275808 WHI7E - CITV CLERK COUIICIl "d���� �� Q
PINK J FINANCE G I TY OF SA I NT PA l� L
CANARY — DEPARTMENT � P. � iF
B`UE - MAVOR File NO. ���� \�
ncil Resolution -
Presented By
Referred To Committee: Date
Out of Committee By Date
A RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO INTERIM FUNDING OF GILLETTE
HOSPITAL DEMOLITION (EXCEPT WEST WING)
RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Saint Paul, upon
recommendation of the Mayor and with the advice of
the Long-Ra.nge Capital Improvement Budget Committee,
that the 1979 Capital Improvement Budget, as heretofore
adopted and amended by this Council, is hereby further
amended in the following particulars:
Amendments
Capital Improvement Bond Funding FROM TO •
Page
35 R-35 Downtown People Mover 96079-001 179,500
None C-XX Gillette Demolition 9 6 079-00 � 179,500
/
��i�
Appropriation Analysis
Current Amended
Appropriation Change Appropriation .
R-35 DPM 96079-001 750,500 -179,500 571,000
Gillette Demolition -0- +179,500 179,500
96079-002_M� �
�J�'�
and, be it,
COU[VCILMEN Requested by Department of:
Yeas Nays
In Favor
_ __ Against BY --
Form Approved by ty!Att ey
Adopted by Council: Date —
Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY
By
Approved by 17ayor: Date _ App ved or for S bmi C�ncil
BY - — BY
WHITE — GTV CLERK yyy���,�(( /� ((('''SSS���
PINK � FINANCE G I TY OF SA I NT PA U L COURCII ����(��eP
CANARV — DEPARTMENT � �t7 79
BI�UE — MAVOR � Flle NO. � �����"�
Council Resolution
Presented By
Referred To Committee: Date
Out of Committee By Date
.
FURTHER RESOLVED, that such amendment transferring funds
from the Downtown People Mover project account is
intended to be temporary, the identified $179,500
to be restored to the Downtown People Mover account
by resolution of this Council transferring that
amount from the Debt -
Capital Improvement Fund at such time as the
Debt - Capital IMprovement Fund attains a balance
of $179,500.
♦ .
The St. Paul Long-Range Capital Improvement
Budget Co �mittee received this request on
(,aate)� � and recominends
Q
Signed: '
ngte:� �� �'?���—
ri
APPROVED A5 TO FUNDING: APPROVED:
/
Bernard J Carlson � R�.chard E. Schroeder
Director of Finance� Budget Director
COU[VC[LMEN
Yeas Nays Requested by Department of:
Hunt �
Levine [n Favor
Maddox
McMahon � __ A gainst BY
Showaiter
Ted _
ilson Or+T � 4 ��p� Form Appro by i y At ney
Ado d by Counci Date �+ ilou �
ertified . -ed by Co cil Sec�etary BY
By� � �
. � �+ `
Approved avor: Date _ � V 1�80 Appr ayor for Subm' to Council
BY - — BY
��� 0 C T 2 v 1980
. . .. � . �tJS���t�
' .;��:�;T,��o^:,-_: �� CITY OF SAlNT PAUL
�;���� ;� ''-' LONG-RANGE CAPl�TAL IMPROVEMEN�T BUDGET COMMlTTEE
4 Z�'.
GO , '�i
�'.� Illl"1�1��i{i �: .
=,�, ?!'-'�"!E''' ��: OFFICE OF 7HE MAYOR — BUDGET SECTION
;� -
'�: s`"� 367 City Hail,Saint Paui,Minnesota 55102
�::�,��.�•.,�.
``. 612-298-4323
G[ORGE LATL'v1ER
MAYOR
September 12, 1980
Honorable George Latimer, Mayor
347 City Hall
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102
Mayor Latimer:
RE: Gillette Demolition
The atta�hed r.esolution came before the Long-Range Capital
Improve:�:ent Budget Cori.-nittee at the Committee ' s September 11
meetin;:. It' s consideration had been laid over from the
August �� meeting p2ndi�g Planning Commission review. The
Plannin.; Commission reviewed the project August 22 (findings
attachecz} .
