportunity Program at the Columbia Heights Limited Partnership I Development in Columbia Heights, Minnesota will conform to the Consent Decree in settl~ent of Hollman et al. v. Cisneros et al., .U.S.D.C. (Minn_ Dist., 4th Div.) Civil No. 4-92o712 and 24 CFR Part 5, Part 8, 913,960 and 966 and applicable Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity laws and regulations. Dated: MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY IN AND FOR TH~ CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS By. Cora McCorvey Its Executive Director D:~qN'I 2~'~029~DOC~ A- 1 ~ A~ CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS meeun ~ oI: AU~USI ~'~, zvvv AGENDA S[CTION: ~TEtqS ['OR ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: r~, g 3)C0NSlDERATiON_0ther BUs, Communit~ Development APPROVAL ITEM: Approval of Acquisition of 3855 BY: Randy S chumacherc~]~___t BY¥:_ ~//~t~/D Main Street N.E. DATE: August 4, 2000 '"~" ISSUE STATEMENT: This is a request to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a purchase agreement for the acquisition of a non-conforming single family property located at 3855 Main Street NE. BACKGROUND/ANALYSIS: In 1997, the City of Columbia Heights established a Housing Redevelopment T.I.F. district consisting of 56 single family homes at scattered sites throughout the City. The purpose of this district was to acquire homes that were blighted, in non-conformance, and to remove or improve these sites. Last month a single family home at 3855 Main Street NE. was listed for sale by Edina Realty. This home is one of the 56 homes on the Cities TIF scattered site Housing Redevelopment district. The option of acquisition was discussed by the City Council at a work session and staff was requested to negotiate a potential purchase agreement for the City Councils consideration. The limited pay 2001 value of the property as obtained from Anoka County is $55,300. The listed asking price is $59,900. The negotiated purchase agreement which staff has prepared for City Council consideration is proposing $54,000. The recommended funding of this acquisition would come fi'om the revolving abatement fund. Because this proposal is considered a Voluntary, Arm's Length Purchase offer, staffhas requested and obtained executed waivers for relocation payments or other relocation assistance under the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies of 1970 (URA). RECOMMENDATION: Based on the City Council's direction given to staff at the work session, we have prepared a purchase agreement for the acquisition of 3855 Main Street NE in the amount of $54,000. Closing costs normally run between $700.00 to $1,000.00 for a home of this value. A closing date has been set for August 15, 2000 at Land Title Inc. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize $54,000 for acquisition of 3855 Main Street N.E. and up to $1,000 for closing costs, with funds to be appropriated from the abatement revolving fund; and furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the purchase agreement for the same. COUNCIL ACTION: l:\consent2000\Acquisition of 3855 Main St. COLUAIBIA HE;IGH?S PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD OI ?RU$?£[,$ q, MINUTES July 5, 2000 The meeting was called to order by Chair, Barbara Miller at 7:00 p.m. Those present were: Patricia Sowada, Barbara Miller, Nancy Hoium, Catherine Vesley, Richard Hubbard, and Becky Loader. It was moved, seconded, and passed to approve the minutes of the June 6~, 2000, meeting as mailed. The July 10, 2000, bill list was reviewed. It was moved, seconded, and passed that they be paid. The accounting was reviewed. Old Business: 1. The open house scheduled for August 6 for the new RUM branch of Anoka County was discussed. Board members will make final plans about attending the opening as a group at the next regular meeting on August 1. Parts have been ordered from various suppliers for the two Intemet browsers. All components will hopefully be available and installed by the end of August. There will be one browser on each floor of the library. The report supplied by Shari Briley and Marsha Tubbs concerning the Heights Pride/Jamboree activities was reviewed. The Board would like to commend Shaft for ail of her efforts. 4. The video shelving order has been confirmed and delivery is scheduled for mid-August. Foundation update was tabled until the next meeting. Barb Miller and Becky Loader will be presenting information for the City Council on this subject at a work session on July 17. The Board will be updated at the next regular meeting. 