The URL can be used to link to this page

03-14-2012 Council PacketCity Council City of Saint Paul Meeting Agenda City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 Council President Kathy Lantry Councilmember Dan Bostrom Councilmember Amy Brendmoen Councilmember Melvin Carter III Councilmember Russ Stark Councilmember Dave Thune Councilmember Chris Tolbert Council Chambers - 3rd Floor3:30 PMWednesday, March 14, 2012 ROLL CALL COMMUNICATIONS & RECEIVE/FILE 1 CO 12-6 Letters from the Department of Safety and Inspections declaring the following properties as nuisance properties: 437 Banfil Street, 1673 Cottage Avenue East, 1145 Edgerton Street, 466 Iglehart Street, 1204-1206 7th Street East, and 702 3rd Street East. (For notification purposes only; public hearings will be scheduled at a later date if necessary.) Sponsors:Bostrom, Brendmoen, Carter III, Lantry and Thune 437 Banfil St.OTA.pdf 1673 Cottage Ave E.OTA.pdf 1145 Edgerton St.OTA.pdf 466 Iglehart Ave.OTA.pdf 1204 7th St E.OTA.pdf 702 3rd St E.OTA.pdf Attachments: 2 AO 12-12 Authorizing payment of costs, not to exceed $7000, for the Police Department's Volunteer Services and Community Services Unit banquet. Volunteer Services Banquet.pdfAttachments: Page 1 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012 March 14, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda CONSENT AGENDA Note: Items listed under the Consent Agenda will be enacted by one motion with no separate discussion. If discussion on an item is desired, the item will be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate consideration. 3 RES 12-352 Approving the January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2012 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and The Saint Paul Police Federation. (Laid over one week for adoption) Sponsors:Lantry 2011 2012 Police Contract.pdf 2011-2012 Police Summary Agreement.pdf Attachments: 4 RES 12-493 Approving the Mayor's appointment of Elizabeth Wefel to serve on the Neighborhood STAR Board. Sponsors:Lantry 5 RES 12-415 Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to apply for a Conservation Partners Legacy grant, and if successful, enter into an agreement with and provide indemnification for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to initiate ecological restoration of 10 acres of oak woodland at Keller-Phalen Regional Park. Sponsors:Bostrom 6 RES 12-382 Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to add organizations to the List of Eligible Recipients for Charitable Gambling funds for 2012. Sponsors:Lantry 7 RES 12-440 Authorizating the Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $10,000 to cover expenses incurred from various recognition ceremonies held throughout the year at various places and times. Sponsors:Lantry 2012 ceremonies.pdf 2012 Ceremonies - Financial Analysis Attachment.pdf Attachments: 8 RES 12-438 Authorizing the Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $9,500 to cover expenses incurred from conducting oral interviews for police officer exams. Sponsors:Lantry Police Interviews- Financial Analysis Attachment.pdf officer interviews.doc Attachments: 9 RES 12-513 Approving the use of grant funds through the Ward 6 Neighborhood STAR Year-Round Program to assist the Payne Phalen District 5 Planning Council in having two pole-mounted security cameras installed at intersection of Payne and Maryland Avenues. Sponsors:Bostrom Page 2 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012 March 14, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda 10 RES 12-405 Declaring a "hardship" to satisfy petition requirements for a proposed vacation of an alley abutting 1073 Eleanor Avenue. Sponsors:Tolbert Exhibit A.pdfAttachments: 11 RES 12-446 Authorizing an agreement to terminate an existing operations and maintenance agreement between the 3M Company and the City of Saint Paul as a condition of a 2005 vacation of streets and alleys on 3M's former property in Saint Paul. Sponsors:Bostrom Exhibit A - O&M Agreement.pdf Exhibit B - Termination Agreement.pdf Attachments: 12 RES 12-404 Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, approving the Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center North. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Bostrom Beacon Bluff North revised final plat.pdf Revision details to final plat.pdf Beacon Bluff North easement.DOC Beacon Bluff North prelim plat.doc Attachments: 13 RES 12-402 Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, approving the Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center South. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Lantry and Bostrom Beacon Bluff South Final Plat Beacon Bluff South Preliminary Plat.doc Attachments: 14 RES 12-455 Approval of Final Plat for Melissa Hill Addition. Sponsors:Lantry Final Plat Revised 2-14-12.pdf melissa hill addn wetland determination.pdf Attachments: 15 RES 12-444 Approving adverse action against the Retail Food (B) - Grocery 101-1000 sq. ft. license held by Mai Thao, d/b/a Zaoub Toj Siab, 1001 Johnson Parkway, Unit 226. Sponsors:Bostrom Notice of Intent to Suspend Licenses.pdf SPLC Section 310.05 (m).pdf Attachments: Page 3 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012 March 14, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda 16 RES 12-482 Approving Settlement Agreement and Release between George M. Pfoser and the City of Saint Paul. Sponsors:Lantry Settlement Agreement and Release.pdf Master.pdf George Pfoser Financial Analysis.xls Administrative Code Section 3.02.pdf Attachments: FOR DISCUSSION 17 ABZA 12-3 Public hearing to consider the appeal of Walter Jirik to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue. (Public hearing held February 15) Sponsors:Carter III Application for Appeal BZA Resolution and meeting minutes Deadline extension letter BZA Neighborhood Notification Neighborhood correspondence 1of 3 Neighborhood correspondence 2 of 3 Neighborhooh correspondence 3 of 3 BZA staff report BZA 2006 Resolution BZA variance application Site photos 1of 3 Site photos 2 of 3 Site photos 3 of 3 Union Park Letter Save Our Selby Packet.pdf Correspondence in opposition to appeal Correspondence in support of appeal Correspondence in support of appeal 03-13-12.pdf Hermanson Spreadsheet.xlsx Hermanson Spreadsheet1.xlsx Attachments: Page 4 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012 March 14, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda ORDINANCES An ordinance is a city law enacted by the City Council. It is read at four separate council meetings and becomes effective after passage by the Council and 30 days after publication in the Saint Paul Legal Ledger. Public hearings on ordinances are held at the third reading. Final Adoption 18 Ord 12-8 Amending Chapter 157, Traffic Code, General Parking Restrictions, to restore no-parking zone and limited-term parking zone violation language to the Code, which language was inadvertently deleted from the September 28, 2011 revisions. Sponsors:Lantry 19 Ord 12-10 Memorializing City Council action granting the application of Marquette Apartments Llc to rezone the property at 204-208 Western Avenue N. from RM2 Medium-Density Residential to T2 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Public hearing held February 1, 2012). Sponsors:Carter III Second Reading 20 Ord 12-9 Amending sections 1.02, 2.01, 2.04, 4.01.1, 4.01.2, 4.01.3, 7.04, 8.02, 8.02.2, 8.02.4, 17.07.1 and 17.07.2 of the City Charter, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 410.12, subd. 7 (2010), standardizing the use of the term "ward." Sponsors:Lantry Charter Commission Letter and Ordinance to City Clerk Ord 12-9.pdf Public Hearing Notice Attachments: 21 Ord 12-11 Amending Section 409.02 and 409.06 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and creating Section 409.29 pertaining to an Off-Sale Wine Only license. Sponsors:Lantry 22 Ord 12-14 Amending Chapter 33.04 of the Legislative Code to create plan review fees governing fire alarm systems. Sponsors:Lantry First Reading 23 Ord 12-16 Memorializing City Council action granting the application of the Saint Paul Port Authority for the rezoning of properties in the area east of Forest Street and north of Phalen Boulevard from VP Vehicular Parking to I1 Industrial, from RM2 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential to R4 One-Family Residential, and from I1 Industrial to R4 One-Family Residential, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Bostrom BBnorth rezoning map.pdfAttachments: Page 5 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012 March 14, 2012City Council Meeting Agenda 24 Ord 12-17 Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, granting the application of City View Apartments Inc. to rezone property at 743 3rd Street E. from B2 Community Business to T2 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Zoning File #11-299-652) (Public hearing held on February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Lantry SUSPENSION ITEMS ADJOURNMENT Council Meeting Information Web Meetings are available on the Council's website. Email notification and web feeds (RSS) of newly released Minutes, Agendas and Meetings are available by subscription. Please visit www.stpaul.gov/council for meeting videos and updated copies of the Agendas, Minutes and supporting documents. Cable Meetings are live on St Paul Channel 18 and replayed on: Thursdays at 5:30 p.m., Saturdays at 12:30 p.m., and Sundays at 1:00 p.m. (Subject to change) Page 6 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012 City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1CO 12-6 Name:OTA 6 Addresses Status:Type:Communications & Receive/File Agenda Ready In control:Legislative Hearings Final action: Title:Letters from the Department of Safety and Inspections declaring the following properties as nuisance properties: 437 Banfil Street, 1673 Cottage Avenue East, 1145 Edgerton Street, 466 Iglehart Street, 1204-1206 7th Street East, and 702 3rd Street East. (For notification purposes only; public hearings will be scheduled at a later date if necessary.) Sponsors:Dan Bostrom, Amy Brendmoen, Melvin Carter III, Kathy Lantry, Dave Thune Indexes:Order to Abate Nuisance, Ward - 1, Ward - 2, Ward - 5, Ward - 6, Ward - 7 Code sections: Attachments:437 Banfil St.OTA.pdf 1673 Cottage Ave E.OTA.pdf 1145 Edgerton St.OTA.pdf 466 Iglehart Ave.OTA.pdf 1204 7th St E.OTA.pdf 702 3rd St E.OTA.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Letters from the Department of Safety and Inspections declaring the following properties as nuisance properties: 437 Banfil Street, 1673 Cottage Avenue East, 1145 Edgerton Street, 466 Iglehart Street, 1204- 1206 7th Street East, and 702 3rd Street East. (For notification purposes only; public hearings will be scheduled at a later date if necessary.) City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Steve Magner, Manager of Code Enforcement CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor 375 Jackson Street., Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1806 Telephone: 651-266-8989 Facsimile: 651-266-1919 Web: www.stpaul.gov/dsi 352 March 2, 2012 11-011345 US Bank Nat Assoc 400 Countrywide Way Simi Valley CA 93065-6298 Troy Martenson Re/MAX Assoc 480 Hwy 96 #200 Shoreview MN 55126 Usset, Weingarden and Liebo 4500 Park Glen Road #300 St. Louis Park MN 55416 Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Unit, Department of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, hereby declares the premises located at: 437 BANFIL ST With the following Historic Preservation information: NONE and legally described as follows, to wit: Winslows Addition Lot 9 Blk 18 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subject to demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On February 23, 2012 a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is not necessarily all the deficiencies present at this time. This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shall not again be used for occupancy until such time as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. All repairs must be in accordance with appropriate codes. Changes or additions to the electrical system, mechanical system, or the plumbing system may necessitate updating or upgrading the systems involved. An Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer March 2, 2012 437 BANFIL ST page 2 Description of Building: Two-story, wood frame dwelling and its detached, single-stall wood frame garage. Interior  Mold throughout  Unapproved hand rails  Unvented, open plumbing  Buckled and sloping floors  Damaged, open walls and ceilings  Evidence of rodent infestation  Peeling paint  Post and beam assembly in contact with the floor  No smoke or CO protection  Damaged and missing floor coverings  No sanitary, functioning bathroom or kitchens Exterior  Missing guard rail on 2nd floor south side flat roof  Deteriorated chimney  Broken balustrade on the north most, west side deck steps  Damaged and missing storm and screen windows As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by April 2, 2012 the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, will begin a substantial abatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed against the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance with law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220, (651) 266-8989. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) performance bond with the Department of Safety and Inspections before any permits are issued, except for a demolition permit. Call the Department of Safety and Inspections for more information at 651-266-8989. If this building is located in a historic district or site (noted on page 1, above, just below the property address) then you must contact Heritage Preservation (HPC) staff to discuss your proposal for the repairs required by this order and compliance with preservation guidelines. Copies of the guidelines and design review application and forms are available from the Department of Safety and Inspections web site (see letterhead) and from the HPC staff. No permits will be issued without HPC review and approval. HPC staff also can be reached by calling 651-266-9078. As an owner or responsible party, you are required by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and March 2, 2012 437 BANFIL ST page 3 any subsequent owners. The property shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed in any manner until the Nuisance Conditions have been abated and the Certificate of Code Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this property which declares it to be a "nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the City. This placard shall not be removed without the written authority of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement. The department is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective action is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Enforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Clerk will then schedule dates for Public Hearings before the City Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this hearing the City Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fix a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if corrective action is not taken within the specified time, the City shall abate this nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the property as a special assessment in accordance with law. If you have any questions or request additional information please contact Dennis Senty between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at 651-266-1930, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, Dennis Senty Vacant Buildings Enforcement Inspector cc: Legistar Approval list and City Council ota60135 5/11 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Steve Magner, Manager of Code Enforcement CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor 375 Jackson Street., Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1806 Telephone: 651-266-8989 Facsimile: 651-266-1919 Web: www.stpaul.gov/dsi 331 March 2, 2012 11-127333 BAC Home Loans Servicing LP 400 National Way Simi Valley CA 93065-6414 Fannie Mae c/o Terry Daniels, Axis Realty 121 McKnight Road N #A St Paul MN 55119 Peterson, Fram & Bergman 55 5th Street East #800 Saint Paul MN 55101 Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Unit, Department of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, hereby declares the premises located at: 1673 COTTAGE AVE E With the following Historic Preservation information: NONE and legally described as follows, to wit: Ames Acre Lots Subj To Alley And Ex N 15 Ft The S 1/2 Of W 1/2 Of Lot 7 Blk 2 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subject to demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On February 15, 2012 a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is not necessarily all the deficiencies present at this time. This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shall not again be used for occupancy until such time as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. All repairs must be in accordance with appropriate codes. Changes or additions to the electrical system, mechanical system, or the plumbing system may necessitate updating or upgrading the systems involved. Description of Building: Single-story wood frame, single-family dwelling and its two-stall, detached garage. An Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer March 2, 2012 1673 COTTAGE AVE E page 2 Interior 1. The bathroom floor covering is deteriorated or inadequate. Provide floor covering which is impervious to water and easily cleanable throughout the bathroom and seal around the edges and fixtures. 2. FURNACE: Have a licensed heating contractor service and clean the furnace or boiler and make any necessary repairs. Perform a C/O test on the heating plant. Then, send the attached form back to the Inspector. Repair of gas fired appliances requires a permit. 3. G.F.C.I.: The bathroom is lacking an electrical G.F.C.I. outlet. Permit May Be Required. 4. The interior ceilings are defective. Repair all ceiling defects and finish in a professional manner. 5. The interior walls are defective. Repair all wall defects and finish in a professional manner. 6. Severe mold throughout the house. As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by April 2, 2012 the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, will begin a substantial abatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed against the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance with law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220, (651) 266-8989. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) performance bond with the Department of Safety and Inspections before any permits are issued, except for a demolition permit. Call the Department of Safety and Inspections for more information at 651-266-8989. If this building is located in a historic district or site (noted on page 1, above, just below the property address) then you must contact Heritage Preservation (HPC) staff to discuss your proposal for the repairs required by this order and compliance with preservation guidelines. Copies of the guidelines and design review application and forms are available from the Department of Safety and Inspections web site (see letterhead) and from the HPC staff. No permits will be issued without HPC review and approval. HPC staff also can be reached by calling 651-266-9078. As an owner or responsible party, you are required by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and any subsequent owners. The property shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed in any manner until the Nuisance Conditions have been abated and the Certificate of Code Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this property which declares it to be a "nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the City. This placard shall not be removed without the written authority of the Department of Safety and Inspections, March 2, 2012 1673 COTTAGE AVE E page 3 Division of Code Enforcement. The department is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective action is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Enforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Clerk will then schedule dates for Public Hearings before the City Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this hearing the City Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fix a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if corrective action is not taken within the specified time, the City shall abate this nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the property as a special assessment in accordance with law. If you have any questions or request additional information please contact Rich Singerhouse between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at 651-266-1945, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, Rich Singerhouse Vacant Buildings Enforcement Inspector cc: Legistar Approval list and City Council ota60135 5/11 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Steve Magner, Manager of Code Enforcement CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor 375 Jackson Street., Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1806 Telephone: 651-266-8989 Facsimile: 651-266-1919 Web: www.stpaul.gov/dsi 326 March 2, 2012 09-033032 Choua Cha Lee 6086 Summit Curve S Cottage Grove MN 55016-4492 WB5 Properties LLC 410 Ware Blvd Tampa FL 33619-4442 Kingdom First Properties LLC 809 E Bloomingdale Ave #398 Brandon FL 33511 Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Unit, Department of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, hereby declares the premises located at: 1145 EDGERTON ST With the following Historic Preservation information: NONE and legally described as follows, to wit: Beaupre Kellys Addition Subj To Alley And Esmts The S 16 Ft Of Lot 5 And N 14 Ft Of Lot 6 Blk 5 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subject to demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On February 15, 2012 a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is not necessarily all the deficiencies present at this time. This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shall not again be used for occupancy until such time as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. All repairs must be in accordance with appropriate codes. Changes or additions to the electrical system, mechanical system, or the plumbing system may necessitate updating or upgrading the systems involved. Description of Building: Two-story, wood frame, single-family dwelling and its two-stall, wood frame, detached garage. March 2, 2012 1145 EDGERTON ST page 2 The following Deficiency List is excerpted from the August 10, 2010 Code Compliance Report. BUILDING  Tuck Point interior/exterior of foundation as necessary.  Dry out basement and eliminate source of moisture.  Remove mold, mildew and moldy or water damaged materials.  Provide adequate access, ventilation and clearance in crawl space area.  Install 20 minute fire rated doors, with self closing device, between common areas and individual units. All penetrations required to have property intumescent device or caulk (per current building codes).  Maintain one hour fire separation between dwelling units and between units and common areas.  Install handrails (34 inches - 38 inches above each nosing) and guardrails (36 inch minimum) at all stairways, and return hand rail ends into a newel post or wall per attachment.  Repair or Replace any deteriorated window sash, broken glass, sash holders, re-putty, etc as necessary.  Provide complete storms and screens, in good repair for all door and window openings.  Provide functional hardware at all doors and windows  Exit doors shall be capable of being opened from the inside, easily and without the use of a key. Remove all surface bolts.  Repair or replace damaged doors and frames as necessary, including storm doors.  Weather seal exterior doors, threshold and weather-stripping.  Repair walls, ceiling and floors throughout, as necessary.  Prepare and paint interior and exterior as necessary. Observe necessary abatement procedures (EPA, MPCA and St. Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 34 for additional information) if lead base paint is present.  Any framing members that required repair or do not meet code (where wall and ceiling covering is removed, members that are over-spanned, over-spaced, not being carried properly, door and window openings that are not adequately supported, etc.) are to be reconstructed in an approved manner.  Re-level structure as much as is practical.  Install Smoke Detectors/Carbon Monoxide Detectors per MN Co Conservation Code and the MN Dept. of Labor and Industry.  Provide major clean-up of premises.  Provide proper drainage around house to direct water away from foundation of house.  Provide proper drainage around house to direct water away from foundation of garage.  Install downspouts and a complete gutter system.  Install rain leaders to direct drainage away from foundation.  Provide major rehabilitation of garage, re-level and install new siding and trim  Install address numbers visible from street and on the alley side of garage.  Review all applicable codes & policies when replacing windows including egress windows for sleeping rooms.  Remove trees which are against foundation of home and garage.  Openings in stair risers must be less than 4 inches. March 2, 2012 1145 EDGERTON ST page 3  Repair front entry porch at step, provide threshold for door and repair floor joist per code. Re level porch as needed.  Install new basement stairs.  Install tempered glass in window on front stairs to code.  Install tempered glass in windows over bathtubs to code.  Replace or repair all damaged cabinets and vanities.  Re level rear stairs and stairwell walls and rebuild as needed to meet code.  Supply crawl space access per code and vapor barrier in crawl space.  Replace siding on house and replace trim as needed.  Obtain appropriate permits for above-stated work. ELECTRICAL  Properly strap cables and conduits in back stairwell  Provide one (1) light for each 200 square feet in unfinished basement. One light must be switched on from the top of the stairs  Install/replace GFCI receptacle in first floor bathroom adjacent to the sink  Ground bathroom light in first floor bathroom  Install globe-type enclosed light fixture on all closet lights  Remove all cord wiring  Repair or Replace all broken, missing or loose light fixtures, switches and outlets, covers and plates  Check all outlets for proper polarity and verify ground on 3-prong outlets  Remove any 3-wire ungrounded outlets and replace with 2-wire or ground 3-wire to code  Replace all painted-over receptacles.  Second floor replace pendant lights  All added receptacles must be grounded, tamper-resistant and be on an Arc-Fault Circuit Interrupter-protected circuit.  Any open walls or walls that are opened as part of this project must be wired to the standards of the 2008 NEC.  All buildings on the property must meet the St. Paul Property Maintenance Code (Bulletin 80-1).  All electrical work must be done by a Minnesota-licensed electrical contractor under an electrical permit. PLUMBING  Basement - Unit 1 - Water Heater - No gas shut off or gas piping incorrect (IFGC 402.1)  Basement - Unit 1 - Water Heater - Vent must be in chimney liner (IFGC 501.12)  Basement - Unit 1 - Water Heater - Water piping incorrect (MPC 1730 Subp. 1)  Basement - Unit 1 - Water Heater - not fired or in service (MPC 2180)  Basement - Unit 2 - Water Heater - No gas shut off or gas piping incorrect (IFGC 402.1)  Basement - Unit 2 - Water Heater - Vent must be in chimney liner (IFGC 501.12)  Basement - Unit 2 - Water Heater - Water piping incorrect (MPC 1730 Subp. 1) rusty  Basement - Unit 2 - Water Heater - not fired or in service (MPC 2180)  Basement - Laundry Tub - provide a vacuum breaker for the spout (MPC 2000 B) March 2, 2012 1145 EDGERTON ST page 4  Basement - Soil and Waste Piping - no soil stack base clean out  Basement - Soil and Waste Piping - replace corroded cast iron or steel waste piping (MPC 0200) pin holes/cracked  Basement - Soil and Waste Piping - unplugged or open piping; back pitched piping (MPC 1000)  Basement - Water Meter - corroded piping; incorrect piping (MPC 0200 0.) steel before meter  Basement - Water Piping - add appropriate hangers (MPC 1430 Subp. 4)  Basement - Water Piping - run 1 inch water line from meter to first major take off (SPRWS Water Code)  First Floor - Gas Piping - range gas shut off incorrect (IFGC 411 1.3.3)  First Floor - Lavatory - fixture is missing (MPC 0200 0.)  First Floor - Lavatory - incorrectly vented (MPC 2500)  First Floor - Sink - waste incorrect (MPC 2300)  First Floor - Toilet Facilities - fixture is missing (MPC 0200 0.)  First Floor - Tub and Shower - provide anti-scald valve (MPC 1380. Subp. 5) to code  First Floor - Tub and Shower - replace waste and overflow (MPC 1240)  First Floor - Tub and Shower - unvented (MPC 0200. E)  First Floor - Tub and Shower - waste incorrect (MPC 2300)  Second Floor - Gas Piping - range gas shut off incorrect (IFGC 411 1.3.3)  Second Floor - Lavatory - fixture is broken or parts missing (MPC 0200 0.)  Second Floor - Sink - fixture parts missing (MPC 0200 0.) basket strainers  Second Floor - Toilet Facilities - fixture is broken (MPC 0200 0.)  Second Floor - Tub and Shower - Provide access (MPC 0900)  Second Floor - Tub and Shower - provide anti-scald valve (MPC 1380. Subp. 5) to code  Second Floor - Tub and Shower - replace waste and overflow (MPC 1240)  Second Floor - Tub and Shower - waste incorrect (MPC 2300)  Obtain appropriate permits for above-stated work. HEATING  Install approved lever handle manual gas shutoff valve on all gas appliances and remove unapproved valve.  Clean and Orsat test furnace burners. Check all controls for proper operation. Check furnace heat exchangers for leaks; provide documentation from a licensed contractor that the heating units are safe.  Verify that Provide diagram with size and length of vent connectors/chimney for venting of furnaces and water heaters.  Reconnect and seal all branch ducts to the side of the main supply duct.  Provide adequate combustion air and support duct to code.  Provide support for gas lines to code.  Plug, cap and/or remove all disconnected gas lines.  Provide appropriate size operable window in bathrooms or provide bathroom exhaust system vented to outside with approved material according to code. A mechanical ventilation permit is required if an exhaust system is installed. March 2, 2012 1145 EDGERTON ST page 5  All supply and return ducts for warm air heating system must be clean before final approval for occupancy. Provide access for inspection of inside of ducts or provide documentation from a licensed duct-cleaning contractor that the duct system has been cleaned.  Repair and/or replace heating registers as necessary.  Obtain appropriate permits for above-stated work. As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by April 2, 2012 the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, will begin a substantial abatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed against the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance with law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220, (651) 266-8989. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) performance bond with the Department of Safety and Inspections before any permits are issued, except for a demolition permit. Call the Department of Safety and Inspections for more information at 651-266-8989. If this building is located in a historic district or site (noted on page 1, above, just below the property address) then you must contact Heritage Preservation (HPC) staff to discuss your proposal for the repairs required by this order and compliance with preservation guidelines. Copies of the guidelines and design review application and forms are available from the Department of Safety and Inspections web site (see letterhead) and from the HPC staff. No permits will be issued without HPC review and approval. HPC staff also can be reached by calling 651-266-9078. As an owner or responsible party, you are required by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and any subsequent owners. The property shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed in any manner until the Nuisance Conditions have been abated and the Certificate of Code Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this property which declares it to be a "nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the City. This placard shall not be removed without the written authority of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement. The department is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective action is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Enforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Clerk will then schedule dates for Public Hearings before the City Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this hearing the City Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fix a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the March 2, 2012 1145 EDGERTON ST page 6 provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if corrective action is not taken within the specified time, the City shall abate this nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the property as a special assessment in accordance with law. If you have any questions or request additional information please contact Dave Nelmark between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at 651-266-1931, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, Dave Nelmark Vacant Buildings Enforcement Inspector cc: Legistar Approval list and City Council ota60135 5/11 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Steve Magner, Manager of Code Enforcement CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor 375 Jackson Street., Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1806 Telephone: 651-266-8989 Facsimile: 651-266-1919 Web: www.stpaul.gov/dsi 361 March 2, 2012 05-181037 Burton A. Murdock and Diane A. Murdock 2082 Kenwood Dr E Maplewood MN 55117-2234 Western State Bank 663 University Avenue W Saint Paul MN 55104 Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Unit, Department of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, hereby declares the premises located at: 466 IGLEHART AVE With the following Historic Preservation information: NONE District: HPL-Hill and legally described as follows, to wit: Mackubin and Marshalls additi E 19.34 Ft of Lot 8 & All of Lot 7 Blk 21 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subject to demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On February 22, 2012 a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is not necessarily all the deficiencies present at this time. This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shall not again be used for occupancy until such time as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. All repairs must be in accordance with appropriate codes. Changes or additions to the electrical system, mechanical system, or the plumbing system may necessitate updating or upgrading the systems involved. Description of Building: Two-story, wood frame duplex and its two stall detached garage. March 2, 2012 466 IGLEHART AVE page 2 Exterior  GARAGES AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. All garages and accessory structures must be in sound condition and secure from unauthorized entry. Repair or replace any missing doors, windows, or hardware for same.  The eaves and soffits are in a state of disrepair or deterioration. Repair all defects, holes, breaks, loose or rotting boards, to a professional state of maintenance. Permit may be required.  The exterior walls and/or trim of the house and/or garage has defective, peeled, flaked, scaled or chalking paint or has unpainted wood surfaces. Scrape and repaint to effect a sound condition in a professional manner.  The foundation is deteriorated, defective or in a state of disrepair. Repair all foundation defects in a professional manner to a weather-tight, water-tight and rodent-proof condition. Permit may be required.  The roof is deteriorated, defective, or in a state of disrepair. Repair or replace the roof covering to a sound, tight and water impervious condition. Permit may be required.  The exterior walls of the house and/or garage are defective. Repair all holes, breaks, loose or rotting siding, to a professional state of maintenance.  The window and/or door screens are missing, defective or in a state of disrepair. Provide proper window and door screens for all openable windows and doors. Screens must be tight-fitting and securely fastened to the frames. As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by April 2, 2012 the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, will begin a substantial abatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed against the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance with law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220, (651) 266-8989. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) performance bond with the Department of Safety and Inspections before any permits are issued, except for a demolition permit. Call the Department of Safety and Inspections for more information at 651-266-8989. If this building is located in a historic district or site (noted on page 1, above, just below the property address) then you must contact Heritage Preservation (HPC) staff to discuss your proposal for the repairs required by this order and compliance with preservation guidelines. Copies of the guidelines and design review application and forms are available from the Department of Safety and Inspections web site (see letterhead) and from the HPC staff. No permits will be issued without HPC review and approval. HPC staff also can be reached by calling 651-266-9078. March 2, 2012 466 IGLEHART AVE page 3 As an owner or responsible party, you are required by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and any subsequent owners. The property shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed in any manner until the Nuisance Conditions have been abated and the Certificate of Code Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this property which declares it to be a "nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the City. This placard shall not be removed without the written authority of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement. The department is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective action is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Enforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Clerk will then schedule dates for Public Hearings before the City Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this hearing the City Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fix a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if corrective action is not taken within the specified time, the City shall abate this nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the property as a special assessment in accordance with law. If you have any questions or request additional information please contact Matt Dornfeld between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at 651-266-1902, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, Matt Dornfeld Vacant Buildings Enforcement Inspector cc: Legistar Approval list and City Council ota60135 5/11 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Steve Magner, Manager of Code Enforcement CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor 375 Jackson Street., Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1806 Telephone: 651-266-8989 Facsimile: 651-266-1919 Web: www.stpaul.gov/dsi 326 March 2, 2012 09-264860 Holden R Holmes LLC PO Box 483 Isanti MN 55040-0483 Deutsche Bank NA 701 Corporate Center Drive Raleigh NC 27607 Construction Network Services 910 W County Road B Roseville MN 55113 Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Unit, Department of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, hereby declares the premises located at: 1204 7TH ST E With the following Historic Preservation information: NONE and legally described as follows, to wit: Messerli Eschbachs Addition Lot 7 Blk 3 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subject to demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On January 26, 2012 a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is not necessarily all the deficiencies present at this time. This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shall not again be used for occupancy until such time as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. All repairs must be in accordance with appropriate codes. Changes or additions to the electrical system, mechanical system, or the plumbing system may necessitate updating or upgrading the systems involved. Description of Building: Two-story wood frame, 4-plex structure and its two-stall, wood frame, detached garage. An Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer March 2, 2012 1204 7TH ST E page 2 The following Deficiency List is excerpted from the February 12, 2012 Fire Certificate of Occupancy Revocation and Order to Vacate letter. DEFICIENCY LIST 1. CONDEMNATION - SPLC 34.23, MSFC 110.1 - This occupancy is condemned as unsafe or dangerous. This occupancy must not be used until re-inspected and approved by this office. 2. ELECTRICAL - SERVICE - SPLC 34.14 (2), 34.34 (5) - Provide an approved electrical service adequate to meet the buildings needs. This work may require a permit(s), call DSI at (651) 266-9090. 3. ELECTRICAL - ALL AREAS - NEC 300-11 Provide for all raceways, boxes, cabinets, and fittings to be securely fastened in place.-Secure all loose receptacles. 4. ELECTRICAL - PANELS - NEC 408.4 Circuit Directory / Circuit Identification-Provide a complete up to date circuit directory for all panels. 5. ELECTRICAL - PANELS - NEC 408.7 Unused Openings. Unused openings for circuit breakers and switches shall be closed using identified closures, or other approved means that provide protection substantially equivalent to the wall enclosure. 6. ELECTRICAL - UNIT 3 - MSFC 605.4 - Discontinue use of all multi-plug adapters. 7. ELECTRICAL - UNIT 3 - NEC 440.13 - For cord-connected equipment such as room air conditioners, household refrigerators and freezers, drinking water coolers, and beverage dispensers, a separable connector or an attachment plug and receptable shall be permitted to serve as the disconnecting means. The appliance must plug directly into a permanent outlet.- Provide a permanent receptacle for the window air conditioner or remove the air condition from the window. 8. ELECTRICAL - UNIT 3 - NEC 210-11(c) (2) - Provide a 20 amp branch circuit within 6 feet of the laundry appliance.-Verify separate 20 ampere laundry circuit. Provide as needed to code. 9. ELECTRICAL - ALL AREAS - SPLC 34.12 (2), 34.35 (1) - Repair and maintain all required and supplied equipment in an operative and safe condition.-Replace all broken and painted receptacles. 10. ELECTRICAL - BASMENT (UNIT 4) - NEC 300.6 Protection Against Corrosion and Deterioration.-Remove, replace, or provide approved protection to the electrical junction box located near the electrical panel. This junction box is corroded. Provide a suitable junction box for the environment. 11. EXTERIOR - EXIT OBSTRUCTION - MSFC 1011.2 - Remove the materials that cause an exit obstruction. Maintain a clear and unobstructed exitway.-Remove snow/ice from exterior stairwell exitway. March 2, 2012 1204 7TH ST E page 3 12. EXTERIOR - GARAGE - Remove the accumulation of snow or ice from the public and private sidewalk abutting this property.-Snow and ice to be removed from sidewalks within 24 hours from end of show storm. 13. EXTERIOR - GRAFFITI - SPLC 45.03(b) - All exterior surfaces must remain free of any initials, marks, symbols, designs, inscriptions or other drawings, scratched, painted, inscribed or otherwise affixed. 14. EXTERIOR - REAR EXIT STAIRWAY/DECKS - SPLC 34.09 (2) 34.32 (2) - Provide an approved guardrail with intermediate ballustrade or rails 4 inches or less apart. This work may require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266-9090.-Provide approved guardrails and balistrades for rear stairwell/decks. 15. EXTERIOR - REAR EXIT STAIRWAY/DECKS - SPLC 34.09 (2), 34.32(2) - Repair or replace the unsafe stairways, porch, decks or railings in an approved manner. This work may require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266-9090.-Rear exterior exit stairway/decks not inspected due to snow cover. Stairway to be in sound condition. 16. EXTERIOR - WALLS/PAINTING - SPLC 34.09 (1) b,c, 34.32 (1) b,c - Provide and maintain all exterior walls free from holes and deterioration. All wood exterior unprotected surfaces must be painted or protected from the elements and maintained in a professional manner free from chipped or peeling paint.-Repair cracks/missing areas of stucco. Scrape and repaint exterior painted surfaces. 17. EXTERIOR/INTERIOR - ENTRY DOORS - SPLC 34.09 (3), 34.32 (3) - Repair and maintain the door in good condition.-All exterior/interior entry doors to be in good repair--doors, frames, trim, thresholds etc. 18. EXTERIOR/INTERIOR - WINDOWS - SPLC 34.09 (3), 34.32 (3) - Repair and maintain the window in good condition.-Replace all broken windows throughout --- windows and doors. All window frames, sashes, trim, window caulking/glazing, sash cords/sash holders etc. to be in good repair. 19. INTERIOR - FIRE EXTINGUISHERS - MSFC 906.1, MN Stat. 299F.361 - Provide approved fire extinguishers in accordance with the following types, sizes and locations.-Provide one minimum 1A10BC fire extinguisher within each apartment unit or a minimum 2A10BC not be more than 50' travel distance from each apartment entrance. They must be permanently mounted between 3 and 5 feet high in readily visible and easily accessible locations 20. INTERIOR - SDA - SPLC 39.02(c) - Complete and sign the provided smoke detector affidavit and return it to this office. 21. MECHANICAL - HEATING REPORT - SPLC 34.11 (6), 34.34 (3) - Provide service of heating facility by a licensed contractor which must include a carbon monoxide test. Submit a completed copy of the Saint Paul Fire Marshal's Existing Fuel Burning Equipment Safety Test Report to this office. March 2, 2012 1204 7TH ST E page 4 22. MECHANICAL / ALL GAS PIPING - TEST FOR LEAKS - MFGC 406.5.2 - Immediately repair or replace the leaking fuel equipment piping. This work may require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266-9090. 23. MECHANICAL / ALL UNITS - KITCHEN STOVES - UMC 2214 - Install, repair, or replace listed gas appliance fuel connector maximum 3 feet in length. (Kitchen range and clothes dryer maximum 6 foot length.) This work my require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266- 9090. 24. PLUMBING BASEMENT LEFT SIDE - WATER HEATER - SPLC 34.11 (5), 34.34 (2) - Contact a licensed contractor to repair or replace the water heater. This work may require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266-9090.-WATER HEATER: NOT FIRED OR IN SERVICE. 25. PLUMBING BASEMENT LEFT SIDE - WATER METER - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-WATER PIPING: REPAIR OR REPLACE ALL CORRODED, BROKEN OR LEAKING PIPING AT METER. 26. PLUMBING BASEMENT RIGHT SIDE - SOIL AND WASTE PIPING - SPLC 34.11 (4), 34.34 (1), MPC 4715.0900 MPC 4715.0220S - Provide and maintain an approved waste trap.- SOIL AND WASTE PIPING: BACK PITCHED PIPING; IMPROPER CONNECTIONS, TRANSITIONS, FITTINGS OR PIPE USAGE. 27. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR LEFT SIDE - GAS PIPING - MFGC 409.5 - Provide an approved gas shut off valve within 6 feet of the appliance in accordance with the mechanical code. This work may require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266-9090.-GAS PIPING: RANGE GAS SHUTOFF, CONNECTOR OR PIPING INCORRECT. 28. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR LEFT SIDE - LAUNDRY TUB - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-LAUNDRY TUB: FAUCET IS MISSING, BROKEN OR PARTS MISSING. 29. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR LEFT SIDE - LAVATORY - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-LAVATORY: UNVENTED. 30. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR LEFT SIDE - TUB AND SHOWER - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-TUB AND SHOWER: REPLACE WASTE AND OVERFLOW; PROVIDE ACCESS. 31. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR RIGHT SIDE - SINK - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-SINK: FAUCET IS MISSING, BROKEN OR PARTS MISSING, March 2, 2012 1204 7TH ST E page 5 32. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR RIGHT SIDE - TOILET - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-TOILET: FIXTURE IS BROKEN OR PARTS MISSING. 33. PLUMBING FIRST FLOOR RIGHT SIDE - TUB AND SHOWER - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-TUB AND SHOWER: PROVIDE A VACUUM BREAKER FOR THE HANDHELD SHOWER; REPLACE WASTE AND OVERFLOW; PROVIDE ACCESS. 34. PLUMBING SECOND FLOOR LEFT SIDE - TUB AND SHOWER - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-TUB AND SHOWER: PROVIDE A VACUUMNBREAKER FOR THE HANDHELD SHOWER; REPLACE WASTE AND OVERFLOW; PROVIDE ACCESS. 35. PLUMBING SECOND FLOOR RIGHT SIDE - GAS PIPING - MFGC 409.5 - Provide an approved gas shut off valve within 6 feet of the appliance in accordance with the mechanical code. This work may require a permit(s). Call DSI at (651) 266-9090.-GAS PIPING: RANGE GAS CONNECTOR OR PIPING INCORRECT. 36. PLUMBING SECOND FLOOR RIGHT SIDE - SINK - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-SINK: FAUCET IS MISSING, BROKEN OR PARTS MISSING. 37. PLUMBING SECOND FLOOR RIGHT SIDE - TUB AND SHOWER - SPLC 34.11, SBC 2902.1, SPLC 34.17, MPC 415.0220 - Repair or replace and maintain the plumbing fixture to an operational condition.-TUB AND SHOWER: PROVIDE STOPPER. 38. UNITS ALL - BASEMENT STAIRWELLS - SPLC 34.10 (3), 34.33(2) - Repair or replace the unsafe stairway in an approved manner.-Repair both basement stairwells, handrails, guardrails to meet codes. 39. UNITS ALL - BATHROOM FLOORS - SPLC 34.10 (4), 34.33 (3) - Provide a bathroom floor impervious to water.-All bathroom floors to be in good repair and impervious to water. NOTE; 1ST FLOOR BATHROOMS HAVE ICE COVERED FLOORING--SUBFLOORING ETC MAY NEED TO BE TOTALLY REPLACED. 40. UNITS ALL - CABINETS - SPLC 34.10 (7), 34.33 (6) - Repair and maintain the cabinets in an approved manner.-Repair or replace the damaged or missing door. Repair or replace the damaged or missing drawer. Repair or replace the damaged framing. Repair or replace the damaged or missing hardware. 41. UNITS ALL - CEILINGS - SPLC 34.10 (7), 34.33 (6) - Repair and maintain the ceiling in an approved manner.-Patch the holes and/or cracks in the ceiling. Paint the ceiling. March 2, 2012 1204 7TH ST E page 6 42. UNITS ALL - CO DETECTORS - MN State Statute 299F.50 Immediately provide and maintain an approved Carbon Monoxide Alarm in a location within ten (10) feet of each sleeping area in hallway or room adjacent to bedrooms. Installation shall be in accordance with manufacturers instructions. 43. UNITS ALL - DEADBOLT LOCKS - SPLC 34.09 (3) i - Provide and maintain an approved one-inch throw single cylinder deadbolt lock. 44. UNITS ALL - FIRE DOORS - MSFC 703 - Provide, repair or replace the fire rated door and assembly. The minimum rating must be:-Repair and maintain the door closer. Repair and maintain the door latch. Repair and maintain the door frame. 45. UNITS ALL - FLOORS - SPLC 34.10 (7), 34.33 (6) - Repair and maintain the floor in an approved manner.-Repair or replace the carpeting. Repair or replace the floor tile. Repair or replace the floor coverings. Refinish the floor. Repair/replace buckled flooring. 46. UNITS ALL - ILLEGAL LOCKS - MSFC 1003.3.1.8 - Remove unapproved locks from the unit doors. The door must be openable from the inside without the use of keys or special knowledge or effort.-Remove all illegal slide bolts from doors throughout. 47. UNITS ALL - STRUCTURAL - SPLC 34.10 (2), 34.33 - Repair and maintain the damaged structural member. This repair may require a building permit, call DSI at (651) 266-9090.- Structural components of building to be inspected due to burst water piping and water damage, buckled flooring, ice buildup innbathrooms--one bathroom has ice about 4 plus inches thick on floor. 48. UNITS ALL - WALLS - SPLC 34.10 (7), 34.33 (6) - Repair and maintain the walls in an approved manner.-Patch the holes and/or cracks in the walls. Paint the wall. 49. UNITS ALL - WINDOW LOCKS - SPLC 34.09 (3), 34.32 (3) - Repair and maintain the window lock. 50. UNITS ALL - WOODWORK - SPLC 34.10 (7), 34.33 (6) - Repair or replace and maintain the woodwork in an approved manner.-All interior woodwork--interior doors, floor trim etc. to be in good repair. As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by April 2, 2012 the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, will begin a substantial abatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed against the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance with law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220, (651) 266-8989. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) performance bond with the Department of Safety and Inspections before any permits are issued, except for a demolition permit. Call the Department of Safety and Inspections for more information at 651-266-8989. March 2, 2012 1204 7TH ST E page 7 If this building is located in a historic district or site (noted on page 1, above, just below the property address) then you must contact Heritage Preservation (HPC) staff to discuss your proposal for the repairs required by this order and compliance with preservation guidelines. Copies of the guidelines and design review application and forms are available from the Department of Safety and Inspections web site (see letterhead) and from the HPC staff. No permits will be issued without HPC review and approval. HPC staff also can be reached by calling 651-266-9078. As an owner or responsible party, you are required by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and any subsequent owners. The property shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed in any manner until the Nuisance Conditions have been abated and the Certificate of Code Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this property which declares it to be a "nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the City. This placard shall not be removed without the written authority of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement. The department is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective action is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Enforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Clerk will then schedule dates for Public Hearings before the City Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this hearing the City Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fix a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if corrective action is not taken within the specified time, the City shall abate this nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the property as a special assessment in accordance with law. If you have any questions or request additional information please contact Dave Nelmark between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at 651-266-1931, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, Dave Nelmark Vacant Buildings Enforcement Inspector cc: Legistar Approval list and City Council ota60135 5/11 DEPARTMENT OF SAFETY AND INSPECTIONS Steve Magner, Manager of Code Enforcement CITY OF SAINT PAUL Christopher B. Coleman, Mayor 375 Jackson Street., Suite 220 Saint Paul, MN 55101-1806 Telephone: 651-266-8989 Facsimile: 651-266-1919 Web: www.stpaul.gov/dsi 326 March 2, 2012 02-113122 Charles D Delisi 2060 Wilson Ave Unit 2 St Paul MN 55119-6405 TCF Mortgage Corp 801 Marquette Avenue S Minneapolis MN 55402 Great Lakes Mortgage 7550 France Avenue S #340 Edina MN 55435 Order to Abate Nuisance Building(s) Dear Sir or Madam: The Vacant/Nuisance Buildings Unit, Department of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, hereby declares the premises located at: 702 3RD ST E With the following Historic Preservation information: NONE District: HPL-DB Building Name: Frederick Reinecker House ,1 Inventory #: _ RA-SPC-2491 and legally described as follows, to wit: Lyman Dayton Addition Lot 21 Blk 38 to comprise a nuisance condition in violation of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, Chapter 45.02, and subject to demolition under authority of Chapter 45.11. On February 16, 2012 a Building Deficiency Inspection Report was compiled and the following conditions were observed. This list of deficiencies is not necessarily all the deficiencies present at this time. This building(s) is subject to the restrictions of Saint Paul Ordinance Chapter 33.03 and shall not again be used for occupancy until such time as a Certificate of Compliance or a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. All repairs must be in accordance with appropriate codes. Changes or additions to the electrical system, mechanical system, or the plumbing system may necessitate updating or upgrading the systems involved. An Affirmative Action Equal Opportunity Employer March 2, 2012 702 3RD ST E page 2 Description of Building: Two-story, wood frame, single-family dwelling. Exterior 1. The chimney is defective, deteriorated or in a state of disrepair. Replace all missing or defective bricks, tuckpoint as needed to restore the chimney to a professional state of maintenance and repair. Permit may be required. 2. The eaves and soffits are in a state of disrepair or deterioration. Repair all defects, holes, breaks, loose or rotting boards, to a professional state of maintenance. Permit may be required. 3. The roof is deteriorated, defective, or in a state of disrepair. Repair or replace the roof covering to a sound, tight and water impervious condition. Permit may be required. 4. The exterior walls of the house and/or garage are defective. Repair all holes, breaks, loose or rotting siding, to a professional state of maintenance. 5. The exterior walls and/or trim of the house and/or garage has defective, peeled, flaked, scaled or chalking paint or has unpainted wood surfaces. Scrape and repaint to effect a sound condition in a professional manner. Interior 6. FURNACE: Have a licensed heating contractor service and clean the furnace or boiler and make any necessary repairs. Perform a C/O test on the heating plant. Then, send the attached form back to the Inspector. Repair of gas fired appliances requires a permit. 7. Lack of Natural Gas Service. Immediately restore natural gas service. Failure to provide natural gas service will result in these premises being declared Unfit for Human Habitation and ordered vacated for lack of this basic facility. 8. The interior ceilings are defective. Repair all ceiling defects and finish in a professional manner. 9. The interior walls are defective. Repair all wall defects and finish in a professional manner. 10. SANITATION: Immediately remove improperly stored or accumulated refuse including; garbage, rubbish, junk, vehicle parts, wood, metal, recycling materials, household items, building materials, rubble, tires, etc., from yard. The Saint Paul Legislative Code requires all exterior property areas to be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. Usable materials must be stored in an approved manner, so as not to constitute a nuisance. 11. Smoke Detector: Lack of properly installed and operable smoke detector. Provide functioning smoke detectors in accordance with the attached requirement, within 24 hours. 12. Lack of Water Service. Immediately restore water service. Failure to provide water service will result in these premises being declared Unfit for Human Habitation and ordered vacated for lack of this basic facility. 13. The windows and/or storm windows are in a state of disrepair. Replace all missing or broken window glass. Make all necessary repairs to frames, sashes, hardware and associated trim in a professional manner. Permit may be required. 14. Severe mold throughout the interior. March 2, 2012 702 3RD ST E page 3 As owner, agent or responsible party, you are hereby notified that if these deficiencies and the resulting nuisance condition is not corrected by April 2, 2012 the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement, will begin a substantial abatement process to demolish and remove the building(s). The costs of this action, including administrative costs and demolition costs will be assessed against the property taxes as a special assessment in accordance with law. As first remedial action, a Code Compliance Inspection Report must be obtained from the Building Inspection and Design Section, 375 Jackson Street, Suite 220, (651) 266-8989. This inspection will identify specific defects, necessary repairs and legal requirements to correct this nuisance condition. You may also be required to post a five thousand dollar ($5,000.00) performance bond with the Department of Safety and Inspections before any permits are issued, except for a demolition permit. Call the Department of Safety and Inspections for more information at 651-266-8989. If this building is located in a historic district or site (noted on page 1, above, just below the property address) then you must contact Heritage Preservation (HPC) staff to discuss your proposal for the repairs required by this order and compliance with preservation guidelines. Copies of the guidelines and design review application and forms are available from the Department of Safety and Inspections web site (see letterhead) and from the HPC staff. No permits will be issued without HPC review and approval. HPC staff also can be reached by calling 651-266-9078. As an owner or responsible party, you are required by law to provide full and complete disclosure of this "Order to Abate" to all interested parties, all present or subsequent renters and any subsequent owners. The property shall not be sold, transferred or conveyed in any manner until the Nuisance Conditions have been abated and the Certificate of Code Compliance or Certificate of Occupancy has been issued. The Enforcement Officer is required by law to post a placard on this property which declares it to be a "nuisance condition", subject to demolition and removal by the City. This placard shall not be removed without the written authority of the Department of Safety and Inspections, Division of Code Enforcement. The department is further required to file a copy of this "Order to Abate" with the City Clerk's Office. If corrective action is not taken within the time specified in this order, the Enforcement Officer will notify the City Council that abatement action is necessary. The City Clerk will then schedule dates for Public Hearings before the City Council at which time testimony will be heard from interested parties. After this hearing the City Council will adopt a resolution stating what action if any, it deems appropriate. If the resolution calls for abatement action the Council may either order the City to take the abatement action or fix a time within which this nuisance must be abated in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 33 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and provide that if corrective action is not taken within the specified time, the City shall abate this nuisance. The costs of this action, including administrative costs will be assessed against the property as a special assessment in accordance with law. March 2, 2012 702 3RD ST E page 4 If you have any questions or request additional information please contact Dave Nelmark between the hours of 8:00 and 9:30 a.m. at 651-266-1931, or you may leave a voice mail message. Sincerely, Dave Nelmark Vacant Buildings Enforcement Inspector cc: Legistar Approval list and City Council ota60135 5/11 City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1AO 12-12 Name:Volunteer Banquet Status:Type:Administrative Order Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Authorizing payment of costs, not to exceed $7000, for the Police Department's Volunteer Services and Community Services Unit banquet. Sponsors: Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Volunteer Services Banquet.