The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About09-07-04 CITY OF HASTINGS COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, September 7,2004 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: III. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of Minutes for the Regular Meeting on August 16, 2004 V. COUNCIL ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED: Youth Recycling Award-Boy Scout Troop #23 VI. CONSENT AGENDA: The items on the Consent Agenda are to be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event the items will be removed from the Consent Agenda to the appropriate department for discussion. 1. Pay Bills As Audited 2. Margie Reuter Fence Agreement 3. Resolution-Approve One-Day Raffle Permit (Hastings Hockey Boosters) at Hastings Civic Arena on December 4, 2004 4. First Reading/Order Public Hearing-Annexation #2004-51: South Frontage Road (0.5 acres) 5. Amend Resolution-Site Plan Review #2004-23: Riverwood ih Addition (MW Johnson) 6. Amend Resolution-Site Plan Review #2004-24: South Oaks of Hastings 2nd Addition (MW Johnson) 7. Approve Subrecepient Agreement-CDBG Agreements (Dakota CDA) 8. Resolution-Adopt Home Occupation Fees 9. Accept Resignation of Building Official 10. Approve Extension of Unpaid Leave of Absence VII. AWARDING OF CONTRACTS & PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Public Hearing-City Code Amendment #2004-43: Accessory Structures VIII. REPORTS FROM CITY STAFF: A. Public Works 1. Appeal Restriction of Fencing in Ponding Basin Easement-1336 Eagle Bluff Drive (tabled from August 2nd meeting) 2. Appeal Removal of Landscape Retaining Wall and Fill in Ponding Basin-1328 Eagle Bluff Drive (tabled from August 2nd meeting) B. Planning 1. Second Reading/Ordinance Amendment-City Code Amendment #2004-43: Accessory Structures 2. Resolution-Variance #2004-47: Front Yard Setback at 532 7th Street West (Kenneth Warner, Jr.) 3. Resolution-Site Plan Review #2004-21: Whispering Lane Condominiums at Whispering Lane & Crestview (Lawrence Builders) 4. Resolution-Preliminary and Final Plat #2004-44: Glendale Heights 3rd Addition (Ryan Contracting) C. Administration 1. Park Shelter Buildings 2. Resolutions-2005 Preliminary Budget a. 2005 Proposed City Budget b. 2005 Proposed City Property Tax Levy c. 2005 HRA Tax Levy d. Set Truth I Taxation Public Hearing Dates 3. Approve Debt Management Policy IX. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE: X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: XI. NEW BUSINESS: XII. REPORTS FROM CITY COMMITTEES, OFFICERS, COUNCILMEMBERS: XIII. ADJOURNMENT: Next City Council Meeting on Monday, September 20, 2004 Date: 09/02/2004 Time: 14:00:45 Operator: BECKY KLINE VI-1 Page: 1 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ COUNCIL AND MAYOR ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING M.I.S. M.I.S. M.I.S. POLICE MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Total for Department 000 MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Total for Department 102 FORTIS BENEFITS INS HASTINGS AREA CHAMBE MINNESOTA MUTUAL RADKE ELECTRIC ZIEGLER, INC. Total for ELECTION DATA DIRECT FORTIS BENEFITS INS GRAPHIC DESIGN KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS MESKO LEE, MELANIE MINNESOTA MUTUAL Total for MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM GRAND EX AGREEMENT/ MISC MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM GRAND EX/ WIRING GRAND. EXCURSION/ SALES T Department 105 VOTING BOOTH LIGHTS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM ENVELOPES 1/2 BLDG RENTAL/ ELECTIO EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT MONTHLY LIFE~~S PREMIUM Department 107 AMERICAN PAYROLL ASS APA DUES/ BENSON BENSON, LYNNE M. MILEAGE/TRANSPORT , FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE :INS PREMIUM STARK, CHARLENE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total for Department 120 FISCHER COMPANIES IN BUILDING-PERMIT CHARGE FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM GRAINGER, W.W. INC. ELEC EQUIPMENT GRAINGER, W.W. INC. SUPPLIES MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM SCHILLING PAPER CO. PAPER' SUPPLIES STATE SUPPLY CO BOILER PARTS Total for Department 140 DAKOTA COUNTY TREASU AS BUILT FEE/LOCK & DAM FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM HEWLETT- PACKARD COMP JENSON/ COMPUTER CPU HINZMAN JOHN EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Total for Department 150 FORTIS BENEFITS INS MINNESOTA MUTUAL NORNES, STEPHANIE Total for MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM FLUSH MOUNTING RAILS Department 160 BOISE CASCADE OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES Amount ------------ 1,193.06 1,193.06* 54.68 54.68* 38.65 1,813.25 20.24 105.00 27.13 2,004.27* 63.14 11.00 158.69 200.00 63.38 5.35 501.56* 165.00 88.91 64.43 32.40 65.28 416.02* 511. 00 14.64 89.05 150.95 200.76 8.10 101.60 455.09 1,531.19* 50.00 32.22 800.88 340.00 15.80 1,238.90* 16.67 8.10 198.04 222.81* 93.27 Date: 09/02/2004 Time: 14:00:45 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 2 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ---------------~-------- ------------ POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE DE LAGE LANDEN FINAN DICTATION SYSTEM FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM JOHNSON, DOROTHY UNIFORM ALWWANCE MID-AMERICAN SPECIAL DARE/ LOLLIPOPS MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM MN DEPT OF ADMINISTR STATE LINK/ USAGE FEE OSI BATTERIES REPLACEMENT BATTERIES PETERSEN, ROXANN UNIFORM ALWWANCE SPECIAL OPERATIONS T WOOD/ SWAT SCHOOL UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORM ALWW/ MCMENOMY WOOD, NATHAN EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total for Department 201 BUILDING AND INSPECT BDM CONSULTING ENGIN FINAL GRADE BUILDING AND INSPECT BDM CONSULTING ENGIN TOP OF BLOCK VERIFICATIO BUILDING AND INSPECT BENSHOOF KEVIN TURBO TABS BUILDING AND INSPECT FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM BUILDING AND INSPECT MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM BUILDING AND INSPECT NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE SERVICE Total for Department 230 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS ADVANCED EYE CARE CE C RUEDY/ SAFETY ~LASSES BAHLS SERVICE A/C RECHARGE BAHLS SERVICE LOCK / PIN BARR ENGINEERING CO. WALLIN/ CLOMR COMMERCIAL ASPHALT C HOT MIX COPY EQUIPMENT INC. SCAN TO DISK/132 MYLARS FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY ~TD PREMIUM GURNEY, DAVID LEVEL/STICK DRIVE MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM MONTGOMERY, THOMAS EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT SPRINT (CELL PHONES) WIRELESS CHARGES/ JAN - Total for Department 300 PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM PARKS AND RECREATION MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 101 PARKS AND RECREATION BAHLS SERVICE REPAIR HYDRAULIC CYLINDE PARKS AND RECREATION BAHLS SERVICE TIRE REPAIR PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM PARKS AND RECREATION MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS PARKS AND RECREATION MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM PARKS AND RECREATION MTI DISTRIBUTING COM GRASS SEED PARKS AND RECREATION MTI DISTRIBUTING COM TAIL LIGHT ASSEMBLY PARKS AND RECREATION NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE SERVICE PARKS AND RECREATION O'BRIEN, JOE CHEVROL COOLANT SYSTEM REPAIR/CH 290.05 458.37 142.19 362.60 226.80 37.00 518.17 77 .36 550.00 64.18 92.97 2,912.96* 5,100.00 1,350.00 28.99 77.78 16.20 324.53 6,897.50* 197.88 169.33 3.59 1,916.33 7,109.04 147.67 225.85 46.06 44.30 117.29 120.00 2,847.29 12,944.63* 7.65 4.05 11. 70* 29,929.28* 33.00 60.91 73.20 82.54 60.75 396.60 139.82 402.65 132.72 Date: 09/02/2004 Time: 14:00:45 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 3 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PARKS AND RECREATION UNITED RENTALS LAWN AERATOR RENTAL PARKS AND RECREATION VIKING ELECTRIC SUPP BALLAST PARKS AND RECREATION WILLIAMS SCOTSMAN IN OFFICE TRAILER RENTAL Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 200 PARKS AND RECREATION HOWELL JENNIFER SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION MCGRATH ANN SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION AQUA LOGIC, INC. CHEMIG:ALS PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM PARKS AND RECREATION GRAINGER, W.W. INC. SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS PARKS AND RECREATION MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 201 CABLE HASTINGS ACCESS CORP ACCESS SUPPORT Total for Department 420 Total for Fund 206 HERITAGE PRESERVATIO FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM ' HERITAGE PRESERVATIO MN HISTORICAL SOCIET LABRECK/ CONFERENCE REGI Total for Department 170 Total for Fund 210 FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM KNOLL RAYMOND JR MEAL REIMBURSEMENT MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM SCHUTT, MIKE MEAL REIMBURSEMENT VERIZON WIRELESS CELL PHONE CHARGES Total for Department 210 AMBULANCE AMBULANCE PASCH CLARENCE REFUND OVERPAY/ CALL 200 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION OXYGEN Total for Department 220 Total for Fund 213 HOUSING AND REDEVELO FORTIS BENEFITS INS HOUSING AND REDEVELO MINNESOTA MUTUAL Total for MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Department 500 Total for Fund 404 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DWYER & ASSOCIATES SURVEY: LOT 1 BLOCK 1 H 66.42 27.70 436.65 1,912.96* 1,912.96* 66.00 33.00 140.57 19.67 97.86 4,922.27 11.18 5,290.55* 5,290.55* 30,000.00 30,000.00* 30,000.00* 1.66 85.00 86.66* 86.66* 208.09 17.36 88.59 105.30 18.91 104.44 542.69* 155.00 61.64 216.64* 759.33* 15.55 8.91 24.46* 24.46* 930.00 Date: 09/02/2004 Time: 14:00:46 Operator: BECKY KLINE Page: 4 Department Vendor Name Description Amount CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM Total for Department 180 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORK~, PUBL I C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS CITY CLERK CITY CLERK Total for Fund 407 SEH ENGINEERS 10TH ST/HWY 61 PROJ 2003 XCEL ENERGY STREETLIGHT/SO OAKS RSO XCEL ENERGY STREETLIGHTS/SPIRAL & 31 Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 493 BARR ENGINEERING CO. SHOP DRAWING REVIEW/WEST NORTHWEST LASERS INC PINK PAINT Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 494 WALMART #01-1472 REFUND OVERCHARGES/DEFEC MN AWWA HEUSSER/ MEMBERSHIP DUBE, DAVID BIBS ;0 ECOLAB PEST ELIM.DIV ODOR UNITS/ PEST ELIMINA FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM HACH COMPANY NITRATE SOLUTION HACH COMPANY SPDNS HEWLETT-PACKARD COMP COMPUTERS LEAGUE OF MN CITIES CLASS/ ZOODA MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM MN PIPE & EQUIPMENT COPPER PLUGS SPRINT (CELL PHONES) WIRELESS CHARGES/ JAN - UNITED RENTALS OXYGEN ZGODA, JOHN COMMUNICATIONS CLASS ZIEGLER, INC. EXTENDED WARRANTY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 600 WALMART #01-1472 REFUND OVERCHARGES/DEFEC FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM MN WASTEWATER OPERAT MWOA MTG/ DAVE, JIM, BIL ZIEGLER, INC. EXTENDED WARRANTY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 601 FORTIS BENEFITS INS MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM 3.33 1.22 934.55* 934.55* 1,103.31 3,474.00 22,255.00 26,832.31* 26,832.31* 809.50 48.86 858.36* 858.36* 20,605.00 124.00 109.99 93.72 106.06 21. 14 203.62 1,414.32 15.00 113.13 45.04 16.74 1,512.06 26.63 441.15 690.00 25,537.60* 25,537.60* 31,310.23 42.03 24.36 45.00 480.00 31,901. 62* 31,901.62* 37.58 23.00 Date: 09/02/2004 Time: 14:00:46 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 5 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ Total for Department 107 Total for Fund 610 PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM PARKS AND RECREATION GRAINGER, W. W. INC. SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION JAYTECH, INC. CHEMlCALS/HAZMAT PARKS AND RECREATION MINNEGASCO,ACCT'S PA AUG GAS PARKS AND RECREATION MN ICE ARENA MNGR AS PlRE/ FALL CONFERENCE PARKS AND RECREATION MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM PARKS AND RECREATION NEW MECH COMPANIES I BRA FILE 22-03-102B PARKS AND RECREATION NEW MECH COMPANIES I BRA FILE 222-03-102B PARKS AND RECREATION RAMSBACHER FLOOR COV CARPET PARKS AND RECREATION UNITED RENTALS LINOLEUM ROLLER Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 615 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS BAHLS SERVICE OIL COUNTRY INN " SUITES HARRIS/ LODGING COUNTRY INN " SUITES LODGING / STEWART COUNTRY INN " SUITES LODGING/ HARRIS ;, COUNTRY INN " SUITES LODGING/ STEWART FORTIS BENEFITS INS MONTHLY LTD PREMIUM MINNESOTA MUTUAL MONTHLY LIFE INS PREMIUM POWER ENGINEERING" SHIPPING STELLAR ENERGY SERVI VOLTMETER/ REPAIR Total for Department" 300 Total for Fund 620 PUBLIC WORKS BARR ENGINEERING CO. COMPILE RVRWD LOMR INFO Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 807 Grand Total 60.58* 60.58* 50.03 79.71 1,024.36 62.85 125.00 21. 22 76,047.50 113,623.80 944.10 15.67 191,994.24* 191,994.24* 37.92 77.56 155.12 155.12 155.12 15.59 14.18 163.96 .1,054.19 1,828.76* 1,828.76* 227.46 227.46* 227.46* 348,178.72* September 7, 2004 APPROVED: City Administrator CM~ ~( Finance Director ~drasits Mayor Werner Qfyof f-bstigs Nemrcrdm To: City Council From: Becky Kline, Finance Department Date: 08/24/2004 The attached Department Report itemizes vouchers that were paid on August 24, 2004. Thank you. Date: 08/20/2004 Time: 13:54:28 Operator: LYNNE BENSON CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Fund: (A) Dept Id: (A) Program: (A) Vendor #: (A) Invoice #: (A) Schedule Journal #: (R) 41184 - 41184 Bank #: (A) Ranges: Options: Print Ranges/Options: Y Page on Department: N # of copies: 1 Page: 1 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ COUNCIL AND MAYOR ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINI STRATION ADMINI STRATION ADMINI STRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINI S TRAT ION CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK FINANCE FINANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE PLANNING PLANNING REGINA MEDICAL CENTE AUGUST WELLNESS Total for Department 000 DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- 2004 TRUTH IN TAXATION N Total for Department 102 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI BOISE CASCADE OFFICE ADD ROLLS BOISE CASCADE OFFICE CHERRY COPY PAPER BOISE CASCADE OFFICE INK ROLLER/BATTERIES/ADD BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PACIFIC PAPER/POCKETS/CA BOISE CASCADE OFFICE YELLOW HANGING FOLDERS FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD GRAPHIC DESIGN GRAND EXCURSION SCHEDULE NEOPOST LEASING MAILPRO RENTAL QUALITY PROPANE PROPANE GRAND EXCURSION STILLWATER TROLLEY GRAND EXCURSION EXTRA TR TKDA ENGINEERS CITY HALL CONCEPTUAL PLA Total for Department 105 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI CUSTOM PIN & DESIGN FLAG LAPEL PINS FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 107 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 120 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSN JULY ELECTRIC FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD JOHNSTONE SUPPLY PARTS LIFEWORKS SERVICES JULY SERVICE Total for Department 140 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 150 150.00 150.00* 1,747.72 1,747.72* 4.13 7.98 5.85 183.85 163.50 21.81 38.65 300.33 233.58 76.68 880.00 2,692.93 4,609.29* 3.14 30.00 11.00 44.14* 5.15 64.43 69.58* 4.66 19.52 19.80 14.64 10.77 285.19 354.58* 2.29 32.22 34.51* Date: 08/20/2004 Time: 13:54:28 Operator: LYNNE BENSON CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ M. LS. M. LS. POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 160 AERKO ILLINOIS, INC CHEMICAL SPRAY CANISTERS AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI BOISE CASCADE OFFICE INK CART/TONER/PENS/CLIP CITY OF MPLS. AUTOMATED PAWN SYSTEM CUB FOODS RIVERTOWN DAYS POP/WATER DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- PETERSON NOTARY COMMISSI DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSN JULY ELECTRIC FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD KONTRON MOBILE COMPU REPAIR PARTS SQUAD COMPU MID-AMERICAN SPECIAL CRIME PREVENTION ITEMS H MIDSTATE ORG. CRIME MOCIC CONF RGNONTI/KEGLE ARCH WIRELESS MONTHLY PAGER LEASE SPRINT (CELL PHONES) MDT VISION CARD CONNECT I Total for Department 201 BUILDING AND INSPECT CHANDLER, MATTHEW REFUND BP2004-595 BUILDING AND INSPECT AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI BUILDING AND INSPECT DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL BUILDING AND INSPECT FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD BUILDING AND INSPECT MN STATE TREASURER SURCHARGE QTR END 6/30/0 Total for Department 230 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI BDM CONSULTING ENGIN LOT REVIEW CERTIFICATES CARLSON AUTO TRUCK LABOR/TRANSMISSION COMMERCIAL ASPHALT C 39.56 TON HOT MIX COMMERCIAL ASPHALT C PROMPT PAY DISCOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSN JULY ELECTRIC FARMERS UNION CO-OP ROUNDUP FORESTRY SUPPLIERS I POISON IVY MEDICINE FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD GENERAL REPAIR SERVI OIL/CAP GRAYBAR ELECTRIC WIRE MINNESOTA BLUEPRINT TONER FOR OCE PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION PLASTIC TIPS/TORCH Total for Department 300 PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 401 LE DUC MANSION MISCELLANEOUS BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 04-6 LE DUC PARKING LOT Total for Department 450 LEAGUE/MN CITIES INS RETRO PREMIUM ADJUSTMENT Page: 2 Amount ------------ 7.99 16.67 24.66* 402.40 75.48 312.30 171.00 38.39 2,716.11 100.00 11.14 458.37 7.99 317.44 390.00 195.49 1,606.02 6,802.13* 40.40 9.60 160.23 77.78 7,348.44 7,636.45* 10.17 5,250.00 2,119.80 1,230.25 -33.71 1,987.94 1,679.17 315.70 41.15 225.85 27.79 66.12 274.58 176.35 13,371.16* 7.65 7.65* 4,841.76 4,841.76* 57.00 Date: 08/20/2004 Time: 13:54:28 Operator: LYNNE BENSON CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ Total for Department 600 Total for Fund 101 PARKS AND RECREATION AIM ELECTRONICS SCORE BOARD SVC-VETS COM PARKS AND RECREATION AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI PARKS AND RECREATION BROADWAY AWARDS SIGN PLATES G SCOUT BIRD PARKS AND RECREATION DOERER'S GENUINE PAR DEARTH PARKS AND RECREATION DOERER'S GENUINE PAR OIL/LUBE VETS COMPLEX PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD PARKS AND RECREATION INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTO DATA TRAVELER PARKS AND RECREATION INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTO DIGITAL CAMERA PARKS AND RECREATION INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTO FLASH CARDS PARKS AND RECREATION INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTO PHOTO PRINTER PARKS AND RECREATION MTI DISTRIBUTING COM 180 DEGREE IRRIGATION HE PARKS AND RECREATION MTI DISTRIBUTING COM 455 RIMS PARKS AND RECREATION MTI DISTRIBUTING COM BOLTS PARKS AND RECREATION SHERWIN-WILLIAMS MASKING TAPE PARKS AND RECREATION SHERWIN-WILLIAMS WHITE MARKING PAINT PARKS AND RECREATION TOWER CLEANING SYSTE CLEANING SERVICE