6. The Legislative summary concerning "filtering" software was reviewed. The stairwell canopy issue was reviewed and discussed. There is a meeting scheduled for next Tuesday with the various departments involved to discuss options. The 2001 budget that was submitted to finance was reviewed. The Finance Department has not returned any information to us at this time. Upcoming dates to remember were discussed: September 5, Volunteer Recognition and October 3, Budget presentation to the City Council. New Business: 1. Crosso~,er statistics were reviewed. The computer crash of 6/27/00 was discussed. The impact on the circulation statistics and other problems related to that day were reviewed. THE MINUTES OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION FROM THURSDAY, JULY 20, 2000 Thc meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. by Dennis Stroik, Chairperson. ROLL CALL: Commission Members: Dennis Stroik, Dan Swee, Bradley Peterson, Reuben Ruen, and Bob Buboltz City Representative: Linda Magee MediaOne Representative: Kathi Donnelly-Cohen Legal Counsel: Steve (~uzzetta Also present was William Sweatt of Savvy Net. ,~A'PROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Bob Buboltz, seconded by Brad Peterson, to approve the minutes from the meeting of May 18, 2000. All ayes. OLD BUSINF.~S A. Channel Check Channels 60 & 62 take awhile to come in through the receiver box. Dennis stated that he did not have this problem at home, hut he does not have.a receiver box. Kathi asked that any commission members who have boxes need to check these channels and report back at the next meeting. B. Correspondence Log and Complaint Follow Up. No formal complaints were received. C. Status of Ordinanoe Regulating Telecommunications Towers/Antennaes At a previ~ meeting, the commissioners recommended that Steve Cmzzetta look at thc ordinance and make any changes he felt was necessary, as he had mine ImoWledge in this area. Steve ~ he has been working closely with Kim Lee from SRF Consult Group who has been working with the city on its zoning issues and the comprehensive plan. He staled he has a &att done and is in the process of incorporating some of the input he has received from Kim Lee regarding the various zo~i%~ sections and what it is the city is Irying to accomplish FCC. It may he best not to include personal satellites in this ordinanoe as we cannot supercede federal law. Staff will forward a copy of the ordinance to commission members to review onoe the city receives it. Steve stated that the orig/nal ordinance that came before the commissi~ was 2-3 pages and the new one will he N~proximately 30 pages in length. D. Status of Consideration of Fnmchise Applications Received We received 2 applications for franchises. One was from Wide Open West and the other from Everest Corp. A public hearing was held July 10, 2000 and continued to September 25, 2000. The city is in the process of reviewing the technical, legal, and financial qualifications of the companies before making a decision regarding ~ranting a franchise. Hopefully, there will he ,.:~ough information by the September 25* date, to make a decision. TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MINUTES FROM AlLY 20, 2000 PAGE 2 E. Columbia Heights Subscriber Survey Results Kathi explained the survey was not done on-line, but was mailed out and Kathi tabulated the information. Motion by Bob Buboltz, seconded by Reuben Ruen to accept the ~lnnual Report nov thai ii is complete. All aves. Kathi again renewed her request to discontinue the requirement of an annual report and the subscriber survey as she feels the information is not very useful. F. Notice of Converter Lock Up Kathi Donnelly-Cohen sent a notice that there was a short term lock up on June 7~. She explained how the complaints regarding the lock up were handled. City staff did not receive any calls on this issue. G. AT & T closes Merger It was noted that the merger is now completed and approved. AT & T must do one of the following to meet the conditions set by the FCC: 1. It must divest itself of 25% ownership in Time Warner 2. It must divest itself of Liberty Media 3. It must divest itself of 9 million subscribers, which is more than what was gained in the merger. AT & T has 6 months to do one of the above to meet the conditions of the approved merger. H. Other Old Business There was no other old business. NEW BUSINESS A. Presentation by Bill Sweatt-savvy Net Mr. Sweatt's firm, Savvy Net, was retained by the City of Mirmeapolis to do an assessment of the economic feasibility of an interact fiber optic line nm up Central Avenue (from 141-37th). The plan was to divide the cost between several interested businesses with the installation to take place in conjoncfion with the road work and re- des/gn of Central Avenue during the next two years. It is being done in hopes of drawing high tech and incubator type compan/es to the Avenue. Savvy Net feels this would have to be done in conjunction with a broader redeve~ strategy for it to work and to be economically fearn'hie. Gmxion Awsumb, his landlord, is interested in getting this service to his building at 3989 Central Avenue NE. Mr. Sweatt originally contacted the City Manager to inqu/re whether this would be something Columbia Heights may be interested in extending up Central Avenue to 40~ Avenue, or posm'bly 45i Avenue, as Central Avenue is also being reconstructed between 37~ and 45~ Ave. in Columbia He/ghts. With the Medmmic headquarters located in Fridley to our north, and this possible link to our south, Columbia Heights is sitting in the middle of a possible super interact highway cotr/dor. He approached the commission to see if the city may be interested in having his company do a needs assessment. The commission members and Mr. Sweatt discussed the possible changes taking place in this area over the next few years, and thanked him for his presentation of information. B NRG-Pe, mitting Information Request for Williams Communications Fiber Optic Facilities This was an information item only. Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director, already answered this inquiry regarding what permits would be necessary to install a fiber optic cable project within Columbia Heights. TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION MINUTES FROM YULY 20, 2000 PAGE 3 C. Other New Business *Notice was received that the semi annual proof of perfonnancetesting will be done in August. *The report for the signal leakage test was received. *Reuben inquired about the term "Competitive Neutrality" and bow it would affect the various franchises. A discussion followed regarding the new companies agreeing to the level playing field provision. Steve explained this provision will actually make it very difficult as the franchises will probably not expire at the same time and therefore, any requirements that are added or changed at the renewal time of one company could cause legal ramifications with the other franchised entities. To synchronize the expirations of the franchises would also be difficult to do. This is something that will need to be addressed as most cities will be fi'anchising more than one company. REPORTS A. Report of Commissioners Educational-Linda reported that a request for funding equipment purchases for the schools was made by Dennis Stroik, to be included in the 2001 budget. The amount of $25,000 was put into the proposed budget, but the entire budget will go through a review process before going to Council. At this time, she has no idea whether it wilt be approved or not. B. Report of MediaOne- Kathi reported that the information that is public, was included in the agenda packets for review. She also stated that she likes the design of the new Columbia Heights Gateway Signs and felt these would be a nice addition. C. Report of the Cable Attorney *The franchise fee audit is moving along. They have issued 2 or 3 data requests to MediaOne. The accountants working on the audit will be going to MediaOne's headquaxters to look over some old records that are on micro fiche. Upon the findings of that h-xformation, we should have the report soon. *The 9~ Circuit Court issued a ruling regarding cable modem service in Portland. The court did not feel the modem service was a cable service, and therefore, may not be subject to franchise fees. This will not affect cities * Steve is working on the request for data from WOW and Everest to obtain financial information needed for the possible new fi'anchise they m'e seeking. D. Report of the Assistant to the City Menag~ Linde stated that the Web Site has had 1,074 hits with 787 files downloaded and 38 job applications that have been downloaded. We're off to a good start! Reuben said his son, Tom, has volunteered to input data onto the web site ifthe city would like his assistance. Linda ~plained she will pass this information on, but that City Staffhas the final word as to what is put on the site. Reuben also questioned if staff would like suggestions as to what should be put on the site. She said, yes, make suggestions, and city staff will decide if the information can be put on line. Motion by Bob Buboltz , seconded by Brad Peterson , to adjourn the meeting at 9: l O pm. All ayes. Shelley Hanson City of Columbia Heights Park and Recreation Commission July 26, 2000 THESE MINUTES HAVE NOT BEE'N APPROVED The meeting was called to order by Eileen Evans at 6:30 p.m. ROLL CALL Members present: Eileen Evans; Pat Cullen; Bob Ruettiman; Bruce Magnuson; Gary Mayer; Scott Niemeyer; Gary Peterson; Keith Windschitl, Recreation Director Members absent: Jerry Foss; Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engineer APPROVAL CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Niemeyer, second by Magnuson to approve the consent agenda. All ayes,, motion carried. LETrF_~R$ AND REOUESTS REQUI~ST FOR REMOVAL OF TREES / GAUVITTE PARK Prior to the start of the meeting, two residents who live in the area of Gauvitte Park came to the meeting to request the removal of several trees that are growing through the chain link fence near the apartment complex. They indicated that if tho trees are not removed, the fence will be ruined. They had called Public Works last year to report the situation, but the trees are still there. The residen~.s left two photographs showing the site where the trees are growing inside the chain link fence. The photos will be forwarded to Public Works along with the request. REQUEST FOR USE OF CITY VAN / SISTER CITIES COMMITTEE Members reviewed the letter from Esther Guzik of thc Sister Cities Committee requesting use of the city van for a trip to Winona, lVlN on Thursday, October 19. Members also reviewed the City Council letter in which use of the City van was to be limited to City departments. Members felt that the policy should be followed. Motion by Evans, second by Mayer to direct staff to send a letter to Esther Guzik