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Authorizing payment of costs, not to exceed $7000, for the Police Department's Volunteer Services and Community Services Unit banquet. Body WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Police Department's Volunteer Services and Community Services Unit are seeking endorsement to sponsor a banquet at the Harriet Island Pavilion, Saint Paul, MN on April 27, 2012 for the department's volunteer groups. These volunteers provided thousands of hours of free labor this past year; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this banquet is to recognize the services that these groups provide the City of Saint Paul and the Police Department. Public events in the city such as the Winter Carnival, Cinco de Mayo, Grand Old Days, Highland Fest, and Rondo Days etc., would not be possible without the support and services of these volunteers. They are also responsible for providing security and traffic control at all the festivals, local parades and similar events throughout the city; and WHEREAS, the only recognition these volunteers receive is the awards banquet and it is important to the morale of these groups that time is taken to recognize their contributions. Awards and plaques are presented at the banquet to those volunteers who contribute the most, which is an incentive to the rest of the volunteers. Room rental, decorations, and meals are needed for this banquet; and WHEREAS, the public purpose of this event is to recognize volunteer groups that provide security and traffic control at public events in the City Saint Paul; and NOW, BE IT ORDERED that the proper city officials are hereby authorized to pay for costs associated with the above mentioned banquet, not to exceed $7,000.00. Account code: GL: 001-04109 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: AO 12-12, Version: 1 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-352 Name:2011 - 2012 Police Contract Status:Type:Resolution For Discussion In control:City Council Final action: Title:Approving the January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2012 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and The Saint Paul Police Federation. (Laid over one week for adoption) Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:2011 2012 Police Contract.pdf 2011-2012 Police Summary Agreement.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council3/7/2012 1 Title Approving the January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2012 Collective Bargaining Agreement between the City of Saint Paul and The Saint Paul Police Federation. (Laid over one week for adoption) Body RESOLVED, that the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby approves and ratifies the attached January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2012 Collective Bargaining Agreement betwen the City of Saint Paul and The Saint Paul Police Federation. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ SUMMARY AGREEMENT SHEET SAINT PAUL POLICE FEDERATION Below is a summary of the changes in the collective bargaining agreement between the City of Saint Paul and the Saint Paul Police Officers Federation. Date of TA June 22, 2011 Duration January 1, 2011 - December 31, 2012 Wages No wage increases during the term of the agreement. Health Insurance The insurance contribution increases follow the Memorandum of Agreement reached with the various bargaining units for 2011-2012. City will send letter to the Federation stating that Health Insurance eligibility is a term and condition of employment and the City will follow the 2001 Council Resolution regarding health insurance eligibility. Labor Relations will send a letter to the Chief of Police recommending suspensions be served in a manner that does not affect the City’s contribution to health insurance. A third party expert in coordination of benefits will present the topic at an LMCHI meeting. Call Back on Holidays Agreed to language clarifying that employees called back to work on a holiday will receive either Holiday pay or Call Back pay, whichever is greater. Bereavement Leave for Non-Sworn Non-Sworn employees may be granted up to three days of sick leave to attend the funeral of the employee’s grandparent or grandchild. Compensatory Time The parties agreed to new language for ECC classifications detailing procedures for requesting and granting or denying the use of compensatory time. Drug & Alcohol Testing Agreed to use new DOT testing standards and protocols. Premiums The License & Mandated Training Allowance premium was eliminated and added to the wage schedule for applicable classifications effective 1/1/12. An obsolete premium was eliminated. Other Language Changes: Other language changes were of a housekeeping nature for clarification and cleanup. I:\LRCOMMON\CONTRACT\POLICE\2011\SUMMARY AGREEMENT SHEET 11-12.doc City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-493 Name:Approving the appointment, made by the Mayor, of Elizabeth Wefel to serve on the Neighborhood STAR Board. Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Approving the Mayor's appointment of Elizabeth Wefel to serve on the Neighborhood STAR Board. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Approving the Mayor's appointment of Elizabeth Wefel to serve on the Neighborhood STAR Board. Body RESOLVED, that the Saint Paul City Council consents to and approves the appointments and reappointments, made by the Mayor, of the following individual(s) to serve on the Neighborhood STAR Board. Appointments Name Representing Term Expires Elizabeth Wefel Ward 2 December 31, 2014 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-415 Name:Ecological Restoration at Keller-Phalen Regional Park Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to apply for a Conservation Partners Legacy grant, and if successful, enter into an agreement with and provide indemnification for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to initiate ecological restoration of 10 acres of oak woodland at Keller-Phalen Regional Park. Sponsors:Dan Bostrom Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to apply for a Conservation Partners Legacy grant, and if successful, enter into an agreement with and provide indemnification for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to initiate ecological restoration of 10 acres of oak woodland at Keller-Phalen Regional Park. Body WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the Lessard-Sams Conservation Partners Legacy (CPL) grant program, and; WHEREAS, it is the intention of Parks and Recreation to submit a proposal to enhance approximately ten acres of disturbed oak forest and oak savanna at Keller-Phalen Regional Park, and; WHEREAS, these enhancement opportunities are identified within the Phalen-Keller Regional Park Master Plan Amendment, and; WHEREAS, these restoration opportunities will improve forest health, increase connectedness of high-quality native plant communities, reduce sedimentation of impaired waterbodies, and improve habitat for fish and, and; WHEREAS, if funded, the grant agreement will require that the grantee indemnify the State, its agents and employees from any claims or causes of action arising from performance of the grant agreement, and; WHEREAS, the Saint Paul City Council finds that accepting the grant funds will fulfill ecological principles of habitat restoration, and; WHEREAS, the expenditure of public funds, which includes the promise of indemnification, for such a purpose will facilitate and enable it to take place, now, therefore, be it; RESOLVED, that the appropriate city officials are hereby authorized to seek CPL funding on behalf of the City City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: RES 12-415, Version: 1 and, if successful, enter into an agreement with the State, which includes an indemnification clause, to accept the funds on behalf of the City. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-382 Name:2012 10% Club List of Eligible Recipients Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to add organizations to the List of Eligible Recipients for Charitable Gambling funds for 2012. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Authorizing the Department of Parks and Recreation to add organizations to the List of Eligible Recipients for Charitable Gambling funds for 2012. Body WHEREAS, Saint Paul Legislative Code § 409.235 established the Charitable Gambling Eligible Recipient advisory board; and WHEREAS, the advisory board annually advises the City Council with respect to promulgating a list of recipients eligible for distribution of proceeds contributed by charitable gambling in on-sale liquor establishments and in private clubs and other places as provided in Saint Paul Legislative Code §§402.10 and 409.235; and WHEREAS, the Department of Parks and Recreation administers the application process for the applicants for inclusion on the list; and WHEREAS, the Youth Programs Fund Advisory Board was formed to implement the administration of the ordinance for the Department; and WHEREAS, the Youth Programs Fund Advisory Board convened on January 20, 2012 to add organizations to the eligible recipients list for the charitable gambling funds for 2012; and WHEREAS, the Council adopts the recommendations of the Advisory Board; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the following organizations shall be eligible organizations for the distribution of 2012 Charitable Gambling funds: Boy Scout Troop #12 Boy Scout Troop #174 Boy Scout Troop #216 Boy Scout Troop #294 Como Park Youth Wrestling/Football Conway Booster Club Duluth & Case Booster Club Dunning Boosters Edgcumbe Hockey Booster Club Friends of Oxford Pool City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: RES 12-382, Version: 1 Hayden Heights Youth Alliance Hazel Park Booster Club History Day Support Club Johnson Area Baseball Boosters Midway Area Baseball Club North Area Football Association Northern Star Boy Scouts of America Palace Booster Club Phalen Youth Club St. Paul Rookies Softball Association St. Paul Science Fair Support Group St. Paul Urban Tennis Program Upper East Side Football Association Youth Express City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-440 Name:Police Department Ceremonies Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Authorizating the Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $10,000 to cover expenses incurred from various recognition ceremonies held throughout the year at various places and times. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:2012 ceremonies.pdf 2012 Ceremonies - Financial Analysis Attachment.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Authorizating the Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $10,000 to cover expenses incurred from various recognition ceremonies held throughout the year at various places and times. Body WHEREAS, the chief of the Saint Paul Police Department (Chief Tom Smith) recognizes and acknowledges police employees for their outstanding achievements and exemplary dedication to public services; and WHEREAS, recognition ceremonies are held throughout the year at various places and time; and WHEREAS, the public purpose of the ceremonies is that the city council and mayor deem it important to recognize the commitment and dedication to public service of the city's police employees through various recognition ceremonies through the year including: Medal of Valor, Employee of the Year, Graduation of Police Recruits, and Promotion of Employees; and BE IT ORDERED, that the pursuant to the 2012 city budget , the proper city official(s) are hereby authorized to remit an amount not to exceed $10,000 to cover expenses incurred from the above various ceremonies. Account code: 001-04000 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Saint Paul Financial Analysis File ID Number:RES 12-440 2 3Budget Affected:Operating BudgetPolice DepartmentSpecial Fund 4 5Total Amount of Transaction:10,000.00 6 7Funding Source:Donation 8 9Charter Citation:10.07.1 10 11 12Fiscal Analysis 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27Detail Accounting Codes: 28 29 Accounting CURRENTAMENDED 30 CompanyUnitAccount Description BUDGET CHANGESBUDGET 31 32 Spending Changes 33 (Action Accomplished) 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 TOTAL:0- 0 42 Financing Changes 43 (Action Accomplished) 44 45 - - - 46 TOTAL:000 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 The Saint Paul Police Department holds various recognition ceremonies throut the year. 10,000 dollars is included in the budget (001-04000) to cover expenses incurred from the ceremonies. City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-438 Name:Police officer Interviews Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Authorizing the Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $9,500 to cover expenses incurred from conducting oral interviews for police officer exams. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Police Interviews- Financial Analysis Attachment.pdf officer interviews.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Authorizing the Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $9,500 to cover expenses incurred from conducting oral interviews for police officer exams. Body WHEREAS, these events are scheduled to take place January 30-February 3, 2012 at the following facility: The Saint Paul River Centre, 175 W Kellogg Blvd #502 St Paul, MN 55102. WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Police Department will provide a light breakfast (pastries) and lunches and snacks for outside panel members for all five days. BE IT ORDERED, that pursuant to the 2012 city budget, the proper city officials are hereby authorized to remit an amount not to exceed $9,500 to cover expenses for food and beverage for the above mentioned Saint Paul Police Department event. Funding source: 001-04000-0219 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Saint Paul Financial Analysis File ID Number:RES 12-248 2 3Budget Affected:Operating BudgetPolice DepartmentSpecial Fund 4 5Total Amount of Transaction:9,500.00 6 7Funding Source:Donation 8 9Charter Citation:10.07.1 10 11 12Fiscal Analysis 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27Detail Accounting Codes: 28 29 Accounting CURRENTAMENDED 30 CompanyUnitAccount Description BUDGET CHANGESBUDGET 31 32 Spending Changes 33 (Action Accomplished) 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 TOTAL:0- 0 42 Financing Changes 43 (Action Accomplished) 44 45 - - - 46 TOTAL:000 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 The Saint Paul Police Department is holding oral interviewa for police officers exams. The Saint Paul Police Department will provide a light breakfast, lunches and snacks for outside panel members. 9,500 dollars is included in the budget (001-04000) to cover expenses incurred from the event. Council File # Green Sheet # RESOLUTION CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA Presented by WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Police Department is conducting oral interviews for police officer exams. 1 2 WHEREAS, these events are scheduled to take place January 30-February 3, 2012 at the following 3 facility: The Saint Paul River Centre, 175 W Kellogg Blvd #502 St Paul, MN 55102. 4 5 WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Police Department will provide a light breakfast (pastries) and lunches and 6 snacks for outside panel members for all five days. 7 8 BE IT ORDERED, that pursuant to the 2012 city budget, the proper city officials are hereby authorized to 9 remit an amount not to exceed $9,500 to cover expenses for food and beverage for the above mentioned 10 Saint Paul Police Department event. 11 12 Funding source: 001-04000-0219 13 14 15 Authorizing the Saint Paul Police Department to remit an amount not to exceed $9,500 to cover expenses 16 incurred from conducting oral interviews for police officer exams. 17 18 19 Yeas Nays Absent Bostrom Carter Harris Helgen Lantry Stark Thune Requested by Department of: By: Approved by the Office of Financial Services By: Approved by City Attorney By: Approved by Mayor for Submission to Council By: Adopted by Council: Date Adoption Certified by Council Secretary By: Approved by Mayor: Date By: City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-513 Name:Payne & Maryland Security Cameras Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Approving the use of grant funds through the Ward 6 Neighborhood STAR Year-Round Program to assist the Payne Phalen District 5 Planning Council in having two pole-mounted security cameras installed at intersection of Payne and Maryland Avenues. Sponsors:Dan Bostrom Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Approving the use of grant funds through the Ward 6 Neighborhood STAR Year-Round Program to assist the Payne Phalen District 5 Planning Council in having two pole-mounted security cameras installed at intersection of Payne and Maryland Avenues. Body WHEREAS, on December 14, 2011 the Neighborhood STAR Board reviewed a proposal for STAR grant financing through the Neighborhood STAR Year-Round Program to assist the Payne Phalen District 5 Planning Council in having two pole-mounted security cameras installed at intersection of Payne and Maryland Avenues; and WHEREAS, the Neighborhood STAR Board rated this project a 4.67 on a scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high); and WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Mayor and the Saint Paul City Council to participate in the financing of these activities by providing up to $24,533 in grant financing through the Ward 6 Neighborhood STAR Year-Round Program; and WHEREAS a waiver to the STAR Guideline in regards to the $1 for $1 matching funds requirement is being recommended; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, upon the recommendation of the Mayor, the Council of the City of Saint Paul hereby authorizes and directs the appropriate City officials to execute the necessary documents to implement this Resolution, subject to approval by the City Attorney; and be it FINALLY RESOLVED, staff of the Department of Planning and Economic Development are further authorized and directed to proceed with all other actions necessary to implement this Resolution. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-405 Name:Vacation Hardship Resolution: alley abutting 1073 Eleanor Avenue Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Declaring a "hardship" to satisfy petition requirements for a proposed vacation of an alley abutting 1073 Eleanor Avenue. Sponsors:Chris Tolbert Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Exhibit A.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Declaring a "hardship" to satisfy petition requirements for a proposed vacation of an alley abutting 1073 Eleanor Avenue. Body WHEREAS, Ronald Brastad, on behalf of Blanche Picka ("Petitioner") is seeking to vacate a portion of a diagonal section of alley right-of-way adjacent to Petitioner's property at 1073 Eleanor Avenue, as highlighted on the attached Exhibit A, area "A", to allow Petitioner to secure fee title to the alley area and to an additional adjacent parcel owned by the State of Minnesota, as highlighted on the attached Exhibit A, area "B"; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the City of Saint Paul's ordinance for vacating city streets, (Leg Code, Sec. 130.02 (2)), the Petitioner has attempted to secure the support of a majority of abutting property owners for the vacation; and WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota, which owns the property abutting the alley area to the east (Exhibit A, area "B"), whose support is necessary to constitute a majority, is supportive of the vacation but will not sign the vacation petition; and WHEREAS, the Petitioner believes that the vacation would not adversely impact the State of Minnesota's access to or use of its I-35E highway right-of-way; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Leg. Code, Sec. 130.02 (3), the Petitioner believes that a hardship therefore exists and requests that the City Council waive the "majority" requirement; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Mayor and Council of the City of Saint Paul do hereby declare that a hardship exists with respect to the proposed petition to vacate said portion of the alley abutting 1073 Eleanor Avenue, and that the requirement to obtain support from a majority of abutting property owners is hereby waived. Financial Analysis None City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ Exhibit A 1073 Eleanor Avenue DISCLAIMER: This map is neither a legally recorded map nor a survey and is not intended to be used as one. This map is a compilation of records, information and data located in various city, county, state and federal offices and other sources regarding the area shown, and is to be used for reference purposes only. SOURCES: Ramsey County (January 31, 2012), The Lawrence Group;January 31, 2012 for County parcel and property records data; January 2012 for commercial City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-446 Name:Beacon Bluff: Approval of Termination Agreement Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Authorizing an agreement to terminate an existing operations and maintenance agreement between the 3M Company and the City of Saint Paul as a condition of a 2005 vacation of streets and alleys on 3M's former property in Saint Paul. Sponsors:Dan Bostrom Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Exhibit A - O&M Agreement.pdf Exhibit B - Termination Agreement.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Authorizing an agreement to terminate an existing operations and maintenance agreement between the 3M Company and the City of Saint Paul as a condition of a 2005 vacation of streets and alleys on 3M's former property in Saint Paul. Body WHEREAS, the City of Saint Paul ("City") and 3M Company ("3M") previously entered into that certain 3M Saint Paul Campus Operations and Maintenance Agreement ("O&M Agreement"), dated as of April 17, 2007 and recorded in the Ramsey County Recorder's Office and Registrar of Titles Office on May 25, 2007 as Document Nos. 4031590 and 2006069, respectively, and attached hereto as Exhibit A, which agreement establishes certain rights and obligations with respect to a 2005 vacation of streets and alleys within the former 3M-owned property located in the City of Saint Paul; and WHEREAS, the Port Authority of the City of Saint Paul (the "Port") currently owns a portion of the former 3M- owned property; and WHEREAS, the City and the Port wish to mutually terminate the O&M Agreement as it relates to the Port and the Port-owned property, as depicted in the Termination and Mutual Release Agreement ("Termination Agreement") attached hereto as Exhibit B; now, therefore be it RESOLVED, that said Termination Agreement is hereby approved in a form and content substantially as set forth in Exhibit B, and the proper city officials are hereby authorized and directed to execute said Termination Agreement on behalf of the City. Financial Analysis None City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ 8392087v1 TERMINATION AND MUTUAL RELEASE AGREEMENT This Termination Agreement and Mutual Release (the “Termination Agreement”) is made as of this ____ day of ___________, 2012 (the “Effective Date”), by and between the Port Authority of the City of Saint Paul, a body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, as successor in title to 3M Company, (the “Port”), and the City of Saint Paul, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “City”). WHEREAS, the City and 3M Company (“3M”) previously entered into that certain 3M Saint Paul Campus Operations and Maintenance Agreement (“O&M Agreement”), dated as of April 17, 2007 and recorded in the Ramsey County Recorder’s Office and Registrar of Titles Office on May 25, 2007 as Document Nos. 4031590 and 2006069, respectively, which agreement establishes certain rights and obligations with respect to certain property located in the City of Saint Paul, County of Ramsey, as more particularly depicted by shading on Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the Port acquired from 3M and currently owns the portion of the Property depicted by shading on Exhibit B attached hereto (the “Port Property”); and WHEREAS, the parties wish to mutually terminate the O&M Agreement as it relates to the Port and the Port Property as of the Effective Date of this Termination Agreement on the terms and conditions set forth herein, and mutually release any and all claims one party may have against the other arising out of the O&M Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Termination Of The Agreement. The Port and the City mutually agree that the O&M Agreement, as it relates to the Port and/or the Port Property, is hereby now and forever irrevocably terminated, and is null and void with no further force or effect with respect to the Port or Port Property as of the Effective Date. 2. Mutual Release Of Claims. a. The Port, on behalf of itself and each and all of its present or former officers, directors, affiliated entities or corporations, subsidiaries, divisions, partners, joint venturers, agents, attorneys, employees, representatives, successors, and assigns (collectively, the “Port Parties”), hereby fully, finally, forever and irrevocably releases and discharges the City and each and all of its present or former officers, directors, affiliated entities or corporations, subsidiaries, divisions, partners, joint venturers, agents, attorneys, employees, representatives, successors and assigns (collectively, the “City Parties”) from any and all “Claims” (as defined in Section 2.c. hereof), that the Port Parties, or any of them, have had, now have, or hereafter can or will have against the City Parties, or any of them, for or by reason of any matter, cause or thing that is related in any manner to the O&M Agreement through and including the Effective Date, including but not limited to the City’s act or failure to act under the O&M Agreement. 8392087v1 2 b. The City on behalf of itself and each and all of the City Parties hereby fully, finally, forever and irrevocably releases and discharges the Port Parties from any and all Claims, that the City Parties, or any of them, have had, now have, or hereafter can or will have against the Port Parties, or any of them, for or by reason of any matter, cause or thing that is related in any manner to the O&M Agreement through and including the Effective Date, including but not limited to the Port’s act or failure to act under the O&M Agreement. c. The term “Claims” shall include any and all claims, demands, agreements, contracts, covenants, reckonings, representations, warranties, promises, undertakings, actions, causes of action, obligations, controversies, debts, costs, expenses, accounts, damages, losses, injuries and liabilities, of whatever kind or nature, in law, equity or otherwise, present and future, whether known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected. d. Each party assumes the full risk of discovery of, or more complete understanding of, any fact, event, law or thing whatsoever, material or otherwise, that if presently known or correctly and fully understood, would have affected this Termination Agreement or its execution. Accordingly, it is the parties’ intention to, and the parties do hereby, fully, finally, forever and irrevocably relinquish all Claims, known and unknown, that heretofore existed, now exist, or may hereafter exist with respect to or in any way connected with the matters and Claims released herein. 3. Integration. This Termination Agreement represents the entire understanding between the parties with respect to its subject matter. This Termination Agreement supersedes all previous representations, understandings or agreements, oral or written, between the parties. 4. Partial Severability. The severability of any provision of this Termination Agreement will not impair or affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof, and this Termination Agreement will be construed as if such invalid provision had not been included herein. 5. Modifications. No modification, alteration or amendment of this Termination Agreement will be valid or binding unless in writing and signed by both parties. All of the terms and provisions of this Termination Agreement will be binding upon, will inure to the benefit of, and will be enforceable by and against the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. Nothing in this Termination Agreement, express or implied, is intended or will be construed to confer upon, or give to, any person, corporation or entity, other than the City Parties and the Port Parties, any remedy or claim under or by reason of this instrument, or any terms, covenants or conditions hereof, and all the terms, covenants and conditions in this Termination Agreement are for the sole and exclusive benefit of such parties. 