The Cap��al Improvertenf Budget.�Committee , in accordance with
Section 57 . 09 of the Saint Paul , Minnesota Administrative Code,
revie�aed the attached resolution amending the 1979 Capital
Improvem�nt Budget and advises as follows :
PdOTION by Mr. Wittman, seconded by Mr. Gmeinder,
recommending no action be taken by the Comrnittee
in regard to the Capital Budget amendment before
it and inviting the City Council to take this
opportunity to reapen consideration of the highest
and best use of the Gillette Hospital site; and
that such consideration be undertaken through next
spring' s Unified Capital Improvement Prograrri and
Budc�et Process.
Motion carried unanim�usly.
�O
,
��
. . . � � ����i
r�•-
September 12, 1980 Page 2
The consensus of the Committee was two-fold: (1) That
established capital budget process procedures, involving the
Planning Commission and CIB Committee, had not been followed
in considering the Gillette site as a municipal capital
improvement versus a housing development; and (2) that the
citywide perspective---as opposed to the neighborhood perspective--
on the use of the Gillette site had not been afforded adequate
airing.
Like the Planning Commission, the Capital Improvement Budget
Committee stands ready to assist you or City Council further .in
this matter, at your request.
Sincerely, .
�GGci'� Y ���
DAVID G. MCDONELL �
Chairma�
DGD:dw
cc : Mr. Thomas FitzGibbon, Planning Commission Chairman
Me:~:bers of the Capi�.al Improvement Budget Committee
Me�::�ers of the Ci-�y Co'unci.l
Mrs. Rose Mix, City Clerk
Ms . Sue �Vanelli , District 5 Community Organizer
-.�4 � T�.r �� � --- . . . . .ti„
. � e� „-,-��:�„-�Y: , ' �- , CiTY PtANN1NG CflMMJ�$IC?
`'M tltl�i��ll��w�-J ' , �
. i� A
'� ' Tf�omas P. jitzCibbon, r. 4
�••• .°' J , Ch irr:t;
' �'''"��,:...,.._�.�
I5 West Fourth Street,Sa�iit Paut,Minrie,pE,, 5S�
GEORGE Ul71MER • G12-29&y.
M/1YOR
��K����
August 22, 1980 � _ .
_ �
. Honorabie Georg� Latimer � -
Mayor
Ci�ty of St. Paul . -
347 Ci-ty Na 11 ; . � .
St. Paui , Minnesota 55102 - �
Qear P4ayor Latimer:
The P.lanning Commis�ion was recently asked by your of�ice ta revieti�r the proposed
1980 Capitai Im�rovement Budget amendment related to the Gilette Hospital site. �
In accordance Hritn M.�. 462.356, Subd. 2, of 57.07 of the St_ Pau1 Administrative
Cade, the Planning Commission must review the proposed amendment for conformance
�ri th the Ci ty's Comprenens i ve P1 an.
At its meeting of August 22, i980, the Planning Cammission considered the pro�osed
budget amendment and adopted the attacf�ed report and findings. .
In discu.ss�ng thzs r�atter, the Comm��ssion also expressed several cancerns which
--I have be��, di rected �a share with you. '
First, the �ommission is cencerned <<�ith the rather signi•fican� co►��=1ict beti�reen
ti�e Gi17e:�e proposal and tf�e City's Comprehensive Plar�, including adopted as t•reli
as propos�� plan elenents. Furthermore, the Commission is concerned ti•�ith the
decision-,�:a;ing process follo.�red by tf�e City Council in tnis matter, especial7y
the bzlate�� involvement of the Pianning CommissiQn. This "after the fact request
for P�lanning Commission review is, hopefully, not ta be construed as a precedent �
for the future. Finally, we are concerned t�tith the apparer;t circumvention of the
established Capital 8udget review process involving bo�h the Capi�al Zmprovement
Budget Com�nittee and the Planning Commission. . I�. ��rould appear that �n th�s �nstance,
-the Ci ty Counci 7 has al ready commi tted funds and de�nol i ti on i s undenr�ay and the
review by tne Planning Corrmission and CTB Cor�nittee is, therefore9 moot.