stating that her request to use the City van does not meet the policy requirements set forth by the City Council. All ayes, motion carried. NOTE: In speaking with the City Manager on July 27, the Recreation Director discovered that membership dues for the Sister Cities organization are paid yearly by the City of Columbia Heights. The City Manager felt that this qualifies the Sister Cities' trip as City business. A phone poll was conducted. A quorum of the Park and Recreation Commission members were contacted via a phone poll. All members who participated in the phone poll voted to rescind their motion and approve the request of the Sister Cities to use the City van on Thursday, October 19. PAGE TWO OLD BUSINESS There is no old business at this time. NEW SU$INESS There is no new business at this time.' REPORTS RECREATION DIRECTOR - All programs are running smoothly at this time. - The Recreation Director will meet with the City Manager tomorrow to discuss the 2001 budget. - The ice machine has been replaced. It had broken down and was not able to be repaired. The Recreation Director had budgeted for a new stove; however, the ice machine was purchased using this money. He will budget for a new stove in the 2001 budget. - The Recreation Director received a call from a resident who lives near Gauvitte Park. This resident was concerned about a group of men who are meeting in the park several nights a week to practice football. The resident had no complaints about their behavior, but simply felt they should not be in the park. She was advised that it is a public park and we cannot tell people to stay away without a good reason. She indicated she would pursue her complaint farther. - The Recreation Director is working with Public Works to put a bid spec together with elevations for the repair of the rear parking lot of Murzyn Hall. The retaining wall project behind Murzyn Hall should be completed prior to the parking lot repairs. PUBLIC WORKS DmECTOR/CITY ENGINEER No report at this time. MEMBERS - Members inquired as to the status of the retaining wall behind Murz3m Hall. The Recreation Director indicated he does not know the Public Works' timetable for this project, but it should be completed before the parking lot is repaired. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Evans to adjourn. All ayes, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. Janice McGhee-Fetzer, Park & Recreation Commission Secretary MinutesUulyO0 OFFICIAL PROCEEDINGS COLUMB~ HEIGHTS TRAFFIC COMMISSION AUGUST 7, 2000 "~HESE MINUTEs APPROVED,, The meeting of the Traffic Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Ed Carlson. II. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Members Absent: S taft Pre sent: Anderson, Carlson, Stumpf, Sturdevant Goodman · Kath Young, Assistant City Engineer Tom Johnson, Police Chief ~ APPROVAL OF MAY 1, 2000 MINUTES Motion by Sturdevant, second by Stumpf, to approve the minutes of May 1, 2000 meeting. Motion passed unanimously. OLD BUSINESS None OTHER OLD BUSINESS None. NEW BUSINESS A. REQUEST TO DESIGNATE "2-HOUR PARKING-SCHOOL DAYS" ON RESIDENTIAL STREET SURROUNDING THE HIGH SCHOOL Ms. Jane Liepold, High School Principal, met with Police Chief Johnson and Captain Bill Roddy to discuss parking issues at the high school. This fall the annual pemait fee for parking in the high school lot will be raised from $5 to $80. Raising the fee will allow the school to provide a security guard during the day. Ms. Liepold is concerned students will park on the residential streets instead of paying the permit fee. The 2-hour limit is proposed for the following streets: · 49* Ave., Johnson St. to Kordiak Park west entrance (north side) 49* Ave., Highland Elementary to 1710 49t~ Ave. (south side) · Fairway Drive, 49* Ave. south to the first curve (both sides) Columbia Heights Traffic Commission August 7, 2000 Page 2 · Fillmore St., Lincolfi Terrace to Pierce Terrace (both sides) (49* Ave. to Lincoln Terrace posted "No Parking-5 AM to 7 PM School Days) · Lincoln Terrace, 1220to 1430 LincoIn Terrace (both sides) · Molan Terrace (both sides) · 50* Ave, 1200 50* Ave. to Fillmore Street (both sides) · Buchanan St., Fillmore St. to 1340 Buchanan St. (both sides) · Johnson St., 49* Ave. to 4975 Johnson St. (east side). (West side is posted "No Parking" to Ramsdell Park.) Commissioner Carlson stated the school district has created a parking problem and felt Ms. Liepold should be discussing this with the School Board. Commission members felt it was hard to determine the number of students who would be parking on the street vs. paying to park in the school lot. Staff recommended the parking situation be reviewed once school is in session. Police Chief Johnson suggested that he have officers monitor cars parking in residential areas when school begins. Flyers could be placed on cars informing them of the six-hour parking restriction and notifying them that they will be tagged if they continue to park in this area. Signage options were discussed including "No Parking", "2-hour Parking", '`No Parking-School Days, 7-9 AM". Commission members felt that residents in the area would object to having '`No