PARKS AND RECREATION UNITED BUILDING CENT LAB SCREWS/TRT TIMBERS PARKS AND RECREATION UNITED BUILDING CENT LAG SCREWS PARKS AND RECREATION UNITED BUILDING CENT MORTAR MIX PARKS AND RECREATION UNIVERSITY OF MINNES TREE WKSHP C LIKES PARKS AND RECREATION UNIVERSITY OF MINNES TREE WKSHP J STEVENS Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 200 PARKS AND RECREATION MAKEEFF, DIANE SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION O'MALLEY REBECCA SWIM LESSON REFUND/ MESH PARKS AND RECREATION KAMI GOEHRING SWIN LESSON REFUND/AVERY PARKS AND RECREATION AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI PARKS AND RECREATION BOUND TREE/NORTH AME GLOVES PARKS AND RECREATION DIPPIN DOTS, INC. DIPPIN DOTS PARKS AND RECREATION FIRST LINE BEVERAGES PRETZELS/SLUSH BASE PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD PARKS AND RECREATION GERLACH SERVICE, INC. REPAIR TIRE PRESSURE WAS PARKS AND RECREATION MIDWEST COCA-COLA BT CONCESSION SUPPLIES Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 201 HERITAGE PRESERVATIO AT&T HERITAGE PRESERVATIO FORTIS BENEFITS INS JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI AUGUST LTD Total for Department 170 Total for Fund 210 REGINA MEDICAL CENTE AUGUST WELLNESS Page: 3 Amount ------------ 57.00* 39,750.63* 410.07 2.23 34.08 13.10 5.53 29.43 27.07 240.83 42.48 132.41 386.86 324.30 11.79 53.29 71.18 500.55 298.07 26.61 3.51 85.00 85.00 2,783.39* 2,783.39* 50.00 33.00 33.00 8.67 121.21 455.00 477.15 19.67 17.04 144.50 1,359.24* 1,359.24* 1.21 1.65 2.86* 2.86* 180.00 Date: 08/20/2004 Department -------------------- FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE AMBULANCE AMBULANCE AMBULANCE Time: 13 :54 :29 Operator: LYNNE BENSON CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry ~ Invoice Payment - Department Report Vendor Name Description -----------------~-- ------------------------ Total for Department 000 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI BOYER FORD TRUCKS GASKET OIL DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL FAIR OFFICE WORLD PAPER/ENVELOPES/CLIPS FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD HASTINGS CHRYSLER CE GAS CAP LEAKING 1497 MIKE'S SHOE REPAIR I REPLACE CUFFS BUNKER PAN WALGREEN'S PHOTOS 7/24 STRUCTURE FI Total for Department 210 DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL NINETY-FOUR SERVICES VENT FOR AMBULANCES REGINA MEDICAL CENTE JULY AMBULANCE SUPPLIES Total for Department 220 Total for Fund 213 PARKS AND RECREATION EER PRODUCTS INC DEHUMIDIFIER/ FILTERS Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 401 HOUSING AND REDEVELO AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI HOUSING AND REDEVELO FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 500 Total for Fund 404 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 180 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS Total for Fund 407 Page: 4 Amount ------------ 180.00* 5.85 15.08 945.18 188.80 212.08 112.83 43.00 11.69 1,534.51* 247.68 92.59 288.76 629.03* 2,343.54* 3,912.81 3,912.81* 3,912.81* 1.12 15.55 16.67* 16.67* 3.33 3.33* 3.33* BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 2002 GENERAL SIEBEN DRIV 37.75 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU 18TH ST NON SAP 24,427.38 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU 18TH ST SAP 3,634.40 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU 19TH ST 4,046.85 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU ASHLAND ST 646.70 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU EDDY ST 7,924.52 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU RETAINAGE 65,721.73 THREE RIVERS CONSTRU SOUTHVIEW DR 725.00 Total for Department 300 107,164.33* Total for Fund 492 107,164.33* BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 03-2 RSO 2,984.50 BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 03-3 SPIRAL & 31ST 5,238.75 BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 2003-2 RSO 1,802.50 Date, 08/20/2004 Time, 13,54,29 Operator, LYNNE BENSON Page, 5 Department Vendor Name Description Amount CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 2003-3 SPIRAL & 31ST PRO BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 2003-6 GSD EXT/BRIDGE BRAUN INTERTEC 2003-2 RSO CONST TEST SV BRAUN INTERTEC 2003-3 SPIRAL & 31ST TES Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 493 LAPEAN , BRUCE REIMBURSE BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 04-2 31ST ST RECONSTRUCT BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 04-3 VRTU BDM CONSULTING ENGIN 04-4 10TH & HWY 61 PROJE BRAUN INTERTEC 04-1 WWOOD CONST TEST SV THREE RIVERS CONSTRU WESTWOOD 04-1 Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 494 AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI BATTERIES PLUS BATTERIES BERRY COFFEE COFFEE DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSN JULY ELECTRIC FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD GOPHER STATE ONE-CAL LOCATES REGINA MEDICAL CENTE AUGUST WELLNESS UNITED RENTALS/ HIGH SIGN & BARRICADE RENTAL Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 600 DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL DAKOTA ELECTRIC ASSN JULY ELECTRIC FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 601 DAKOTA COUNTY TREAS- JULY FUEL FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD HASTINGS BUS CO 6/18 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO 7/15 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO 7/16 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO 7/19 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO 7/20 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO 7/21 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO 7/26 BACKUP DRIVER HASTINGS BUS CO BACKUP DRIVER 7/14 MOTOR PARTS SERVICE HALOGEN BULBS Total for Department 107 437.50 240.63 1,769.50 3,263.25 15,736.63* 15,736.63* 154.39 18,405.00 3,038.50 9,185.85 4,645.50 748,059.19 783,488.43* 783,488.43* 2.46 39.18 18.00 904 .29 39.02 103.65 587.65 30.00 517.97 2,242.22* 2,242.22* 303.66 124.18 41.23 469.07* 469.07* 1,052.07 37.58 87.50 318.75 187.50 218.75 106.25 112.50 112 .50 118.75 17.90 2,370.05* Date: 08/20/2004 Time: 13 :54 :29 Operator: LYNNE BENSON CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry ~ Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ Total for Fund 610 PARKS AND RECREATION AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI PARKS AND RECREATION BECKER ARENA PRODUCT PROTECT ALL GRAY FLOORIN PARKS AND RECREATION BECKER ARENA PRODUCT RINK BOARDS SEALER PARKS AND RECREATION ELECTRO WATCHMAN, IN SERVICE CALL ALARM PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD PARKS AND RECREATION GRAINGER, W.W. INC. LAMPS PARKS AND RECREATION NEW MECH COMPANIES I PAY REQ #1 ARENA REFRIGE PARKS AND RECREATION REGINA MEDICAL CENTE AUGUST WELLNESS Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 615 PUBLIC WORKS AT&T JULY LONG DISTANCE SERVI PUBLIC WORKS COUNTRY INN & SUITES LODGING J PROVOST PUBLIC WORKS FEDERAL ENERGY REG.C ADM CHARGE/DAM CHARGE PUBLIC WORKS FORTIS BENEFITS INS AUGUST LTD Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 620 PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS BDM CONSULTING ENGIN EASTENDERS ADD'N JULY BDM CONSULTING ENGIN GLENDALE HTS JULY BDM CONSULTING ENGIN RIVERWOOD 8TH PLAN REVIE BDM CONSULTING ENGIN RY-VIC WEST Total for Department 150 BDM CONSULTING ENGIN CENTURY SOUTH BDM CONSULTING ENGIN CENTURY SOUTH 5TH BDM CONSULTING ENGIN CENTURY SOUTH DRAINAGE BDM CONSULTING ENGIN GLENDALE HTS 2ND JULY BDM CONSULTING ENG IN GLENDALE HTS GRADING BDM CONSULTING ENGIN HIDDEN LANE BDM CONSULTING ENGIN MARKETPLACE WEST BDM CONSULTING ENGIN SOUTH PINES 4TH BDM CONSULTING ENGIN WALLIN 11TH BDM CONSULTING ENGIN WALLIN WEST Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 807 Grand Total Page: 6 Amount ------------ 2,370.05* 1. 00 364.23 33.97 171 . 06 50.03 140.40 25,883.70 30.00 26,674.39* 26,674.39* 4.85 68.80 17,906.23 15.59 17,995.47* 17,995.47* 625.00 1,250.00 375.00 1,500.00 3,750.00* 59.50 89.25 750.00 2,182.50 1,829.75 89.25 75.50 75.50 250.00 156.75 5,558.00* 9,308.00* 1,015,621.06* Qtyof J-h;tigs Nennrdm To: City Council From: Becky Kline, Finance Department Date: 08/31/2004 The attached Department Report itemizes vouchers that were paid on August 31, 2004. : Thank you. Date: 08/31/2004 Time: 09:36:57 Operator: BECKY KLINE Page: 1 Department Vendor Name Description Amount CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ COUNCIL AND MAYOR COUNCIL AND MAYOR ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINI STRATION CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK FINANCE LEGAL MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE PLANNING L.E.L.S. PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS LOCAL UNION 49 PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS LOCAL 320 PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS MINNESOTA NCPERS PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT CONNELL/ CASE 0014354526 MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT PUCH/ CASE 00138614701 TEAMSTERS 320 WELFAR DENTAL INS Total for Department 000 COFFEE. SERVICE MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 102 FILTERFRESH SPRINT BOISE CASCADE OFFICE PAPER BOISE CASCADE OFFICE SUPPLIES GRAPHIC DESIGN GREEN STOCK ENVELOPES SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE S & T OFFICE PRODUCT PAPER Total for Department 105 CITY OF HASTINGS REPLENISH PETTY CASH SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE ~ U.S. POSTMASTER NEWSLETTER POSTAGE Total for Department 107: SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 120 FLUEGEL & MOYNIHAN P LEGAL FEES Total for Department 130 AIR FILTERS UNLIMITE AIR FILTERS DRUMMOND AMERICAN CO CLEANING CHEMICALS FILTRATION SYSTEMS I AIR FILTERS/ PD FINAL TOUCH SERVICES CITY HALL WINDOW CLEANIN FINAL TOUCH SERVICES PD WINDOW CLEANING NATIONAL AUDIO-VI SUA TV WALL MOUNT NORTHLAND CHEMICAL S CLEANING CHEMICALS ORKIN PEST CONTROL AUGUST RON'S CUSTOM CABINET TWO CABINET DOORS SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE STATE SUPPLY CO CITY HALL BOILER PARTS T.D.'S CLEANING AUGUST SERVICES TOWER CLEANING SYSTE AUG CLEANING SERVICES WALMART COMMUNITY GENERAL SUPPLIES XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 140 SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 150 592.00 765.00 921. 00 160.00 238.57 438.39 520.00 3,634.96* 180.00 13.42 193.42* 198.72 927.61 84.14 202 .27 12.58 1,425.32* 9.95 13 .42 1,159.94 1,183.31* 101. 54 101. 54* " 10,838.33 10,838.33* 97.24 536.37 384.60 852.00 271.58 247.00 158.02 91.30 95.85 43.68 185.64 1,150.80 1,196.21 .58 4,470.53 9,781. 40* 67.11 67.11* Date: 08/31/2004 Operator: BECKY KLINE Time: 09:36:57 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 2 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ M.I.S. M.I.S. M.I.S. M.I.S. CDW GOVERNMENT INC VERITAS MEDIA CDW GOVERNMENT INC VERITAS SOFTWARE SOLBREKK INC LASERFICHE LICENSING SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 160 POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE CITY OF HASTINGS REPLENISH PETTY CASH ITL PATCH & MONOGRAM UNIFORM PATCHES MID-AMERICAN SPECIAL CRIME.PREVENTION PENCILS MILLER & HOLMES, INC SQUAD CAR WASHES SHAMROCK ANIMAL CLIN ANIMAL POUND STORAGE SPRINT (CELL PHONES) MDT VISION CARD CONNECTI SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE STREICHER'S GENERAL SUPPLIES XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 201 BUILDING AND INSPECT 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER 2 DAY FIRE SPRINKLER/BEN BUILDING AND INSPECT 10,000 LAKES CHAPTER PERF COMM BLDG INSPECTIO BUILDING AND INSPECT CITY OF HASTINGS REPLENISH PETTY CASH BUILDING AND INSPECT MCES JULY SAC CHARGES ;, BUILDING AND INSPECT SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE BUILDING AND INSPECT SPRINT TELEPHONE Total for Department 230 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WOR~S PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PEA ROCK SEALCOATl'NG TELEPHONE VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS MONTHLY ELECTRICITY for Department 300 AGGREGATE INDUSTRIES CALDWELL ASPHALT CO SPRINT SPRINT XCEL ENERGY Total Total for Fund 101 PARKS AND RECREATION LEEF BROTHERS, INC. LAV/SHOP TOWELS PARKS AND RECREATION MN RECREATION /PARK MRPA WORKSHOP/ BERNSTEIN PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT TELEPHONE PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS PARKS AND RECREATION VERMILLION ELEVATOR GRASS SEED PARKS AND RECREATION VERMILLION ELEVATOR MILLENIUM ULTRA HERBICID PARKS AND RECREATION XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY PARKS AND RECREATION YOCUM OIL CO INC DIESEL FUEL PARKS AND RECREATION YOCUM OIL CO INC UNLEADED FUEL Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 200 PARKS AND RECREATION RIVERTOWN HEATING PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT POOL HEATER REPAIR TELEPHONE DIRECTORY CHARGES 35.00 1,558.58 2,468.67 26.84 4,089.09* 8.50 193.67 253.45 125.00 642.84 803.73 716.44 133.98 36.33 2,913.94* 150.00 525.00 16.00 34,749.00 67.11 13.42 35,520.53* .1,404.55 '31,467.55 223.91 149.29 12,744.43 45,989.73* 115,738.68* 49.47 70.00 274.86 298.58 47.93 3,968.19 3,157.10 1,200.15 1,800.70 10,866.98* 10,866.98* 413.25 125.38 10.25 Date: 08/31/2004 Time: 09:36:57 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 3 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY BATTERIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY CONCESSION SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY POOL SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY SLIDE REPAIR SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY TEEN NIGHT GRAB BAGS PARKS AND RECREATION XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 201 CABLE SPRINT TELEPHONE Total for Department 420 Total for Fund 205 REPLENISH PETTY CASH TELEPHONE Total for Department 170 HERITAGE PRESERVATIO CITY OF HASTINGS HERITAGE PRESERVATIO SPRINT Total for Fund 210 . MINNESOTA NCPERS PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS Total for Department OOG FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE AMERIPRIDE LINEN & A TOWELS OOERER'S GENUINE PAR SWITCH/ 1483 MOTOR PARTS SERVICE TOGGLE SWITCH NAT'L FIRE PROTECTIO FIRE PREVENTION WEEK MAT NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE PUBLIC SAFETY CENTER EXTRICATION GLOVES SPRINT TELEPHONE WALMART COMMUNITY SUPPLIES XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 210 AMBULANCE AMBULANCE AMBULANCE AMBULANCE BOYER FORD TRUCKS BRAKE KIT/ 1463 MOORE MEDICAL CORP. AMBULANCE MEDICAL SUPPLI MOTOR PARTS SERVICE FILTER PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION OXYGEN Total for Department 220 Total for Fund 213 TIF / DISTRICT 1 TIF 1 ANNUAL REPORTING for Department 500 HOUSING AND REDEVELO BRADLEY & DEIKE PA HOUSING AND REDEVELO EHLERS & ASSOC Total Total for Fund 402 HOUSING AND REDEVELO EHLERS & ASSOC RIVERFRONT/ TIF 4 PRE-DE 6.86 123.63 51. 54 20.64 43.18 2,645.19 3,439.92* 3,439.92* 13.42 13.42* 13.42* 5.54 13 .42 18.96* 18.96* 64.00 64.00* 27.62 36.38 . 5.49 105.11 85.75 342.76 457.35 413.00 944.34 2,417.80* 109.43 337.74 10.96 100.12 558.25* 3,040.05* 37.50 300.00 337.50* 337.50* 1,237.50 Date: 08/31/2004 Time: 09:36:58 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 4 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ HOUSING AND REDEVELO HANKEN GARY & CANDAC REHAB LOAN/715 VERMILLIO HOUSING AND REDEVELO SPRINT TELEPHONE Total for Department 500 Total for Fund 404 PUBLIC WORKS A-1 EXCAVATING REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR CO Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 493 PUBLIC WORKS A-1 EXCAVATING REPLACEMENT CHECK FOR CO Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 494 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS CUSTOM ASPHALT STREET REPAIRS~ DPC INDUSTRIES, INC. HYDROFLOUROSILICIC ACID G & K SERVICES MAT / TOWEL RENTAL MINNESOTA NCPERS PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS SOLBERG AGGREGATE CO LIMEROCK SPRINT TELEPHONE SPRINT VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS T. D. . S CLEANING AUGUST SERVICES U.S. POSTMASTER POSTAGE WALMART COMMUNITY SUPPLIES XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 600 PUBLIC WORKS XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 601 CITY CLERK BOYER FORD TRUCKS BRAKE KIT STOCK CITY CLERK HASTINGS TIRE & AUTO TIRES T-3 CITY CLERK MN BODY & EQUIPMENT EGRESS WINDOW CITY CLERK MN BODY & EQUI PMENT HANDLE EGRESS WINDOW CITY CLERK MN BODY & EQUI PMENT T-4 DOOR SWITCH CITY CLERK MINNESOTA NCPERS PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS CITY CLERK MOTOR PARTS SERVICE BACKUP LIGHTS/ T-1 T-4 CITY CLERK SPRINT TELEPHONE Total for Department 107 Total for Fund 610 PARKS AND RECREATION MINNESOTA NCPERS PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS TELEPHONE 3,000.00 13.42 4,250.92* 4,250.92* 97,676.81 97,676.81* 97,676.81* 145,964.25 145,964.25* 145,964.25* 1,897.00 604.29 133.32 32.00 473.99 129.96 149.29 319.50 772 . 