6. Counterparts. This Termination Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. [Remainder of the page intentionally left blank; signature pages to follow] 8392087v1 3 THE PORT’S SEPARATE SIGNATURE PAGE TO TERMINATION AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Port enters into this Termination Agreement on the Effective Date set forth above. PORT: The Port Authority of the City of Saint Paul _________________________________ (Signature) Name: ___________________________ Title: ____________________________ STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) SS: COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing Termination Agreement was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ______________, 2012, by ________________________, the Port Authority of the City of Saint Paul, a body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said body. Notary Public 8392087v1 4 THE CITY’S SEPARATE SIGNATURE PAGE TO TERMINATION AGREEMENT IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City enters into this Termination Agreement on the Effective Date set forth above. CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA By: _____________________________ Its Mayor or Deputy Mayor By: _____________________________ Its Director of Financial Services By: _____________________________ Its City Clerk Approved as to form: ____________________ Assistant City Attorney STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ____________, 2012, by ________________________, Mayor or Deputy Mayor, ________________________, Director, Office of Financial Services and _______________________, City Clerk of the City of Saint Paul, a Minnesota municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota. _____________________________________ Notary Public This instrument was drafted: Leonard, Street and Deinard (ED) 150 South Fifth Street, Suite 2300 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 335-1500 8392087v1 5 EXHIBIT A TO TERMINATION AGREEMENT Depiction of Property 8392087v1 6 EXHIBIT B TO TERMINATION AGREEMENT Depiction of Port Property City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-404 Name:Beacon Bluff North final plat Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, approving the Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center North. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Dan Bostrom Indexes:Subdivisions of land, Ward - 6, Zoning Code sections:Sec. 69.300. - Subdivision approval., Sec. 69.405. - Combining preliminary and final subdivision review., Sec. 69.511. - Parkland dedication requirements. Attachments:Beacon Bluff North revised final plat.pdf Revision details to final plat.pdf Beacon Bluff North easement.pdf Beacon Bluff North prelim plat.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, approving the Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center North. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Body WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Port Authority, in Zoning File # 10-918-220, has submitted for City Council approval the attached Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center North to create two industrial parcels and five outlots, in the area northeast of Forest and Phalen Blvd.; and WHEREAS, the appropriate City departments have reviewed the plat and found, subject to the recommended conditions, that it meets the requirements of Chapter 69 of the Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council was duly published in the official newspaper of the City on February 2, 2012, and notices were duly mailed to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the City Council having held a public hearing on the proposed plat on February 15, 2012, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and recommendations concerning the subdivision; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council accepts and approves the attached preliminary and final plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center North to create two industrial parcels and five outlots, subject to the following conditions: A parkland cash dedication in the amount of $21,651.66 is paid prior to the city clerk's signing of the final plat; and The applicant shall file a copy of the Council Resolution approving the plat with the Ramsey County City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: RES 12-404, Version: 1 Recorder's Office. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the Applicant, the Zoning Administrator, and the Planning Administrator. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ 8419698v3 (Space Above for Recorder/Registrar Use) DEDICATION OF EASEMENT TRAIL PURPOSES AND BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION The Port Authority of the City of Saint Paul, as Grantor, for good and valuable consideration, to them in hand paid and the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey to the City of Saint Paul, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota, its successors, and assigns, as Grantee (i) a permanent, non-exclusive permanent easement for pedestrian, bicycle and trail purposes (the “Trail Easement”), and (ii) a permanent, non-exclusive easement for construction, maintenance, and reconstruction of the Forest Street bridge and related retaining wall construction, pier and abutment construction, utility relocation and inspection (the “Construction and Maintenance Easement”) on, over, under and across the tract of land being in the County of Ramsey, State of Minnesota, described on Exhibit A attached hereto. To have and to hold the same forever. It is intended and agreed that this agreement shall be a covenant running with the land and shall be binding to the fullest extent of the law and equity for the benefit of the public. It is further intended and agreed that this agreement and covenant shall remain in effect without limitation as to time. [Remainder of the page intentionally left blank; signature pages to follow] 8419698v3 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, Grantor(s), ________________________________________, a _______________________________ under the laws of ____________________, has(ve) caused this deed to be executed in its corporate name by its duly authorized officers, and attested to this day of _____________, 2012. By Its By Its STATE OF MINNESOTA } ss COUNTY OF RAMSEY The foregoing was acknowledged before me this day of , 2012 by and the and of This Instrument was drafted by: City of Saint Paul Office of Financial Services – Real Estate Section 25 W. 4th St., Rm. 1000 St. Paul, MN 55102 8419698v3 EXHIBIT A TO DEDICATION OF EASEMENT TRAIL PURPOSES AND BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION Legal Description of Trail Easement and Construction and Maintenance Easement The west 20.00 feet of Lot 1, Block 1, BEACON BLUFF BUSINESS CENTER NORTH, Ramsey County, Minnesota, AND The west 20.00 feet of Outlot A, BEACON BLUFF BUSINESS CENTER NORTH, Ramsey County, Minnesota. City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-402 Name:Beacon Bluff South plat Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, approving the Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center South. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Kathy Lantry, Dan Bostrom Indexes:Subdivisions of land, Ward - 6, Ward - 7, Zoning Code sections:Sec. 69.301. - Platting required., Sec. 69.406. - Review of divisions of land., Sec. 69.511. - Parkland dedication requirements. Attachments:Beacon Bluff South Final Plat Beacon Bluff South Preliminary Plat.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, approving the Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center South. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Body WHEREAS, the Saint Paul Port Authority, in Zoning File # 11-243-475, has submitted for City Council approval the attached Preliminary and Final Plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center South to create one I2 General Industrial parcel and one B3 General Business parcel at 999 7th St E, NE corner 7th St and Forest, and 915 Minnehaha Ave E, NW corner of Forest at Minnehaha; and WHEREAS, the appropriate City departments have reviewed the plats and found, subject to the recommended conditions, that they meet the requirements of Chapter 69 of the Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council was duly published in the official newspaper of the City on February 2, 2012, and notices were duly mailed to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the subject property; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed plat on February 15, 2012, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and recommendations concerning the subdivision; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council accepts and approves the attached plat for Beacon Bluff Business Center South to create one I2 General Industrial parcel and one B3 General Business parcel, subject to the following conditions: A parkland cash dedication in the amount of $27,295.33 is paid prior to the city clerk signing the final plat; and The applicant shall file a copy of the Council Resolution approving the plat with the Ramsey County Recorder's Office. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: RES 12-402, Version: 1 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the Applicant, the Zoning Administrator, and the Planning Administrator. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-455 Name:Melissa Hill Addition Final Plat Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Approval of Final Plat for Melissa Hill Addition. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes:Subdivisions of land, Ward - 7, Zoning Code sections:Sec. 69.404. - Final plat_Procedures. Attachments:Final Plat Revised 2-14-12.pdf melissa hill addn wetland determination.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Approval of Final Plat for Melissa Hill Addition. Body WHEREAS, Phillip Gustafson, in Zoning File # 12-028-127, has submitted for City Council approval the attached final plat for Melissa Hill Addition, creating six (6) single family residential lots, at 589 Burlington Road; and WHEREAS, the appropriate City departments have reviewed the final plat and found, subject to the recommended conditions, that it meets the requirements of Chapter 69 of the Zoning Code; and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing on the preliminary plat at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having approved the preliminary plat on March 9, 2011, in RES 11-402 subject to two conditions: 1. A wetland determination by a qualified professional is provided for Lot 1 prior to submission of the final plat. If it is determined that a non-exempt wetland exists on Lot 1, the final plat will revised accordingly; and 2. The final plat is submitted for City Council approval within one year following approval of this preliminary plat; and WHEREAS, in compliance with the first condition, a wetland determination was performed in June, 2011, revised in August, 2011, and reviewed by a duly constituted Technical Evaluation Panel as required by the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act in August, 2011, with a final decision that no wetland is present on the site; and WHEREAS, the final plat was submitted for approval within one year of March 9, 2011, in compliance with the second condition; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council accepts and approves the attached final plat for Melissa Hill Addition at 589 Burlington Road, creating six (6) single family residential lots, subject to the following conditions: 1. A parkland cash dedication in the amount of $1987.33 is paid prior to the city clerk signing the final plat. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: RES 12-455, Version: 1 2. Prior to development, each lot will undergo site plan review to address the issues and comply with the conditions identified as part of the preliminary plat site plan review (File # 10-927623) and as required by the Zoning Code in Section 61.402. Among other items, the review will include a tree preservation plan, and an erosion/sediment control plan. 3. As each lot gets developed, a copy of a certified survey of the whole site must be submitted showing existing building(s), new structure(s) and addition(s), and site drainage; and 4. The applicant shall file a copy of the Council Resolution approving the plat with the Ramsey County Recorder's Office. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk shall mail a copy of this resolution to the Applicant, the Zoning Administrator, and the Planning Administrator. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-444 Name:Zaoub Toj Siab License Suspension and Fine Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Approving adverse action against the Retail Food (B) - Grocery 101-1000 sq. ft. license held by Mai Thao, d/b/a Zaoub Toj Siab, 1001 Johnson Parkway, Unit 226. Sponsors:Dan Bostrom Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Notice of Intent to Suspend Licenses.pdf SPLC Section 310.05 (m).pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Approving adverse action against the Retail Food (B) - Grocery 101-1000 sq. ft. license held by Mai Thao, d/b/a Zaoub Toj Siab, 1001 Johnson Parkway, Unit 226. Body WHEREAS,adverse action was taken against the Retail Food (B)-Grocery 101-1000 sq.ft.license held by Mai Thao d/b/a Zaoub Toj Siab (License ID #20100004379)for the premises located at 1001 Johnson Parkway,Unit 226 in Saint Paul,by Notice of Intent to Suspend Licenses dated February 6,2012,alleging licensee failed to pay delinquent license and late fees of $153.00 and submit a completed Certificate of Compliance Minnesota Workers' Compensation Law form; and WHEREAS,per Saint Paul Legislative Code §310.05 (m)(2),the licensing office also recommended a $500.00 matrix penalty for failure to submit required information in order to maintain the license; and WHEREAS,the licensee did not respond to the Notice of Intent to Suspend Licenses to pay the delinquent license and late fees and submit required information; and WHEREAS,the Notice of Intent to Suspend Licenses stated that if the licensee failed to pay the delinquent license and late fees and submit required information by February 16,2012,that the matter would be placed on the consent agenda to impose the recommended penalty; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED,that the Retail Food (B)-Grocery 101-1000 sq.ft.license held by Mai Thao d/b/a Zaoub Toj Siab is hereby suspended for failure to pay delinquent license and late fees of $153.00; and FURTHER RESOLVED,the licensee is ordered to pay a matrix penalty of $500.00 for failure to submit required information.Payment of such penalty shall be made within thirty (30)days of the date of the adoption of this resolution. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ Download finished. McAfee Web Gateway has finished downloading file: http://stpaul.legistar.com/View.ashx? M=F&ID=1783557&GUID=67B50A35-3E77-4C33-913B-89BED2020C55 Click here to get the file. McAfee Global Threat Intel Report: Minimal Risk Website Country Code: Destination IP: 74.208.193.67 Source IP: 172.17.190.63 Triggered Rule Set: Gateway Antimalware Triggered Rule: Block if Virus was Found File Type: application/pdf File Size :1436216 City of St. Paul Acceptable Internet Use Policy Click here for Internet Policy For assistance, please contact ishelp@ci.stpaul.mn.us generated 2012-03-13 12:12:50 by McAfee Web Gateway City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1RES 12-482 Name:George M. Pfoser Settlement Agreement Status:Type:Resolution Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Approving Settlement Agreement and Release between George M. Pfoser and the City of Saint Paul. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Settlement Agreement and Release.pdf Master.pdf George Pfoser Financial Analysis.pdf Administrative Code Section 3.02.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Approving Settlement Agreement and Release between George M. Pfoser and the City of Saint Paul. Body RESOLVED, that upon execution and delivery of a release in full to the City of Saint Paul, the proper City officers are hereby authorized and directed to pay out of the Tort Liability Fund GL 225-42310-0511 to George M. Pfoser and his attorney, Daniel B. O'Leary, Mansur and O'Leary P.A., the total sum of forty-five thousand dollars and no cents ($45,000.00) in full and final settlement of two civil court files captioned George M. Pfoser v. City of St. Paul for UIM and No Fault Benefits claims arising from the motor vehicle accident on December 13, 2005. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ City of Saint Paul Financial Analysis Template Instructions Purpose of the Fiscal Analysis Template: Fiscal Analysis Template Tab Budget Reference Tabs Drop Down Menus Tab ● The Drop Down Menus tab (grey tab) is used by OFS only to manage the drop down lists contained in the Financial Analysis template. ● Department staff filling out this form should not attempt to edit this page. ● The Operating Budget Reference and CIB Budget Reference pages (blue tabs) are read-only tabs. They contain guidance on what kind of mayoral and/or council action is required for budget adjustments in both the operating and CIB budgets, and include charter and administrative code citations for these actions. ● If you have questions about what is required to accomplish a particular finance related action, please contact your budget analyst. ● Fill out all of the information in Financial Analysis Template (green tab) of this file. Pop-up windows will appear throughout the file to provide more details on what information is required. ● The top portion of the file, including the fiscal analysis, will need to be filled out for any finance related action, including: - Grants: applying for, accepting and budgeting - Donations: soliciting, accepting, and budgeting - Budget amendments (both resolutions and administrative orders) - Other action with a financial impact ● If the action includes either a CIB or Operating Budget Amendment, the detail accounting codes section must also be filled out. ● If you have further questions, please contact your budget analyst. ● The purpose of this template is to standardize the information accompanying financial resolutions that come before the Mayor and City Council. This form will be required to be submitted as an attachment to all resolutions that contain budget changes, related to grants or donations, or otherwise impact the city's finances. ● Resolutions without this information will not be approved by OFS, and will be returned to the drafter. City of Saint Paul Financial Analysis 1 File ID Number:RES #12-482 2 3 Budget Affected:Operating Budget Human Resources General Fund 4 5 Total Amount of Transaction:$45,000 6 7 Funding Source:Other Please Specify: 8 Tort Liability Fund - GL 225-42310-0511 9 Charter Citation:Administrative Code 3.02 10 11 12 Fiscal Analysis 13 14 15 Settlement agreement between the City of Saint Paul and George M. Pfoser and his attorney, Daniel B. O'Leary, Mansur and O'Leary P.A., in full and final settlement of two civil court files captioned George M. Pfoser v. City of St. Paul for UIM and No Fault Benefits claims arising from the motor vehicle accident on December 13, 2005. In order to: Resolution, A.O., or Other Documentation Required? Resolution/AO Action Charter/Code Citation Template Agenda Section 1.)Recognize additional/unanticipated revenues (Ex. Outperforming revenues, outside donations, etc) Budget Amendment Resolution and Public Hearing - Mayor certifies that there are available for appropriation total revenues in excess of those estimated in the budget - Amend spending and financing to recognize new revenue in the appropriate company and activity C.C. 10.07.1 Budget Amendment or Gifts and Donations Public Hearing 2.)Accept a Grant a.) No Budget Previously Establish for the Grant Award Letter and/or Grant Agreement Budget Amendment Resolution and Public Hearing - Mayor certifies that there are available for appropriation total revenues in excess of those estimated in the budget - Amend spending and financing to recognize the grant in the appropriate company and activity C.C. 10.07.1 Admin 41.03 Grants Public Hearing b.) Previously Established Grant Budget Award Letter and/or Grant Agreement Resolution Accepting the Grant Funds (No public hearing needed) - Accept the awarded grant funds - Include in the resolution that the grant funds were anticipated in the current year's budget Grants Consent 3.)Transfer Appropriations within Departments: a.) Within the same Fund (Lawson Company)A.O.- Mayor may transfer any unencumbered appropriation balances within a department - Administrative order is prepared to execute the transfer C.C. 10.07.4 Budget Amendment Consent b.) Between Funds (Lawson Companies)Budget Amendment Resolution - Mayor recommends and council approves through resolution to transfer appropriations between companies - Amend spending and financing to recognize transfer C.C. 10.07.4 Budget Amendment Consent Operating Budget Changes Procedures Guide In order to: Resolution, A.O., or Other Documentation Required? Resolution/AO Action Charter/Code Citation Template Agenda Section Operating Budget Changes Procedures Guide 4.)Transfer Appropriations between Departments a.) Within the same Fund (Lawson Company)Budget Amendment Resolution - Mayor recommends and council approves through resolution to transfer appropriations between departments - Amend spending and financing to recognize transfer C.C. 10.07.4 Budget Amendment Consent b.) Between Funds (Lawson Companies)Budget Amendment Resolution - Mayor recommends and council approves through resolution to transfer appropriations between departments - Amend spending and financing to recognize transfer C.C. 10.07.4 Budget Amendment Consent 6.) Allow appropriations to lapse (non-capital improvement dollars) For Lapse of appropriations - Capital improvements see City Charter 10.09. For guidance on budget change procedures for accomplished or abandoned projects, see the CIB Project and Budget Changes Procedures Guide, numbers 1, 2, and 6. None - No action required. -All non-encumbered appropriations will fall to fund balance at the end of the fiscal year. - All encumbered appropriations will be re- appropriated in the following fiscal year's budget for the same purposes C.C. 10.08 N/A N/A 7.)Enact Emergency Appropriation Emergency is defined as "a sudden or unforeseen situation affecting life, health, property, or the public peace or welfare that requires immediate council action", C.C. 6.06 Emergency Ordinances Budget Amendment Resolution - Resolution to appropriate emergency funds is adopted by unanimous affirmative vote by the council C.C. 10.07.2 C.C. 6.06 Budget Amendment Consent 8.)Reduction of Appropriations Report by the mayor of the estimated amount of the deficit Recommendation by the mayor to the city council of steps to be taken - Resolution or other actions deemed necessary by council to prevent or minimize any deficit C.C. 10.07.3 Budget Amendment Consent In order to:Resolution and/or AO Required? CIB Approval?Resolution/AO Action Charter/Code Citation Template Agenda Section 1)Close a completed project with excess balances Administrative Order (Completed by OFS) Periodic Review by CIB Committee - Amend project financing and spending - Transfer excess appropriation to contingency Administrative Code 57.09 (2) City Charter 10.09 - Accomplished projects Budget Amendment Consent 2)Close a completed project with no excess balances (but excess spending authority) Administrative Order (Completed by OFS) Periodic Review by CIB Committee - Amend project financing and spending City Charter 10.09 - Accomplished projects Budget Amendment Consent 3)Close a completed project with no excess balances and no excess spending authority None - Contact OFS with project budget codes to have the project inactivated in the finance system N/A N/A 4)Adding new spending to an existing project (without changing the scope of the project): 4 a ) Financing source is new money CIB Committee Review and Recommendation Mayor recommends via resolution Compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing - Amend spending and financing to recognize new revenue Administrative Code 57.09 (1) City Charter 10.07.1 Budget Amendment or Grants or Gifts and Donations Public Hearing 4 b ) Financing source is contingency (less that $25,000) All proposed uses of contingency must first be reviewed by OFS Transfers within a department require an Administrative Order (Completed by departments. Verified and approved by OFS) A.O.s require Periodic Review by CIB Committee Transfers between departments require a Resolution (Completed by departments. Verified and approved by OFS) - Reduce amount in appropriate contingency fund - Amend project spending and financing to recognize use of contingency Administrative Code 57.09 (3) a City Charter 10.07.4 Budget Amendment Consent CIB Project and Budget Changes Procedures Guide 4 c ) Financing source is contingency (more that $25,000) All proposed uses of contingency must first be reviewed by OFS CIB Committee Review and recommendation Mayor recommends via resolution Public Hearing - Reduce amount in contingency fund ("unallocated reserve account ") - Amend project spending and financing to recognize use of contingency Administrative Code 57.09 (3) b City Charter 10.07.4 Budget Amendment Public Hearing 5) Add a new project OR Expand the scope of an existing project: 5 a ) Financing source is new money CIB Committee Review and Recommendation Mayor recommends via resolution Compliance with the City Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing - Amend spending and financing to recognize new revenue Administrative Code 57.09 (1) City Charter 10.07.1 Budget Amendment or Grants or Gifts and Donations Public Hearing 5 b ) Financing source is contingency All proposed uses of contingency must first be reviewed by OFS CIB Committee Review and recommendation Mayor recommends via resolution Public Hearing - Transfer dollars from contingency to new project - Amend spending and financing to recognize new revenue City Charter 10.07.4 Administrative Code 57.09 (1) Budget Amendment Public Hearing 6)Declare a project abandoned Council Resolution - Identify project as abandoned - Transfer appropriation for the abandoned project to a separate contingency fund ("unallocated reserve account ") - Re-appropriation of the funds needs CIB review, mayor recommendation, and council approval (see either of the "Add dollars to a project" scenarios above) City Charter 10.09 Administrative Code 57.09 (4) Budget Amendment Consent 7)Replace an approved project with a new project 1) Declare an approved project abandoned or completed with excess balances (see process above) 2) Add new project after capital improvement budget is adopted (see process above) - Can accomplish both steps in one resolution Budget Amendment Consent or Public Hearing Departments Affected Budgets General vs. Special Fund Funding Source (Select Department)(Choose CIB or Operating)(Choose General, Special or Capital)(Select Funding Source) Multiple Departments Transfer of Appropriations City Attorney's Office Both Operating and CIB BudgetsGeneral Fund Grant City Council Operating Budget Special Fund Donation Emergency Management CIB Budget Capital Multiple Financial Services Multiple Funds Other Fire and Safety Services General Government Accounts HRA Human Resources HREEO Mayor's Office Parks and Recreation PED Police Department Public Health Public Library Agency Public Works RiverCentre Safety and Inspections Technology and Communications Water Department City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1ABZA 12-3 Name:Jirik Appeal of BZA approval at 1170 Selby Avenue Status:Type:Appeal-BZA For Discussion In control:City Council Final action: Title:Public hearing to consider the appeal of Walter Jirik to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue. (Public hearing held February 15) Sponsors:Melvin Carter III Indexes: Code sections:Sec. 63.304. - Parking location, nonresidential., Sec. 63.310. - Entrances and exits., Sec. 63.312. - Setback. Attachments:Application for Appeal BZA Resolution and meeting minutes Deadline extension letter BZA Neighborhood Notification Neighborhood correspondence 1of 3 Neighborhood correspondence 2 of 3 Neighborhooh correspondence 3 of 3 BZA staff report BZA 2006 Resolution BZA variance application Site photos 1of 3 Site photos 2 of 3 Site photos 3 of 3 Union Park Letter Save Our Selby Packet.pdf Correspondence in opposition to appeal Correspondence in support of appeal Correspondence in support of appeal 03-13-12.pdf Hermanson Spreadsheet.pdf Hermanson Spreadsheet1.