The Comm7ssian stands ready to provide any further assistance to yoc� or the City
Council that, we can to reso7ve the various concerns related tQ the Gil�ette proposal-
and the budget�amendr�ent process. Thank you for consideration.
Sincerely, _
��.�.P� ���, -
Thomas P. FitzGibb �
� Chairman
cc; City Council Members �
District 5 Council Chairman, Doug Forsberg
Capital Improvement Budget Committee F�embers .
Rose Mix, City Clerk . - .
..��n .
►
� • � w � ' CtTY OF SAINT PAI,
. , ,t� . .
� a; DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ECONOMlC DEVELOPMEi�
��:�� .:
- :����� -� .
��
�� .
DIVISION OF PtANi�i1N
.... ,
��''�"'� 25 West Fourth Street,Saint Paut,Min�esota,55i
.;EOftGE CATIMER . - 6rt2_2�}8-q�
MAYOk � '
MEh10RRNDUM .
DATE: August 15, 198Q . � _
TD: Pianning Commission � - - .
FROti: Comprehensive P7anning Staff . - .
RE: Capita7 Improvement Budge�t Amendment: Gillette Haspital
Introduction - -
The City Council i�s seeking an amendm�nt of the 1980 Capital Improvement Buciget �o
provi de fund i ng for the t�emo7�ti on of al l be2t the tdest !�!i ng of G�1 i ette Hospi tal � �
In accordarce with t�I.S. 462.356, Subd . 2 and 57.07 of the St_ Paul , Minnesota, . -
Administrat�ve Code, the Pianning Commission must reviet�t the propaszd arrendment for
conformance ti�r�th the city's CompreF�ensive Plan. The Capita7 Impravement Budget
Committee has cieelined to mal�e a budgetary recommendatian un�i1 after the Cornmission
revie�•rs the proposal for conformance t•iith the Comprehensive P1an_
Back round � . . �
Log Number: C-05xx (unassio��ed) : -
Operati►�� �•eoartment: Co,�rtunity Services , Division of Parks and Recreation
Description: Acquisition of approxir►iately l3 acres of undereztilized iand adjacent
to Pha�en Park, demolition of structures, except t�Jest 4�ing of formzr
Gi17e�te Hospital , and development of property as an additi�n tv
Phalen Regional Park.
Location: Ivy Avenue between Forest Street and Earl S�reet. - -
Justification. Additional land to serve needs of users of Phalen Regional Far�c.
Funding Schedule: 1980 - $213,000; interim funding from 1979 Capital Tmpravement
� • Bonds (borrowecl from DP�1 project accaunt� ; ultimate funding from
1980 Debt-Capital Improvement Fund .
Future - Unkno�,vn; parl: developrnent costs �o be a minimur� of �T70,000
Estimated Effect on Operatin� Budqet: +$6,000 per year.
Est�mated Eff`ect on Future Revenues: IVone
Status: Contract for demo ition has been Tet, at a cost of $128,000.
Analysis . .
Four elements �of the Comprehensive Plan bear directly on tF�e Gillette proposal � The
Parks and Recreation P1an, the Housing Plan, the propased land Use F1an, and the _
District 5 Plan. -
. " . .- . -z- , .
, � . ; �
.� - � . , � - ��7����.
a �.��..,� �
.rarks and Recreation P7an (adopted by City Courici� September 18, 1979)
� _
The Gillette proposal wou?d directiy conflict ��rith one specific policy of this
plan:
,� M-5 Provisions -For maintenance shall be made before propasals fior ne1•i facilities
� , are approved (page 8) . '
i . -
� Tn acldition, the proFosal would appear to confl�ict t•r-ith the general thrust o-E the
Plan, t�rhich includes the following policies (pages 6-7� :
. ; _
�
. G-1 The City shail be responsibie for the acquisition, development, operation
and programming of those recreat�on eiements c7assi�fied as mini-park, neighbor:
_. recreation center, neighborhood park, community recreation cerrter, corr�r►unity
park, athietic Fields and citywide speciai use areas .