63 55.71 '10,717.63 15,285.32* 15,285.32* 517.07 517.07* 517.07* 106.30 665.25 300.24 113.97 25.43 16.00 16.36 15.42 1,258.97* 1,258.97* 16.00 95.95 Date: 08/31/2004 Time: 09:36:58 Operator: BECKY KLINE Page: 5 Department Vendor Name Description Amount CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY BOX FAN PARKS AND RECREATION XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 401 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PLANNING Total for Fund 615 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS CO CONCRETE COLT ELECTRIC INC. REPAIR LABOR MINNESOTA NCPERS PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS NORTH AMERICAN HYDRO REPAIR LABOR POWER ENGINEERING & GEAR BOX INSPECTION SPRINT TELEPHONE XCEL ENERGY MONTHLY ELECTRICITY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 620 BRADLEY & DEIKE PA EISCHEN AGREEMENTS Total for Department 150 HOUSING AND REDEVELO BRADLEY & DEIKE PA SHERMAN DOWNT<;JWN DEVELOP HOUSING AND REDEVELO EHLERS & ASSOC SHERMAN-RIVERFRONT PROJ Total for Department 500 Total for Fund 807 Grand Total 298.58 15.41 862.15 1,288.09* 1,288.09* 744.52 225.00 16.00 5,304.99 1,782.50 43.68 3,130.45 11,247.14* 11,247.14* 362.50 362.50* 1,000.00 1,750.00 2,750.00* ,:3,112.50* 414,056.58* VI-2 FLUEGEL & MOYNIHAN PA. Donald J. Fluegel * Shawn M. Moynihan Daniel J. Fluegel Attorneys At Law 1303 South Frontage Road, Suite 5 Hastings, MN 55033-2477 Telephone 651438-9777 Fax 651-438-9775 September 2, 2004 Mayor Mike Werner and City Council Members Hastings City Hall 101 East Fourth Street Hastings, MN 55033 Re: Marge Reuter - Right-of-Way Permit Request Alley Way Between]st Street and 2nd Street Dear Mayor and City Council Members: Staffis requesting the council approve Marge Reuter's request to replace a pre-existing fence in its prior location which is partially with~n the platted alley right-of-way north of 2nd Street between Ashland and Eddy Streets. Back~round . > Marge Reuter lives at 321 West 1 st Street between Ashland and Spring Streets. Although her address is 1st Street, it appears her house actually fronts on the platted alley just north of 2nd Street. Apparently, prior to the beginning of the summer, Ms. Reuter had a fence on the south side of her property. This fence encroached somewhat into the platted alley right-of-way. This fence had been there for some period oftime. Ms. Reuter hired a contractor to remove her fence and replace it with a new fence. After the old fence was removed, her contractor went to City Hall for a permit to construct the new fence. City staff told the contractor that the prior fence encroached somewhat into the street right-of-way and the new fence would have to be set back about two feet from the previous location so as not to be in the right-of-way. Apparently moving the fence back even a couple of feet will create problems because her buildings, some which are quite old, are located close to the alley right-of-way. Ms. Reuter's attorney, George May, approached me two months ago and asked ifthe City would be willing to accommodate Ms. Reuter replacing her fence in its prior location. After talking to City staff, City staff felt that a partial alley vacation would not be a viable solution since the alley is narrow as it is and it is needed to provide access to Ms. Reuter's property. The solution that City staff can recommend to the council is to allow Ms. Reuter to reinstall her fence in its prior location upon Ms. Reuter signing the attached right-of-way permit agreement. This agreement will require Ms. Reuter to remove the new fence at her cost if the City needs to use or * Also admitted to practice in Wisconsin work in the platted right-of-way in the future. This agreement will then be recorded against the property so as to put any future owners on notice. Recommendation. City staff recommends council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the attached right-of-way permit agreement and to authorize the building department to issue any required permits upon Ms. Reuter paying the appropriate fee and her signing the attached agreement which will be recorded against her property at the Dakota County Recorder's Office. Very truly yours, FLUEGEL & MOYNIHAN P.A. ~/?7 Shawn M. Moynihan City Attorney SMM:ham Enclosure cc George L. May -' RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made this _ day of September, 2004 by and between the City of Hastings, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation ("City") and Margie Reuter, a single person. Recitals. A. Ms. Reuter is the owner of proPerty legally described on attached Exhibit A. B. There is a platted alley in front of Ms. Reuter's property. C. Prior to the date of this Agret:(ment, Ms. Reuter had a fence located along the southern portion of her property, which fence encroached into the platted alley right-of-way. - D. Ms. Reuter has removed th~ fence and pow s.eeks to install a new fence in the same location as the previous fence. E. Ms. Reuter is willing to give certain assurances to the City in return for the City allowing her to replace her fence in its prior location. NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the parties as follows: 1. In return for Ms. Reuter's agreement to abide by the terms of this Right-of-Way Permit Agreement, the City will issue Ms. Reuter the necessary permit to replace her fence on her property after all required fees have been paid. 2. Ms. Reuter agrees to install her new fence in the same location as was her previous fence and abide by City requirements regarding the installation of the fence. 3. Ms. Reuter agrees to timely remove the fence at her own expense if requested to do so by the City because of the City's need to improve the right-of-way; install, maintain or repair utilities in the right-of-way; or otherwise use the right-of-way for any of the purposes given to the City by law. 4. If Ms. Reuter is requested to remove all or part of her fence and fails to do so in a timely manner; or if an emergency requires the City to remove all or part of the fence, the City will not be responsible for any damage to Ms. Reuter's fence. 5. By entering into this Agreement, the City does not give up any of its rights to use the platted right-of-way in any manner allowed by law. 6. The terms of this Agreement shall run with the land and shall bind Ms. Reuter's heirs, successors and assigns. Dated this _ day of September, 2004. CITY OF HASTINGS, A MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION By: Michael D. Werner, Mayor (SEAL) By: Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk Dated this _ day of September, 2004. :By: Margie Reuter ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SSe COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of September, 2004 by Michael D. Werner and Melanie Mesko Lee the Mayor and Administrative Assistant/City Clerk of the City of Hastings, Hastings, Minnesota. NOTARY PUBLIC ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) SSe COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of September, 2004, by Margie Reuter. a single person. NOTARY PUBLIC .. THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Fluegel & Moynihan P.A. 1303 South Frontage Rd., #5 Hastings, MN 55033 SMM/ham EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION The west 43 feet ofthe south 83 feet of Lot 1, Block 7; and That part of the east two feet of Lot 2, Block 7, beginning at the southeast comer thereof; thence west two feet; thence north 85 feet, thence southeast to a point on the east line 83 feet north of the southeast comer; thence south 83 feet to the point of beginning; and The west 64 feet of Lot 2, Block 7; and All of Lot 3, Block 7; and All of Lot 4, Block 7; and All of Lot 1, Block 8; all in the Town of Hastings, Dakota County, Minnesota according to the recorded plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Dakota County Recorder. " VI-3 MEMORANDUM I To: From: Date: Re: Mayor Werner and City Councilmembers Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk September 1, 2004 Resolution- Application for Gambling Premises for Hastings Hockey Boosters at Hastings Civic Arena Recommended City Council Action: Approve the attached Resolution, authorizing the Hastings Hockey Boosters to conduct a raffle on December 4, 2004. Backaround: Application has been received from the Hastings Hockey Boosters to conduct a raffle on December 4, 2004 at the Hastings Civic Arena. The raffles total value of prizes is estimated not to exceed $2,500.00. Per Hastings City Code, Section 5.80, Subd. 7B, a $10.00 application fee is required. If Council should approve this application, the attached resolution will be sent to the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Board showin.g the City's approval to allow the raffle. ~ Should you have any concerns or ~uestions, please do not hesitate to contact me. .. Attachment: , 1. Resolution- Approving One-Day Raffle License for the Hastings Hockey Boosters at the Hastings Civic Arena. CITY OF HASTINGS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 09-_-04 EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS, MINNESOTA HELD: SEPTEMBER 9, 2004 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Hastings, Dakota and Washington Counties, Minnesota, was duly held at the City Hall in said City on the 9th of September 2004 at 7:00 o'clock p.m. for the purpose in part of authorizing Resolution No. 09-_-04, authorizing the Hastings Hockey Boosters to conduct a raffle on December 4, 2004 at the Hastings Civic Arena. The following Councilmembers were present: And the following Councilmembers were absent: Councilmember adoption: introduced the following resolution and moved its RESOLUTION NO. 09-_-04 RESOLUTION AP~ROVING _THE.,REQUEST & APPLICATION FOR THE HASTINGS HOCKEY BOOSTERS TO CONDUCT A RAFFLE WHEREAS, the Hastings Hockey Boosters has presented an application to the City of Hastings to conduct a raffle on December 4, 2004, at the Hastings Civic Arena; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Lawful Gambling Board requires a Resolution be passed approving the request; and WHEREAS, the application for Exemption from lawful Gambling license has been presented; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hastings that the Mayor and City Clerk are authorized and directed to sign this resolution and forward to the Minnesota Department of Gaming, Gambling Control Division, showing the approval of this application for an Exemption from Lawful Gambling License. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember Riveness and, after full discussion thereof and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk (SEAL) VI-4 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: September 7,2004 Subject: First Reading\Order Public Hearing - Annexation #2004-51 - South Frontage Road south of Xcel Energy Substation - Paul Augustine REQUEST Paul Augustine has petitioned for annexation of approximately 0.56 acres generally located west of the Xcel Energy substation. -The property would accommodate the future extension of South Frontage Road in conjunction with the Vitt\Centex property located directly to the south. ~ Upon consideration of first reading, the public hearing and 2nd reading of the Annexation Ordinance would be held at the October 18, 2004 City Council Meeting. - RECOMMENDED ACTION -' Approval of the annexation is recommended. The property has been identified for annexation under the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. The additional property will allow for the construction of South Frontage Road further north to provide additional separation between the proposed townhomes and adjacent single family homes. The cost of the road would be the sole responsibility of the developer. ATTACHMENTS . Petition for Annexation - Augustine . Location Map . Vitt Property Preliminary Plat Proposal BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The property has been identified for future annexation in the 2020 Comprehensive Plan and designated as C, Commercial. Zoning Classification The property would be zoned A - Agriculture upon incorporation. The property would likely be rezoned consistent with adjoining land uses upon development. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use Direction North East South ExistinQ Use Vacant Xcel Substation Vacant Proposed Townhomes Vacant ZoninQ Nininger Twp. Nininger Twp. A - Agriculture Proposed R-3 PRD Nininger Twp Comp Plan C - Commercial P - Public U-II (4-8 units) U-II (4-8 units) Not in Comp Plan West Existing Condition The site is vacant and is currently farmed. ' ;0 Proposed Improvements The property would be part of the future extension of South Frontage Road. August 11,2004 City of Hastings Attn: Dave Osberg City Administrator 101 4th Street East Hastings, MN 55033 RE: Annexation Petition Dear Dave: #~OOL-{- ,S-( Enclosed please find the petition for Annexation for a 0.56 acre parcel of property c~ently in Nininger Town~hip. :pJease present this ~or publication at the next ~vailable . City Council meeting. If you have any questions or need anything further from me, please call me at (612) 313- 0124. ;, . Sincerely, ,- --. - ~~, I1r', {j"".....v~, L- ~ .'.,~:;::/ ::::...-z.. -,/ Paul Augustine .. &-j?"J/~ August J%, 2004 City of Hastings Attn: Dave Osberg City Administrator 101 4th Street East Hastings, MN 55033 RE: Annexation Petition Dear Mr. Osberg: The owners of approximately 0.56 acres of land in Nininger Township, as evidenced by their signatures attached hereto, hereby petition for the annexation of approximately 0.56 acres of land, as legally described on Exhibit A, into the City of Hastings. Attached as Exhibit B is a survey showing a depiction of the property to be annexed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties executed this Amendment under seal as of the date and year first above written. ;. . OWNER: By:~{J;~ ROb~UfS1" . Dated: - / - OWNER: ~~ ~ "-t.~'4 . ~~~ '--- ~.. .,~ By: Paul ~~!~ Dated: (!1- -" -' OWNER: Br-j~~~ Rosemary A gus&e . Dated: .7--1 b - t:? Lf-. . ~ . -' OWNER: BY:Cf~9rz~~ Rose Marie Sieben Dated: (/~ i /1 j'J. t)(] ~ " .-~. OWNER: By: :i);;g..~~<c:;i;?fe~ ~ Del~~~~ Dated: . I - . . -' --' (' EXHIBIT A: (LEGAL DESCRIPTION) That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter of Section 30, Township 115, Range 17, Dakota County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northwest comer of Outlot C, SUNSET WEST, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota; thence North 00 degrees 19 minutes 27 Seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 557.27 feet to a point on a line 603.00 feet south of the southerly light of way line of Trunk Hwy. No. 55 and to the point of beginni~g; thence continuing North 00 degrees 19 minutes 27 Seconds West along said west line of the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 33.00 feet; thence North 89 degrees 27 minutes 02 seconds East, a distance of 671.12 feet; thence South 78 degrees 02 minutes 49 seconds East, a distance of 152.44 feet to a point on said line 603.00 feet south of the southerly right of way line of Trunk Hwy. No. 55; thence South 89 degrees 27 minutes 02 seconds West, along said line a distance of 820.07 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 0.56 Acres. '0"'" .......... ~ . 0 ~ c5 (J) ::'E~~:p~:p:p:p-po;G::!:7'()~~~)> ::'E 1]:::J ~~c"U1./:..WI\)~-.!.. ::'E.j..WI\)~ ~ ~ a. u; ~ . ~ 0)> ~ Q) 0" . !j!. "'C >.~ ,.,., - c:: ~' . 0 " Q) ............ r CJ1(Q ~ - ~ (J) CD (7)c: CD en en "U "{J OJ CC Q) tn >< (J) DJ c: :::;: .., DJ CD (J) "'C (') a. 0:: n...... Q) ~ - CD In 5" :J r CD Vi co a. ., -- ...... 0 oo*z~ In CD ~ -- (") 0 s:u tn(D - o' ~ :::J tr1 0 0 * ~ C)., ~ CI'\ t <::: - += T ~ ~- ~ I - ~ ...' r' ~ ,!I ~ :1 I ~ !h 0 i'E a.. ! ~ ! [ S ~ ~. .r< ~ - I IIi Ii Il! ,II fll t.i1 f ,.1 , III I~ i!' Ii , - I - 1m - (') r~a rf~ i::Z: :0 gi e m f ~ < f "tS .... tI).... ....... ... '< ~:." e-r- ~J .. ~ - L { W' P"ZDOJlnO\d.g'Z1)(I310311PL~L.dwg 08/19tZ!lO. lo.IU1 ~M CDT t~ .~ cSt ~ii . . i ~ JHI! fI'l' n ulolf flU. fW~ I rf~~ ~ ~r!if Ii'" A ............. ... i~ J ~ '"Of' blo ~ lit.! qlil ..1 < !hff 11.1 nr 1/ i r' !. f ./ '~ ~ . .. R/Tt.fiE~, STREff.. \ ~ ~ ~ "'" ...--... .r---: ~ .r'... .r- ,...--... ...--... ; 1 :U'_:_':~ :c;,.~~~~~, ~~~ I " ~ ''<Jo.Y. '\ \ ~~1 ~€~J{~~,,:\ i ~. "?" ;AJ ~ "~ ~ k ~- " ! c-;: P ~ b~' ~ J )1 r\ 1 ' " I I. I i ".,.V-' ~"~ ,-'F..k " I' \ ~--',&. "'h ~' ~lW ~- -;-"~,,- i~hr-I':-'r'-".~J~k~ I' ',,_u,_u,_,u_'"'' \. 'Lrn::::IIc b J ''c. In- ,f..! " ..." ~"- .'....( -'-~D H 1IIf'l\ k"';.J" Jtl.1' I ~ ~.:\, '~" ~ ts3\6,J'''. . '. u.:::r ~ - -I-. 1\ ~ r-' r-T-, r-, v '~ .), 1-1 I 1-1 ' "',. l\ ~ ~ ~ ~ :: : :~J A~)>>'. ~~J:L~~j::L#_fJ ~- - '~. ~ ~ ;). ~'" t , f\ r~ ~~'-:-' ~ ~I? ~:~r;-~nr~~t ' ~ [ - .'.C'i'r~-i'rJ ~! j-:JL~Jt~_f^r I,; ~ ~ . ;'1' '.. f-.1-{-T-1-{-1-{-i ,I r\ - C\ ~ U II W ~ ~I ~::J! ~".II M M,~ : ~ \ 'l~~'O~-~~" ~. ':. ~ ,:\~ ~ ~+' ~ ' '! ' '~\ L_J C_~-:-J C_J c_J t' i ~ >".J r-' :~-T-' .'-' ~ ~." ;1 ~ r-I-I' r-TT1-{-V-' '!< ~ ...H:,~...m;; !!~ , '. ;1'\ D II n ra,l t, f1 '1 0 11M r-: ~ v ~ .; - ..;....,., . 3 , r:.J U II W ~~..\~ ~,"\a:"J W u II 0 . ~. ~', l!:i:: J ~ ~'R~ r- l_rL c'~l_nu r~' ~ if ,,' 1- I _J L_",-_J L_" . . ' , ., " ,~ ~) .... I C: (",;, " .' &.-..,..,.." _~ ,. r"'" " _Of\. i._ ~. - '<\I ~ 71111',~~" II 6.~\~~I"-<I \ \ ~! i i i ~! i -- '~: T1ERNEf DRII'!; 1. I~.g I '. \ ~p5\~ \ - f[f!IEfHfI f rtrHHti! rfJdl~ifr! "I'! .in 0 rifHrf1nl! " Ih' Irfi [ , J (I i' n f f i, I'Irf Uli ii" ~~.:i Hi, H.l 1"j , ! - @j;~ ~ '. .L"<b\.'\",~=. =~=m~,.u "'~~',. , - , ~. ... ~'~,~'.,u'. ' , ',..... .=I : ','! ~ -cIE5lf< ' , ~) U U II U <ca J i: ~ ," . [~'" "<~I l~{C_J ~,_Lr"cji. io .. - '., . .[~ ~ :~tJ,r-G-1-{~r1-{-' !'j~ ~~ 't'" ( ]., t'1!(1 It, KJ 4: I. i i ~ I :> - ~ ~- d~, \ \ \ i! \ ~ , :':\~] ~ '. Lch.' ~ ,j,I ~ ~ U \ J i 31,'" ~ ~ f ~, ~ ~ I ~~ l_J "'c_J c_l_" \'U i i f' ~ 7 i - ~ ::~~ , Irf0 r-U-1-{~T-~-l ! i ~ \~... )' ,'. "t,:;:).J)n ~II rlf.) :,; lie ~ ~ ! ! p~ ~@~ ,- ,.[',_"n_'!!, ~ I ! jl~ lUll "I ~ \ ' ' ~ ~J ~-g~r~f~'3 l\.,.j....,,_J~ '" ~ ! I /' JI' \ ~,~ ._ ~ _ .:..<. _.' K,r.,. " A"..;; , 0 ';: ~ ill ~.... - ~1~'~~ra>1't.. I , '... ,\;;,:,f f ~ iHi i! lif HH fHi IIj i~ in m JBHi Il:~IHi H lim I:i if H !! :! if m ii H m i~(.!.!.!.iH }!iHl l Ilil '1 srI IIH HI ~I h in 'I ~:j!i fE'in! " Wi, d, h 'i II i ~I ;i L ~ j! .i! ! lil:!~': IJill i" Jj: ~ ~ ff~ll; Hi Hi; tji r;, i iil Ii Hi,' h i~~il~J!!I ~!iH II II i~ H i It ~j ii ! d ~'i i !~nm ~fni ~ ~! ~ i "f ! iil {hI ["I I. t 5{ i,! J'o"'! ;, u'i II :11;. j; 1~ li"j t' r Ii II 1 1"1; f 1 ; ; ;J11 ! [II i ~~ ~ r :ii i tl im ~i! ~: ! !o F IIF! naFI H i,l!j ,I i; Hi! j JI ii i ~. ~ I : , "'llf' j~ii;: 'r;;l! II' 1 ~, II' ,Ii '1 I'!. ;f 'I-Ii i!u-l. Ii I':;. II Iii', I ' , Ii., . If'! Ii! f ! If! ~Hf Hi I ii r" I!. fA ! }! II jl;!! d'lif! ! r~!I! !! ;! · : ! I: j ! IJ '1' ,I J J tJ!~ i~~. .!, t .. 0< \'1 P f p. of I'llt nJ -tI 111'1, ! 1 1 1 I ; ~. 1 I if ; I j "1 PI" . ~ f~~ i f ~I ~f- !!!' if . I ii " ~I - , ~'I', 1 ! ! ! I~fl ' :::I,;':':'%':t~Ir'%'%n !iiiiiiiiiii ..... "'1":":"'1": ........... w:o "1"1"1"1"11:1: IIIII IIIII lUll if ~ '. ; ~ I ' , , ~:'.-w, '\ \. ~,~ \ ' \ ,\ ~ \~ ' '1'1" I I.!;!H .lllt" 11(1, i Jr, ! I ,q!jJ'II!,rm I Ii, 'II 'II" ! i:'," :ill:~! I HIi! i,:l ~, I 'I, f II' il~ . I,. .: IJ ;, '~ v- 'I:!',!J IHII1I11IJ JII!lm r,. I.: I .1 ~ ! ;! I! .!llm J 'I .11'1! I ':, il ~Hliil' I Iii r ,i " III: :;1 ill' I II, J II "11111, r · di " I i ~ r ' ! g ; ! . " i ~ ~. ..J VI-5 Memo To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Werner and City Council John Hinzman, Planning Director September 7, 2004 Amend Resolution - Site Plan Review #2004-23 - Riverwood 7th Addition Townhomes - 36th Street - MW Johnson REQUEST The City Council is asked to amend the conditions of Site Plan approval for MW Johnson Construction on Lots 1-15, Block 4, RIVERWOOD 7TH ADDITION as follows: Remove Condition No. 8 - ":that language proposed by the builder restricting the long-term rental of units within the development be added to association documents for this area" The Council approved the Site Plan ,at the July 19, 2004 meeting. RECOMMENDATION Deletion of the language is recbmmendea. The inclusion of the rental restriction would preclude the property from being eligible for FHA financing (please see attached letter from Richard Hocking). According to Dakota CDA, FHA financing is commonly used by individuals purchasing townhome units. FHA generally provides a lower down payment requirement and mortgage insurance premium than a conventional loan. Some lenders work exclusively with FHA loans. The inclusion of rental restriction language was brought forward by the developer, independent of any request by the city. ATTACHMENTS . Amended Resolution . Letter from Richard Hocking HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 09- -04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AMENDING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 07-24-04 APPROVING THE SITE PLAN OF MW JOHNSON TO CONSTRUCT TOWNHOMES ON LOTS 1-15, BLOCK 4, RIVERWOOD1m ADDITION, HASTINGS, MN Council member adoption: introduced the following Resolution and moved its WHEREAS, MW Johnson has petitioned for approval to construct 12 townhomes on property legally described as Lots 1-15, Block 4, RIVERWOOD 7TH ADDITION, Dakota County, _ Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on July 19, 2004, The City Council adopted Resolution No. 07-24-04 approving the Site Plan request subject to nine (9) conditions; and WHEREAS, MW Johnson has petitioned for deletion of Condition No.8 of the Site Plan approval as follows: 8) That language proposed by the builder restricting the long-term rental of units within the development be added to association documents for this area. WHEREAS, MW Johnson has stated the inclusion of Condition No.8 will preclude the property for FHA financing eligibility. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Council hereby approves the deletion of Condition No.8 of Resolution No. 07-24-04 approving the site plan request of MW Johnson. All other conditions of Resolution No. 07-24-04 shall remain in effect and binding. Council member Schultz moved a second to this resolution and upon being put to a vote adopted by all present. Ayes: Nays: Absent: ATTEST: ~chaelI>. VVerner,~ayor ~elanie ~esko Lee Administrative Assistant/City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County ofI>akota, ~nnesota, on the 7th day of September, 2004, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. ~elanie ~esko Lee Administrative Assistant/City Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (JWH) 101 4th St. East ..Hastings, ~ 55033 " RICHARD K. HOCKING, PA LA W OFFICES A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION TELEPHONE FAX (952) 432-8129 (952) 241-3861 10657 165TH STREET WEST LAKEVILLE, lvIN 55044 August 17, 2004 John Hinzman Community Planning Director City of Hastings 101 Fourth Street E Hastings MN 55033-1~55 RE: My client, M.W. Johnson Construction, Inc. South Oaks of Hastings 2nd Addition Dear John: This correspondence is be'ing sent to you at your request in regard to the Resolution Number 2004-24 approving South Oaks of Hastings 2nd Addition, Lots 1 through 14, Block 6. I recently received and reviewed your forrespondence of August 3, 2004, which contained Conditio~No. 8 in regard to the restriction on long term rental of properties. Since I have not seen such a provision in my 25 years of practice on a Minnesota Declaration, I made some phone calls prior to ~ncorporating that provision - into a Declaration of Covenants. -j One of my calls was to the local office of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. From there, I was referred to the Colorado office of the General Counsel of HUD, which has regional jurisdiction over the State of Minnesota. I discussed the provision with one of the senior personnel that handles HUD project financing approvals. As is the processing channel with HUD, he then discussed the matter with senior counsel. I then received followup contact from HUD, which was clear and unequivocal. That contact indicates that HUD would consider such a provision to be an unreasonable restraint on the alienation of the property, and would therefore not approve FHA financing on any of the units in the project that were subjected to a Declaration of Covenants that contained such rental restriction language. As it was explained to me, HUD was concerned with both the issue of constitutional provisions regarding restraints on alienation of property, and with the practical consequence of insuring mortgages in a project that would John Hinzman August 17, 2004 Page 2 experience reduced marketability as the result of the restrictive language. Given the circumstances, I would therefore request that the matter be placed on the agenda for the City Council meeting of September 7, 2004 for action that would amend the Resolution to delete the rental restriction, Condition No.8. Please advise me by way of a copy of the' Council agenda that the matter has been placed on the September 7, 2004 meeting. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. RKH:cks cc: Mark Gergen (~ia fax) Erin Houck (via fax) Bill Johnson (via fax) V~~L'r , Ribhard K. Hockin -' RLvJ ~!F{(O'i VI-6 Memo To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Werner and City Council John Hinzman, Planning Director September 7,2004 Amend Resolution - Site Plan Review #2004-24 - South Oaks 2nd Addition Townhomes - Century Drive - MW Johnson REQUEST The City Council is asked to amend the conditions of Site Plan approval for MW Johnson Construction on Lots 1-14, Block 6, SOUTH OAKS OF HASTINGS 2ND ADDITION as follows: Remove Condition No. 8 - ''That language proposed by the builder restricting the long-term rental of units within the development be added to association documents for this area" The Council approved the Site PlaD'at the July 19, 2004 meeting. - RECOMMENDATION -' .-.,7 Deletion of the language is recommended. The inclusion of the rental restriction would preclude the property from being eligible for FHA financing (please see attached letter from Richard Hocking). According to Dakota CDA, FHA financing is commonly used by individuals purchasing townhome units. FHA generally provides a lower down payment requirement and mortgage insurance premium than a conventional loan. Some lenders work exclusively with FHA loans. The inclusion of rental restriction language was brought forward by the developer, independent of any request by the city. ATTACHMENTS . Amended Resolution . Letter from Richard Hocking HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 09- -04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AMENDING CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION No. 07-25-04 APPROVING THE SITE PLAN OF MW JOHNSON TO CONSTRUCT TOWNHOMES ON LOTS 1-14, BLOCK 6, SOUTH OAKS 2ND ADDITION, HASTINGS, MN Council member adoption: introduced the following Resolution and moved its WHEREAS, MW Johnson has petitioned for approval to construct 12 townhomes on property legally described as Lots 1-14, Block 6, SOUTH OAKS 2ND ADDmON, Dakota County, _ Minnesota; and - .~~ WHEREAS, on July 19, 2004, The City Council adopted Resolution No. 07-25-04 approving the Site Plan request subject to ten (10) conditions; and WHEREAS, MW Johnson has petitioned for deletion of Condition No.8 of the Site Plan approval as follows: 8) That language proposed by the builder restricting the long-term rental of units within the development be added to association documents for this area. WHEREAS, MW Johnson has stated the inclusion of Condition No.8 will preclude the property for FHA financing eligibility. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Council hereby approves the deletion of Condition No.8 of Resolution No. 07-25-04 approving the site plan request ofMW Johnson. All other conditions of Resolution No. 07-25-04 shall remain in effect and binding. Council member Schultz moved a second to this resolution and upon being put to a vote adopted by all present. Ayes: Nays: Absent: ATIEST: Michael D. Werner, Mayor Melanie Mesko Lee Administrative Assistant/City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the 7th day of September, 2004, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. Melanie Mesko Lee Administrative Assistant/City Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (JWH) _ 101 4th St. East . .,Hastings, MN 55033 -' RICHARD K. HOCKING, P.A. LA W OFFICES 10657 165TH STREET WEST LAKEVILLE, MN 55044 A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIA nON TELEPHONE FAX (952) 432-8129 (952) 241-3861 August 17, 2004 John Hinzman Community Planning Director City of Hastings 101 Fourth Street E Hastings MN 55033-1955 RE: My client, M.W. Johnson Construction, Inc. South Oaks of Hastings 2nd Addition Dear John: This correspondence is being sent to you at your request in regard to the Resolution Number 2004-24 approving South Oaks of Hastings 2nd Addition, Lots 1 through 14, Block 6. I recently received and reviewed your correspondence of August 3, 2004, which contained Condition N6. 8 in regard to the restriction on long term rental of properties. Since I have not seen such a provision in my 25 years of practice on a Minnesota Declaration, I made some phone calls prior to incorporating that provision - into a Declaration of Covenants. " One of my calls was to the local office of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. From there, I was referred to the Colorado office of the General Counsel of HUD, which has regional jurisdiction over the State of Minnesota. I discussed the provision with one of the senior personnel that handles HUD project financing approvals. As is the processing channel with HUD, he then discussed the matter with senior counsel. I then received followup contact from HUD, which was clear and unequivocal. That contact indicates that HUD would consider such a provision to be an unreasonable restraint on the alienation of the property, and would therefore not approve FHA financing on any of the units in the project that were subjected to a Declaration of Covenants that contained such rental restriction language. As it was explained to me, HUD was concerned with both the issue of constitutional provisions regarding restraints on alienation of property, and with the practical consequence of insuring mortgages in a project that would -- John Hinzman August 17, 2004 Page 2 experience reduced marketability as the result of the restrictive language. Given the circumstances, I would therefore request that the matter be placed on the agenda for the City Council meeting of September 7, 2004 for action that would amend the Resolution to delete the rental restriction, Condition No.8. Please advise me by way of a copy of the Council agenda that the matter has been placed on the September 7, 2004 meeting. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. V~~['r , Ribhard K. Hockin RKH:cks cc: Mark Gergen (via fax)'" Erin Houck (via fax) Bill Johnson (via fax) .. (bJ ~llq(of VI.7 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: September 7,2004 Subject: Approve Subrecipient Agreement - CDBG Agreements (Dakota CDA) REQUEST The City Council is asked to authorize signature of the attached subrecipient agreement between the City and Dakota CDAin order to utilize CDBG funds. ATTACHMENTS . Subrecipient Agreement " ,/ SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CDA) AND THE CITY OF HASTINGS THIS AGREEMENT entered into this _ day of , 2004 by and between the Dakota County Community Developm~nt Agency (the "Grantee") and the City of Hastings (the "Subrecipient"). WHEREAS, the Grantee is the administering agency for funds received from the United States Government under Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, to Dakota County as an Urban Entitlement County under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and WHEREAS, the Grantee wishes to engage the Subrecipient to assist the Grantee in utilizing such funds. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration"ofthe mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the Grantee and Subrecipient agree as follows: I. TIME OF PERFORMANCE. Services of the Subrecipient shall start on the first day of July 2004 and end on the la~t day of June 2005. However, this Agreement remains in effect until it is replaced by a subsequent Subrecipient Agreement. 11.- NATIONAL OBJECTIVES.. The Subrecipient will provide documentation to certify that the activities carried out with funds provided under this Agreement (the "Activities") will meet one or more of the CD8G program's national objectives, including: (1) benefit low/moderate income persons, (2) aid in the prevention or elimination of slums and blight, and (3) meet community development needs having a particular urgency, all as defined in 24 CFR Part 570.208 (Exhibit A). III. FEDERAL COMPLIANCE. The Subrecipient agrees to perform all the tasks enumerated below in a manner which will meet or exceed the terms and conditions imposed upon the Grantee in administering the CDBG program and in the terms and conditions stated in the Authority to Use Grant Funds effective July 28, 2004; the Dakota County Anti-Displacement Policy; and the Subrecipient's portion of the Activity Statement included in the annual Action Plans, copies of which are attached as Exhibits 8, and C, and D respectively. The Subrecipient shall carry out each Activity in compliance with all Federal laws and regulations described in Subpart K (Exhibit E) of the regulations with the exceptions outlined in Section III (E) below. A. Citizen Participation. Comply with all HUD citizen participation requirements. Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 2 of 11 B. Federal Requlation Compliance. Ensure program compliance with the following federal regulations: 1. Historic properties (the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966). 2. Noise (HUD Handbook 1390.2 Noise Abatement and Control, Department Policy, responsibilities and standards, 1971). 3. Flood Plail'J (Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973). 4. Coastal Zones and Wetlands. 5. Air9uality (Clean Air Act). 6. Water Quality (Federal Water Pollution Control Act). 7. Wildlife Act (Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act). 8. All other Federal Acts or Regulations and requirements of HUD, including but not limited to Executive Order 11246 prohibiting discrimination in employment contracts, and directing government contr~cts to establish and maintain affirmative action. C. Acquisition and Relocation. Ensure that all Activities comply with all aspects of Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Pglicies Actpf 1970 (as amended) and the Dakota County Anti-Displacement Policy. D. Compliance with Federal Labor Standards. Ensure compliance on all applicable Activities with Davis-Bacon and Related Acts, the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, the Copeland Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act as outlined in 29 CFR Parts, 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 (Exhibit F). E. Environmental Review. The Grantee shall insure that all Activities comply with environmental review requirements, unless otherwise stated herein. This would include the Grantee's completion of a study and assessment of each Activity in conformance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1967. The Subrecipient shall furnish the Grantee a copy of any updated environmental report. The Subrecipient shall carry out each Activity in compliance with all Federal laws and regulations described in Subpart K of the regulations, except that: 1. The Subrecipient does not assume the Grantee's environmental responsibilities described at 9 570.604; and Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 3 of 11 2. The Subrecipient does not assume the Grantee's responsibility for initiating the review process under the provisions of 24 CFR Part 52. F. Compliance with Equal Opportunity Requlations. The Subrecipient shall maintain compliance with Section 3 of the Housing and Community Development Act Women and Minority Business requirements, Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Act, Executive Orders and Civil Rights Act of 1964 as specified in 24 CFR 135.20. G. Compliance with Common Rule and Uniform Administrative Requirements. The Subrecipient shall comply with all applicable requirements at 24 CFR Part 85 and 24 CFR 570.502. (Exhibits G and H). H. Conflict of Interest. The Subrecipient agrees to abide by the provisions of 24 CFR 570.611 with respect to conflicts of interest, and covenants that it presently has no financial interest and shall not acquire any financial interest, direct or indirect, which would conflict in any manner or degree with the performance of services required under this Agreement. (Exhibit F). I. Conditions for Reliqious Orqanizations. In accordance with 24 CFR 5.109 and Federal Register Volume 69, Number 131 published July 9, 2004, faith-based organizatfons are eligible, on the same basis as any other organization, to participate in CDBG programs and activities, provided that the organizations do not engage in any inherently religious actiyjties, such_as worship, religious instruction, or proselytization, as part of the programs or services supported by direct CDBG funds. (Exhibit I). _J J. Recordkeepinq. The Subrecipient shall: 1. Maintain records as outlined in 24 CFR 570.506 (Exhibit H). 2. Keep complete and accurate records of all program claims and disbursements. The Subrecipient shall prepare a Request for Reimbursement Form (Exhibit J) listing all claims certified and paid by the Subrecipient for Activities and submit this Form to the Grantee. 3. Ensure compliance with 3-day rule requirements once funds are received by the Subrecipient from the Grantee. 4. Provide the Grantee with information necessary to submit reports as outlined in 24 CFR 570.507 (Exhibit H). 5. Submit to the Grantee quarterly progress reports of any outstanding Activities. The status report ,shall be submitted to Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 4 of 11 the Grantee by or before the fifteenth day of October, January, April, and July. 6. Maintain records in accordance with its retention schedule or for three years after the completion of the Activity, whichever is longer. Such records shall be made available for audit or inspection at any time upon request of the Grantee or its authorized representative. K. Proqram Income., Program income is defined in 24 CFR 570.500(a) with requirements set forth in 24 CFR 570.504 (c). The Subrecipient shall return all program income immediately to the Grantee except for revolving accounts approved by the Grantee. Program income will be disbursed according to the Program Income Policy attached as Exhibit K. (See Exhibit H for 24 CFR 570.500 and 570:504) L. Reversion of Assets. Upon the expiration of this agreement, the Subrecipient shall transfer to the Grantee any CDBG funds on hand at the time of expiration and any accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds. Any real property under the Subrecipient's control that was acquirector improved in whole or in part with CDBG funds in excess of $25,000 shall be: 1 . Used to meet one of the national objectives in 24 CFR Part 570.208 (Exhibit A) until five years after the Subrecipient no longer participates in the CDBG Entitlement Program; or 2. Disposed of in a manoer that results in the Grantee's being . - reimbursed in the amount of the current fair market value of the property less any portion of the value attributable to expenditures of non-CDBG funds for acquisition of, or improvement to, the property. (Reimbursement is not required after the period of time specified in paragraph III (L)(1) of this section) .' M. Audit 1. The Grantee shall have full access to all records relating to performance of this Agreement. 2. The Subrecipient shall submit an audit or, upon prior approval by the Grantee, a copy of their financial statements for the fiscal years the grant is in effect. Audits must be performed by a Certified Public Accountant in accordance with generally accepted auditing principles and if applicable, OMB Circular A- 133. All audits or financial statements must be submitted to the Grantee within 180 days of the close of the Subrecipient's fiscal year. Failure of the Subrecipient to comply with these requirements may result in the withholding of future payments. Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 5 of 11 IV. OBLIGATIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES. The Subrecipient agrees to assume and carry out the Grantee's obligations and responsibilities under: A. The Cooperation Agreements entered into between Dakota County and the Subrecipient concerning the Dakota County CDBG Program; and B. The Supplemental Agreements to the aforementioned Cooperation Agreements entered into between Dakota County and the Subrecipient. V. BUDGET. This Agreement replaces all previous Subrecipient Agreements and is applicable to prior fiscal year Activities which are not yet completed and to new Activities programmed for CDBG Grant Year 2004. It is understood that the Funding Approval/ Agreement (HUD 7082) which is attached hereto as Exhibit L is based upon a 2004 program budget reflecting receipt of $2,058,000 in CDBG Funds from HUD of which $83,773 is allocated to the Subrecipient as the maximum amount available for Fiscal Year 2004. The Subrecipient's total 2004 allocation will be administered by the Subrecipient and is covered by this Agreement. VI. SCOPE OF SERVICES. As required in 24 CFR 570.503 (Exhibit H), the Subrecipient will be responsible for the administration of the following Activities under this Agreement, including ongoing Activitie~ from previous fiscal years and Activities programmed with 2004 CDBG funds. FY 2004 funds will be committed to Activities after July 1, 2004. All funds wi!1 be expended to meet timeliness requirements specified in Section VII (A) and Exhibit M of this Agreement. Activity 1-Residential Fire Protection Assistance .> A. Description Assistance for fire protection improvements to residential rental units in downtown mixed-use buildings. B. Budqet FY 2004 Funding: $36,500. Activity 2-ResidentialFire Protection Assistance Proiect Administration A. Description Project administration for Residential Fire Protection Assistance activity B. Budqet FY 2004 Funding: $3,500 Activity 3-Bliqhted Propertv Clearance A. Description Clearance of spot blight focused on areas adjacent to downtown. Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 6 of 11 B. Budqet FY 2004 Funding: $40,000 Activity 4-Bliqhted Property Clearance Proiect Administration A. Description Project administration for Blighted Property Clearance activity. B. Budqet . FY 2004 Funding: $3,773 Activity 5-Assessment Abatement A. Description Assessment abatement for low- and moderate-income homeowners for city infrastructure improvement projects. B. Budqet FY 2003 Funding: $37,000 Remaining balance as of 6/30/2004: $5,088.68 Activity 6-Assessment Abatement Proiect Administration A. Description ' Project administration for assessment abatement activity B. Budqet. _.. FY 2003 Funding: $3,000 Remaining balance as of 6/30/2004: $1,421.91 VII. GENERAL CONDITIONS. The following shall apply to the Subrecipient and this Agreement: A. Timeliness. HUD requires that sixty (60) days prior to the end of the Grantee's program year, the amount of non-disbursed CDBG funds be no more than 1.5 times the entitlement grant for its current program year. The penalties for failing to meet the 60-day spend- down requirement potentially affect all jurisdictions in the county. Reallocation of funds, if necessary, will be done according to the CDBG Contingency Plan attached in Exhibit M. B. Independent Contractor. For the purpose of this Agreement, the Subrecipient shall be deemed an independent contractor, and not an employee of the Grantee. Any and all employees of the Subrecipient or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the Subrecipient under this Agreement, shall not be considered employees of the Grantee; and any and all claims that mayor might arise on behalf of said employees or other persons as a Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 7 of 11 consequence of any act or omission on the part of said employee or the Subrecipient shall in no way be the obligation or responsibility of the Grantee. C. Hold Harmless. It is further agreed that the Subrecipient shall defend and save the Grantee harmless from any claims, demands, actions, or causes of action arising out of any act or omission on the part of the Subrecipient, its agents, servants, or employees in performance of, or with relation to, any of the work or services performed or furnished by the Subrecipient I,mder the terms of the Agreement. It is further agreed that the Sub recipient shall notify the Grantee of any actual or potential claims against the Grantee that may arise as a consequence of any of the work or services performed or furnished by the Subrecipient under the terms9f this Agreement. D. Transfer. The Subrecipient shall not assign any interest in this Agreement and shall not transfer any interest in the same, whether by assignment or subcontract, without the prior written consent of the Grantee. E. Amendments. Any alteration, variation, modification, or waiver of the provision of this Agreement shall be valid only after it has been reduced to writing and duly signed by both parties, with the exception of Administrative Amendments defined as any revision to the original annual budget that ' 1. Does not create a new Activity; 2. Does not-delete an -existing Activity in its entirety prior to any expenditure; and 3. Does not involve the reallocation of more than $75,000 per Activity. F. Waiver. The waiver of any of the rights and/or remedies arising under the terms of this Agreement on anyone occasion by either party hereto shall not constitute a waiver of any rights and/or remedies in respect to any subsequent breach or default of the terms of this Agreement. The rights and remedies provided or referred to under the terms of the Agreement are cumulative and not mutually exclusive. G. Liabilitv. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the Subrecipient shall not be relieved of liability to the Grantee for damages sustained by the Grantee by virtue of any breach of this Agreement by the Subrecipient, and the Grantee may withhold any payments to the Subrecipient for the purpose of set-off until such time as the exact amount of damages due the Grantee from the Subrecipient is determined. H. Entire Aqreement. This Agreement, as well as Exhibits A through M, which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, shall Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 8 of 11 constitute the entire agreement between the parties and shall supersede all prior oral or written negotiations. I. HUD Approval. It is expressly understood between the parties that this Agreement is contingent upon the approval of HUD and its authorization of grant monies to the Grantee for the purpose of this Agreement. J. Violation of Law. Should any of the above provisions be subsequently determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be in violation of any Federal or State Law or to be other wise invalid, both parties agree that only those provisions so adjudged shall be invalid and that the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. K. Discrimination. The Subrecipient agrees to comply with all Federal, State and local laws and ordinances as they pertain to unlawful discrimination on account of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, or age. L. Applicable Laws:~The Subrecipient further agrees to comply with all Federal, state, and local laws or ordinances, and all applicable rules, regulations, and standards established by any agency of such governmental units, which are now or hereafter promulgated insofar as they relate to the: Subrecipient performance of the provisions of this Agreement. M. State Law. T!1is Agreerylent shall be interpreted and construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota. j N. Suspension and Termination. In accordance with 24 CFR 85.43, (Exhibit G), suspension or termination may occur if the Subrecipient materially fails to comply with any of the provisions hereof, and the award may be terminated for convenience in accordance with 24 CFR 85.44. Such termination shall occur thirty (30) days after receipt by the Subrecipient of written notice from the Grantee specifying the grounds therefore, unless, prior to such date, the Subrecipient has cured the alleged nonperformance of the provisions of this agreement. VIII. CERTIFICATION FOR CONTRACT, GRANTS, LOANS AND COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS. The Subrecipient certifies, to the best of its knowledge and belief, that: A. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the Subrecipient to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, and officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 9 of 11 contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. B. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress, in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the Subrecipient shall complete and submit Standard Form - LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. C. The Subrecipient shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this agreement was made or entered into. Sub"mission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this agreement imposed by section 1332, title 31, U.S. Code. Any per~on who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 fqr'each such failure. IX. NOTICE. Written notice to be provided under this Agreement shall be provided as follows: " For the Grantee: Mark Ulfers, Executive Director Dakota County CDA 1228 Town Centre Drive Eagan, MN 55123 For the Subrecipient: Dave Osberg, City Administrator City of Hastings 1 0 1 4th Street East Hastings, MN 55033 Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 10 of 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantee and the Subrecipient have executed this Subrecipient Agreement on the date indicated below. City of Hastings The Subrecipient By Dakota County CDA The Grantee :..:.:...... . ~f).11 l ~ / :':':':::':'.:.::::::' By _+-~_k""-1 /' ~:.:.~~. . Mark Ulfers . :::.::..:.:.:......:. -. .:. a.a........ .... Its Executive Director . . .'. .:. '.:::::::: . . Its Date of Signature Date of Signature t{ /;q 104 , . -' Hastings 2004 Subrecipient Agreement Page 11 of 11 EXHIBITS A. 24 CFR Part 570.208 B. Authority to Use Grant Funds C. Dakota County Anti-Displacement Policy D. Activity Statement-FY 2004 Action Plan E. 24 CFR Part 570.600-614 (Subpart K) F. 29 CFR Parts 1,,2,5,6, and 7 G. 24 CFR Part 85 H. 24 CFR 570.500-507 I. Federal Register Vol. 69, No. 131 J. Request for Reimbursement Form K. Program Income and Reuse Policy L. Funding Approval/Agreement (HUD 7082) M. Contingency PlanlTimeliness of Expenditures .. VI-8 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: Kris Jenson, Associate Planner Date: September 7,2004 Subject: Resolution'. Request to set new Home Occupation License Fee REQUEST On August 16, the City Council approved an ordinance adopting new home occupation license regulations. Because the license issuance will now include a neighborhood mailing and a longer term prior to renewal,Staff is asking that the fee be changed to reflect the changes. Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. HISTORY .' Under the previous requirements, all hQme occupations were required to pay a $50 ~'application fee as well as a $50 annual fee. Staff is proposing to establish a home occupation license fee of $250. This takes into account the three year renewal time, as well as the Staff and overhead costs related to preparing reports for Planning Commission and City Council and preparing and mailing notice to all property owners within 350 feet of the proposed home occupation. This would only be for home occupations falling under the Type II category. There would be no fee for those home occupations which fall under the Type I category. ATTACHMENTS . Resolution CITY OF HASTINGS Dakota County, Minnesota Resolution No. 09-_-04 RESOLUTION SETTING HOME OCCUPATION LICENSE FEES WHEREAS, recent changes in City ordinances have changed the process for obtaining a home occupation license, and WHEREAS, the City of Hastings now requires home occupations that fall under the Type II category to be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council, as well as to notiJy surrounding property owners, and WHEREAS, the City of Hastings has determined that it is necessary to establish new home occupation license fees. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS; That the following home occupation license fee is hereby in effect: Type I License Type II License No Charge $250. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF HASTINGS, MINNESOTA, THIS 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 20Q4. Ayes: Nays: Absent: Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, City Clerk (SEAL) VI.9 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor Werner and City of Hastings Councilmembers Melanie Mesko, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk September 1, 2004 Bill Mesaros Resignation Council Approval Requested: Accept notice of resignation from Bill Mesaros, Building Official/Code Enforcement Supervisor, effective September 21,2004. Backaround Information: Bill Mesaros has submitted a letter of intent to resign on September 21, 2004. Staff has begun the recruitment process for a replacement and recommends acceptance of Bill's resignation. VI-10 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Mayor Werner and City Councilmembers Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk September 2, 2004 Request for Extension of Unpaid Leave of Absence Council Action Reauested: Approve extension of an unpaid leave of absence for Marsha Katasonova, with the following conditions recommended by staff: 1. An unpaid leave of absence be approved for the period of September 8- September 20,2004 for Marsha Katasonova; 2. Marsha Katasonova be responsible for all insurance costs while on the unpaid leave of absence and during FMLA leave; 3. Marsha Katasonova willlJ.Qt accrue any sick, vacation, or other benefits while on an unpaid leave of absence; 4. Marsha Katasonova must return to work on September 21, 2004, and must provide medical certification, before returning to work, of her ability to return to work and perform the es~ential functions of her job as code enforcement inspector. : To: City of Hastings, City Council Cc: Melanie Mesko Lee and Bill Mesaros From: Marsha Jones Katasonova Date: September 2, 2004 RE: Request to continue leave To Whom It May Concern: I am requesting an extension of unpaid leave, which started July 7, 2004 until September 20, 2004, per my physician's orders. I was unable to get an appointment with my physician for a work release earlier and this appointment will be taking place on September 9, 2004. Thank you for your consideration. 26 August 2004 To: ,Mayor and City Councilmembers From: Tom Kusant, Facilities Maintenance RE: Historic City Hall building repairs In our continuing efforts of building maintenance excellence, we have been investigating the repair/replacement of broken stone stairs at the north entrance of City Hall. The problem is that four steps ,have broken due to the improper installation of the handrails. When the handrails were installed, they were not set properly and as a result the stone has been cracked and broken due to the handrail posts rusting. The original stone has been matched and approval for replacement has been received from the Historical Preservation Committee. All four steps will have to be custom cut, when installed they will be drilled and sleeved properly for reinstallation for the handrails. I have a proposal for $5,740 to do the work listed above. I am requesting that the council approve a transfer of funds from the Facilities Maint. ERF to the City Hall Repairs and Maint. account. The current balance in the ERF is $54,000. Sincerely, Tom Kusant Facilites Maintenance ~~ RECEIVED AUG 2 6 2004 VII-1 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: Kris Jenson, Associate Planner Date: September 7, 2004 Subject: Public Hearing - City of Hastings -Zoning Ordinance Amendment #2004-43 - Amend Section 10.05 Application of District Regulations. REQUEST The City Council ordered a public hearing at their August 16th meeting to consider the attached amendment to the Zoning Ordinance relating to Accessory Structure and Building Requirements. The existing ordinance allows for the construction of one accessory structure 120 s.f. or less, and one ,accessory structure over 120 s.f. up to 1000 s.f. The proposed ordinance change would address the issue of attached versus detached accessory structures. RECOMMENDATION ~ The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item at their August 9, 2004 _ meeting. No one spoke in favor of or against the ordinance change. The Planning Commission had little discussion before recommending approval of the change on 4-0 vote. HISTORY In April of 2001, the City Council approved a City Code amendment to more closely regulate the size of accessory structures in residential districts. The intent was not to prohibit homeowners from having sheds/detached garages on their property, but merely to limit the overall size and number of such structures to ensure that sufficient open space was maintained on each lot. The same ordinance also ensures that no more than 35% of the rear yard is covered by structures and that the structures meet minimum setback requirements and setback distances from other structures. In researching other codes, our language was very similar to what other cities permit. The reason why the numbers of 120 square feet and 1,000 square feet were chosen is due to definitions and requirements within the building code. The building code defines detached structures over 1,000 square feet as 'storage buildings' (versus a garage) and requires engineered plans for review prior to issuance of a building permit. Also, the building code does not require a building permit for storage structures 120 sq. feet and under, though Hastings has chosen to require a zoning permit to ensure the structures meet setbacks and are not placed within easements. The most common 'complaint' regarding this ordinance is that if a homeowner only has a detached garage (no attached garage), that they are then limited to one shed no larger than 120 s.f., whereas someone whose home has an attached garage may build both the shed up to 120 s.f. and a detached garage up to 1,000 s.f. PROPOSED CHANGES Staff is proposing to modify the ordinance to permit a homeowner without an attached garage to construct up to two accessory structures (shed or garage) provided that the total of both detached structures rnay not exceed 1,000 square feet. All accessory structure standards - lot coverage, setbacks, distance between buildings, etc. - must still be met. For example, under the current ordinance, if a property owner has a 24' x 22' detached garage (for a total of 528 sq. feet), they would be allowed to only construct a shed no larger than 120 sq. feet. With the proposed change, that same homeowner would be allowed to build a second shed/garage no larger than 472 sq. feet. ., If the proposed language is adopted, the ordinance change would also involve some 'clean-up' of that particular section - there, is an overlap in subdivision numbers and the location of the accessory structure ordinance would be moved within the section to a more logical location. , One other minor language change involves how the maximum size is calculated. The -current language states "Total S.tructure Si?e", but has been ambiguous about whether that :,is foundation size or total building size, if the structure has any storage space above. Staff has interpreted the size to be maximum foundation size, but we also understand that the term "Total Structure Size" is open to interpretation. Therefore, Staff is proposing to change the term "Total Structure Size" to "Maximum Foundation Size" to remove the ambiguity. ATTACHMENTS · Ordinance Amendment ORDINANCE NO. , SECOND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS, MINNESOTA AMENDING CHAPTER 10, SECTION 10.05 OF THE HASTINGS CITY CODE PERTAINING TO: APPLICATION OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Hastings as follows: Chapter 10 of the Hastings City code is amended as follows: SECTION 10.05. APPLICATION OF DISTRICT REGULATIONS SUBD. 2A. ACCESSORY BUILDING AND STRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS Accessory BuildinQs and Structures shall meet the following requirements: 1) No accessory buildinQ shall be erected in any required front or side yard fronting a public street or right of way. 2) No accessory buildinQ or structure shall be constructed on any lot prior to the time of construction of the principal buildinQ to which it is accessory. 