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council2/15/2012 1 Title Public hearing to consider the appeal of Walter Jirik to a decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue. (Public hearing held February 15) Body The applicant, JJ Haywood, owner of Pizza Luce applied for two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue. A public hearing was held on December 27, 2011. Staff recommended approval of the variances subject to the condition that bumper guards be installed on the east side of the City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: ABZA 12-3, Version: 1 parking lot to keep parked cars from hitting the commercial building to the east. The applicant's request was subsequently approved by the BZA as recommended by staff with the additional condition that the applicant obtains site plan review approval prior to obtaining a building permit for any construction or grading on the site. Required Background Information The appellant (Walter Jirik) has provided a three page document detailing his grounds for appeal. That document is attached to this file. Does this issue fall within the 60 day rule? No If yes, when does the 60 days expire? Has an extension been granted? Yes If so, to what date? April 3, 2012 Key Staff Contact Yaya Diatta 651-266-9080 Yaya.diatta@ci.stpaul.mn.us <mailto:Yaya.diatta@ci.stpaul.mn.us> City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ e February 2, 2012 Saint Paul City Council 310 City Hall 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Saint Paul, Min nesota 55102 Dear Council President Lantry and City Councilmembers, At a meetin g of the Union Park District Council Board of Directors on February 1, 2012 , the Union Park District Council passed the following motion regarding the Application for Appeal to appeal a decision made by the Board of Zonin g Appeals on December 27, 2011, regarding property located at 1170 Selby A venue: The Union Park District Council (UPDC) supports the BZA decision of December 27, 2011, to grant the variances to allow Pizza Lucé to build a parking lot on their property at 1170 Selby A ve nue, and opposes the appeal by a group of neighbors to reverse that decision. UPDC recommends that Pizza Lucé and neighbors conti nue efforts to address pedestrian safety issues by reviewing the suggestions of fered at community meetin gs on January 10 and 31, 2012, and adopting a package of measures to make the parking lot safer. Thank you for your time and consideration of this important issue. Sincerely, Carla Olson President UNION PARK DISTRICT COUNCIL 1570 Concordia Avenue, Suite LL100, Saint Paul, MN 55104 p 651 645 6887 | f 651 917 9991 | e info@unionparkdc.org | w unionparkdc.org Download finished. McAfee Web Gateway has finished downloading file: http://stpaul.legistar.com/View.ashx? M=F&ID=1739691&GUID=727BD955-3E7F-4C44-AF2D-8D614D171C2B Click here to get the file. McAfee Global Threat Intel Report: Minimal Risk Website Country Code: Destination IP: 74.208.193.67 Source IP: 172.17.190.63 Triggered Rule Set: Gateway Antimalware Triggered Rule: Block if Virus was Found File Type: application/pdf File Size :12843289 City of St. Paul Acceptable Internet Use Policy Click here for Internet Policy For assistance, please contact ishelp@ci.stpaul.mn.us generated 2012-03-13 12:13:53 by McAfee Web Gateway February 14, 2012 RE: File # 12-000964 Dear City Council members, We would like to express our support of the variances that were granted by the Council for the proposed parking lot at 1170 Selby Ave for Pizza Luce. Pizza Luce has been a good neighbor to us and have always responded when we approach them with issues or concerns. Many neighbors have expressed concerns about customer parking and we see that Pizza Luce is again trying to be a good neighbor by finding a way to provide additional off-street parking. We are glad to have them in the neighborhood hope that you will deny this appeal. We would much rather see the lot at 1170 Selby be put to use and be improved with new fencing and lighting than have it sit as a vacant lot. Thank you. Sincerely, Ellen and David Tzeutschler 1192 Dayton Ave St Paul MN 55104 Dear Councilmember Carter - I understand that the St. Paul City Council will be taking up the request for variances from Pizza Luce for the proposed parking lot on Selby Avenue this Wednesday. I live at 1121 Hague Avenue - about a block and a half to the east and one block to the south of Pizza Luce. I attended the community meeting on January 31 and know that some of my neighbors are opposed to the approval of the variances and thus the parking lot. At that same meeting, I heard comments by staff of and consultants for Pizza Luce regarding their efforts to respond to neighborhood concerns. I also heard support for the variances, with safety conditions suggested, from my neighbors. Below is the message I sent to the Union Park District Council later the evening of January 31. I understand that the variance requests have been approved by Union Park and that Pizza Luce has continued to work closely with the neighbors immediately to the west of the lot. I am unable to attend the Council meeting on Wednesday, February 15, but I want you and your colleagues on the City Council to be aware of my support of Pizza Luce's request. Pizza Luce has responded to the concerns expressed by neighbors, particularly those to the immediate west of the lot, carefully and considerately. At this point, it is prudent to move forward and allow Pizza Luce to develop the proposed parking lot. It is my hope that the Council will approve the request for variances. Sincerely, Kathy Mann Arnott 1121 Hague Avenue, St. Paul, MN 55104 651-225-4447 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kathy Mann Arnott <klmannarnott@gmail.com> Date: Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 10:03 PM Subject: Pizza Luce proposed parking lot To: anne@unionparkdc.org Cc: Margaret Jones <margaretjones1181@gmail.com>, LHCC-Director <lexham@lexham.org>, sarah@unionparkdc.org Good evening Anne - I attended the meeting this evening regarding the variance request by Pizza Luce to construct a parking lot at 1170 Selby. I write to express my support for the necessary variances. Pizza Luce has been a significant, positive addition to our neighborhood. As a proud city dweller, I am encouraged by the development and growth of small businesses in my neighborhood. I value having Pizza Luce within a five minute walk of my home. In fact, I would welcome the addition of a coffee shop, bakery, neighborhood grocer, dry cleaner, etc. nearby. When Pizza Luce announced plans to build a restaurant on Selby Avenue, I was delighted. I knew then, as I know now, that having small businesses in my neighborhood is good for the economic growth of my community. And Pizza Luce has proven to be a good neighbor in Lex-Ham on macro- and micro-levels. Tonight I heard that Pizza Luce's immediate neighbors have been more than satisfied by the responsiveness and attentiveness Pizza Luce has given to their comments and concerns. I also know that Pizza Luce has been a good neighbor to the Lex-Ham Community Council - contributing gift certificates to community events, spaghetti sauce to our annual spaghetti dinner and much more. Pizza Luce has created an attractive addition to Selby Avenue with their clean and dynamic store front, plantings, pink dinosaur and more. The creation of more off-street parking can only assist our neighborhood. The plans as proposed by Pizza Luce are thoughtful and have considered the immediate neighbors. Consideration to fence height, greening, lighting, etc. has been done in meaningful conversation with the immediate neighbors. I sense a receptiveness by the Pizza Luce representatives to safety improvements as proposed by the meeting attendees. I hope that Union Park will add their support to the variance request made by Pizza Luce to the city. I wholeheartedly endorse their requests and firmly believe that their track record as a good neighbor will continue as they move forward on the construction of the new parking lot. Sincerely, Kathy Mann Arnott 651-470-3383 To Members of Saint Paul City Council, I oppose the two variances thatPizzaluce wants for 1170 Selby Avenue. Giving the variances for this lot will not solve anything. Instead putting a second parking lot 100 feet across the street from the present parking lot will create an incredible safety hazardon Selby Avenue. There are multiple problems with this lot and creating the second lot will mirror the same unsafe conditions that exist withPizza Luce's existing lot. I oppose the two variances also because the second lot does not address the primary ."uso, that we are having problems. Because Pizzaluce is a large corporate business, it needs to have huge amounts of cars coming into our neighborhood. It promised to be a neighborhood business. A neighborhood business should be able to survive primarily on neighborhood customers or nearby customers. Instead it is a business for the entire Twin Cities area. I have come to rcalizethatPizzaluce is beyond "neighborhood" in its business plan. As along term property owner in this neighborhood I know of neighbors who are planning to do less, not putting large investrnents into their homes and properties. This is i business that has a greater concern for its profits than keeping the qualities of this neighborhood that brought us here. What was once a quiet, truly pleasant neighborhood is now invaded by crowds of strangers every day who care little about ourneighborhood, our livability or quality of life concerrs. The problems is again the fact that large numbers of cars from all over, are coming together at a business located in the middle of a residential avenue that is a collector avenue. It is too big a business for this residential neighborhood. AddressPizza Luce's business plan. $eny the granting of the variances. Avenue Paul, MN r* -, ,";o' 5,n cU- i 9l"B fis \yt- buu-r, lrur-c S .r vn {s Yr e'.s t'v u 5st o, e-*furra,nga-/, Sur,o; S cl-,u-",J0. S ,.,, tfnqfg-, e-,. 6rr-n'!tJ 0-g ?uc"rE 7u.SS *rrF$,\- ',.,.rrr. SJi.S, V",'i nr Vt,U coc-1ons -ri- -tr,',.L)- 91,< l-,lSo r,:a-S bo-<.)So- 6€',*s /-oo"|ho) d. &Lb? .+-./w- r5)ru.,^u-*s tllru b\>rnt-551-> A)ruv^u J,. Y\h r'"4- u gD-, q--f ):r s nol l) n t na.LLt D a.., d ,>-e \ts* cr-J-],- N9 tLo-..>Sr* +f Vor,- Ns ,-\ult-. Y"rJ; 1ro'n \tA;f l-,o.\e-vo'.. t-lfz Ll-taa7w 5rz,rca- p,Z=r- t,)cu- rt-t,>vwJ rzr \6rr- nur-y t lr-1""d r \ bo a rJa-' , n" On SL\crdu- *-a- Aot SLL}? An\-, I h"r-u &. o,.1 ,1Ym ^f Q-, Yr-., r,,L)ft)rn a.-,d rqY>ra ho-V ,--r- *-r-- \4rL r>-, CO^W a d-t Ori i,z tc r t o >S n, q hYS a.- il. al-u--\-^ J).-or -lAvr.,- SsLuuj a).,^>S A^.OiAmzrz e O-fhv> ;,LL b7t'7\ , rsr s/n* oS7- tn orY-- E ^"6)ort\t-t7 . Y^n -.1-.- ),YL c^- d o b o *-t - Lr-;g t V Af t>.nd!-S ,>-<- .z- AoR- ?.) d^tLL 1< N"l z-l l, 2>4 -fu Yorr. a: ..)\L( r,ls- Y1-u,- b Ylrv Nl.d bt Vck IXu d,Ero.^&r5,- V6o:,,- alc--rn-ud 5,:fu- ?u-f,."1 lrVS - N[ro, ,,^, tr;s-- d)r,aq o?n l-o.: r-= tflrr-at qly Ja=,.u=< lro,:r.- Lo.^\st- oT-YLn \fr.U /-;-t F,: tL , (ow /Liaih'nq \fln ;2','z-t:o$on r,-"--9 {od " - L^ - '' \,, -, J ., ., ) ^ , t - bn-"...\:s- G,.. o'fl}r o rta- ,tt {r ona of \",,/ \+4rt- 04 P > (y, D L,/ , --0 1lr 92) - LJ,' 'dz{ 44tV +\ uo zloTa'trP J?o jfo J-Yo )ouq f ar Zixz?v ov '-a4 vY -\ y(X"tA 6) (211512012) Shari Moore - Fwd: '1 170 Selby Page 1 From: Noel NixTo: Shari MooreDate: 2115120123:27 PMSubject: Fwd: 1170 Selby Attachments: Special meeting.odt; Special meeting.pdf; Withdrawal of Assent.pdf Foruvarded at constituent's request. >>> Mike Madden <mike@mudouppies.net> 211312012 9:36 AM >>> Dear CM's Stark and Carter, As I mentioned in my voice mail, the appellants of the BZA decision are suggesting alternative interim uses for the parcel that would be embraced by the neighborhood and attractive to Pizza Luce from a business perspective. We are hoping for an amicable resolution before Wednesday. I am attaching two documents drafted pursuant to D-13 bylaws that challenge the propriety of the UPDC board's February 1st decision. At this point, any representation of a D-13 position on the issue, written or oral, is premature. Sincerely, Mike Madden February th,2072 President Carla Olson Union Park District Council 1570 ConcordiaAvenue St. Paul, MN 55104 Dear President Olson, In accordance with bylaw 7.05, we, the undersigned, request that a special meeting of board of the Union Park District Council be called. The purpose of the meeting is to consider rescinding the board action of February L't, which supported the Board of Zoning Appeals decision to grant the variances requested for the Pizza Luce parking lot at LL70 Selby and opposed the appeal filed by neighbors. Mike Madden 1-768Iglehart Mike Andert 1433 Ashland Debbie Meister 13L2 Portland Zack Wilson 1288 Portland John Schatz 535 Glendale Monday, February 6e, 2012 President Carla Olson Union Park District Council l-570 Concordia Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 Dear President Olson, In accordance with bylaw 5.09. Presumption of Assent, I am writing to inform you of the withdrawal of my assent to the board action of February L't,201.2 that expressed support for the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) decision granting variances for the Pizza Luce parking lot at LL70 Selby and opposing the appeal filed by neighbors. The grounds for my withdrawal are threefold:. Notification for the board meeting appears to have been preferential.. The summary of the January 31" community meeting is objectionable and biased in its content and omissions.. The wrong motion was put on the floor for consideration. When the Land Use Committee (LUC) takes action on a request for variance, and there is a scheduled board meeting prior to the BZA hearing, it has always been our practice that the LUC decision is considered by the full board for affirmation or denial. Indeed, these motions have special status, they go automatically before the board and require no second. In this case, at its January 10ft meeting, the LUC had passed a motion withdrawing its support for the setback variances required for the parking lot. The special meeting held on January 31't was advertised as a community meeting for discussion of the general issues of traffic, safety, and neighborhood livability as weli as the appeal and variances. The LUC chair specifically said it was not a committee meeting and no motions would be entertained. In adherence to the chair's instruction, no motions were made or discussed. However, the summary of the community meeting, not seen prior to the board meeting and buried in a board packet some 90 pages long, Ieads with a proposed motion which, during report, the LUC chair promptly introduced supplanting the motion out of committee. The written summary is biased and objectionable in its content and omissions. It fails to mention many of the opposition views expressed at the meeting including; the inherent danger of curb cuts and vehicles crossing the sidewalk, the possibility that the parking lot will lead to restaurant expansion, late night noise, Iight pollution, the benefit of vehicles parked on the street to the pedestrian realm, the loss of a building, the loss of a buildable lot, and increased traffic drawn by free, abundant, and subsidized parking. It also makes no attempt to distinguish between those who are supportive of the parking lot and the appellants. Those who are already supportive did, by and iarge, embrace the mitigative measures. But to many of the appellants, the measures either; made a bad proposal even worse, were unworkable, were unenforceable, or doable independently of the unwanted parking lot. The claims that "Pizza Luce and the neighbors have agreed to continue reviewing suggestions for ways to improve pedestrian safety in the vicinity of the parking lot" and "The high resident turnout and constructive dialogue at the two community meetings on January 70'h and 31." indicated to the UPDC that Pizza Luce and neighbors are ready and willing to continue working together to make the 1170 porking lot work as well as possible..! Iumps all into the single category of "neighbors" and misrepresents those who do not want to continue dialogue (especially now that the Ieverage of UPDC recommendation is gone) and those who have made up their minds and simply oppose the lot and the requested variances. It is also improper to include in the summary any statement made privately, off the record, and after the meeting. Finally, it appears there was preferential notification for our board meeting. An electronic meeting reminder with a map was sent out to UPDC directors on the day of our board meeting. The two most powerful proponents of the parking lot, Pizza Luce and the Lex-Ham Community Council, were included in the email, but none of the opponents. Submitted by, Mike Madden To: Melvin Carter, City Council Member, Ward 1 2/14/2012 Re: An appeal of a decision by the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue - February 15, 2012 Dear Mr. Carter, I am the home owner at 1168 Dayton Ave. I have lived at that residence since 1983, 29 years. I am one of many neighbors opposed to the December 27, 2011 BZA decision to grant the variances for the Pizza Luce (PL) proposed parking lot at 1170 Selby and a supporter of the appeal of this decision brought forth to be reviewed by the City Council on February 15, 2012. Many of us neighborhood residents in opposition to the granting of those variances had submitted comments and attended that BZA hearing. In fact, twelve letters and a petition with 62 signatures opposing the variances were received by BZA. Only one letter in support was received by BZA and no one in support was in attendance at that hearing. At that hearing and at several Union Park District Council meetings, opposition neighbors have made an excellent case as to why we see the proposed parking lot as extenuating the problem of Pizza Luce in our neighborhood, not improving it. We spoke of the toll Pizza Luce has placed on our neighborhood since 2006...the horrible increase in traffic, noise, the already unsafe existing parking lot adjacent to the restaurant with cars backing out of the lot, the increased air pollution, noise and blocking of the delivery trucks constantly on Selby (there are no alleys), the sadness that a building had been torn down (one day before the variance hearing) for very little gain and the lack of communication from PL. Back in 2006, Pizza Luce originally represented themselves to the city and the neighborhood as a small neighborhood pizza parlor with 65 seats, open only until 11:00, with the peak times between 5:30 to 9:00pm, but this proved to be false. In fact, it has a mission to be more of a bar destination, hoping to attract suburbanites into the inner city. Here is a paragraph from its mission statement: "Unique Urban Atmosphere: Tatoos, piercing, patio seating and late night hours all add to the unique urban atmosphere that makes Pizza Luce a destination for suburbanites and a natural for natives." Immediately they had 108 seats, were open 7/365 days a year, from 10 am to 2:30 am., plastered their windows with beer signs to seemingly attract a younger drinking crowd, aggressively lobbied to get a liquor license, bought up other properties on Selby, and have been unsuccessfully trying to secure the required signatures to rezone one of those properties for an outdoor patio, a very contentious city-wide issue, and one the neighborhood has been fighting. The original approved site plan was totally different than what is occurring today. Additionally, PL has never been in compliance with city codes and their original granted variances regarding handicapped parking and any required variances to accommodate a larger establishment with more seating. There are suspicions that the same thing will happen with any newly granted variances. Pizza Luce is a chain corporation with aggressive metro-wide marketing, not a small business sensitive to the neighborhood into which they plopped one of their many restaurants, in the middle of the block with 18 residences. Naturally, when we are all suffering now from the affects of their business, there is worry and suspicion about their ever-increasing expansionist efforts. We are concerned about our neighborhood livability. The proposed parking lot is inherently unsafe. It will encourage more traffic. Because of its narrow size, vehicles will have to back out of the lot onto Selby, with little visibility to persons on the sidewalk. There will be more U-Turns, jaywalking, and blocked driveways and intersections. We fear declining housing values, loss of privacy and diminished security when the goal of Pizza Luce, as outlined in their mission statement, is to bring in customers from the whole metro area who are not invested in our neighborhood. Additionally, we have been frustrated by what we see as a very biased and improper process conducted by the UPDC (Union Park District Council), the neighborhood and Pizza Luce. The residents had not been notified of the initial discussion of the PL proposed parking lot request for variances and were totally unaware that UPDC had recommended support for them prior to the BZA hearing. Even after UPDC was notified of this appeal and was asked to withdraw their support, which they did at first, and we were able to show how much opposition there was to the variances, they again held a meeting, notifying PL but not any of us. A credible process has not been followed by UPDC. I ask the council to request some environmental and economic impact studies before proceeding. More study is needed to determine the impact Pizza Luce has on emissions, volume of traffic, traffic flow and abatement, safety issues, property values, residential tax base. We would like neighbors in the community to be interviewed about their quality of life as it relates to the impact of Pizza Luce's presence. There is time to consider this. The current infrastructure is sufficient for our neighborhood. Pizza Luce states they have NO need for this lot, that they have the required off-street parking. As of right, now this lot is unnecessary. Thank you for your consideration of my concerns. Janet Lotzer 1168 Dayton Ave. St. Paul, MN 55104 Shari Moore - Selby Ave Safety Concerns Dear City Council Member Carter, All Council Members and Staff, I am writing as a 20 year homeowner, tax payer and resident of 1188 Selby Ave, Saint Paul. My concerns involve the on-going, and growing, congestion and traffic associated with customers visiting Pizza Luce at 1183 Selby Ave. Since Pizza Luce opened for business in 2006, the livability of our neighborhood has been negatively impacted as a result of the business scope of what the restaurant/pub has marketed itself to become. While Luce has restored an unoccupied building, adding positively to the neighborhood, the noise levels and parking/driving hazards grow each day. It is my observation that Luce is a business that has grown, and states want to grow even more, out of scope for our residential neighborhood. Examples of negative impact to resident's livability include: Congested traffic, especially in the dark evening hours, with frequent backing out of their parking lot onto busy Selby Ave, constant u-turns in the middle of the street as patrons race for an open spot on the street, my driveway blocked by parking patrons and taking one’s life in one’s hands just trying to back out of my own driveway given speed, congestion and carelessness. And add the MTC 21 bus every 20 minutes to the mix. I personally have seen 3 car accidents as a result of people backing out of the Luce parking lot. People also double park outside of Luce to run in and pick up a pizza or to pick up their party members. Patron’s jay-walk at any point they choose across Selby. Garbage trucks backing up with loud, beeping monitors very early in the morning many days a week, semi's delivering product in the middle of the night or during business hours (usually double-parked). The hazards of Pizza Luce being “too large” for this neighborhood are many: serious threats to safety due to traffic congestion, threat to pedestrians, noise pollution and light pollution. We understood Pizza Luce to be entering the neighborhood, when it began, as a small 65 seat neighborhood pizza restaurant. It now seats 108 and its business plan includes additional growth. As a long-time resident of the neighborhood, I am asking that the City Council, prior to approving any variance request for additional parking lot for Luce on Selby, order an impact study of the increased volumes of traffic congestion and safety hazards on this block. Unfortunately, representation of our neighborhood, on this issue, through our Union Park District Council, has been insufficient, before and after, UPDC voting to support Luce’s variance request for which our appeal comes before the City Council 2/15/12. Respectfully submitted, Marjean Leary 1188 Selby Ave Saint Paul, Minnesota 55104 612-968-0135 From: <Smileleary@aol.com> To: <ward1@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward3@ci.stpaul.mn.us... Date: 2/13/2012 8:03 PM Subject: Selby Ave Safety Concerns CC: <noel.nix@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <patricia.lindgren@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <nicole... Page 1 of 1 2/14/2012file://C:\Documents and Settings\smoore\Local Settings\Temp\XPgrpwise\4F3A174Cmail... Walter Jirik 1184 Dayton Avenue February 14, 2012 To: Melvin Carter, City Council Member, Ward 1 Re: Appeal regarding approval of two variances to build a parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue. Zoning File# 12-000964 I am opposed to granting the variances for the parking lot located at 1170 Selby Avenue. The arguments of this request demand thoughtful, serious consideration to all the variables there are about this parking lot. I hope that political expediency and underlying, simple reasoning are not the factors that tip the balance of decision making. The neighbors have sober, earnest concerns about creating this second parking lot and the serious traffic issues it will exacerbate. The granting of the variances will not alleviate or mitigate the parking problem. In 2006 when Pizza Luce persuaded the neighborhood to welcome it, Pizza Luce minimized concerns of the neighbors about parking by assuring that parking was not an issue at its Seward Minneapolis business. Based on similarity to the Seward site, Pizza Luce claimed that it did not expect parking to become an issue at the Selby location. Pizza Luce now gives mitigation as the purpose of its request but denies the root cause of the traffic issue. The causal relationship of the now-recognized problem of traffic is the comprehensive, aggressive marketing strategy of this business. It is requesting relief from itself. Is the city obligated to relieve a property owner of hardships that the property owner himself created? It has not been an acceptable premise for all those persons who built without permits, stored junked cars on lawns, or used a domestic basement workbench to mass produce and sell a product sold from their homes. Occupying a singular B-2 building in the middle of a primarily residential street on a collector avenue without access to an alley for alternative traffic circulation, as a restaurant, is permissible by the city zoning codes. What many neighbors do not understand is that the designation does not address the intensity or actual activities of what actually occurs in a business’ building. The designation seems not to be concerned about the dynamic impacts of what occurs around a business. What also is not understood is that all the conditions on this collector avenue have existed since this street and proximate streets were platted in 1890’s. Expert advisors to a business should be keenly aware of and investigate thoroughly the environment of interest and foresee disadvantages rather than assuming it would simply alter that environment to fit the business needs. I oppose the variances because of the incredible safety issues that the creation of this second parking lot creates. The parking lot does not address the causes of the enormous volumes of traffic entering our neighborhood. A second parking lot solves nothing, and will instead encourage increased traffic, aggravating the core concerns about livability and safety that are pertinent to the neighbors. The city should do a comprehensive traffic study and also continuously monitor the existing parking lot at 1183 Selby Avenue over several weeks. Thank you for consideration, Walter Jirik Name: Bettine and John Hermanson Address: 1173 Hague Avenue, Saint Paul, MN 55104 Date: February 12, 2012 To: Melvin Carter, City Council Member, Ward 1 Re: The appeal of the decision by the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue -‐ February 15, 2012 We are the homeowners of 1173 Hague Avenue, and this has been our home for the last 9 years. Our property borders the 1170 Selby property to the north. We are neighbors who oppose the BZA decision made on December 27, 2011 that granted the variances for the Pizza Luce proposed parking lot. We are supporters of the appeal that will be addressed by the City Council on February 15, 2012. We are sharing our concerns in this letter, and we thank you for taking the time to read and your willingness to understand our perspectives. Please know that safety in neighborhood is our main goal. We believe (as does the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan) that our neighborhood would benefit if we “Prioritize the development of compact commercial areas accessible by pedestrians and transit users, over commercial areas more readily accessed by automobile. Discourage new and expanded auto oriented uses.” (1.52) Like the City’s Comprehensive Plan we see bringing more traffic to our neighborhood as a disadvantage especially when we try to promote pedestrians and transit friendliness. These are conflicting goals towards safety. More parking will attract more traffic and put pedestrians and bikers at risk. Additional parking is not needed in our neighborhood as on-‐street parking is available (and plentiful), AND secondly, Pizza Luce already has their required off-‐street parking in place. The question becomes: Why are we adding an unsafe parking lot to our neighborhood, when 1. additional off-‐street parking is not needed and 2. the lot will decrease safety, quality of life, and livability for pedestrians, visitors and residents in our community? We want to make sure that you understand our point of view as residents to the Lex-‐Ham community and as adjacent neighbors to the proposed lot. As a resident of the Lex-‐Ham neighborhood: In our neighborhood we question and measure the quality of life and livability we experience and create here. This is our home, a place we want to thrive in, and the fact that we care, is a huge asset to this neighborhood. The group that is opposing the variance proposal, has a growing concern for the increased traffic that has occurred over the last 6 years. When Pizza Luce came into our neighborhood they presented their business as a small pizza restaurant seating 65-‐75 people. The business now seats approximately 110, a 35-‐36 % increase from the original presentation. It was promoted as a restaurant that delivers, but now includes take-‐out service and catering, and is open until 2:30 am every day. In addition they are planning to expand with a patio in the future, again adding more seats to their business. The Comprehensive Plan (1.13) calls out that scale of development be compatible with the neighborhood. In addition the Comprehensive Plan speaks to create an environment that is conducive to small, locally-‐owned businesses that can establish and sustain viability primarily through patronage from the local area, not the entire metro area as reflected in Pizza Luce’s marketing campaigns. By promoting neighborhood and local community self-‐sufficiency, we attain both sustainability and reduction on car dependency, a prime, principle, and comprehensive plan goal (1.51, 1.52 and 1.7). We argue that Pizza Luce’s growth and expansion have a negative impact on the safety of our community and is not scaled to be compatible with this neighborhood. Growth and expansion bring in a larger volume of costumers, which increase the traffic. More traffic is the problem. Not more parking. As an adjacent neighbor: Decreased Safety: The change in variances to a zero setback (and 1 foot) will create NO physical buffer between the adjacent properties. This setback will decrease our privacy and safety. Cars will be able to park there during opening hours from 11:00 am – 2:30 am, 7 days a week, 365 days a year. There is also the possibility of repeated damage to our properties (especially fences) as the lot is narrow leaving little space for cars to maneuver. In addition cars create noise pollution and the sound of engines starting and stopping, alarms going off, stereos being played, not too mention guests continuing conversation into the late night hours next to their cars, will be a daily nuisance for us, and have a huge affect on our private lives. The lot is remotely located in relation to the restaurant itself, and we wonder how Pizza Luce staff will monitor the lot? We have already witnessed loud conversations in the AM when Pizza Luce used the parking lot on the empty lot of 1170 Selby before putting up a temporary fence. We will also experience light pollution not only from the many headlights coming and going, but also from the light posts required by the city. These lights will go on at dusk and off at dawn 365 days of the year. Keep in mind that there is no alley on either side of Selby to provide a buffer and privacy between properties. In addition this means all cars enter on to Selby from residential properties and businesses. Increase in Pollution: Cars entering and exiting the lot will increase the exhaust pollution. Cars will leave the lot with 1.5 to 2 hours intervals for 15.5 hours every day! In addition, with new technology, car owners can start their car remotely and leave the engine on for their car to warm up or cool down depending on the season. We will most likely not be able to spend any time in our back yard due to exhaust pollution alone! Decrease of Property Value: The financial impact for us can’t be calculated. What we do know is this parking lot will have a negative impact on the desirability of our property. Who wants to buy a house next to a busy parking lot? Now you may ask if we didn’t know that we bought a house next to a commercial lot. And of course we did and we still do. We actually enjoy living in a neighborhood that provides a mix of commercial and residential uses. However we bought a house next to a commercial lot, NOT a parking lot. And there is a BIG difference here; we bought a house next to a commercial lot that had zoning codes in place. These zoning codes are created to promote and protect public health, safety, and general welfare of neighboring properties and human beings. By taking the setback zoning codes away, you are not only affecting and putting our health at risk, but you are also stripping us from our privacy and safety. The proposed lot is also a mirror image of Pizza Luce’s existing lot (which already shows hazardous and unsafe driving) and will put the larger community at risk. We also want to mention that ordinances are promises to citizens from our leaders. The promise is not to allow circumvention of intent and purpose. A variance is relief from a city’s zoning ordinance standards due to a regulation creating unnecessary hardship or a particular difficulty to a property owner. First of all we question what the hardship is for Pizza Luce in this case? In a letter we received from Pizza Luce they state that “Pizza Luce currently meets the City’s requirement for off street parking, on-‐street parking is tight on our block With that in mind, we purchased the vacant commercial building at 1170 Selby Ave to expand our off street parking capacity.” Is this the hardship? The fact that they have the required off street parking? Or because they claim that on-‐street parking is tight on this block and they want to expand off street capacity? Is that all it takes to prove a compelling need for a variance? And if that is the case, why are the adjacent neighbors AND the community asked to carry the burden this lot will inflict on our neighborhood? And isn’t it ironic that we as neighbors don’t see an off-‐street parking need as the main issue – but increased and increasing traffic as the main issue? From our perspective we are adding hardship by allowing this lot to be developed into additional parking! The Comprehensive Plan asks to recognize and promote the creation of a sense of place, an amenity that serves the community, where neighbors can interact in small ways and connect, creating and enhancing the fabric of community. 