G-2 The City should encourage the county and the Metropolitan Gouncil to sF�are
witFt the city the responsibility for tf�e acquisition, development, operation
and programming of those recreation elements classified as regional parks,
� regional historic parks , regional special use areas and regional trails.
A-1 Maximum use sha11 be made of existing public facilities and land.
A-2 The acquisition of land in areas with a defined need tvith no recreation servicf
s��u7d take priori�y over the acquisition of land to expand existing recrea�ior
ar�as . ° -
A-3 T�e acquisition o� vacant land should talce priority over the acquisition of
developed land . - �
A-4 La:�d acquisition s;�all be consistent with the Parks and Recreation Plan
The general direci.ian of these policies is that funds are lim�ited, and acquisition
of' park 7and by the City should a7so be limited to providing recrea�ion space
in underserved areas . 7he Phalen n�ignbornood is not identified in the Plan as an
unde.rserved area.
2. Housin Plan (adopted by Pianning Commission; Hearing before City Council or�
August 28 .
The G�llette pro�osa7 would not be in direct confilic� �•rith any specific policy
of tf�e Housing Plan, but it would not be in keeping 4vith the general thrust of
city hausing policy--that the c�ty needs to provide a 1arge nu��bpr of additional
housi ng uni ts and ti�ri 11 expl ore a11 avai 1 ab7 e opportuni ti es . Housi ng ���as frequent�y
suggested as an appropriate reuse for the site in earlier discussions .
3e Land Use Plan (a��roved by Land Use Comrnittee; Pub1ic Hearing on August 22� . - '
" The Gi7lette proposal �•rould conflict witln a proposed policy regarding the reuse • �
o� institutional lands. �
Policy 4.3-5: The city, in conjunctior� with the nei�hborf�ood and District
' Council 7nvolved , will inves�igate appropria�e reuses for vacated �institutional
buildings and land, giving first consideration to parks only if specifically
called for in the Parks and Recreation Plans and other�ris� giving preference
to residential uses or mixed use developm�n.ts (page 67; Nearjng Draft) .
,. ' /. -3- , '
� � ' s
�ecause the Parks and Recreation Plan does no� specifically ca71 for additional
park land at that location, the L�znd Use Pian would ca11 for residential or
mixed use development of the Gillette property.
� � �
�` 4. pistrict 5 Plan (adopted by City Council) . �
�" .
. � District 5 made no specific recommendations on Gillette, .except that they be allowe
to participate in determining appropriate reuse of tfie property. This tivas done
in earlier discussions. The District Plan does not give the city any guidance
on the disposition ofi the Gillette site. - - • .
- Two othzr land use issues should be considered : the effect of the proposal on the �
environment, and its effect on historic preserva�ion. � �
1 . Effect on Environment: Unknawn '
2. Effect on Historic Preser��ation: Somewhat positive: The historic�lly ia�3�gn�fican
portion of Gillette Hospital is being demolished, while that� portion (41es� Wing)
t�hat is historically significant wi11 remain. . -
Summary of Findings - .
1. The proposal would be in conf3ict ti,ritt� the Parks and P,ecreation PTan based on
- i�s priorities for the use of the City's limited funds for recreation.
2. The proYOSa1 would be in conflict with the general intent of. th� �lousing Plan,
to add housing units wh�n opportunities to do so are available. �
3. The preposa1 would be in c�nflict ���ith the Land UsepPlan`s policy on reuse of '
insti�;.E-�;onal proper�y: for a par�:, if the Par�:s and P.ecreation Plan `ca11s
for it, and othe��ise for housing or mixed uses.
4. The Dis�rict 5 Plan makes no recommendation regarding reuse af the Gillette site_
5. Other land use effects are unknown or ���ould be limited.
Recommended Action . �
Staff recommends that tne Planning Commission adopt this report and forward it to
. the hiayor, City Council , and Capital Improvemen� Committee far. their consideration.
. .;- . . . .