3) Accessory structures. except fences meeting the requirements of Sec. 10.05 Subd. 4. shall not be placed in any easements. 4) All accessory structures. except fences. shall meet the setbacks listed in Table 1. 5) All accessory structures shall be setback at least six feet from all other structures. 6) At grade accessory structures such as basketball courts. patios. dog kennels shall meet the accessory structures setbacks listed in Table 1. These accessory structures are not included in the total allowable square footaQe allowed. as 10nQ as the total impervious surface of the lot does not exceed 35% for the rear yard. The rear yard shall be measured from the rear buildinQ line to the rear lot line. 7) Accessory structures shall have weather resistive exterior finishes that are durable and architecturally compatible with and similar in desiQn. color. and material to the principle structure. 8) The sidewall height of accessory structures shall be limited to ten feet. unless architectural elements are incorporated such as exterior materials chanQe or buildinQ offset to reduce the massiveness and starkness of the wall. 9) The height of any accessory structure shall not be taller than the primary structure 10) Accessory structures 120 square feet or less require a zoning permit. Structures over 120 square feet require a buildinQ permit. 11) The followina Table (Table 1) shall determine the number, size and setbacks of accessory structures. In addition to the accessory structures listed in Table Lona accossory storago structuro up to 120 sq. foot in sizo, and swimmina pools meetina the requirements of Chapter 4 Sec. 4.15 Accessory Structures Subd. 2 Swimmina pools are permitted. Table 1 Accessorv BuildinQ/Structure Number. - Setbacks - Size. and Setback Standards +etaJ Maximum Property Number of Foundation Side Corner Rear Zonina Structu res Structuro Size Side - a A R-1. R-2, R-3, R-4, R-5 1 1 ,000 sa. ft. Q .1.Q Q with attached aaraae - b R-1. R-2. R-3, R-4. R-5 2 Combined total Q .1.Q Q without attached aaraae 1 000 sa. ft. R-6 1 1 000 sa. ft. 5 10 5 Multi-Family Site Site - - Commercial! Plan Plan - - Office Districts Review Review Site P~n Site Plan Industrial Districts Review Review a. Garaqes shall be setback 20 feet from the riqht of way. b. Residential properties with an attached aaraae are also permitted an accessory storaae -- structure under 120 square feet in size. SUBD. 3. Yard Area Regulations. No yard or lot existing at the time of passage of this Chapter shall be reduced in dimension or area below the minimum requirements set forth herein. Yards or lots created after the effective date of this Chapter shall meet at least the minimum requirements established by this Chapter. SUBD. 4 Fences and Walls or Hedges. 1) Location. Fences are permitted, but shall not extend into public right of way. Notwithstanding other provisions of this Chapter, fences, walls and hedges are permitted in any yard, including a required yard, or along the edge of any yard, provided that no fence, wall or hedge shall extend into public right of way. Homeowners are responsible for establishing the location of property lines and demonstrating their location upon request of the inspector. 2) Materials. All fences built or maintained on a residential property shall be constructed of materials capable of providing a finished appearance on the outward side visible to the public. All materials used to construct the fence shall be sound materials, resistant to rot, and capable of accepting and maintaining a visually attractive appearance. The fence shall be constructed in such a manner as to be capable of resisting the design wind loads for structures as defined by the state building code. 3) Hazardous fences and walls. Hazardous fences and walls such as barbed wire, electric, chain link with barbs exposed, and walls with protruding sharp edges thereof, and other fences and walls designed for or likely to cause harm to persons are declared hazardous and are prohibited in the City, except as follows: conventional barbed wire fences with barbs exposed are allowed with permission of the Council by simple resolution in Commercially zoned areas, and are allowed without permission of the Council in Industrial and Agriculturally zoned area. Any fence constructed in violation of this section after the effective date shall be brought into compliance or removed as determined by the Planning Director. 4) Height Restrictions. The maximum height of any residential fence installed within the City of Hastings is 6 feet. Fences installed around swimming pools from ground up must be a minimum of 4 feet high and non-climbable with a self-closing, self-latching gate. Maximum height of all fences shall be incompliance with the city zoning code or as approved by the Planning Commission. 5) Special Consideration/Corner Lots. Fences that extend into front yards of corner lots MUST NOT impair traffic visibility. No fence or hedge shall be over 30" in height located within 25 feet each direction from a property corner fronting a street right of way..See drawing below. 6) Covenants. The City of .Hastings does not enforce the private covenants of subdivisions. Homeowners should always check the covenants in their area for additional fence requirements. 7) Permits. A zoning permit is required for all fences installed in Hastings. .- - SUBD. 4ft.. Assessor}' BuilEling and Structure Requirements Accossory Buildings and Struoturos shall moot tho following roquiromonts: 1) No acoossory building shall bo oroctod in any roquirod front or sido yard fronting a public streot or right of way. 2) No 3ccessory building or structure shall bo oonstructod on any lot prior to the time of construction of tho principal building to which it is acoossory. 3) Acoossory structuros, excopt foncos mooting tho requiremonts of Soo. 10.05 Subd. '1, shall not bo plaood in any oasomonts. 4) /\11 accossory struoturos, oxoopt foncos, shall moot tho setbacks listod in Tablo 1. 5) /\11 aooossory struoturos shall bo sotback at loast six foot from all othor structuros. 6) I\t grade acoossory struotu res suoh as baskotball oourts, patios, dog konnols shall moot tho aooossory structuros sotbacks listod in Tablo 1. Thoso aocossory struoturos aro not inoludod in tho total allowablo square footago allo',.'od, as long as tho total imporvious surfaoo of the lot doos not oxceod 35% for tho rear yard. Tho rear yard shall bo moasurod from tho rear building lino to the roar lot lino. 7) ^ccossory structuros shall havo 'Noathor rosistivo exterior finishos that are durable and architecturally cemp3.tible '",'ith and simibr in design, celer, 3.nd material to the principlo structure. 10) Tho sidewall height of accessery structures shall be limited to ten foot, unloss architoctural elomonts are incorporatod such as oxtorior matorials chango or building offsot to reduco tho massiveness and starknoss of tho waJ.h. 11) Tho hoight of any accessory structuro shall not be tailor than tho primary structure 10) Acoossory structures 120 square foot or loss require a zoning permit. Struotures ovor 120 squaro foot roquire a building pormit. 11) Tho following Tablo (Tablo 1) shall dotormino tho numbor, sizo and sotbacks of accossory structuros. In addition to the aocossory structuros listod in Table 1, one accossory storago structure up to 120 sq. foet in sizo, and s,.a,imming pools moeting tho requiremonts of SEC. 4.15 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES Subd. 2 S'Nimming pools. Tablo 1 J.ccessory Building/Structure Number, Setback Size, and Setback Standards s - Proporty Numbor of +etaJ SiEIe Cornor Rear: .... . Structures Structure Size ~ - - A - - - - - R 1, R 2, R 3, R 4, ;, ~ -+ -1 nnn"...,.. ~+ ~ .w ~ , , R-6 -+ -1 nl'\l'\ ~~ ":... ~ .w ~ , Multi Family Site Site - - -- Commorcial! J2IaR ~ - - - Offico Distriots Roviow Roviow - - - Sito Plan Sito Plan Industrial Districts Re'lio'.\' Roviov: - - - * Garagos shall bo sotback 20 foot from tho right of 'Nay. Source: Ordinance No. 494, and 497, Second Series Effective Date: April 21, 2003; July 7, 2003. SUBD. 4-. 5. Erection or More than One Principal Structure on a Lot. In any district, more than one structure housing a permitted principal use may be erected on a single lot provided that yard and other requirements of this Chapter shall be met for each structure as if it were on an individual lot. SUBD. s.. 6. Exceptions to Height Regulations. The height limitations contained in Section 10.1 O-District Use Regulations, do not apply to spires, belfries, cupolas, antennas, water tanks, ventilators, chimneys, or other appurtenances usually required to be placed above the roof level and not intended for human occupancy except as otherwise allowed by the City Council. SUBD. e.. 7. Structure to Have Access. Every building hereafter erected or moved shall be on a lot next to a public street, or with access to a City allowed private street or driveway and all structures shall be so located on lots as to provide safe and convenient access for servicing, fire protection and required off street parking. SUBD. h 8. Deleted in entirety 11-3-97 (Adopted as a part of Newly adopted Chapter 18) Recreational Vehicle Storage - Parking & Storing Certain vehicles - Misc. Material equipment storage. SUBD. 8. 9. Deleted in entirety 11-3-97 (Adopted as a part of Newly adopted Chapter 18) Recreational V.ehicle Storage - Parking & Storing Certain vehicles - Misc. Material equipment storage. SUBD. ~ 10. Deleted in entirety 11-3-97 (Adopted as a part of Newly adopted Chapter 18) Recreational Vehicle Storage - Parking & Storing Certain vehicles - Misc. Material equipment storage SUBD. -1-Or 11. Yard Mainte'nance. In all districts, landscaping and fences shall be constructed and maintained so as not to be unsightly or present harmful health or safety conditions. SUBD. +1-.-12. Towers and: Antennas ALL OTHER SECTIONS SHALL REMAIN UNCHANGED ::'ADOPTED by the Hastings City Council on this ih day of September 2004. Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant! City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of an ordinance presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the of , 2004, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative AssistanV City Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (KKJ) 101 4th St. Hastings, MN 55033 VIII-A-1 MEMO To: From: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor and City Council Tom Montgomery September 1, 2004 Appeal Restriction of Fencing in Ponding Basin Easement - 1336 Eagle Bluff Drive Enclosed is a request from Linda and Rich Myklebust, 1336 Eagle Bluff Drive, requesting permission to extend a proposed fence 10 to 12 feet into a ponding/drainage/utility easement that runs through a large portion of their backyard. The Myklebust's permit application to construct a fence in the easement area was denied by Planning and Public Works staff. I have enclosed a copy of the development grading plan for this area and photos of the Myklebust's back yard with lines approximately denoting the easement boundary and proposed fence location. STAFF RECOMMENDA nON I am recommending denial of the Myklebust's appeal. A fence in the ponding basin area may impede maintenance operations - normal and/or emergency activities. Although a 20 ft. wide drainage and utility easement straddles the property line on the west side of the property, the location of the storm sewer outfall may require access from another location, possibly across the backyards of the properties abutting the pond. In addition, fences tend to define ownership and privacy. Subsequent owners of the property may not realize that a substantial easement lies within their fenced backyard, creating unpleasant situations when access is needed or additional encroachments are installed within the easement areas. If Council wishes to approve the appeal, I would recommend that approval include the following conditions: 1. The fence must be an open type structure such as a chain link fence that will easily permit water flow through the fence. 2. The property owners must enter into an agreement with the City that is to be recorded against their property acknowledging that the fence encroaches into a drainage and utility easement and that the property owners are responsible for all costs associated with removal and replacement of the fence should the City need to remove the fence for access to the easement area. 3. The property owners shall pay the cost of preparing the agreement and recording the agreement. - CITY OF HASTIN6S I ,:~ ~::gg I ji IIJii'~1 I III/lf,) ~ALL CHAIN , J I,ll JI/ f'v ~CE I ('/ //111/1/ A :>.,~ 'I I I 1/11 I I ," _-~-j===::::._JIJIIIIJ l -- '-- - ~ ------_:::. :;:.~.......- - - - __ / /1/ II, :::.-- -:... -----...:- -=-:- -::::.:;:::..-....... - - - -- _11// .. ;::==:.::--=::....~..............------- //// \ "'-~"'-~~bc}--r=~1jJ h ~~'> . -...............- .....-1~ "",h :--~'" ...,~ -=-'--~ - ..:............ --:;J. ""'./ :J~ " '-.' ---;or... '~Ap..-i~~ ~. -O,TAt:l~1'I -- :;m- - l:I~K'faL~ _- - - - -756- :j"J "'---. ----- 'I ~- ........rw INv 751.57-- " " July 7, 2004 To Whom It May Concern: Our names are Linda and Rich Myklebust, we live at 1336 Eagle Bluff Dr., and we would like put up a chain link fence in our backyard for our pets. We applied for a permit and were ~pproved, however with the restriction that we could come out 17 feet from our house, because there is a drainage/utility eas~ment running through our backyard. We also have a deck on the back of our house; therefore, the fence would be only 4 feet from our deck. All this considered, putthg a fence up for our pets would be impractical given the restrictions. Our request is that we can put the fence 10-12 feet into the easement without restrictions. The fence will not impede any water flow, as it will run parallel to the drainage ditch. No access to the culvert on the north side of our property will be stopped either. We don't feel this will hinder anything whatsoever, and will only allow us (and our pets) to enjoy our property fully. ;, Once again, we are asking ;for a variance t6 place our fence within the easement, without any restrictions now or in the future. Thank you, ~1A- Rich and Lind~ebust . 1336 Eagle Bluff Dr. . . cc. Tom Montgomery, Public Works Director Tumey Hazlet, Ward 2 Council Member City Council -'.--"'"- VIII-A-2 MEMO To: From: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor and City Council Tom Montgomery September I, 2004 Appeal Order to Remove Retaining Wall and Fill in Ponding Basin Easement- 1328 Eagle Bluff Drive Enclosed is a request from Don Hartinger, 1328 Eagle Bluff Drive, appealing City staff s order to remove a retaining wall and fill that was constructed in the backyard over a drainage and utility easement for the ponding basin. By placing fill in the ponding basin, Mr. Hartinger has reduced the design capacity of the ponding basin, though the consultant who designed the ponding basin has calculated that the fill will result in only a 'l2 inch rise in the flood level of the pond. . I have enclosed a copy of the development grading plan for this area and photos of the Hartinger's back yard retain~ng wall and fill. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A certificate of survey is required for all.new home construction to verify that lot grading meets the development grading plan. The lot is then surveyed to ensure that grading was completed according to the approved plan. Mr. Hartinger's retaining wall and fill were placed after the lot grading had been checked and approved. Developers or homeowners who want to change the lot grading from the approved development grading plan have been required to have the consultant who designed the development grading plan submit the modifications for review. In this way, the designer is able to account for impacts the modification may have on the rest of the development grading design, and the City does not incur liability for revising a grading design. While aware that an easement crossed his backyard, Mr. Hartinger has stated that he was unaware that his backyard slope was part of a ponding basin. A building permit is not required for small landscape retaining walls similar to the one installed by Mr. Hartinger. STAFF RECOMMENDATION I am recommending denial of Mr. Hartinger's appeal. There are over 30 ponding basins throughout the City with hundreds of homes backing out onto these ponding basins. Any request to fill part of these ponding basins to create more usable yard space would be denied by staff in order to protect the integrity of the storm water system. - ern' OF HASTIN6S If Council wishes to approve the appeal to allow Mr. Hartinger to keep the existing retaining wall and fill in the ponding basin, I would recommend that Council consider the following options: 1. Require Mr. Hartinger to work with the designer of the development's grading plan to modify the plan and require Mr. Hartinger to excavate material from the City's property on the north side of the pond to replace the storage volume lost through the construction of the retaining wall and fill, or 2. Require Mr. Hartinger to enter into an agreement with the City that would be recorded against his property. Under this agreement, Mr. Hartinger would indemnify the City from any claims resulting from the modification of the ponding basin. 3. The Council minutes should reflect that Mr. Hartinger's request represents a unique situation that does not set a precedent to be followed that will permit other property owners to place fill within ponding basin easements. From: Don R Hartinger [dharting@comcast.net] Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2004 6:05 PM To: Thomas M. Montgomery Subject: Boulder wall in backyard Part 1 Tom: Consider this my written request to appeal the removal of the boulder wall at 1328 Eagle Bluff Drive. Attached is a Power Point presentation with pictures of our backyard and the basis used when we landscaped our yard. I will send the presentation in two parts so we don't have email issues. In addition, I will be sending a 3rd email with the engineering calculations on pond basin impact performed by James R. Hill Inc. Don R. Hartinger 1328 Eagle Bluff Drive Hastings Minnesota 734-306-6000 1328 Eagle Bluff Drive Boulder Wall -Owners consulted documentation given: Certificate of Survey. Drainage easement was assumed/portrayed as lot drainage, from front to back of lot. ~ -Amount offill & boulders: approx. 