12 letters and a petition with 62 signatures opposing the variances were received by the BZA before the December 27th hearing, indicating strong opposition to this lot and variance changes. Only one letter was received in favor. To: City Councilman Melvin Carter This letter discusses the issues regarding the variance request for a parking lot at 1170 Selby Ave. Pizza Luce purchased this property in 2010. 1. Livability and Sustainability: A parking lot with variances on setbacks and variances on proximity to residential properties, will cause safety issues and increased congestion on Selby Avenue. The way the proposed lot is laid out , with no alley, and only one ingress and egress, will allow 9 -10 cars off the street, but will make it difficult for drivers to efficiently exit without causing a bottle necked lot with spillover onto Selby. This means that PL patron’s cars will have to back out of the lot onto Selby, exacerbating congestion. This impacts the safety of our neighborhood. No longer can our children play in our front yards, due to the increased traffic load. 2. The original presentation by Pizza Luce to our neighborhood was they were going to be a neighborhood pizza restaurant/parlor with 65-75 seats, they now are over 112 seats…. Through an aggressive marketing campaign, Pizza Luce has outgrown our neighborhood, and continues to ask for variance upon variance. Check on ongoing compliance over their tenure at their present 1183 Selby location, and a pattern emerges that is not congruent with being a neighborhood restaurant. Their Twin Cities marketing campaigns imply that Pizza Luce is a destination bar, open late with liquor and food. If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck…….. 3. There are over 75 signatures on a petition of long=term neighbors within a four block radius, who are not in favor of these variances being granted. How many additional buildings must be razed in our neighborhood to before notice is taken and the neighborhood is transformed? Building / zoning regulations are there for a reason. After variance upon variance, a residential neighborhood is being transformed, and property values will decline as a result. We are not opposed to Pizza Luce as a neighborhood pizza parlor, their original concept. Many of us are patrons. We are asking that the variances for this lot not be granted. Respectfully Submitted The concerned residents at 1201 Selby Ave. Mark Dunlop, Keara Dunlop, Cassidy Dunlop Ph. 612.670.1234 (2/14/2012) Shari Moore - variance appeal /Pizza Luce Page 1 From: <chandoerr@q.com> To:<ward1@ci.stpaul.mn.us> CC:<ward2@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward3@ci.stpaul.mn.us>, <ward4@ci.stpaul.mn.us... Date: 2/13/2012 3:31 PM Subject: variance appeal /Pizza Luce Melvin Carter: The reason for this letter is to address the issues that surround the new parking lot variance of 1170 Selby Ave. We, as concerned citizens in the neighborhood, have appealed the BZA's decision to grant the variances. There are four main points to our argument that need to be heard on our behalf before any decision is made. The first, one is "livability" and "sustainability". The second, is Pizza Luce' "original" proposal to the neighborhood. The third, is the "perceived partiality" of our community councils Lex/Ham and Union Park District Council. The fourth concern would be the need of a fair and comprehensive study based on the "impact" Pizza Luce has made on the traffic and safety of Selby Ave. It should be noted that Selby Ave has no alleys,so residents are required to back out. Once again we "NOT" trying to shut Pizza Luce down, we just want people to be aware that there are even more problems facing us if this new, unnecessary parking lot is granted. We feel that Pizza Luce should leave well enough alone because they have enough parking for the "small", "neighborhood" restaurant that they said they were going to be, had they adhered to their original presentation to the neighborhood in the Lex/Ham Eavesdropper in March of 2006,there would be no problem. There is a much deeper issue going on here, it is about a corporate enterprise coming from the outside and taking over your small residential neighborhoods without St Paul families having a voice. For us it is about the monopolization of our block due to the vastness of their marketing campaign and the late hours of business they keep(Restaurant 1:00am, deliveries until 2:30am, Brunch Saturday and Sunday10:00am to 2:00pm). This location is one of busiest of six. It has become apparent that their values are strictly business with a disrespect for the values of a residential neighborhood they have come to know. When does a supposably small restaurant become too big for a residential neighborhood? When does it become an infringement on our rights to "safety" "privacy" and "family" as a citizen and a home owner with 3 children who lives on Selby? Keep in mind this is exactly why "good" families with children move out and your block becomes rentals and forever changed. It took over 30 years to get this block back to owner occupied single family homes. It would be nieve to think Pizza Luce made it a safer and better place, it was that way long before they arrived. I ask you just for one moment, please put yourself in our shoes. The proposed parking lot is a mirror image of the parking lot they have now and forces people to back out onto Selby. So the problems they have now on the North side will be recreated two houses down on the South side at 1170 Selby. Ultimately safety will be compromised for very little gain. It should't be taken lightly that a Golden Lab was killed on New Years Day in front of Pizza Luce... an unwarranted tragegy. Zoning laws were made to protect home owners from this type of infringement. Thats why they are in need of two variances for 1170. Are demands are simple no patio (patio=more seats=more cars),curtail late hours and the parking lot across at 1170 is accident waiting to happen. Channon Doerr 1205 Selby Ave. DiMeglio 1148 Selby Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 February 15, 2012 To: Kathy Lantry, City Council Member, Ward 7 Re: Decision by the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve two setback variances in order to build a new parking lot at 1170 Selby Avenue - February 15, 2012 As a resident of the neighborhood that will be negatively affected by Pizza Luce’s plans for the parking lot across the street from its Selby Avenue location, I am NOT in favor of the setback variances proposed by Pizza Luce. I have the following concerns and requests: 1. The negative impact on the quality of life and livability for resident families with increased and increasing traffic volume: a. Safety (Traffic and Pedestrian) U-Turns, drivers unfamiliar with city streets, blocked driveways, backing out onto Selby Avenue, crossing sidewalks, little visibility b. Pollution (Noise, Air, Light) 7/365 days a year, open from 10 am – 2:30 am c. Commercial Vehicles d. Declining Housing Values, loss of privacy e. Diminished Security (bringing in costumers from the whole metro area who are not invested in our neighborhood) 2. Pizza Luce’s original presentation to the neighborhood for a "Small, Neighborhood Pizza Parlor"in relation to its actual business plan: a. Originally stated 65 seats: Actual seating is now 108. b. Large marketing campaign brings in patrons from 20 mile radius/no longer “neighborhood c. Continuous non-compliance of City Codes, (handicapped parking infringements, request for variances to accommodate a larger establishment, more seating) d. Original approved site plan totally different than what is occurring today e. A re planning a patio with additional seating in their business plan 3. Poor communication between UPDC (Union Park District Council) and neighborhood: a. Little or no communication with residents (and UPCD) b. On-going communication with PL (and UPCD) - Credible process not followed - Notification of intent to residents (from Pizza Luce) has been neither timely nor clear 4. Impact studies needed: We want more study around this variance requests i.e. traffic study, interview neighbors in community about quality of life issues and impact of PL presence and the increased traffic volume. As of right now this lot is unnecessary (not needed by Pizza Luce). a. Economic: Property values, residential tax base, b. Environmental: Emissions, traffic volume and flow, and abatement. As a resident and patron of Pizza Luce, I believe the current infrastructure is appropriate for a neighborhood pizza restaurant and our neighborhood. I will attend the City Council Appeal on February 15 and hope that our elected representatives and local government entities will represent the concerns and interests of the citizens. Sincerely, Jeanne DiMeglio Dear Esteemed City Council Members, I'm writing as a relatively new home-owner in the Lex-Ham neighborhood, residing at 1196 Selby Avenue, just across the street from Pizza Luce. It is my hope with this letter that I might convey some of our thoughts around the parking lot variance being discussed today; express my overall support of Pizza Luce in the neighborhood; my appreciation for the safety concerns being raised by my neighbors; alongside my questions around the future of the business in this little urban residential / commercial corridor of St. Paul. My husband and 20 month old daughter moved into this once-vacant 107 year old home roughly nine months ago. We are thrilled to be members of this community. We feel fortunate to be in proximity to so many great people, families, parks, schools and businesses, and Pizza Luce is part of this. We have learned a bit about the history of Pizza Luce's presence from several of our neighbors, and met directly with the local manager and CEO. It's not an uncomplicated history or set of relationships, goals or agendas to digest. We tip our hats to all of you as you weigh what's being presented this day! My husband and I applaud the free enterprise spirit that Pizza Luce brings to this once economically- challenged neighborhood. We appreciate the stability that they lend to our section of the Selby Avenue corridor by being a thriving business. That being said, we also wonder about the effects of further development by this for- profit organization. We hold the concerns expressed by neighbors just adjacent to the Pizza Luce proposed parking lot as we consider our own interests in being new home- owners with a small child. Some questions that arise as my husband and I review this situation: • "What will the traffic volume look like when/ if this lot across from Luce becomes one with a zero-set back variance for parking? • How will further jay-walking between the lot and eating establishment affect safety of my child and all pedestrians, as well as that of drivers? • What does living close to a parking lot do for property values? • What happens if this doesn't become a parking lot? • Will this parking lot bring more business, more traffic and more noise and late nights to our community? • Is there a way to create a win-sin solution for all involved?" I do not have any answers: I am just writing to express the nuances of this situation from my perspective, and to advocate for my neighbors who are likewise raising questions and concerns. Thank you. -- Melissa Borgmann-Kiemde 1196 Selby Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 612.247.1151 Dear City Council Members, On February 26th, AnnMarie Fox wrote an excellent letter contrasting the proposed parking lot at 1170 Selby with the St. Paul Comprehensive Plan. I'd like to expand on that letter and bring to light the direction provided by the three legacy council plans which now comprise the Union Park community plan. Broadly, these plans call for support of the alternative modes and transit oriented development. They mention walkability numerous times and call for development that fits the scale of the neighborhood. Specific excerpts include: • LexHam: Enhanced pedestrian and bicycle connections centered around Griggs will unify the neighborhood. • SnellHam: The neighborhood is resolute about promoting a walkable, healthy, and safe environment through the use of design principles. Encourage economic development that enhances the pedestrian environment and keeps traffic off of local streets. • Merriam Park: Preserving the pedestrian environment is critical. Additional parking for existing businesses will only be approved if it will qualitatively improve the neighborhood. I've also been thinking about 1170 Selby in the light two recent appeals before the City Council and some of the "anti business" criticism that has ensued. The first, 650 Pelham, was properly decided. Even though that development did not require any variances, it is reasonable to ask a developer to create a site plan that is respectful of the pedestrian realm when that request does not cause undo hardship on the developer. Simple changes that site the building closer to the street, enhance the appearance of the facade, increase the buildings transparency, and move the bulk of parking to the rear are good design principles, especially for a street that is anticipated to bring many riders to Central Corridor LRT. I believe that in the second, Cupcake on Grand Avenue, the City Council may have erred. If a business believes it can succeed without the required number of off-street parking spaces, and there is no land available to build that parking due to existing development, I think it's prudent to let that business make a go of it. Free and abundant parking is one of the drivers of automobile dependence. When it is subsidized by cash register receipts, as is done by most businesses, it amounts to a tax on all customers including those who arrive by walking, biking, and transit. Our shared goal of transitioning to a transportation system more reliant on the sustainable modes will be reached more quickly if we provide no more parking than is absolutely necessary and insure that the true and full cost of that parking is born by those who utilize it. Pizza Luce currently has all the parking it is required to have. It is a successful business. Among all of its locations, I understand that Selby is the second most profitable. This seems an ideal time to further build a local and loyal customer base that is rewarded for walking, biking, and busing. LexHam is a neighborhood that warmly welcomes visitors to its parks, schools, and churches. It also welcomes businesses that fit the scale of the neighborhood and their customers. But like all neighborhoods, it wants to minimize the burden of motor vehicle traffic for reasons we all understand; noise, pollution, and the hazard it poses to people outside of cars. I ask you to please support the appeal and deny the variances required for the proposed parking lot at 1170 Selby. I believe there are alternative uses for the site that can benefit Pizza Luce from a business standpoint and also be embraced by the neighborhood. Thank you, Mike Madden Dear Councilman Carter: I am writing in opposition to the variance request for 1170 Selby. Although it would be convenient for me personally to have another parking lot so close to my home (I have no off-street parking), the impact of the current Pizza Luce parking lot has been so negative that I cannot support and strongly object to a second one. The existing, small and inaccessible lot has created a dangerous situation on that block of Selby because of cars backing out, cars waiting to park, and cars threatening the safety of pedestrians – particularly on weekend nights. Having another back-out only lot so close to the entrance of the first one would significantly more than double the potential for harm. Thank you for your time and attention. Deborah Durkin 1163 Hague Ave St. Paul Dear Councilmembers Carter, Stark, Bostrom, Brendmoen, Lantry, Tolbert and Thune, Please oppose the 1170 Selby Avenue parking lot variances. These variances are contrary to principals outlinde in the City's Comprehensive Plan to • Minimize and consolidate driveway curb cuts on commercial streets as opportunities arise, for pedestrian safety and comfort and to maximize on- street parking. • Promote walkability and transit use, as well as seeking to fund traffic calming measures. • Discourage new and expanded auto-oriented uses, while instead prioritizing the development of compact commercial areas accessible by pedestrians and transit users over commercial areas more readily accessed by automobile. An overwhelming majority of residents living adjacent to and near 1170 Selby oppose this parking lot, especially because of safety issues. Pizza Luce does not need this parking lot to meet it's current parking requirement. For these reasons, we ask you to oppose these parking variances. Debbie Meister and Gene Christenson 1312 Portland Avenue, 55104 651.647.6816 Hello, my name is Andrew Faltesek, a homeowner at 1197 Hague Avenue since 1990. I wanted to relay to you my concerns about the proposed 2nd parking lot at 1170 Selby Ave. for Pizza Luce. Please accept this preface to my comments with two statements. First; I was supportive of Pizza Luce opening in our location, as commercial development occurred and was supported mostly east of Lexington and west of Ayd Mill Road over the years. Pizza Luce was a welcome and positive addition to our neighborhood in its original format. Second; the true renaissance of our neighborhood through various issues was accomplished by the involvement and hard work of the wonderful families I am blessed to count as my neighbors; and as is evident; we are a close, numerous, and unified group. Included below are relevant issues that are in opposition to us not only as a neighborhood, but also to stated objectives by the City of Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan, as underscored by the excellent work by our neighbors; after my own personal concerns about the parking lot variance request and the responsibilities of both Union Park District Council and Lexington-Hamline Community Council. While I understand that private businesses are not required to telegraph their business plans, increase of profit, or expansions; and may well conform to procedural requirements for development or variance requests; in the case of this 2nd parking lot and variances, the concerns of the neighborhood residents that might be affected was never addressed until the last moment. Pizza Luce’s own Marketing Strategy includes only one real point of working with neighborhoods: Point 5.: “We will work closely with neighborhood associations, schools, colleges, hospitals, arts organizations, and the food co-ops to stimulate word-of-mouth advertising.” The vetting of concerns by affected residents was not attempted outside of the variance notification. Notice for the UPDC variance meeting was delivered 10 days prior to the December 27th event. I cannot say what you might have been doing ten days before or two days after Christmas, but this date was assuredly predisposed to minimal involvement...I’m not assigning blame; just pointing out practical reality. Many neighbors had no idea of developments until the residence at 1170 was being demolished. Since then a clear unity and voice has risen from the neighborhood...I paraphrase: “ We do not want this parking lot, and despite all suggestions and alternate options offered, Pizza Luce and UPDC support the lot and variance.” Opposition to the lot has been characterized as being in “opposition to neighborhood sustainability/livability, commerce, etc.”; but I can assure you that we as homeowners are very aware and committed to retaining the character and future of our block. In my 22 years here, we as neighbors have continually improved and solidified our unity and collaborated on issues as diverse as Lex-Ham co-op housing problems; drugs; to even continually treating the mammoth elm tree at 1199 for Dutch Elm disease at our own significant cost. We are communicative and in agreement. My own concerns about the process are: the procedural timeline and efforts to actually discern concerns of affected homeowners. Real estate was purchased, plans laid, organizations consulted, and decisions made; many months before homeowners had any knowledge. I would hope, as I understand by the mission statements of UPDC, Lex-Ham, and City of Saint Paul; that neighborhood/homeowner concerns would be addressed at the initiation of this sort of proposal, not after the fact. The parking lot as proposed only multiplies by two; the problems and concerns we as a neighborhood have voiced. It seems that our alternate proposals are to be rejected. UPDC seems to be more worried about admitting to procedural mistakes than addressing homeowners concerns. I have but little input or control to the decisions made by the individuals promoting this parking lot, but hope ultimately, that you...Melvin Carter; and the Saint Paul City Council, will respond to the desires of its constituency; and stop the proposed parking lot at 1170 Hague Avenue. Most sincerely; Andrew J. Faltesek, 1197 Hague Avenue I am opposed to the variance requests on the 1170 Selby Avenue property because the lot will create an inherently unsafe parking space for our neighborhood, as it is a mirror image of the existing parking lot next to Pizza Luce, a lot I know is hazardous. The Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan seeks to minimize and consolidate driveway curb cuts on commercial streets as opportunities arise. For pedestrian safety and comfort and to maximize on-street parking (1.7). I am opposed to the variance requests on the 1170 Selby Avenue property because the lot will create more moving traffic in our neighborhood. Creating addition surface parking, invites and therefore increases traffic on Selby. Increased automobile traffic means less safety for pedestrians, bikers and transit users. This goes against the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan goals which promotes walkability and transit use, as well as seeking to fund traffic calming measures (2.2 and 4.11). I am opposed to the variance requests on the 1170 Selby Avenue property because adding more surface parking goes against the St. Paul Comprehensive Plan. The plan discourages new and expanded auto- oriented uses as it seeks to prioritize the development of compact commercial areas accessible by pedestrians and transit users over commercial areas more readily accessed by automobile (1.52). I am opposed to the variance requests on the 1170 Selby Avenue property because this opens the doors for future expansion of Pizza Luce. Pizza Luce is planning to add a patio to their Selby location becoming a business that is not scaled to our neighborhood. A patio also means more need for parking. This is not congruent with the St. Paul Comprehensive Plan as it seeks to: Establish boundaries for Mixed-Use Corridors to guide development activity, monitor growth and other development conditions and evaluate performance toward meeting objectives for providing services (1.22). Dear City Council member, I am opposing the variance requests on the 1170 Selby Avenue property because the lot will create more moving traffic in our neighborhood. Creating additional surface parking invites and therefore increases traffic on Selby. Increased automobile traffic means less safety for pedestrians, bikers and transit users. This goes against the Saint Paul Comprehensive Plan goals which promotes walkability and transit use, as well as seeking to fund traffic calming measures (2.2 and 4.11). Sincerely, Katie Bratsch 671 Ashland Ave., St. Paul To Whom it may Concern-- Echoing Mr Madden's letter regarding Luce's end-run around established norms when seeking to further support car-culture at the expense of encouragement of more friendly travel via 2-wheels or 2-feet; I'd also like to add that I looked at the now-flattened space in question for moving my 35-year old business into, but was dismayed when I learned it had been bought by Luce across Selby. I expected perhaps another eatery to ape their success across the way or some other interesting and complimentary business. Imagine my shock Cycling by and seeing the beautiful old storefront gone, and my horror to see it turned into a parking lot! The boldfaced flouting of regulation, to say nothing of the elimination of another (!) resource for the neighborhood or the city of Saint Paul for a pandering parking lot? I have watched my beloved Uptown in Minneapolis transition from a neighborhood business node with funky small-businesses (like mine) and a walking (and Cycling) culture, to a "destination" shopping-area with big-box stores and ever-present traffic doing what traffic does best: marginalizing Bikes, relegating them to the periphery, as well as Pedestrians who're encouraged to stay just long enough to spend their money and then get back in their cars and go home to their neighborhoods. Isn't this what we value about Saint Paul? The Neighborhoods that encourage folksy interaction, down on the street, in slow-motion? The building is gone, don't add insult to injury by letting this ugly scar mark what once was an opportunity, rather mark it as a memorial by making it a small park with some Art, or Bicycle parking, or letting a Neighborhood Group plant flowers or topiary. But a(nother) parking lot? Is that the best we can do? Really? --Chris Büdel City of St. Paul 1170 Selby Variance Notification List Name1 Name2 St. #Street Oppose Support Petition/ Letter Naureen Turner 1160 Dayton Janet Lotzer 1166 Dayton O P&L C. Parker & HeatherStaley*1170 Dayton O P Walter Jirik 1184 Dayton O P Vernon Harms*1178 Dayton O P Mitchell Grengs 1188 Dayton David & EllenTzeutschler 1192 Dayton Randolph & AnnPark 1194 Dayton Richard Zajac 1198 Dayton O P Subhash Vidyarthi Trust 1204 Dayton O P Andrew/Jim Nelson 1209 Selby O P Dale & GalenNelson 1209 Selby Charles & SuzanneDoerr 1205 Selby O P Mark DunlopCatherine Hanson 1201 Selby O P Justin SelbitschkaLaurel Goodman 1197 Selby O P Jbb Properties 1193 Selby Susan & Chris HoehnCasa Grp 1179 Selby S L David Boquist 1177 Selby Ray Bro Inc 1171 Selby Krengel Propp 1161 Selby Dan & Linda Harms*1148 Dayton O P Ron & CourtneyRoberts 1150 Dayton Gary & Eunice Smith 1156 Dayton O P St. P & ISD 625 1157 Selby Tim Ward*1153 Selby O P Ben Thomas 1149 Selby Wade Carr 1145 Selby O P Brent WeigeltDalma Martinovic 1141 Selby John & Barb Taylor 1140 Selby Gary Thomas*1142 Selby O P Jeanne DimeglioRussell Rathbun 1148 Selby O P Y Express 1150 Selby Doug Nelson 1157 Hague Louella Pittman 1153 Hague Geo & Lisa Charlton 1149 Hague Xavier Demello 1145 Hague Andrew & Teri Remke 1141 Hague Thomas Gallagher 1168 Selby S L Jbb Prop 1170 Selby Wm Bush Moira Lynch 1174 Selby O L Levine Randle 1180 Selby O P Elliot Olde 1182 Selby City of St. Paul 1170 Selby Variance Notification List Janis Smiley Marjean Leary 1188 Selby O P Nicole Bloomquist 1190 Selby O P Melissa& FranKiemde 1196 Selby Richard Palmquist 1200 Selby O P Sushil Rana 1204 Selby Adi Molvin 1208 Selby Margaret Ryan 1209 Hague Dan & Judy Gabriel 1205 Hague David & Eliz Woodland 1201 Hague O P Andrew FaltesekAnn Fox 1197 Hague O Jayne & Wm Sillman 1193 Hague O P Maureen & TommyOlson 1189 Hague O P Josh Oneil Ken Odoyle 1177 Hague John & BettineHermanson 1173 Hague O L&P John & AmaliaMueller 1169 Hague Deborah Durkin 1163 Hague Jeanne & JasonGeonvese 139 Dunlap Tim FinneganMoira Sweeney 1168 Hague Duane & JeannePerry 1172 Hague O P Stephen FaltasekRebecca Mcnally 1176 Hague John & SuzettPeterson 1180 Hague O P Leben & JulianaMccormick 1184 Hague Mary Hannula 1192 Hague Brent & RachelleThomson*1196 Hague O L&P Ken & Helen Hermann 1200 Hague Paul Slattery 1204 Hague O L&P Joe & Bev Perry 1193 Laurel M & S Dovre Wudali 1189 Laurel O L Erik Nelson Joanna Vossen 1185 Laurel Heidi Losleben 1181 Laurel Francis & MargotGalt 1177 Laurel O P Maxwell CoraKimberly Hall 1173 Laurel Jeff Nelson Alisa Blackwood 1167 Laurel Glenn & Lea Sherer 1163 Laurel Mary JohnstonPhillip Harper*1148 Hague O P Ben Shakal Tho Waltman 1150 Hague Wm Strub Marie Michel 1156 Hague O P Cliff & Eliz Skagen 1157 Hague Mary Blatherwick 1157 Hague Michael GoergenJen Knudson 1185 Hague O P Stacey GrenzNathan Meath 1181 Hague Dominic Berstson 1186 Hague Jbb Prop 1183 Selby *Non owner City of St. Paul 1170 Selby Variance Notification List Attended 1/10 &/or 1/31 Mtgs 10-Jan 1/10 & 1/31 1/10 & 1/31 10-Jan 31-Jan 1/10 & 1/31 10-Jan 31-Jan 31-Jan Teslow #12 1/10 1/10 & 1/31 31-Jan City of St. Paul 1170 Selby Variance Notification List 10-Jan 10-Jan 1/10 & 1/31 1/10 & 1/31 10-Jan 10-Jan 1170 Selby Variance Non-Notification List Name1 Name2 St. #Street Oppose Support Petition/ Letter Attended 1/10 &/or 1/31 Mtgs City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:2Ord 12-8 Name:Traffic Code - Amending Chapter 157 Status:Type:Ordinance Final Adoption In control:City Council Final action: Title:Amending Chapter 157, Traffic Code, General Parking Restrictions, to restore no-parking zone and limited-term parking zone violation language to the Code, which language was inadvertently deleted from the September 28, 2011 revisions. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council3/7/2012 2 City Council2/15/2012 1 City Council2/8/2012 1 Title Amending Chapter 157, Traffic Code, General Parking Restrictions, to restore no-parking zone and limited- term parking zone violation language to the Code, which language was inadvertently deleted from the September 28, 2011 revisions. Body THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1 Chapter 157 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 157.01. - Stopping, standing and parking. No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle on any street or highway so as to interfere with or interrupt the passage of other vehicles unless otherwise provided by state law. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.02. - Removal of illegally stopped vehicles. (a) Whenever any police officer finds a vehicle standing upon a street or highway in violation of any law, such officer is hereby authorized to move such vehicle or require the driver or other person in charge of the vehicle to move the same to a position off the main traveled part of such street or highway. (b) When any police officer finds a vehicle unattended upon any street or highway or upon any bridge or causeway or in any tunnel where such vehicle constitutes on obstruction to traffic, such officer is hereby authorized to provide for the removal of such vehicle and remove the same to a place of safekeeping established by law. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-8, Version: 2 (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.03. - Stopping or parking prohibited in certain places. (a) No person shall stop, stand or park a vehicle except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer or other recognized emergency authority or in obedience to a traffic-control device, in any of the following places: (1) Across any curb, on a sidewalk or boulevard, lawn or grass plot except as provided in section 157.04, state fair parking district, or section 157.05, parking or stopping on a public way; (2) In front of or within five (5) feet, of the throat of any public or private driveway or alley, or in such a manner as to block such driveway or alley; (3) On that portion of a private road or driveway lying between the public right of way line and the curb line of the adjacent street or if no curb the edge of pavement. (4) Within an intersection; (5) Within ten (10) feet of a fire hydrant; (6) On a crosswalk; (7) Within twenty (20) feet of a crosswalk at an intersection; (8) Within thirty (30) feet upon the approach to any flashing beacon, stop sign, sign indicating direction of travel, or traffic-control signal located at the side of a roadway; (9) Between a safety zone and the adjacent curb or within thirty (30) feet of points on the curb immediately opposite the ends of a safety zone, unless a different length is indicated by signs or markings; (10) Within an area designated as a bus stop for a length of eighty (80) feet or as signed; (11) Within fifty (50) feet of the nearest rail of a railroad crossing; (12) Within twenty (20) feet of the driveway entrance to any fire station, and on the side of a street opposite the entrance to any fire station within seventy-five (75) feet of said entrance when properly signed; (13) Alongside or opposite any street excavation or obstruction when such stopping, standing, or parking would obstruct traffic; (14) On the roadway side of any vehicle stopped or parked at the edge of the curb of a street; (15) Upon any bridge or other elevated structure upon a highway or within a highway tunnel, except as otherwise provided by ordinance; (16) At any place where official signs prohibit stopping; (17) On private property of any person without consent of such property owner; (18) Any place on public property which is not at the time open for the use of vehicular traffic; (19) At any place on any pathway, sidewalk area for pedestrians or other portion of any public property which is not intended for the use of vehicles; (20) On any street or alley, at the same location, for more than forty-eight (48) consecutive hours; (21) In the front or rear entrance to any building so as to block a fire escape or exit from any building. (22) In any no-parking zone now or hereafter established; (23) For any time period longer than the time allowed as indicated by the signage in limited-time parking areas now or hereafter established. (b) No person, firm or corporation operating any business or parking facility shall park vehicles on the streets or alleys adjacent to or in the vicinity of such business or parking facility for longer than ninety (90) minutes. (c) No person shall move a vehicle not owned by such person into any prohibited area or away from a curb such distance as is unlawful. (d) No person shall, for camping purposes, leave or park a travel trailer on or within the limits of any street or highway or on any street or highway right-of-way, except where signs are erected designating the place as a camp site. (e) No person shall stop or park a vehicle on a street or highway when directed or ordered to proceed by any peace officer invested by law with authority to direct, control, or regulate traffic. (f) No person shall park any vehicle or allow any vehicle to remain parked or standing upon any street or alley within one hundred (100) feet of any place where tree trimming is being performed by the division of parks and recreation or a designee; and the director of the department of parks and recreation is hereby authorized to procure signs of such size as to be easily legible indicating that tree trimming work is in progress and that City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-8, Version: 2 parking is banned within one hundred (100) feet of the location of such work; and the director or his/her designee is further authorized to place or cause to be placed a sufficient number of such signs in each and every location where tree trimming is being or is about to be carried out so as to inform the public of the parking restriction in the area. (g) No vehicle shall be parked in any alley in the congested district, as the term "congested district" is defined in section 151.02(5), except to load and unload only, but shall leave such space promptly upon completion of that operation and shall not park for more than thirty (30) minutes at any one time. (h) No vehicle or any part of a vehicle shall be parked in any alley outside the congested district, as the term "congested district" is defined in section 151.02(5), or load and unload in the alley, unless at least ten (10) feet of the alley is left available for the free movement of traffic and the vehicle is five (5) feet or more from of any driveway or garage entrance and, on the side of the alley opposite to said driveway, also maintains twenty (20) feet or more from said driveway or garage entrance. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.04. - State fair parking district. Vehicles shall not be parked across any curb, on a sidewalk, nor upon any boulevard, lawn or grass plot; except parking on lawns in required setbacks for side and front yards as defined in the zoning code, sections 66.231 and 60.226(1), (3) shall be permitted if such parking occurs within the special overlay zoning district known as "State Fair Parking District," as established by section 67.101 (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.05. - Parking or stopping on public way. The following provisions shall apply to parking or stopping on public ways: (a) No person shall stop, park or drive an automobile, motorcycle, motorized bicycle, truck, tractor, construction equipment, house moving equipment or vehicular equipment of any kind on, along or across any public curb, boulevard or sidewalk within the limits of the City of Saint Paul, other than where regular or authorized driveways or crossings are provided for that purpose. (b) The following are exceptions to the above restrictions: (1) State fair parking (as defined in section 65.740) and which occurs within the special overlay zoning district known as "State Fair Parking District" as established in section 67.101. State fair parking shall not be permitted along any Minnesota state trunk highway. (2) Vehicles equipped with rubber tires may be used on those sidewalks not having areaways or other substructures between November 15 and April 1 for the purpose of plowing and removing snow where such equipment does not exceed a total weight of four thousand (4,000) pounds and the axle weight does not exceed two thousand (2,000) pounds. (3) When necessary and provided a permit has been obtained from the traffic engineer under Chapter 135. Any permit granted shall be with the condition that suitable precautions are taken to prevent any unnecessary damage to the curb, boulevard or sidewalk. The permittee shall bear the cost of repairing or installing curb, boulevard or sidewalk damaged by him or her, or his or her agents or employees. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.06. - Manner of parking. (a) Parallel to curb, except where marked. No person shall stand or park a vehicle in a roadway other than parallel with the edge of the roadway, headed in the direction of traffic, with the curbside wheels of the vehicle within twelve (12) inches of the edge of the roadway, and in a manner that does not block another vehicle from entering or exiting a legal parking spot, except where marks or signs on the streets indicate that cars shall be parked at an angle. (b) Backing to curb restricted. No vehicle shall be backed into or up to the curb at any time for the purpose of loading or unloading or any other purpose whatsoever, unless a permit has been obtained in accordance with Chapter 135 of this code. When taking on or discharging freight or passengers, vehicles shall be headed in the City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 3 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-8, Version: 2 direction of traffic on the right of the roadway. (c) Parking space about to be vacated. The driver of a vehicle intending to park at the curb of any street or highway at a place about to be vacated by another vehicle shall stop back of said parking space and wait until said vehicle has vacated said parking space. The person so desiring to park shall then move his or her vehicle to a place immediately in front of said parking space and back into it, and the driver of any other vehicle approaching from the rear shall yield the right-of-way to such person for the purpose of parking at said parking space. In case there is no one in position immediately in front of said parking space preparing to back into it, and said space is large enough to permit it, the driver of an approaching vehicle may head into said parking space without backing. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.07. - Duty to lock ignition, remove key. (a) Every person when leaving a motor vehicle, except a commercial motor vehicle, unattended on any street, alley, or parking lot in the city shall lock the ignition, remove the key and take it with him or her. Any violation of these provisions shall not (1) mitigate the offense of stealing such motor vehicle, nor (2) be used to affect a recovery in any civil action for theft of such motor vehicle, or the insurance thereon, or (3) have any other bearing in any civil action. (b) Any police officer who finds a motor vehicle standing in violation of the foregoing provisions, is authorized and directed to remove the keys and to deliver them to the desk officer at the city's central police station. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.08. - Parking on one-way streets. In the event a street or highway includes two (2) or more separate roadways and traffic is restricted to one direction upon any such roadway, no person shall stand or park a vehicle upon the left-hand side of such one- way roadway unless signs are erected to permit such standing or parking. The traffic engineer is authorized to determine when standing or parking may be permitted upon the left-hand side of any such one-way roadway and to cause signs to be erected giving notice thereof. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.09. - Double parking. Vehicles shall not stand two (2) or more abreast in any street except as follows: Commercial vehicles, when clearly so designated, and when calling for or delivering merchandise may double park at the place of delivery when access to the curb immediately adjacent to the place of delivery is occupied, including on streets where parking meters are in operation, but shall leave such space promptly upon completion of that operation and shall not park for more than thirty (30) minutes at any one time. If requested the commercial driver shall allow any blocked vehicle to move. A clearly designated vehicle shall meet the requirements of section 151.02 or 158.01. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.10. - Physically disabled parking. (a) Designated parking areas. No person shall park a motor vehicle in or obstruct the access aisle to a designated physically disabled parking space unless: (1) That person is a physically disabled person as defined by the law or the person is transporting or parking a motor vehicle for a physically disabled person; and (2) The motor vehicle is displaying a disability plate, or a valid identifying certificate or permit issued by the State of Minnesota, or another state, for the physically disabled. (b) Parking privileges. A person exercising disabled parking privileges may park in a designated spot with appropriate identification: (1) In a metered parking space without obligation to pay the meter fee in Saint Paul but must follow the time City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 4 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-8, Version: 2 restrictions officially posted for the physically disabled, section 160.09. (2) Without time restrictions in a non-metered parking space where parking is otherwise allowed for passenger vehicles but restricted to a maximum period of time and that does not specifically prohibit the exercise of disabled parking privileges in that space. (c) Disabled parking privileges. Disabled parking privileges do not permit parking in areas designated as no parking spaces or in parking spaces reserved for specified purposes or vehicles. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.11. - Parking for larger vehicles. (a) Recreational vehicles. No vehicle or combination of vehicles except those licensed under Chapter 331A.04 (d)(17) as a mobile food vehicle, or those registered as recreational vehicles pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 168.013, subdivision 1g or as amended, twenty-two (22) feet or more in length and seven (7) feet or more in width, measured between the two (2) most widely separated points or proportions on either side of such vehicle or combination of vehicles, shall be parked on any street or alley for more than thirty (30) minutes. (b) Garbage or rubbish trucks. No vehicle designed, used or maintained for the transportation of garbage or rubbish, whether licensed or unlicensed, shall be parked or left standing on any private property, street or alley in any Class R-1, 2, 3, or 4, RT-1, 2, or RM-1, 2, or 3 District for more than thirty (30) minutes. (c) Commercial vehicles. No vehicle defined herein as commercial or overweight shall be parked overnight or stored on property zoned residential or occupied exclusively as residential nor shall any such vehicle, excluding a school bus where its driver parks the bus at the curb abutting the driver’s residential property or on the driver’s residential property, said property being the address on the driver’s Minnesota driver license, for up to a maximum four-hour period, which is within or abutting, including across a street or alley, from an R-1 through R-4, RT-1, RT-2, or RM-1 through RM-3 Zoning District, shall be permitted to stop, stand or park on any street unless such vehicle is actually engaged in the loading or unloading of passengers or materials from the vehicle or is actually engaged in the providing of services at that location, or in compliance with official traffic-control devices, the direction of a police officer or unless otherwise provided by law. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.12. - Taxi parking at taxi stands. (a) No taxicab shall be permitted to stand on any public street or alley while in service except on taxicab stands which shall be designated and plainly marked by the department of public works. The parking of any vehicle not a taxicab on such designated stands is hereby prohibited. Whenever a taxicab is on a designated cab stand and blocks the delivery entrance to any building, the driver of such cab shall make an opening to the curb so as to permit a commercial vehicle to load or unload. The driver of any taxicab occupying a designated stand must remain on the driver's seat at all times, except when necessary to open or close the door of his or her cab, to assist a passenger to enter or leave, or to answer his or her call signal. No taxicab shall stand for a period longer than one-half an hour; at the end of such time the taxicab heading the line shall move off the stand and the remaining cabs will then move forward. No person shall solicit passengers for a taxicab upon the streets and highways of the city except the driver of a taxicab when sitting upon the driver's seat of his or her vehicle, but the fact that such taxicab displays a device to indicate that such vehicle is not engaged shall not be considered as soliciting patronage. (b) Nothing in the foregoing provision of this section, however, shall prohibit the driver of any taxicab from parking in any legal parking space in keeping with all parking regulations during which time said driver is taking his or her meals or is on an errand of personal business. During such periods, however, solicitation of patronage by said drivers is expressly prohibited. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.13. - Display of vehicle sale. No more than one vehicle displaying a for sale or exchange sign or notice shall be parked on the street in front City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 5 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-8, Version: 2 of a person's residence. Any such vehicle found parked in front of a residence which is different from the vehicle's registration address shall be in violation of this section. Such vehicle must be parked in full compliance of all other provisions of this chapter. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) Sec. 157.14. - Saint Paul secondary schools-Parking restrictions. (a) No person shall stop, stand or park any motor vehicle on the land or premises of any public high school at any time, except parking of designated vehicles shall be permitted on those portions of said premises within and in accordance with regulations as indicated by appropriate signs and markings, and only after obtaining a permit to do so from the principal of each respective school or institute and displaying said permit on the motor vehicle. (b) Appropriate signs shall be erected and the parking areas suitably marked so as to clearly designate the restrictions set forth in this section. (Ord. No. 11-84, § 1, 9-28-11) SECTION 2 This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days following its passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 6 of 6 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1Ord 12-10 Name:Ordinance memorializing rezoning of Marquette Apts. from RM2 to T2 Status:Type:Ordinance Final Adoption In control:City Council Final action: Title:Memorializing City Council action granting the application of Marquette Apartments Llc to rezone the property at 204-208 Western Avenue N. from RM2 Medium-Density Residential to T2 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Public hearing held February 1, 2012). Sponsors:Melvin Carter III Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council3/7/2012 1 City Council2/22/2012 1 City Council2/15/2012 1 Title Memorializing City Council action granting the application of Marquette Apartments Llc to rezone the property at 204-208 Western Avenue N.from RM2 Medium-Density Residential to T2 Traditional Neighborhood,and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map.(Public hearing held February 1, 2012). Body WHEREAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §462.357 and § 61.800 of the Legislative Code, Marquette Apartments Llc, in Zoning File # 11-307389, duly petitioned to rezone 204-208 Western Ave N, being legally described as Dayton And Irvines Addition S 1/2 Of Lot 5 And Ex E 10 5/10 Ft S 1/2 Of Lot 6 Blk 80, Parcel Identification Number (PIN) 012823120032, and Dayton And Irvine's Addition N 1/2 Of Lot 5 And Ex E 10 5/10 Ft N 1/2 Of Lot 6 Blk 80, PIN 012823120031, from RM2 Medium-Density Residential to T2 Traditional Neighborhood; the petition having been certified by the Planning Division on November 23, 2011, as having been consented to by at least 67 percent of the owners of the area to be rezoned, and further having been consented to by at least two-thirds of the owners of the property situated within 100 feet of the total contiguous property within one year preceding the date of the petition; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held public hearings on December 8, 2011 and January 5, 2012, for the purpose of considering the rezoning petition, and, pursuant to §107.03 of the Administrative Code, submitted its recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the rezoning petition at its meeting held on January 13, 2011, and recommended approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council on said rezoning petition was duly published in the official newspaper of the City on January 20, 2012, and notices were duly mailed to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property sought to be rezoned; and City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-10, Version: 1 WHEREAS, a public hearing before the City Council having been conducted on February 1, 2012, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and recommendations concerning the petition; now, therefore THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. That the zoning map of the City of Saint Paul as incorporated by reference in § 60.303 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows: That the property at 204-208 Western Ave N, being more particularly described as: Dayton And Irvines Addition S 1/2 Of Lot 5 And Ex E 10 5/10 Ft S 1/2 Of Lot 6 Blk 80 and Dayton And Irvine's Addition N 1/2 Of Lot 5 And Ex E 10 5/10 Ft N 1/2 Of Lot 6 Blk 80 be and is hereby rezoned from RM2 to T2. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1Ord 12-9 Name:Charter Amendment regarding Ward terminology Status:Type:Ordinance Second Reading In control:City Council Final action: Title:Amending sections 1.02, 2.01, 2.04, 4.01.1, 4.01.2, 4.01.3, 7.04, 8.02, 8.02.2, 8.02.4, 17.07.1 and 17.07.2 of the City Charter, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 410.12, subd. 7 (2010), standardizing the use of the term "ward." Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments:Charter Commission Letter and Ordinance to City Clerk Ord 12-9.pdf Public Hearing Notice Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council3/7/2012 1 Title Amending sections 1.02, 2.01, 2.04, 4.01.1, 4.01.2, 4.01.3, 7.04, 8.02, 8.02.2, 8.02.4, 17.07.1 and 17.07.2 of the City Charter, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 410.12, subd. 7 (2010), standardizing the use of the term "ward." Body The Council of the City of Saint Paul does Ordain: Section 1. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 410.12 subd. 7 (2010), on January 23, 2012, the Saint Paul Charter Commission recommended to the City of Saint Paul that certain charter amendments, as more fully stated below, be made by ordinance. Public notice has been given and a public hearing has been held according to law. The Council of the City of Saint Paul, by unanimous vote, hereby amends Charter Sections 1.02, 2.01, 2.04, 4.01.1, 4.01.2, 4.01.3, 7.04, 8.02, 8.02.2, 8.02.4, 17.07.1and 17.07.2 as follows: Section 2. Sec. 1.02. - Wards. The council may, by ordinance, provide for the establishment of wards, define or change their boundaries, and increase or eliminate the number of wards in the city; but no change, increase or elimination shall be made within three (3) months prior to any election held in the city. Sec. 2.01. - Elective officials. There shall be a mayor elected by the voters of the city at large, and seven (7) councilmembers, each elected from a council district wardas provided herein, and such judges and other officials as are provided by statute and elected as provided therein. Sec. 2.04. - Vacancy. An elective office becomes vacant when the incumbent dies, resigns by a writing filed with the city clerk, is convicted of a felony, ceases to reside in the city, or is adjudged incompetent by a court of competent City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-9, Version: 1 jurisdiction, or when a councilmember ceases to reside within the council districtwardfrom which elected. Sec. 4.01.1 - Council districts wards. Each member of the council shall be elected from a separate district which ward which is substantially equal in population to all other districts wards. Each councilmember shall be a resident of the district wardfrom which elected. Voters may only vote for a candidate for the council district seat ward seat within which the voters reside. Sec. 4.01.2. - Initial districts The division of the city into seven (7) contiguous districts of substantially equal population, and the serial numbering of same will be effected by a resolution of Charter Commission after public hearings on said districting. The public hearing shall be held after published notice of said hearings, and opportunity to speak shall be allowed members of the public upon such reasonable terms as the commission shall adopt. The commission shall adopt its districting resolution by a majority vote of its entire membership, and file it in the office of the city clerk at least sixty (60) days prior to the day on which filings open for the first city primary election occurring after the 1980 city election. The council shall provide for a sum of money, adequate for this purpose, to be used by the commission to hire staff to aid it in preparing its districting plan. Sec. 4.01.3. - Mandatory redistricting After every federal decennial census the Charter Commission shall redistrict in the manner described above. The commission shall redefine the council districts so as to make them substantially equal. . The commission shall file its redistricting resolution in the office of the city clerk no later than the first Tuesday in June prior to the first city election after the federal decennial census. For the purposes of electing city councilmembers, the city shall be divided into seven (7) contiguous wards of substantially equal population, and serially numbered. After every federal decennial census the Charter Commission, after public hearings, shall redistrict in the manner described herein. The commission shall redefine the council wards so as to make them substantially equal. The public hearings shall be held after published notice of said hearings, and opportunity to speak shall be allowed members of the public upon such reasonable terms as the commission shall adopt. The commission shall adopt its districting resolution by a majority vote of its entire membership, and file it in the office of the city clerk no later than the first Tuesday in June prior to the first city election after the federal decennial census. The council shall provide for a sum of money, adequate for this purpose, to be used by the commission to hire staff to aid it in preparing its districting plan. Sec. 7.04. - Name on ballot. In years when wards are redistricted, candidates for mayor and council member may file affidavits of candidacy no more than 91 days and no less than 77 days before the city general election. In all other years, candidates for mayor and council member may file affidavits of candidacy at the same time provided for candidates for the Saint Paul school board. The filing fee for the office of mayor is $500. The filing fee for the office of council member is $250. Candidates for city offices may file a petition in place of the filing fee containing the signatures of registered voters in the district wardfrom which the candidate seeks election. The number of signatures required is either 500 or 5% of the number of votes cast for the office at the previous general election, whichever is less. Sec. 8.02. - Petition. Initiative, referendum or recall shall be initiated by a petition (1) signed by registered voters of the city equal in number to eight (8) percent of those who voted for the office of mayor in the last preceding city election in the case of initiative or referendum, or (2) signed by registered voters of the city equal in number to twenty (20) percent of those who voted for the office of mayor in the last preceding city election in the case of recall of the office of mayor, or (3) signed by registered voters of the relevant council district wardequal in number to twenty (20) percent of those who voted for the relevant office of councilmember in the last preceding city election or fifteen (15) City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-9, Version: 1 percent of the registered voters in the relevant council district ward, whichever number is greater. Sec. 8.02.2. Each signer of the petition shall write thereon the petitioner's name and the street number and election council ward or legislative district and precinct designation of the petitioner's residence. Sec. 8.02.4. Any person whose name appears on a petition may withdraw his or her name by a statement in writing filed with the city clerk before the clerk advises the council as to the sufficiency of the petition. Any name appearing on any petition which does not comply with the foregoing requirements, except as to councilward or legislative district and precinct designation, shall be stricken, and no names shall be counted which have not been verified. Sec. 17.07.1. - Commercial development districts; patrol limits (1) A commercial development district in an area within the city as designated herein, or created by the council hereafter in accordance with this section. Six (6) commercial development districts are hereby created, whose names and defined boundaries are indicated on maps attached hereto as Exhibits 1 through 6, which are incorporated and adopted herein by reference. The council may by ordinance create new or additional commercial development districts, or amend the boundaries of those already created, only in accordance with the following procedures: (a) The proposed commercial development district shall be submitted in writing, accompanied by a map setting forth its boundaries; and (b) Reasonable public notice of the proposed commercial development district shall be given by the license inspector to residents and organizations in the ward or wards in which said district is to be located; and (c) The council or a committee thereof shall hold a public hearing in the ward or wards in which said district is to be located; and (d) After the foregoing steps, an ordinance designating the new commercial development district and defining its boundaries is adopted upon the affirmative vote of at least five (5) members of the council. (2) The council may by ordinance adopt additional procedural and substantive requirements for the creation or amendment of commercial development districts. (3) The entire land area in each council district ward,which has not been made part of a d commercial development district, is a separate liquor patrol limit. Sec. 17.07.2. - Restrictions. (1) No on-sale intoxicating liquor license shall be issued for any location in a liquor patrol limit, nor transferred from a place outside the liquor patrol limit to any location within the liquor patrol limit, unless: (a) The number of such on-sale licenses in the liquor patrol limit into which a license is proposed to be issued or transferred has, prior to said issuance or transfer, decreased by one or more from the number which existed in such liquor patrol limit on the effective date of this Charter amendment; and (b) In the case of a transfer from place to place, the building or structure in which the licensed business operated has been substantially damaged or destroyed by fire, natural disaster or act of God, or the lease for the building or structure in which the licensed business operated has expired and has not been renewed. (2) Upon the filing of an application for issuance or transfer, the councilmember representing the council district wardcongruent with the affected liquor patrol limit shall immediately receive a copy of the application; said application shall be set aside without further action for a period of forty-five (45) days upon a request by said councilmember, during which period residents, community organizations and other organizations within said council district wardshall be notified by the license inspector (if the councilmember does not elect to do so within ten (10) days after receipt of the application) of the content, stated purpose and nature of said application. (3) After such forty-five (45) day period has expired, or immediately if no such forty-five-day period was requested, the council may proceed to consider an application for issuance or transfer under paragraph (1) herein only if: (a) A petition supporting the application is signed by at least ten (10) percent of the registered voters in the City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-9, Version: 1 ward congruent with the affected liquor patrol limit, and filed with the city clerk (who shall examine its sufficiency and report to the council within twenty (20) days; or (b) The council determines by an affirmative vote of at least five (5) members that approval of the issuance or transfer of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license within or into the affected liquor patrol limit would not result in a concentration of businesses having such licenses nor that such issuance or transfer would have an adverse impact on existing community institutions and values or tend to cause neighborhood blight or deterioration. The foregoing determination, if made, shall not preclude the council from denying an application for issuance or transfer to a particular location within said liquor patrol limit. Final approval of the issuance or transfer to a particular location shall also require an affirmative vote of at least five (5) members of the council. (4) Nothing in this section shall apply to or affect the renewal of any on-sale intoxicating liquor license, or its transfer from place to place, within the liquor patrol limit in which such license is located, or to the issuance of a license to an applicant who purchases an existing business having an "on-sale" license with the intent of operating said business at the same location for at least one year thereafter. (5) There shall be no limitation on the number of on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses which may be issued or renewed within, or transferred into, a commercial development district, except as set forth in paragraph (6) below. No restriction applicable to such licenses in liquor patrol limits in this section shall apply to such licenses in commercial development districts. (6) Notwithstanding the provisions of any law or this Charter allowing the issuance of on-sale intoxicating liquor license, not more than two hundred fifteen (215) such licenses shall be issued by the city. Priority shall be given, by ordinance, in the issuance of all such licenses first to applicants who purchase an existing business having an "on sale" license with the intent of operating said business at the same location for at least one year thereafter, and then to restaurants capable of seating and servicing meals to not less than one hundred (100) guests at one time and then to hotels having dining rooms capable of seating and serving meals to not less than fifty (50) guests at one time, and thereafter as the council may determine. (7) Private clubs; exemption. The restriction in subsection (1)(a) above shall not apply to licenses issued to or applied for by a club which at the time of application for such on-sale license held a private club license under Chapter 404 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code for the same premises for which a license hereunder is sought or will be issued for so long as the on-sale license remains at that location and the licensed premises is neither enlarged nor transferred and the club operates in conformity with law. This exemption applies only to the requirements of subsection (1)(a) above and not to any other provision or requirement hereof. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect ninety (90) days after passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING The Saint Paul City Council will conduct a public hearing on Wednesday, March 21, 2012 at 5:30 p.m. in Council Chambers, 3rd floor City Hall - Court House regarding the Saint Paul Charter Commission recommendation to the City of Saint Paul that the following charter amendment be made by ordinance: An ordinance pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 410.12, subd. 7 (2010) amending Charter Sections 1.02, 2.01. 2.04, 4.01.1, 401.2, 401.3, 7.04, 8.02, 8.02.2, 8.02.4, 17.07.1and 17.07.2 standardizing the use of the term “ward”. The Council of the City of Saint Paul does Ordain: Section 1. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 410.12 subd. 7 (2010), on January 23, 2012, the Saint Paul Charter Commission recommended to the City of Saint Paul that certain charter amendments, as more fully stated below, be made by ordinance. Public notice has been given and a public hearing has been held according to law. The Council of the City of Saint Paul, by unanimous vote, hereby amends Charter Sections 1.02, 2.01. 2.04, 4.01.1, 401.2, 401.3, 7.04, 8.02, 8.02.2, 8.02.4, 17.07.1and 17.07.2 as follows: Section 2. Sec. 2.01. - Elective officials. There shall be a mayor elected by the voters of the city at large, and seven (7) councilmembers, each elected from a council ward as provided herein, and such judges and other officials as are provided by statute and elected as provided therein. Sec. 2.04. - Vacancy. An elective office becomes vacant when the incumbent dies, resigns by a writing filed with the city clerk, is convicted of a felony, ceases to reside in the city, or is adjudged incompetent by a court of competent jurisdiction, or when a councilmember ceases to reside within the council ward from which elected. Sec. 4.01.1. - Council wards. Each member of the council shall be elected from a separate ward which is substantially equal in population to all other wards. Each councilmember shall be a resident of the ward from which elected. Voters may only vote for a candidate for the council ward seat within which the voters reside. Sec. 4.01.2. For the purposes of electing city councilmembers, the city shall be divided into seven (7) contiguous wards of substantially equal population, and serially numbered. After every federal decennial census the Charter Commission, after public hearings, shall redistrict in the manner described herein. The commission shall redefine the council wards so as to make them substantially equal. The public hearings shall be held after published notice of said hearings, and opportunity to speak shall be allowed members of the public upon such reasonable terms as the commission shall adopt. The commission shall adopt its districting resolution by a majority vote of its entire membership, and file it in the office of the city clerk no later than the first Tuesday in June prior to the first city election after the federal decennial census. The council shall provide for a sum of money, adequate for this purpose, to be used by the commission to hire staff to aid it in preparing its districting plan. Sec. 7.04. - Name on ballot. In years when wards are redistricted, candidates for mayor and council member may file affidavits of candidacy no more than 91 days and no less than 77 days before the city general election. In all other years, candidates for mayor and council member may file affidavits of candidacy at the same time provided for candidates for the Saint Paul school board. The filing fee for the office of mayor is $500. The filing fee for the office of council member is $250. Candidates for city offices may file a petition in place of the filing fee containing the signatures of registered voters in the ward from which the candidate seeks election. The number of signatures required is either 500 or 5% of the number of votes cast for the office at the previous general election, whichever is less. Sec. 8.02. - Petition. Initiative, referendum or recall shall be initiated by a petition (1) signed by registered voters of the city equal in number to eight (8) percent of those who voted for the office of mayor in the last preceding city election in the case of initiative or referendum, or (2) signed by registered voters of the city equal in number to twenty (20) percent of those who voted for the office of mayor in the last preceding city election in the case of recall of the office of mayor, or (3) signed by registered voters of the relevant council ward equal in number to twenty (20) percent of those who voted for the relevant office of councilmember in the last preceding city election or fifteen (15) percent of the registered vote rs in the relevant council ward, whichever number is greater. Sec. 8.02.2. Each signer of the petition shall write thereon the petitioner's name and the street number and council ward or legislative district and precinct designation of the petitioner's residence. Sec. 8.02.4. Any person whose name appears on a petition may withdraw his or her name by a statement in writing filed with the city clerk before the clerk advises the council as to the sufficiency of the petition. Any name appearing on any petition which does not comply with the foregoing requirements, except as to council ward or legislative district and precinct designation, shall be stricken, and no names shall be counted which have not been verified. Sec. 17.07.1. - Commercial development districts; patrol limits. (1) A commercial development district in an area within the city as designated herein, or created by the council hereafter in accordance with this section. Six (6) commercial development districts are hereby created, whose names and defined boundaries are indicated on maps attached hereto as Exhibits 1 through 6, which are incorporated and adopted herein by reference. The council may by ordinance create new or additional commercial development districts, or amend the boundaries of those already created, only in accordance with the following procedures: (a) The proposed commercial development district shall be submitted in writing, accompanied by a map setting forth its boundaries; and (b) Reasonable public notice of the proposed commercial development district shall be given by the license inspector to residents and organizations in the ward or wards in which said district is to be located; and (c) The council or a committee thereof shall hold a public hearing in the ward or wards in which said district is to be located; and (d) After the foregoing steps, an ordinance designating the new commercial development district and defining its boundaries is adopted upon the affirmative vote of at least five (5) members of the council. (2) The council may by ordinance adopt additional procedural and substantive requirements for the creation or amendment of commercial development districts. (3) The entire land area in each council ward, which has not been made part of a commercial development district, is a separate liquor patrol limit. Sec. 17.07.2. - Restrictions. (1) No on-sale intoxicating liquor license shall be issued for any location in a liquor patrol limit, nor transferred from a place outside the liquor patrol limit to any location within the liquor patrol limit, unless: (a) The number of such on-sale licenses in the liquor patrol limit into which a license is proposed to be issued or transferred has, prior to said issuance or transfer, decreased by one or more from the number which existed in such liquor patrol limit on the effective date of this Charter amendment; and (b) In the case of a transfer from place to place, the building or structure in which the licensed business operated has been substantially damaged or destroyed by fire, natural disaster or act of God, or the lease for the building or structure in which the licensed business operated has expired and has not been renewed. (2) Upon the filing of an application for issuance or transfer, the councilmember representing the council ward congruent with the affected liquor patrol limit shall immediately receive a copy of the application; said application shall be set aside without further action for a period of forty-five (45) days upon a request by said councilmember, during which period residents, community organizations and other organizations within said council ward shall be notified by the license inspector (if the councilmember does not elect to do so within ten (10) days after receipt of the application) of the content, stated purpose and nature of said application. (3) After such forty-five (45) day period has expired, or immediately if no such forty- five-day period was requested, the council may proceed to consider an application for issuance or transfer under paragraph (1) herein only if: (a) A petition supporting the application is signed by at least ten (10) percent of the registered voters in the ward congruent with the affected liquor patrol limit, and filed with the city clerk (who shall examine its sufficiency and report to the council within twenty (20) days; or (b) The council determines by an affirmative vote of at least five (5) members that approval of the issuance or transfer of an on-sale intoxicating liquor license within or into the affected liquor patrol limit would not result in a concentration of businesses having such licenses nor that such issuance or transfer would have an adverse impact on existing community institutions and values or tend to cause neighborhood blight or deterioration. The foregoing determination, if made, shall not preclude the council from denying an application for issuance or transfer to a particular location within said liquor patrol limit. Final approval of the issuance or transfer to a particular location shall also require an affirmative vote of at least five (5) members of the council. (4) Nothing in this section shall apply to or affect the renewal of any on-sale intoxicating liquor license, or its transfer from place to place, within the liquor patrol limit in which such license is located, or to the issuance of a license to an applicant who purchases an existing business having an "on-sale" license with the intent of operating said business at the same location for at least one year thereafter. (5) There shall be no limitation on the number of on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses which may be issued or renewed within, or transferred into, a commercial development district, except as set forth in paragraph (6) below. No restriction applicable to such licenses in liquor patrol limits in this section shall apply to such licenses in commercial development districts. (6) Notwithstanding the provisions of any law or this Charter allowing the issuance of on-sale intoxicating liquor license, not more than two hundred fifteen (215) such licenses shall be issued by the city. Priority shall be given, by ordinance, in the issuance of all such licenses first to applicants who purchase an existing business having an "on sale" license with the intent of operating said business at the same location for at least one year thereafter, and then to restaurants capable of seating and servicing meals to not less than one hundred (100) guests at one time and then to hotels having dining rooms capable of seating and serving meals to not less than fifty (50) guests at one time, and thereafter as the council may determine. (7) Private clubs; exemption. The restriction in subsection (1)(a) above shall not apply to licenses issued to or applied for by a club which at the time of application for such on-sale license held a private club license under Chapter 404 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code for the same premises for which a license hereunder is sought or will be issued for so long as the on-sale license remains at that location and the licensed premises is neither enlarged nor transferred and the club operates in conformity with law. This exemption applies only to the requirements of subsection (1)(a) above and not to any other provision or requirement hereof. Dated February 13, 2012 Shari Moore City Clerk (February 23, 2012 ) City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:4Ord 12-11 Name:Amending Section 409.02 and 409.06 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and creating Section 409.29 pertaining to an Off-Sale Wine Only License Status:Type:Ordinance Second Reading In control:City Council Final action: Title:Amending Section 409.02 and 409.06 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and creating Section 409.29 pertaining to an Off-Sale Wine Only license. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council3/7/2012 4 Title Amending Section 409.02 and 409.06 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code and creating Section 409.29 pertaining to an Off-Sale Wine Only license. Body THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1 Section 409.02 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is hereby amended to include the following definition: Off-sale Wine Only: Off-Sale Wine Only shall mean an off-sale license issued under section 409.29 of this code. SECTION 2 Section 409.06 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 409.06 Licensing Requirements (i) License location restrictions. These restrictions shall not apply to off-sale/brew pub license or off-sale brewery licenses. (1) No off-sale license shall be issued for any place where non-intoxicating malt beverages shall be sold for consumption on the premises. (2) No off-sale license shall be issued to any location within a half-mile radius of any existing off-sale establishment, except in the downtown business district, where the distance requirement shall be a radius of three hundred (300) feet. a. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no off-sale liquor establishment, except for off-sale wine only, shall be City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-11, Version: 4 located within a half-mile radius of the Xcel Energy Center. (3) No license shall be issued for an off-sale location which is within three hundred (300) feet of residentially zoned property, a park or a licensed child-care center, said three hundred (300) feet being calculated and computed as the distance measured from the property line of the premises or building proposed as the location of the off-sale liquor license to the property line of any residentially zoned property, park or child care center in the area for which the license is sought. a. The council may waive the restrictions set forth in paragraph (3) above relating to the distance if it makes findings that such license is not inconsistent with the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the adjoining neighbors or community. Factors which may be considered include, but are not limited to the following: the likelihood of increased noise, traffic, litter, loitering or unlawful behavior by patrons of the establishment, excessive artificial lighting, substantial decrease in adjoining property values, and the extent to which any of the potential problems can be addressed by conditions on the license. b. In order to waive the restrictions relating to distance the council must first receive a petition from seventy- five (75) percent of the owners and tenants of all private residences, dwellings and apartment houses located within three-hundred (300) feet of the proposed off-sale location stating that they have no objection if the waiver relates to residentially zoned property or a written statement consenting to the waiver by the director and/or owner of the child care center if the waiver relates to a licensed child care center. c. An establishment holding a valid license on the effective date of this amendment shall not be affected by this limitation, but shall be entitled to have such license renewed so long as they are in compliance with all other requirement of law and there exists no ground for adverse action against such license. Section 409.29 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is hereby created to read as follows: 409.29 Off-Sale Wine Only licenses (a) Definition. Off-sale Wine Only shall mean an off-sale license that includes a license condition limiting the type of liquor sold to wine, as defined in Minn. Stat. 297G.01, Subd. 20. (b) Issuance of license; fee; conditons of license. A holder of an off-sale wine only license is subject to the same terms as a holder of an off-sale license under Minn. Stat. 340A.405 and Chapter 409 of this code. In addition, an off-sale wine only license is subject to the following conditions: (1) The license fee shall be paid in the amount listed for an off-sale license in section 310.18 of this code. (2) The license shall be valid on all days of the week consistent with the hours of sale provided by section 409.07 (b). (3) A licensee may not hold both an off-sale license and an off-sale wine only license. A licensee may hold only one (1) off-sale wine only license under this section. (4) The only alcoholic beverages sold may be wine as defined in Minn Stat. 297G.01, Subd. 20, in original packages in retail stores for consumption off or away from the premises where sold. (5) All other provisions of this chapter shall be applicable to such licenses and licensees unless inconsistent with the provisions of this section. SECTION 3 This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days following its passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1Ord 12-14 Name:Amending Section 33.04(9) to create plan review fees governing fire alarm systems Status:Type:Ordinance Second Reading In control:City Council Final action: Title:Amending Chapter 33.04 of the Legislative Code to create plan review fees governing fire alarm systems. Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes: Code sections: Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. City Council3/7/2012 1 Title Amending Chapter 33.04 of the Legislative Code to create plan review fees governing fire alarm systems. Body THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: Section 1 Section 33.04 (9) of the Saint Paul Legislative Code is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 33.04 - Establishment of permit fees. * * * (9) Fire alarm systems: a. The minimum fee shall be $65.00, in addition to which the following fees shall be paid: 1. Fire Alarm Control Unit: $20.00 per unit 2. Fire Alarm Opening: $2.00 per device b. A plan review shall be required for all new systems and permits having over one-hundred (100) fire alarm openings. The plan review fee shall be sixty-five percent (65%) of the fee set forth in item a. * * * Section 2 City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-14, Version: 1 This ordinance shall take effect and be in force on thirty (30) days following it's passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1Ord 12-16 Name:Beacon Bluff North rezoning Status:Type:Ordinance Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Memorializing City Council action granting the application of the Saint Paul Port Authority for the rezoning of properties in the area east of Forest Street and north of Phalen Boulevard from VP Vehicular Parking to I1 Industrial, from RM2 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential to R4 One- Family Residential, and from I1 Industrial to R4 One-Family Residential, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Dan Bostrom Indexes:Rezoning, Ward - 6, Zoning Code sections:Sec. 61.801. - Changes and amendments., Sec. 69.508. - Lots. Attachments:BBnorth rezoning map.pdf Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Memorializing City Council action granting the application of the Saint Paul Port Authority for the rezoning of properties in the area east of Forest Street and north of Phalen Boulevard from VP Vehicular Parking to I1 Industrial, from RM2 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential to R4 One-Family Residential, and from I1 Industrial to R4 One-Family Residential, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Public hearing held February 15, 2012) Body WHEREAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 462.357 and § 61.800 of the Legislative Code, the Saint Paul Port Authority, in Zoning File 11-297-833, duly petitioned to rezone from VP Vehicular Parking to I1 Industrial; from RM2 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential to R4 One-Family Residential; and from I1 Industrial to R4 One-Family Residential, areas north of Wells St. between Forest and Russell, all or portions of existing PINs 282922310116, 282922310134, 282922310135, 282922310128, 282922310085, 282922310084, legally described as noted below; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 22, 2011, for the purpose of considering the rezoning petition, and pursuant to §107.03 of the Administrative Code, submitted its recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the rezoning petition at its meeting held on December 2, 2011, and recommended approval to the City Council; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council on said rezoning petition was duly published in the official newspaper of the City on February 2, 2012, and notices were duly mailed to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property sought to be rezoned; and WHEREAS, a public hearing before the City Council having been conducted on February 15, 2012, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-16, Version: 1 recommendations concerning the petition; now, therefore THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. That the zoning map of the City of Saint Paul as incorporated by reference in §60.303 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows: That the property described as: Lots 19, 20, 39 and 40, Block 2 and Lots 18, 19 and 20, Block 3, all in Auditor's Subdivision Number 7, St. Paul Minn, Ramsey County, Minnesota, together with adjoining streets that would accrue thereto by virtue of the vacation thereof be and is hereby rezoned from VP to I1; and That the property described as: Those parts of Lots 17 and 18, Block 2, Auditor's Subdivision Number 7, St. Paul Minn, Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 18; Block 2; thence northerly, along the west line of said Lot 18, Block 2, a distance of 39.03 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence deflecting to the right 88 degrees 08 minutes 19 seconds a distance of 160.0 feet and there terminating, together with adjoining streets that would accrue thereto by virtue of the vacation thereof, be and is hereby rezoned from RM2 Medium Density Multiple-Family Residential to R4 One-Family Residential; and That the property described as: That part of Lot 17, Block 1, Auditor's Subdivision Number 7, St. Paul Minn., Ramsey County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the following described line: Beginning at the northwest corner of said Lot 17; thence southerly, along the west line of said Lot 17, on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 03 minutes, 25 seconds West, a distance of 19.50 feet, to the point of beginning of the line to be descibed; thence North 89 degrees 01 minutes 33 seconds East 104.01 feet, more or less, to the east line of said Lot 17 and there terminating, together with adjoining streets that would accrue thereto by virtue of the vacation thereof, be and is hereby rezoned from I1 Light Industrial to R4 One-Family Residential. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™ City Hall and Court House 15 West Kellogg Boulevard Phone: 651-266-8560 City of Saint Paul Legislation Details (With Text) File #: Version:1Ord 12-17 Name:City View Apartments Inc Status:Type:Ordinance Agenda Ready In control:City Council Final action: Title:Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, granting the application of City View Apartments Inc. to rezone property at 743 3rd Street E. from B2 Community Business to T2 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Zoning File #11-299-652) (Public hearing held on February 15, 2012) Sponsors:Kathy Lantry Indexes:Ward - 7, Zoning Code sections:Sec. 61.801. - Changes and amendments. Attachments: Action ByDate Action ResultVer. Title Memorializing City Council action taken on February 15, 2012, granting the application of City View Apartments Inc. to rezone property at 743 3rd Street E. from B2 Community Business to T2 Traditional Neighborhood, and amending Chapter 60 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code pertaining to the Saint Paul zoning map. (Zoning File #11-299-652) (Public hearing held on February 15, 2012) Body WHEREAS, Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 462.357 and § 61.800 of the Legislative Code, City View Apartments Inc, in Zoning File 11-299-652, duly petitioned to rezone 743 3rd St E, being legally described as Lyman Dayton Addition Ex Alley Nely 3 50/100 Ft Of Lot 2 And All Of Lot 1 Blk 34, PIN 322922140187, Rezoning from B2 Community Business to T2 Traditional Neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Committee of the Planning Commission held a public hearing on January 5, 2012, for the purpose of considering the rezoning petition, and pursuant to §107.03 of the Administrative Code, submitted its recommendation to the Planning Commission for approval; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered the rezoning petition at its meeting held on December 16, 2011, and recommended approval recommended to the City Council; and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing before the City Council on said rezoning petition was duly published in the official newspaper of the City on November 28, 2011, and notices were duly mailed to each owner of affected property and property situated wholly or partly within 350 feet of the property sought to be rezoned; and WHEREAS, a public hearing before the City Council having been conducted on February 15, 2012, at which all interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, the Council having considered all the facts and recommendations concerning the petition; now, therefore THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAINT PAUL DOES ORDAIN: City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 1 of 2 powered by Legistar™ File #: Ord 12-17, Version: 1 Section 1. That the zoning map of the City of Saint Paul as incorporated by reference in §60.303 of the Saint Paul Legislative Code, as amended, is hereby further amended as follows: That the property at 743 3rd St E, being more particularly described as: Lyman Dayton Addition Ex Alley Nely 3 50/100 Ft Of Lot 2 And All Of Lot 1 Blk 34 be and is hereby rezoned from B2 to T2. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage, approval and publication. City of Saint Paul Printed on 3/13/2012Page 2 of 2 powered by Legistar™