. . / •'� 'vv 179406
' _ . .� _. _ _ _
._ _ __ _- -- _.
-..__ , �`����
VYH17E — CITV CLERK � � �y �1Y'a.✓ � ,��"
f'�NK — FINANCE (j I TY U F �A I �rT ��A LS I� Council
C<.��AitY — DEPAitTMENT File NO.
E1LUE -- MAYOR
�o��cil .�es�l�t�on � -
Presentei] f3y
Re�erred To _ Committee: Date
Out of Committee By — .- Date
A RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO TNTERIM FUNDING OF GILLETTE
HOSPITAI, DEMOLTTION (EXCEPT WEST WING)
RESOLVED, by the Council of the C9.ty of Saint Paul, upon
recommendation of the Mayor and with the advice of
the Long-Range Capital Improvement Budget Coznmittee,
that ��he 1979 Capital Improvement Budget, as heretofore
adopted and amended by this Council, is hereby further
amended in the following particulars:
Amendments
Capital Improve�;;ent Bond Funding FROM TO -
Paqe
35 R-35 Downt�wn People Mover 96079-001 179,500 �
None C-XX Gillette De..�olition ����� -DDL" 179,500
• Appropriation Analysis
Current Amenc?ed
� Appropriation Change Appropriation
R-35 DPM 96079-001 750,500 -179,500 571,OOQ
Gillette Aemolition -0- +179,500 179,500
and, be it,
. ._ _. _ . __ ___ __ _ . __ _
_ � ' •
- -- _ �����{'�
W�+iY� — c�rv c�er+!c
VfNK - FINANCE / � `
-CANAfZy - DEPARTMENT . ■, T•TV O�+ ` A T 1�7T ��L�TT T Council
E�L:JF_ ._ MAYOF2 . \ 1 1 1 �.J�� 1 1♦ A l} 1� File � N0.
Co���c�� �e��l�t���'l
Presented F3y ___
Referred To _ Committee: Date
Out of Committee By__ Date
-- -- . .�
FURTHER Rc.SOLVED, that such amendment transferring funds �
from the Downtown People Mover project account is
intended to be temporary, the identified $179,500
to be restored to the Downtown People Mover account
by resolution of this Council transferring that
amount from the 1980 u����-�--r�a� Debt -
Capital Improvement Fund at such time as the
Debt - Capital IMprovement Fund attains a balance
. of $179,500. ' .
�. .
'Th�St. Pau1 �.o;:g-Zange Capital Z:.�provement
1�3ud.ga; Co rnictee ze�cia�� thi�request on
� (,-2�IQ) 1r1"lL.i�t� �'�/�'-��'and reco�a�etzds
_ �' on �
s.���a: � -�—�
Da2a:�� !l�,_���
• APPROVED AS TO FUNDTNG: APPROVED:
�� T �G�'���
, �
Bernard J: Carlson Ri.chard E. Schroeder
Director of Finance Budget Director
. , : .; ' ` ` � ' . �:t,,;���� _
L���'
4'°"Aa:� . .
CITY OF SAINT Pl�UL
INTERDEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
���,���
d �.'r-_ � {
T�: Mark Senn
FROM: Richard Schroeder
DATE: September 3, 1980
SUBJECT: Financing of Gillette Hospital Demolition
and Related Costs
[.F
•� Please be informed that the Council resolution pertaining to
interim funding of Gillette Hospital demolition is currently
�in the review process and is anticipated for City Council
action late th_is September.
The CIB Committee at their August 14, 1980 meeting chose
� not to make any funding recommendation until after the
Planning Commission recommendation on use of the site is
known. The Planning Commission made their recommendtion
on �ugust 22, 1980. (See attached. ) The CIB Committee
will consider the m,atter again at their September 11, 1980
mee�?ng. It is ant�cipated tha-t the Finance Committee will
cor_s�der the fundir.e resolution the week of September 23
and `hat the resolution will be on the September 30, 1980
Cou_ncil agenda.
riark, the payment of existing demolition and maintenance
related costs is moot, because no matter how City Council
decides to reuse the land (housing vs park) we are liable
for aIl existing costs. The current financing plan for the
payment assumes the Gillette site will be used as a public
park and thus debt capital monies will be used for acquisition
and demolition costs and future grants and bonding will be �
used for construction of �public improvements. If negative
recommendations regarding proposed park use were made by
both the Planning Cor�unission and the CIB Committee and they
were enough to change City Council' s reuse proposal to
housing, then it would be reasonable to assume that the
demolition and maintenance costs would be finally .financed
by the HRA Tax Levy Fund.