Parking" in front of their property. A Public Hearing would be necessary to allow residents to state their opinions on "no parking" signage. Motion by Sturdevant, second by Stumpf, to direct staff to review the parking on local streets after school is in session and report back to the Traffic Commission at the September 13, 2000 meeting. Roll Call: Motion carried unanimously. REQUEST TO INSTALL "SLOW-CHILDREN" SIGN IN THE AREA OF 52~a~ AVENUE AND 5TM STREET Mrs. Rose Corbett of 5152 5* St. have requested a "Slow-Children" sign for the 5* St. and 52~ Ave. area. The concern is speed. Several years ago Mn/DOT sent a letter advising against the installation of this type of sign except in unusual situations. Motorists should expect the presence of children and pedestrians in residential areas. Columbia Heights Traffic Commission August 7, 2000 Page 3 VI. VII. Chief Johnson was unaware of a speed problem in this area and said he would bring the speed trailer out. He indicated that the street is not a playground and children should not be playing in it. A "slow-children" sign is not enforceable. Co Motion by Stumpf, second by Anderson, to table the request to install a "Slow- Children" sign and direct staff to conduct a traffic survey of speed and volumes. Motion carded unanimously. REQUEST TO REVISE PARKING FROM "LOADING ZONE" TO "15- MINUTE PARKING"ON WASHINGTON STREET AT ST. MATTHEWS LUTHERAN CHURCH St. Matthews Lutheran Church has obtained a conditional use permit fi:om the City to operate a Day Care facility. The Day Care will be limited to 25-30 children. The church is requesting the current "Loading Zone" be revised to "15- minute parking". The original request for the loading zone was to allow someone to be dropped off near the door of the church and then proceed to park in the lot. A vehicle is not to be left unattended in a loading zone. Changing the parking designation will allow a parent to park the car and drop off or pick up their child inside thc church and still serve as a loading zone at other times. It is staff's opinion that the intent of the parking restriction is the same and no Public Hearing is required. Motion by Smrdevant, second by Anderson, to redesignate the "Loading Zone" as "15-minute parking". OTHER NEW BUSINESS None REPORTS A. CITY ENGINEER 1. SEPTEMBER MEETING As the normal meeting date (September 4) falls on Labor Day, an alternate date of September 13 was set for the Traffic Commission meeting. Columbia Heights Traffic Commission August 7, 2000 Page 4 2. HANDICAP PARKING SIGNS At the request of the residents, handicap parking signs were installed at 1102 Gould Avenue and 3709 Polk Street. 3. METRO TRANSIT BUS STOP LOCATION Metro Transit has requested the relocation of the existing bus stops on 40t~ and 41st Avenues and Central Avenue. Presently they stop north of 40t~ Avenue and north of 41a Avenue. Relocating these bus stops to the south would mean they would be stopping in the right turn lane at both 40t~ and 41't and Central Avenue. Traffic Commission members indicated they did not agree with moving the bus stops to the south sides of 40t~ Avenue and 41~t Avenue and suggested a representative from Metro Transit attend the next meeting to discuss other options. Motion by Sturdevant, second by Anderson, to direct staff to request Metro Transit representative attend the September 13~ Traffic Commission Meeting and present alternatives for bus parking at 40t~ and 4 l't Avenues and Central Avenue. Motion carried unanimously. B. POLICE CHIEF Chief Johnson indicated new software has been ordered for the speed trailer and once installed will produce better reports. Motion by Sturdevant, second by Stumpf, to adjourn the meeting at 8:15 p.m. Traffic Commission Secretary CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (6 ! 2) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES August 8, 2000 MEMBERS Tom RamsdalL Chak K~vin Hanson Ted Yehle Stephan Johnson Tammera Ericson The August 8, 2000 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting was called to order by at 7:00 p.m. by Chairperson Ramsdell. Members present were Ericson, Johnson, and Ramsdell. Commissioners Hanson and Yehle were not in attendance. Also present were Kathryn Pepin (Secretary to the Planning and Zoning Commission), and Tim Johnson (City Planned. MOTION by Johnson, seconded by Ericson, to approve the minutes from the meeting of July 11, 2000 as presented in writing. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. NEW BUSINESS Public Hearing Variance Case//2000-0820 Ralph Pautsch Construction RE: 4524 Fillmore St. N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. Mr. Johnson presented the request of Ralph Pautsch on behalf of Barb Reed the property owner of 4524 Fillmore Street for a setback variance of eight inches from the rear property line to allow the construction of a 20' x 30' detached garage with the doors facing the alley at 4524 Fillmore Street. The applicant had originally proposed to build a garage measuring 22 feet by 30 feet as outlined in the original request, which exceeded the maximum lot coverage. This request has been downsized to meet the maximum 30% lot coverage in place. The applicant is now proposing to build a detached garage measuring 20 feet by 30 feet (600 square feet) at 4524 Fillmore Street. The variance is being requested to allow for a proposed garage to be built nineteen feet and four inches (19' 4") from the rear property line abutting the alley. The proposed garage would face the west or towards the alley. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance requires garages to be set back a minimum distance of twenty (20) feet from the property line when the garage doors face a street or alley. He explained that the proposed garage would infringe eight inches {8")into the setback area. The existing house occupies 1,691 square feet of property with the proposed detached garage occupying an additional 000 square feet. The total amount of lot coverage proposed with the addition of the detached garage would be 2,291 square feet. Ordinance 9.104(5) allows for a maximum lot coverage of 30%. The lot measures approximately 7,744 square feet and allows a maximum lot coverage of 2,323 square feet. Mr. Johnson stated that this proposal meets lot coverage requirements. Mr. Johnson further stated that the purpose of the request is to provide off-street enclosed parking for existing tenants of the two unit dwelling. The tenants currently park on a concrete slab abutting the alley. THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OI~ DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 2 Accessory structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance with requirements as follows: No accessory structure shall exceed the height of the principal structure or fifteen (15) feet, whichever is less. The height of the garage should be within these limits. No accessory structure or combination of accessory structUres shall exceed 1,000 square feet. The proposed detached garage covers 600 square feet meeting requirements. Any lot over 8,500 square feet in size may have a lot coverage of up to 30%. The lot is 7,744 square feet. The maximum allowable lot coverage for this lot is 2,323 square feet. This proposal would cover 2,291 square feet. This proposal meets lot coverages. Detached accessory structures must be six (§) feet or more from the principal structure. The proposed detached garage will be approximately six (6) feet away from the principal structure. Whenever a garage is designed so that the vehicle entry door is facing a street or alley, the distance between the door and the lot line shall be 20 feet or more. The proposed detached two-car garage will be placed nineteen feet, four inches (19'4") from the rear lot line, with the garage doors facing the alley. The proposal requires an eight inch (8") variance. Mr. Johnson stated that Staff has visited the site and believes that a slight hardship exists with relation to the topography of the site, which limits where and how a garage could be built without reasonable difficulty. There are also existing concrete blocks surrounding the current slab area that are at or below grade. Because of these issues staff has looked at possible options for building a reasonable sized garage to fit within the setbacks. The proposed garage could be placed on the property to meet setbacks if the garage doors were faced to the north. However, this proposal would require the owner to remove the existing sidewalk that leads up to the house on the south property line, as well as removing an existing patio area for the tenants. It was Mr. Johnson's opinion that the proposed two-plus car garage would intend to complement the property and would also provide covered and secured parking facilities for the tenants as well as a great improvement for the property. Mr. Johnson reminded the Commissioners that hardship needs to be established or circumstances unique to the property in question need to be established in order for a variance to be granted adding that Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance also states that the Commission shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Ordinance in instances where their "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". He stated that Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified as follows: PLANNING ANO ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 3 protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; and, preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land and buildings surrounding them. Mr. Johnson stated that Staff recommends approval of the request because there does appear to be a hardship on which to base approval of the variance and the proposal appears to be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. He added that it is staff's opinion that, because the lot coverages will be met, the property will not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property will be maintained and be improved. There is also an existing garage with doors facing the alley adjacent to this property, that is approximately 14 feet from the property line. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. The public hearing was closed as no one was present to speak regarding this request. Motion by Johnson, seconded by Ericson, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the eight (8) inch setback variance request to allow the construction of a 20 foot by 30 foot detached garage facing the alley at 4524 Fillmore Street N.E. due to topographic hardship and existing sidewalk and patio as well as the proposal being in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE AUGUST 14, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Public Hearing Variance Case//2000-0821 Kevin Doty 1845 Fairway Drive N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn. Tim Johnson presented the request of Kevin Dory for a setback variance of eight feet, six inches to allow the construction of an addition to the attached garage space measuring 13 feet wide by 24 feet deep (312 square feet) at 1845 Fairway Drive. The variance is being requested to allow for the proposed addition to be built 21.5 feet from the rear property line. The proposed addition would be on the east side of the existing structure. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that Section 9.107(4) of the Zoning Ordinance requires principal structures to be set back a minimum distance of thirty (30) feet from the rear property line. He added that the proposed garage would infringe not closer than 21.5 feet to the rear property line. Attached garages are considered as part of the principal structure and are subject to the same setbacks as the house. The existing house occupies 1,066 square PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 4 feet of property, the existing attached garage occupies an additional 424 square feet, and the proposed addition occupies 312 square feet. The total lot coverage of the house with the additions will be 1,914 square feet, which would be well within ordinance requirements in the R-1 (single family residential) Zoning District. Mr. Johnson explained that the purpose of this request is to gain additional enclosed parking and storage room. The applicant currently has a two-car garage, but one stall was partially converted into extra kitchen space by previous owners, thus leaving only one usable enclosed parking space. Mr. Johnson informed the Commission that there are no previous Planning and Zoning Commission cases pertaining to this site. However, he stated that in December of 1995 a variance case for the property at 1850 N.E. 49~" Avenue, which abuts 1845 Fairway on the north, was approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. The variance of thirteen feet (13') was approved for an addition onto the rear of the house. Mr. Johnson stated that residential structures are regulated under Section 9.104(5) of the Zoning Ordinance and are as follows: Minimum lot size shall be 8,400 square feet. The subject property is 9,838 square feet which meets this requirement. Minimum lot width is 70 feet. The subject property is 105 feet wide which meets this requirement. · Front yard shall be a minimum of 25 feet from property line. The existing house is approximately 28 feet. Rear yard shall be at least 30 feet. The existing house is approximately 26 feet from the rear property line at its closest point. A majority of the house meets the 30 foot setback from the rear property line as the lot configures at an angle on the north lot line. The existing deck is also within the 30 foot setback area, and is approximately 15 feet from the rear lot line. The house and deck are considered "legal non- conforming". Side yard shall be a minimum of seven (7) feet. The existing house and proposed addition will be placed at no closer than 7.5 feet from the side yard, which meets this requirement. An accessory structure shall be considered to be an integral part of the principal building if it is connected to the principal building. For single-family homes, no accessory structures or any combination of accessory structures shall exceed 1,000 square feet. The existing garage is 424 square feet and the proposed addition is 312 square feet totaling 736 square feet which meets this requirement. Any lot over 8,500 square feet may have a lot coverage of up to 30%. The maximum lot coverage on the property is 2,951 square feet. The applicant has proposed 1,912 square feet which meets the requirement. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 5 Mr. Johnson stated that, with the exception of the rear yard setback requirement, the proposal meets the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The existing attached garage and the proposed attached garage do not meet the setback requirements noting that the structure was built in 1965, prior to the adoption of these regulations, so it is considered legally non-conforming. Section 9.104(3) of the ordinance states that normal maintenance of a non- conforming structure is permitted, provided it does not extend or intensify the non-conformity. He added that the proposal would further encroach into the setback area, as the garage will be expanded on the east side of the lot. Considering that the non-conformity will be intensified, a permit cannot be granted without the approval of a variance. He stated that the addition matches up with the pxisting attached garage but is closer to the lot line because of the shape of the lot. Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance states the following "In recommending a variance, it shall be found that by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of lot or whereby reason of exceptional topography, soil conditions, tree number or location or water conditions the owner of such lot would have an undue hardship in using his lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the rules of the zoning district." Mr. Johnson stated that Staff has visited the site and believes that a hardship exists with relation to the shape of the lot, which restricts an addition onto the east or north of the house because of the setbacks. Because of these issues, staff has looked at possible options for adding additional attached garage space within the setbacks. There appear to be no other locations on the lot that could reasonably accommodate this addition or a similar addition to meet setbacks. If the lot were square or rectangular shaped, the addition would meet setbacks. If a detached structure were built to meet setbacks, the depth of the garage would be approximately 15 feet, which could not accommodate a normal sized vehicle. It was Mr. Johnson's opinion that the proposed garage addition would intend to complement the property, would also provide additional covered and secured parking for the owners and would be a nice improvement to the property. The proposed addition would appear to match up with adjacent homes and their properties. However, there is only one other home on the same block that has the appearance of a three-car garage. Section 9.105(3)(d) of the Zoning Ordinance also states that the Commission shall hear requests for variances from the literal provisions of this Ordinance in instances where their "strict enforcement would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and to recommend variances only when it is demonstrated that such action will be in keeping with the spirit and intent of this Ordinance". Section 1 of the Zoning Ordinance identifies the intent and purpose of the Ordinance. Four of the purpose statements are identified as follows: protecting the public health, safety, and general welfare; dividing the City into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, the percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; providing adequate light, air, and convenience of access to property; and, preventing overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to surrounding land and buildings. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING- MINUTES AUGUST 8, 2000 PAGE 6 Mr. Johnson indicated the positive aspects of this proposal are that tho proposal will create additional enclosed and secured off-street parking for two vehicles, which will help to enhance the character of the residential neighborhood and provide needed parking space for the single-family structure and the addition will follow an established building line that matches the existing structure. He added that the negative aspects of this proposal would be that the addition will intensify and extend a non-conforming structure and infringe into the rear yard setback area and thereby could set a precedent for approval of other similar type proposals. Mr. Johnson stated that a prior variance granted to the neighbor at 1850 N.E. 49m Avenue was five feet closer than the proposed variance currently requested. It is staff's, opinion that because minimum lot coverages will be met, the property will not be overcrowded, and adequate light, air, and convenient access to the property will be maintained and improved upon. It was his opinion that the proposal is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. He added that staff does have some concerns about this site and some proposed future additions that would also need variance approvals. Chairperson Ramsdell opened the public hearing. Chairperson Ramsdell asked Mr. Doty if the tree in front of the proposed addition would be removed and if the width of his driveway would be increased. Mr. Dory stated that the tree would be removed. It is also his intent to increase the curb cut for his driveway to the maximum width of twenty-two feet. In response to Planner Johnson's concerns with future variance requests and the possibility of a precedent being set, Chairperson Ramsdell stated that each variance request is different and is considered on an individual basis based on the information provided and the existing conditions when they are presented to the Commission. Chairperson Ramsdell closed the public hearing. Motion by Ericson, seconded by Ramsdell, to recommend to the City Council the approval of the 8.5 foot setback variance request due to the irregular shape of the lot as well as the fact that the proposal is in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed. **THIS ITEM TO APPEAR ON THE AUGUST 14, 2000 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA. Motion by Johnson, seconded by Ramsdell, to adjourn the meeting at 7:45 p.m. Voice Vote: All Ayes. Motion passed, j Secretary to th~' Plannifqi~MSd Zoning Commission kp