50 yd3 - Engineering calculation on the impact of fill & boulders to the pond basin resulted in a 0.6 in. increase in pond height,. using 92.6-yd 3 offill in a 100 year flood model. Analysis provided by James R. Hill Engineering Consultants -Owners intention was to add usability to backyard while maintaining/improving the natural beauty of the surroundings. ~ Q) ~ r/'J ~ o Q) ~ u ~ .~ t Q) U .,"',.... ....--.. / \ ) / '~; trJ J C"'-J .....) ...~; 1'... ~ I ~ 0:: Z VI ~ ~ '- {5 ~eJ: ~ a; IZ 0 f" ~ \" I.L ) 0;-'" VIII-B-1 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: Kris Jenson, Associate Planner Date: September 7, 2004 Subject: Adopt Ordinance - City of Hastings -Zoning Ordinance Amendment #2004-43 - Amend Section 10.05 Application of District Regulations. Please refer to the complete Staff report and proposed ordinance under the Public Hearing section. .. VIII-B-2 Variance - 532 ih Street West City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 1 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: Courtney Wiekert, Planning Intern Date: September07,2004 Subject: Kenneth Warner - Variance #2004-47 to vary from the front yard setback and to enlarge a non-conforming structure to construct an addition to the rear at 532 W ih Street. REQUEST Kenneth Warner seeks a 13' variance to thj3 20' front yard setback requirement as well as a variance to enlarge a non-conforming structure (rear addition) at 532 W. 7th Street. RECOMMENDATION O. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the variance to vary from . :-the front setback and to enlarge a non-conforming structure to construct an addition to the rear property of his house at the August 23, 2004 Meeting. The Commissioners granted the variance based on the following criteria: . 1) That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. 2) The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10, by denying the applicant the opportunity to construct an addition to the home meeting all zoning setback requirements.. 3) That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant; the home was constructed in 1880, prior to adoption of the zoning ordinance. There was limited discussion on the construction of the house addition. The Commissioners asked about the structure found in the rear of the property and if it would Variance - 532 ]'h Street West City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 2 be removed for the construction of the addition. Mr. Warner believes it is a cistern and would like to remove the structure prior to construction. A condition concerning the structure was added. ATTACHMENTS . Location Map . Elevation . Site Plan . Application BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The use conforms to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated U-I - Urban Residential (1-3 units/acre). Zoning Classification . The subject property is zoned R-2 - Medium Density Residential. Single Family homes are a permitted use in the R- 2 District.: _ Adjacent Zoning and land Use The following land uses abut the property: : Direction North East South Existina Use Zonina Single Family Home R-2 - Med. Dens Res. Single Family Home R-2 - Med. Dens Res. W. th Street Single Family Home R-2 - Med. Dens Res. Single Family Home R-2 - Med. Dens Res. Comp Plan U-I - Urb Res. U-I - Urb Res. West U-I - Urb Res. U-I - Urb Res. Existing Condition The proposed site slopes at the rear of the existing house and there are a few trees in the rear property to be removed. The owners are proposing to build an unfinished basement and main level within the slope. PROPERTY REVIEW The house was constructed in 1880 and the current homeowners did not cause the structure to be non-conforming. Street improvements were constructed in 1954 with a 15' Boulevard from the curb to the front property line. The addition would be constructed in the rear the house and would go no closer to the front property line. Variance - 532 7'h Street West City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 3 Tree Plan There are a few trees to be removed in order to constructthe addition. The removal of the trees is not significant since the property has a sufficient amount of trees on the property. There is concern with a bur oak tree adjacent to the east. The tree is located on the neighbor's property and the critical root zone is on Mr. Warner's property, the only visible access to the rear of the property. The City Forester has visited the site and the following issue must be addressed. 1) Provide an alternate route to the rear property or a tree preservation plan in order to protect the neighbor's tree. VARIANCE REVIEW Minimum Setback Requirements . ~ Minimum setback requirements for:structures in the R-2 District are: Area Setback Front 20' Side 7' Rear I 20' ,<:, Review Criteria The following criteria have been used as findings of fact in granting variances to zoning provisions: A. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. B. The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10. C. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from actions of the applicant. D. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special Variance - 532 7'h Street West City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 4 privilege that is denied by Chapter 10 to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. No non-conforming use of neighboring lands, structures, or buildings in the same district, and no permitted or nonconforming use of lands, or buildings in other districts shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance. Notification of Adjoining Property Owners Notification was sent to adjoining property owners. No comments have been received at this time. The Planning Commission will be notified of any comments received prior to the meeting. RECOMMENDATION A motion to recommend approval of the variances for 532 ih Street West to construct an addition to the City Council with the following conditions: 1) Provide an alternate route to the rear property or a tree preservation plan in order to protect the neighbor's tree prior to construction. 2) A building permit is required pr.ior to construction of the addition. 3) The new addition shall comply with the current setbacks of the zoning ordinance. 4) Approval is subject to a qne year Sl;InsetClause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. 5) Removal of any underground structure to accommodate the addition as required by the building official. -..' _.-;.........-:'.~ , ' ...n............n..-.. .-.~--......--~ : __..nn_u.n_h____n. .n':-_"'___"~ : , , . . -..~_..n__...~._: _ ..n..__n...n . . : :: ._n_________......----.. .._.!.u___._...~n: ...__________________.... n__n..--u...-- , ' .:.---.---......-. - ..._...-~-_..-":'.. .-..--------.-..--.- n_._u____n_..__n..___ ---.;..._-_._---~ ____....___~~h_____n__ u_~-.------n.i i \ \ In. . ' . ' ....... --f :r: en --f :;c m m --f ~ ~ \ , ' : : : ~n__..__~.. , ,..n_n._n .n________ ,_.._..oo..__n__~ :_;_;nu________________ :' : U<_.Ln_u______ ____n.._ ;_-;--_u_n___ . . ' : ~n.....n~..-- In :: r.--oo---...- , 1)....... """ - 0" "0""" CD 0 ~3 r~ -.0 ::] ::] CD_ " , , " , " " ," .oo~_.____...~:_.~ ' . 1'l--uoo--.--oo- __u.: Ii : . l!~-mmm___mm//. < ~I ~ ~D) m 0 r "0 '. . CJ '. ::s ::5. en " ::ssuw m '. m r CD::sN en ~ -0 :::0 m CD ,....n~ ;::;: CC ::rCD"'" (1) CC II) 0 s::: ~ c: 0 II) c: CD :e;;:o::r r (I) Co en C/I 5" :J 0 oo.z~ (jj g fC a. C/I D)CDcn - c,- ~.Q ; ::] ::sC tr1 ~ ~m ,.... AUG 1 G 2004 ~~/i;tt Lt), LJ/ t" tV -,--.:~.:-':::::'-':::'~-:;::~::--=::.----- .---;-/ ---.........--......... ------ ----- ---:-:,-:-"';:-'- --------......:; -=:.=:.--~-- .:~ ~ 8 I II' .. .-..- J..,. -J'"..'-........ II.rl'"oA-.. . -- - ...;;- . _____ "t.. .-~J;;:-' .-"'::.;.~ :~:::.l_ ./.;:yo' . ......:::..., ,. -';;'-.- ...-.',,'- --. .....~ "- ,or...- - -'- ... t8 ~ ..... ..- .... .- ...... . ~. .' .--.- ..- ,..' .- ' ~:, ,'...,',' "1 .. -.. ... -- .- -r---r-- t ' .: 1'---,1-,- tr,'-,::-,.~-<~:.'_-,: fB EI ---.'---/--1-- " " I T- o ._ ..' i/ ..-' l ...,..-...-r----r- -,r--r--/--1. .' f-- i " I .---T-- I _ --,..L- ,.1 ,I ,'I -~- ~~ ~ -f T-+-+-" i I ~~__ ." l l II -r---r---L ~~ -:: _:::-=:~::: _--- _ --z-.;:Z. r=-.,L~'---L " I - "'-"_' '_. -.... .::..~ ---~ ......- -~:z: Z::--" ,,....-~ -+----J-- I "-. -... ~_--- _~- _-- ~ :::---~ ._'- . -:.-"-_ " ---:L--- J -~ ._~~~~-- .._:;:-=~.. ~:'--=L' 7---~...-.- .... L_~ --.l -----r ---"4 ~_- ~ .-- ~ ......- --......:: ,.- ----.::::. ,,~..L ,.' ---- -- -..,....-- ~ ~--- ---.." .,~ --~- .-' ----./ ,-- .. ./ ___._ _ ...,..-- ~__- ../--___ ..r ...r-___ ..." .." -_ l -,;.....____- ~.--- _---::..-=-=----~------.- ~.--.,---=-~~-Z--/L----:1---I-----.--t--=;.~- .~.. _----.~ -=....:::- _..-"'-- -.....- ...-... L---_ .../ /. --_ ~.' ~ f.:::- .' .- / ______-..... .::>f"-.. -- \ ":='"-- .'''' --.....-- / '~'" ~-:::: /_-~---" _---r=--., .-...- I ~_ \ ,..-.- \, ----..,.,,:::.. '....... ./ -..... -~ " -, I - --. -r----. ........+---; ;.. _ _:.~_ . _ " 1 I .... _ _..~.r"""--Il. ... _, ,I .,. --..-....,r..::.r-..1 _. .---~... -",!-.... ~- -....-,_.." -----:: ----:-_... r;:::::::":::::--- )" '"i(. ". ~... ./' " .............. :)o(!;'~::.r::.~' .~><. .- "'. ~ ~ ....... ....... ._~- .....~ ... "I'( B ..s..............'..:.... i - \ii ....... .'~'~ .(",. ::'r .,.-i....-..~- " 7" ...... ,. .' .' .' , :'/ . - __........-,...,?i<i- -. - ---_:.::;;,~~:~" \, , ; .' :.' , -~; t .~ '''l , . t.-.__..~ .' M/)il "". ". ._----~~.-:::~ ... ----~-~-... -'. ':1,,-, .~..............'......... .~ ~.. . ." .. " ..23...........-..........1 ....- --. .'~ .~ ~.:'" ,~. "~.. .....,....."...,..,'- I .l I I ...... 'l. t , t j I I j /; !J(1) V i'(' ./-. . - ....- - J..-.r"........... ""...-~:: -.: ---... - :':':"::r- .....~~:.~~~~p;...,.:::;:;:.::';. i=i-;-;r L . '~'! i : j . . .. . . '.' -.. .... --- ...~ . .... '\'-<J ", '. '. '. . - j, \ . ":-- \, ...., \ \"'" :..... ":";: .-.-4-:! " 'j .., " ' , , -'\ \, .~ \'" ..,."\ ............ ,...... "'::.:.'1. ' , " \. '-, .... ,'co"""';::-4 'oJ ...... ....... ..I.... ....::._.,~.._., ::---'.;--- \ .... \" \. ~ .~~~,..- ~~~, :"~:':'.'".<~.-:sl ~ ~. ". ~,,,'.:.,. ..... ~ ...,,~ . - ..---. \, ',,, '"" ..- ". " '\ ....... , . -...,..:.-;:.~:tt --~.,,: ~.,_..' .~. .1.. "--..." ... I \"" .... ~'..." "'.. "\. \ ..~...;::...::_-___...':'~:~:-~._:_2~.:_.~:.:w::.~ I _..-.,:~- . ......." "',\::.w...~_, _ '-'. \"------,. '. .- ---t---t " "_.."'" .. _~_~.-:.;..r,",_ I "'_. . " " .' -... - -"'--. . ..~ ,- - --.. ....' ~-,.._... fLJ4.""- (/','v/ (/ie (,f,/ ./\~-------- ----- -------~~\ J~':" ...:::::::::::. - ~.:.:-..:..-~-. -- - -- - - - ~.>~::....' ~ '1'.... ':::.. .....-.... -~------"'- ... ,,'i:... ~. --~ -- '--.... It1 ~f ~ w . - .. -- - J...-.,,,-n....... - .r.r..~.... .--- -_.: ---........- s.'.'........... , i. . --, ~.--.~ ~..... ,,'.:.,. .... _::.""':., -~~~---...-=-'=:,.=:-"::::~:...... ~ ,-- -~~--~;:~~-~'-.:-;:,,:-~:~:~~~~:-~~-<<~, __-'_ _', .__- ~_ " . _..:::..:...._- 4... .... ~.._. _------:3...~.~-----~: --::-~... ..... -<:.:_---2~:-.~--..:"'=::.. >_--:<:~:n.-. " ...... _---- _,",,~,jo&_--- <'v ..... '. ------- .... .~. '. '. "0 k-- ........ ...._..:.I.t.-...-...-_..:..~~ '. -.., ------.::;~:-:.------- ....... . .---~_. .... '. .--.::---- .------- .......... - -2~.:--.-----"""-.::..~---- "" ..)..::- -~ ~ . . : _."---,,,~ ~ - ..~~._....,Jf'_ _ ...::....-:.""....-- ---:;-rl~__ -,-..-'" -" ~,;~ . - -- . . -,' . ... ". .11 -'. .. .. -;',................. --..-...... ~.. I >'-'t fluffY - ~.. ., f" lo .... - . - - --~I -- ---- l ,. 1u. y~r IJ..; / West 7th s: \ I I I I \, I I ,,\I I .~-t-----~-----~!---r _..:r:-.:c ~ \ ; ;{ tL'H1 . H i I L "'-~-~ i r--1'~ J'.r......r-' ( ()v< V~,,<l'j ) [UFO ___n__~_._______ - - -- --- -~ --~~ Ii .~U! , .11,' ' .....;\'1_ .j-'<J B,I'\t, ''11 \ I ~ ~I , ....... I '\I \.~ I "-> I ! I I I I ")..\ I ~1 (. ~7Z Lv '7 fA,l ~-j I I-! 14"? 77 i1 j:; / 411 A/ )7J)"77 ) (j-------- .~ ;~.... 10'..Q"~"''''0f<0 ; Gatage M '7i1') I J "j ......:.,,; ~.! --- Lor 5 icE (Q ~7 X I S- c !ET/j/lLI<. S (C')~Y/ "7 I $IIJES ;20 I ~nMf- ,;llJ ' ;JFk-K - /lei-il. (.LP ~-----... 7/ pn.t.t" 71). h W{~{- IV ( E/hT ~ Si tiE' h~() {p~O . rle.' Fr FII.-I ~ . n-.. ,}.O (,{ vi 1/11') '1 A:.i;' fj4)eh1(;?:,Vl /Ii/If tf7() V/ ~/J ~[; I X r77 '-rJuhidlR t.fftp ~ ..'Cltie ;:::. J1-/r~/1 .0 1"'.1,:]<:: LAND USE APPLICATION #cX;Gi-l- 47 CITY OF HASTINGS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 4th Street East, Hastings, MN 55033 Phone; 651.480.2,350 Fl!ix: 651.437.7082 Address of Property; ,5,;J;2 it: Ja/ti -<)'-r' fIA51l/Yt.'y /)JJl/ , Legal Oescription of Property: bill/, fJ/dLI< t7~ /JLlct/j-)o~ 5~rzJ 3 } /~ Applicant: //' " // 'i' ___ Name ,f) ,;l<1/J tV""! ~ / t2 r/;1f1/ j:F Address / 57}" I,>' '7~t ,<:;r ,tI~~t/'1-t'i rf/f/;/ ,C.::D? ~ Phone t'!'':;-'- fit);! /)~) jf~i -t.:.,uL. Fax 111 n -t{ Rn.'~ '7f' '1 f) EmailIA/ClJtl..7t1-/..h;.../&.h-.:c.LS?u / Description of Request (i"Clu~e site plan, sur;ey. and/or pl~tAf applicable): .J ~, '. ., ( "-1" h' '/!< (; r) tl n LL- -Ie /' t-L flt1!. rn ().?-j f) (j! & r/7!}i-J ; S I f7 f).tz l} fleX O-P Jhe- 11.N; 8-P (<; f,-J- hti. [ic 7~' (;Ylr: -It/,t~..e.. J -f>'D"Io-f-',.,,( <J-t,u.. 1/ hl"!t.I~-e- I.r 7F1 rl?f-~Dc..(c If d.()/le.."~r- I" . Check applicable box(es): ,,').X Final Plat Minor Sub. Rezone Spec. Use Variance Annexation EAW Prelim Plat - Site Plen TOTAL: . Owner (It different from Applicant): Name Address Phone Fax Email Note; All fees and escrow amounts due at time of application, $600 $500 $500 $500 $250 $500 plus legal expenses $500 plus $1000 escrow $500 piUS escrow: , - Under 1 b acres: $3060 ($500 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - Over 10 acres: $6000 ($1000 Planning + $5000 Engineering) $500 plus escrow: .0 - 5,000 5.1.: $1500 (Engineering) - 5,000 - 10,0005.1.: $2500 ($500 Planning + $2000 Engineering) . 10,000 - 50.000 s.f.: $3250 ($750 Planning +- $2500 Engineering) -50,000 s.f. +: $4000 ($1000 Planning + $3000 Engineering) . Administrative Lot SpHt Camp Plan Amendment House Move Lot Line Adjustment Vacate ROW/Easement $50 $500 $500 $50 $400 Signature 01 Applicant Date Signature of Owner Date M /7!('j"7'h /- /?;1/0f Applicant Name a TitJe - Please Print Owner Name - Please Print ,t;'J/"i' cltt fj,l, tL 1t(J',.;J{/" :;r --Ztl.IL C' '" 'f . Official Use Only File 1# ..:2oc)'.1-41 Fee Paid ' 4I2312~ Rec'd By: Receipt '# Date Rec'd App. Complete ,m~ ;!u 'S II ,i I .!~:~ ii, ">; '--,~- U i')<".' Ii/ ' LU -..;r:=:~i I:') :: .!i ..; t,,' .,il.! ,) ~LG If; 2004 'if;: TOTAL P.02 ":.) , . ; ....~. ,;' "- ~. ~..-.:=:. :'~-=::::--::::J HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS APPROVING A VARIANCE FOR KENNETH WARNER JR. TO ENLARGE A NON- CONFORMING HOUSE AT 532 7TH STREET WEST. Council member its adoption: introduced the following Resolution and moved WHEREAS, Kenneth Warner Jr. has petitioned to vary 13 feet :trom the 20 foot minimum front setback requirement of the R-2 Zoning District as regulated under Section 10.26, District Lot Regulations of the City Code to expand al\ existing non-conforming structure located 532 ih Street West, legally described as Lot 11, Block 42, ADDITION NO. 13, Dakota County, Minnesota: , WHEREAS, on August 23, 2004, review was conducted before the Planning Commission of _ the City of Hastings, as required b~ state law, ~ity cp.arter and city ordinance; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission determined that the following hardship criteria exists to justify granting the variance: 1) That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings in the same district. 2) The literal interpretation of the City Code would deprive the applicants of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the terms of Chapter 10, by denying the applicant the opportunity to construct an addition to the home meeting all zoning setback requirements. . 3) That the special conditions and circumstances do not result :trom actions of the applicant; the home was constructed in 1880, prior to adoption ofthe zoning ordinance. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOLLOWS: That the City Council hereby concurs with the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approves the variance request of Kenneth Warner Jr. as presented to the City Council subject to the following conditions: I) Provide an alternate route to the rear property or a tree preservation plan in order to protect the neighbor's tree prior to construction. 2) A building permit is required prior to construction of the addition. 3) The new addition shall comply with the current setbacks of the zoning ordinance. 4) Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. 5) Removal of any underground structure to accommodate the addition as required by the building official. moved a second to this resolution and upon present. Council member being put to a vote it was unanimously'adopted by Ayes: Nays: Absent: ATTEST: : Michael D. Werner, Mayor -~ Melanie Mesko Lee Administrative Assistant/City Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the ih day of September, 2004, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. Melanie Mesko Lee Administrative Assistant/City Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings 101 4th St. East Hastings, MN 55033 VIII-B-3 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: September 7, 2004 Subject: Lawrence Builders - Site Plan Review #2004-21 - Two 36 unit Condominium Buildings - Whispering Lane & Crestview Drive REQUEST Lawrence Builders seeks Site Plan Approval to construct two 3 story, 36 unit condominium buildings (72 units total) and 4 garages on +/- 4.0 acres located west of the intersection of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive in Williams 1 st Addition. Approval to construct 90 units on the ~site was approved as part of a Rezoning, Planned Residential Development and Plat ~pproved by the City in 1986. Action on the request was tabled at the August 2, 2004 City Council Meeting. The . Council directed the Planning Committee of th~ City Council to meet with the developer ..to find a development compromise. . The applicant has agreed to an extension of the 60 day approval until 5:00pm on September 8, 2004. PLANNING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL The Planning Committee of the City Council met with the developer on August 16, 2004. The Committee directed the applicant to provide further materials changes to segment the building and further landscape screening. REVISED PLANS The Developer has provided revised architectural elevations, landscape plan, and typical section views. Architectural Elevations - The revised elevations include more color and siding material changes as well as addition of window mullions. Landscape Plan - 27 Colorado Spruce Trees measuring 10 feet high at planting have been added to the site plan to further screen the site. Section Views - 3 perspective views of the building have been submitted. RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission - Deny The Planning Commission voted to deny the request by a 4 - yes (Greil, Schmitt, Alongi, Mcinnis); 1 - no (Hollenbeck); 1 - abstention (Twedt) at the June 28, 2004 meeting. Commissioners voting no cited the following reasons: 1) The site plan does not meet the landscaping and berming conditions placed upon the 1986 Preliminary Plat approval. 