Based on the above, please now pay the demolition contractor
payments for his legally contracted work. Permanent financing
��ill be known when Council adopts a financing plan late this
month or early this October.
, RS/lm
cc: Mayor Latimer
George McMahon
Tom PZeyer
Greg Blees
� ���
,�;;��=`� �'IT� �3�;'' ��L�:�;'"n �..�,TJ'�. .
'•"/ ` ll.�.�` 0�.��.''-.�v��.r �..T{ Z''L�{2!: �ir�� Ci�'l��{�i7.x. . � �� �. �
f` ;(�`.,�'__�-�=1�`:::1 ����' ��
S_;:. �;j�,:::. f 1
` il n� •i1 .
, :� � ::��:-��_:�
\ Da�e : October 9, 1980
�' ��, ���_..
��:��:�� .
G � �'a� �'i�� � f T� � � � �' C� �� � _
? 0 : �oint P��ai Ci�� ��u�ci� � "�: �
�RO �I � COi�l�il'��'�� ��1 FINANCE, MANAGEMENT & PERSONNEL .
George McMahon ; �hoi�mun, makES the folta��ting
� reporf on C. F. � 4r-dinance
. . (2) �x� �4esotufion . -
� . - • � Oiher : -
� ���.,.E : . - - -
_ &t its meeting of Qctober . 9, 1980, the Finance Committee recommended
approval of the following: � - .
1. Resolution revising Saint Paul' s Rehab Grant Guidelines to be
consistent with the State ' s. � .. _
2.. Resolutior� approving. financing for Gillette: Ho`spital demolition � � -
from the Dowritown People Mover project. � _ .
C�TY rI�1LL SE�'E:vTH FLOO2 5:111T PAIfI., Di€\�LSOTeS, S�f42
. 4� .._r 'J . . . .
� r . . � ,,� �%�� ��NC�
.. �
, ;;�^!�
,..."��,�i��R ��� �;�Y
`���`'T* °'L''°- ����`` ' �CITY OF SAI PAUL
_=;� .
_� ;--.,,
'� �= DEPARTMEN OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT S VICES
;' iu�iiiii ��
;,�� A��
= DIVISION OF ACC
��'4i��. ���� �.`��`
,m,�„,,,,,� 34 City Hall '
GEORGE LATIMER /Saint Paul, Minn
MAYOR t= jY,' -;= /'C � � gO — O E(,
,�
�� � � � � 'JED
�, . ,,,,,
.. _. �. `+ !�t��;.
M E M 0 R A N D U M MAYOR'S QF.�,�CF
/
T0: Gre upt
FR� Bob Lang ���
�`-" " � �
DATE: September 18, 1980
RE: Draft Council Resolution - financing Gillette Demolition
from Downtown Pem�ple Mover project R35. �
r,_,,, ,/�., , ;" � ' �� !J �-
,r.�r
Suggested clarifications ` � " ` `��0�`/`���
page 1 - project �� and CIB Bond Fund ��' for"Gillette Demolition - 179,500".
,/ page 2 - . . . . transferring that amount from "Debt - Capital
Improvement Fund; at such time as the Fund attains a balance
of $179,500".
This proposed Council Resolution was very confusing to Robert Trudeau, so
we collaborated in the suggested clarifications.
r� /
`-
C�- ' �- ,, /
RGL/mt �-,�,c '"G �
_ , ;i ,� �
. �%' ,?S
� � .
�, ���,�° `,
, � ,
�
��,- � ��,."
- �
� .
_ _,._ �
� J
�o