2) Increase in traffic from the development would cause a negative effect on the neighborhood. Staff - Approve Staff recommends approval of the Site Plan subject to the conditions enclosed in the memorandum. Staff contends the lanqscaping proposed meets site plan requirements and provides greater tree planting size~'(3" caliper, instead of 1.5") The applicant has also designated native planting areas consisting of shrub and understory vegetation. The increased landscaping was required in lieu of berming. Because the site is higher in _ ejevation than surrounding areas, berming would have a minimal effect on screening. The .2003 traffic study for the area was revise-d to Include High School traffic; all streets and intersections operated at an acceptable level of service during am peak, pm peak and average daily traffic (operating at Level B or better). The proposed 72 units is less than the 90 units approved for the property. Staff will prepare a resolution upon direction of the City Council. ATTACHMENTS · Location Map . Plan Set · Updated Traffic Study Memo - Benshoof and Associates. . Traffic Count Reports - 4th Street and Comparable Roads · Letter from Foster & Brever, Attorneys - June 28, 2004 · Property Value Comparison - Whispering Lane Area - submitted by Larry Christianson 275 Whispering Lane · Letter from Jan Hanson - Neighboring Resident · "Objections to Proposed Project on Whispering Lane" - Larry Christianson 275 Whispering Lane Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 3 . Application MEETING HISTORY The following meetings have taken place since application submittal: May 19, 2004 - Neighborhood Meeting On May 19, 2004 a neighborhood meeting was held to present the plan to the public. Approximately 20 people att~nded the meeting. June 14, 2004 - Planning Commission Meeting The Planning Commission discussed the request at the June 14, 2004 meeting, however no formal action was taken by the Commission at that time. Several residents spoke in opposition to the request. Commissioners directed staff to provide further information on the following: · Sidewalks and trails · Parking · Verify timing of Traffic Study to ensure inclusion of High School. · Architecture ' · Tree Preservation - June 28, 2004 - Planning COlJ1mission .Meeting . J The Planning Commission voted to deny the request. Staff provided the following . information based upon the June 14th meeting requests. · Sidewalks and Trails in the Neighborhood - Whispering Lane is not part of the sidewalk and trail plan. The sidewalk and trail policy calls for placement only along collector roads and highways, or to provide links to community amenities (schools, parks, etc.). Whispering Lane is 36 feet wide (curb face to curb face); wider than the 32 foot standard currently in place, providing additional width for bikes and pedestrians. · Parking - Adequacy On Site and On Street - Parking meets the 2 space per unit minimum requirement (144 spaces) of the Zoning Ordinance. Parking is allowed on both sides of Whispering Lane in the area. Whispering Lane is 36 feet wide (curb face to curb face); wider than the 32 foot standard currently in place. The City has just enacted changes to the parking code to limit on street parking to no more than 24 hours. Any change to restrict parking could be approved by the City Council after review by the Public Works Director. · Architectural Issues - The applicant's architect David Harris has submitted additional information including a color rendering of the building and analysis of conformance to the Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 4 City's Architectural Standards. He has also included property information and pictures of adjacent residences. · Traffic Study - Benshoof and Associates, author of the original Traffic Study in July, 2003 has re-analyzed traffic along Featherstone, 4th Street, and Whispering Lane to include traffic from generated by the High School. They have concluded that their original projections on level of service are unchanged even with the school traffic. Please see attached memo for further information. Traffic Count reports for 4th Street and other comparable streets have also been included for comparison. · Tree Preservation Plan - The grading plan has been modified to include preservation of nine significant trees at the northwest corner of the property. The City Forester has reviewed the plans and they have addressed the comments of his previous reviews. He notes that given the density previously approved on the property (prior to Tree Preservation Standards) it is virtually impossible to meet all of today's tree preservation guidelines with the approved density. July 6, 2004 - City Council Meeting - Item tabled and directed to the Planning Committee of the Council to review fir}dings of fact for denial. July 27,2004 - Planning Committee Meeting - Findings of fact for denial discussed by Planning Committee .,August 2, 2004 - City CouncifMeeting .:.. Item tabled to Planning Committee to discuss ., development changes to make project more compatible with the neighborhood. August 16, 2004 - Planning Committee Meeting - Committee sought further materials\color changes and further buffering. Comments from Neighbors The following comments have been voiced during various meetings: · Incompatibility with the neighborhood. · Increase of traffic on Whispering Lane, Featherstone Road, and 4th Street. · Affect on property values · Will units be owned or rented · Can city services, fire, police, utilizes serve the site adequately. · Positioning of driveway entrances facing homes on Whispering Lane. · The area has changed since the original approval in 1986. · Sidewalks and trails · Parking · Have other housing options been examined for the site? · What about upscale town homes? Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7. 2004 Page 5 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The subject property is guided U-II- Urban Residence (4-8 units per acre) in the Hastings Comprehensive Plan. Williams 1 st Addition was approved as a Planned Residential Development allowing for density on individual lots to exceed that of the plan, provided the entire development is within the required density. Overall density for Williams 1 st Addition (including Hillcrest Townhomes, and excluding the church) is 5.9 units per acre and consistent the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Classification The site is zoned R-3 - Medium High Density Residence. Multiple Family residential structures are a permitted as part of a Planned Residential Development in the district. Adjacent Zoning and land Use'" The following land uses abuts the site: Direction North East Existina Use Single Family Res Whispering Lane Single Family Homes Potential 39 Units Townhomes Zonina A-Ag\R-3 Comp Plan U-II - Res 4-8 .~ South West R-3 - Med\High " R-3 - Med\High R-3 - Med\High U-II - Res 4-8 U-II - Res 4-8 U-II - Res 4-8 History Williams 1 st Addition was originally platted in 1986 as mixed use development including 177 residential units. 90 units were originally approved for the subject property. The original plan has been modified over the years as follows: · Twin home units originally platted along the east side of Whispering Lane were replaced by Single Family Homes. The revision eliminated 7 of 14 planned units. · Lots 1-3, Block 3 (south end of development between Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive) were replatted as Hillcrest Townhomes. The revision eliminated 4 of 22 planned units. · Site Plan approval to construct a 30 unit building was granted by the City Council on July 21, 2003. It does not appear that the developer, Jon Whitcomb, will construct the 30 unit building, and may seek approval for a lower density townhome development. Existing Condition The existing site is forested. The site slopes approximately 25 feet west to east. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 6 Proposal Two 36 unit, 3 story buildings, and four 18 stall garages are proposed. The entire site would be graded resulting in a great loss of trees. SITE PLAN REVIEW Tree Preservation Plan The site is forested with nativ~ trees including oaks, basswoods, and cedars. 65 significant trees (6" deciduous or greater, 12" coniferous or greater) have been identified on the site. The applicant proposed to save nine significant trees at the northwest corner of the site. The City Forester has reviewed the plans and they have addressed the comments of his previous reviews. He notes that given the density previously approved on the property (prior to Tree Preservation Standards) it is virtually impossible to meet all of today's tree preservation guidelines with the approved density. .", Building Setbacks Building setbacks are determined through site plan review for Planned Residential Development projects. Building setbacks are acceptable, and are as follows: Direction Minimum Proposed Setback Front Yard Setback - WhisperinQ Lane 35 feet North Side Yard Setback "7 SinQle Family,- 30 feet South Side Yard Setback - Future 30 units? 30 feet Rear Yard Setback-Summit Point Townhomes 30 feet Condo Buildings The condo buildings have been positioned to present the shortest sides to Summit Point residents to the west, and Whispering Lane residents to the East. Each building would contain 36 condominium units ranging from 1-2 bedrooms and 783 - 1,426 s.f. Garage Placement Four, 18 stall garages are proposed. The garages are located in close proximity to one another, but are separate buildings. Their placement creates a long 15' wide space between the garages which is difficult to maintain, and could be become and attractive nuisance. The following change should be made: 1) The separation between the four garage buildings must be modified in one of the following ways: a) eliminate the space by combining buildings. b) Access and drainage behind and between buildings must be eliminated in such a way to be Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 7 architecturally compatible with the buildings at the discretion of the Planning Director. Staff strongly recommends combination of the garage buildings to avoid this Although underground parking would be preferable to avoid tree loss and increase green space, the bedrock in the area just below the surface adds additional expense. Access and Circulation Two entrances are proposed on Whispering Lane. Access and circulation is acceptable with the following modification: 1) The driveway entrances must be placed to avoid headlight interference on existing homes and to achieve a minimum 150 foot setback from intersection if at all possible. Transportation Study - 2004 Update. Benshoof and Associates, author of the original Traffic Study in July, 2003 has re-analyzed traffic along Featherstone, 4th Stre~t, and Whispering Lane to include traffic from generated by the High School. They have concluded that their original projections on level of service are unchanged even with the school traffic. _Original Traffic Study .A transportation study was conducted by Benshoof and Associates as part of the 30 unit .: Williams Addition Site Plan last year. The evaluation included impacts of the 30 unit building, 90 unit building, and potential future development on the following intersections: · 4th Street & Whispering Lane · Featherstone Road & Whispering Lane · Site Access & Whispering Lane Capacity analysis was presented in terms of Level of Service (LOS), which ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. The study concluded that all intersections will operate a LOS of B or better under all traffic scenarios during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Therefore the proposed development will not create any serious negative impacts on level of service at the subject intersections. Parking The site meets minimum parking requirements. Parking is provided as follows: Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 8 Site 72 Condo Units aces Parking Lot Setback The Parking lot meets minimum setback requirements. A retaining wall along the west end would lower the parking lot 3-6 feet below the existing grade of the Summit Point homes to minimize traffic and noise interference. Pedestrian Access No new sidewalks or trails are proposed. Architectural Elevations Architectural elevations meet the City's Architectural Standards. The building incorporates both brick and lap siding. The longer, front and rear portions of the building incorporate brick below the first floor window. The vertical height is segmented by aluminum trim. Windows would incorporate decorative shutters. The horizontal plane of the front and rear is broken by decks. The plane is offset at the building corners. The sides of the building adjacent to Whispering Lane and Summit Point incorporate a much higher percentage of brick. The garage buildings incorporate similar materials with brick on the sides facing public view. . ,'Waste Enclosure . Two waste enclosure buildings are proposed between each of the garages. The enclosures must be enclosed on all four sides. Their proximity abutting the garage buildings may trigger additional fire rating separation. Landscape Plan The Landscape plan provides for a variety of plantings adjacent to building and throughout the site. Planting beds have been incorporated into the building design and along the top of the western retaining wall. The plan appears acceptable, however additional trees may need to be planted per the Tree Preservation policy to offset those removed. Lighting Plan A photometric lighting plan has been submitted. Lighting levels at the perimeter of the site are acceptable. All lighting must be downcast and shielded towards parking areas Signage Signage is not proposed. One monument sign not to exceed 50 square feet is allowed under the zoning district, subject to sign permit approval. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 9 The Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans have been forwarded to 8DM Engineering for review and comment. Review comments must be adequately addressed before the plan is scheduled for final review by the City Council. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control plan and Utility plan approval must be obtained by the Public Works Director as a condition of approval. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Approvals for the site in 1986 triggered a mandatory EA W to assess environmental impacts. The City Council reviewed the EAW and determined that the project would cause no significant impacts, and did not warrant a more comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be completed. The EAW required creation and adherence to an erosion control plan (now required by all developments). The applicant shall adhere to the EAW in construction of the site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Approval of the Site Plan request is recommended subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant must work with tl1le City Forester prior to site construction to evaluate areas for tree preservation. : 2) Any significant trees removed must be replaced per the City's Tree Preservation Policy as determined by.the City Forester. , 3) The separation between the four garage buildings must be modified in one of the following ways: a) eliminate the space by combining buildings. b) Access and drainage behind and between buildings must be eliminated in such a way to be architecturally compatible with the buildings at the discretion of the Planning Director. 4) The driveway entrances must be placed to avoid headlight interference on existing homes and to achieve a minimum 150 foot setback from intersection if at all possible. 5) All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 6) Final approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans by the Public Works Director, and reimbursement for any fees incurred in review of the development. The owner assumes all risks associated with the grading and utility placement prior to formal approvals. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 10 7) An orange snow fence must be installed around all trees identified for preservation on the Tree Inventory prior to commencement of any grading on site, and shall be maintained until final grade. The fence shall be installed out to the drip line of all trees marked for preservation. 8) An escrow account must be established for all uncompleted site items (including landscaping) prior to certificate of occupancy. 9) All landscaped areas must be irrigated. 1 0) All waste enclosures shall be enclosed on all four sides to fully screen the contents, and constructed with exterior materials to match the primary building. 11 )Submission of a phasing plan to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. 12)Submission of an electronic oopy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to recording of the Final Plat mylars. 13)Approval is subject to a one ye~r Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void ' .j tn ao.. tn CDC) :2-c "S in m~ "- CD t: U:J t:U) eM ~ I CUN ..oJ -c c:: ~ ~ en Q) .!!! :. .....J 1a ~.Q. ~ :3 ~ :. 1i B .... fi~BJ ~~~~~~~~~ '" .... OG} 0 0 f 101(9 10000 IDCD.....-('IfC"J"t_ ~ ~a:~OoooO...J:::a:~ d:a:: <> :$ O'!O~III!O'~OO ... tB rn tE tE tE rn~ ~ z*oo j ....... Q) ~ en i .~ '" . ,.~ !; '" I . '.4' €€"'~~ 'N\.! '~"'N11~I>'H Z"JZ xoa 'O'd L9"'<"'~W[~"J 'Hd '00l1li 1r;!~OOD.!!.nlm moo'll'il ~OODOOU~DCilfjg\ ~@@OO@@ ~@OO~lliJfAVA\WlJ 1~a1!4~JV spJeH 01 P!^ea g <{ CC\ a ill d) ): ~ ~ i= ~ ill -l ill t- ill ~I d)1 J-- ~ ~ '"J C'- ~ ~J ~ ~ ..Q~~ 'NW 'S9NI!SV'H ,q, X09 'D'd L9Ql'Q\WI~q 'Hd '001 'nooDUn iJUiI nDU@l@D~l!I @@@OO@@ ~@OO~lliJflWlJ 1~al!4~JV spJeH "1 P!^ea . ~~ ~ '<[ (i) Q IJJ (/) ): ,~ ~ t- ~ IJJ ..J IJJ ,IJJ Q (/) ">- oc ~ i IJJI IDa E-<~ rxJ~ rx:I~ :I:~ rJ) (lJo Z 0 ...... E--< U ~~ W Z en 0 ~...c:::. .....:! ...... E--< ......::: m ij-- ~ ...... ~'\S'\ U Q ....... Q ,.. iJ... 1~ >-< ~ ~~ E--< -+-' [J] ...... rJ) ;;2i < ....... ....::i ....::i ~ ~ ~~ d w- -.J\~ W - ~~ ->- >-~ ~! 5~ w ...r-- . =5 ~s U">::> '" Cf)Z 0;;2i ...... Z ~ .......p.::, E--<..., ....::i Cf) ~ r:q <;::J ::r::o ~U t.\1 O(\j ..., E--< >-< 0 0 E--<~ ....::i ....... (\j UQ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 11 a I ! ~ ~ ~ ~ :=0 QQ bO '"'... .~ <=i <=i ;; ~ '~'a ~~ ~ g! d !! "6D a ~ ~~ . t:: lfJ ~~ r.:1 u z 0' ~E ~ ~~ ~j %. Rj - ~ ~~ N I N~ -z= o ~ ~ ~ J ~ ...... ~ ~ - UJ ~ I ~ cJ":j I ~ 8 3 ,!i ~ j u);::; .3 ~" b::<... . f-S'~J,gh il~' I 1thd I 1'.;1, ~ is,i!; I' '"I<!X . ef ~I' I~:i ~ ~ _~.I r . ~~ :5 z ;1 ~ ~J!~1:>'" ::sa i ~ ~ Q< r.J.. ;~~~~ Ii ~ z p: :r:.. i!i .." ~ Q ~ < 000 ;; ~L m i i!' zE-< ~ .. 11 <z ~ 'a""~ g I!sjiJ ; !t. ~ ....~ :ad.IDID% S: tia8i o ~d o...~ ~ ~:.:''''!! -~ ~~ Ii ~I~ ~ . o~~ ~ Z ~ !i~~i d i!~ ; ~j!;1 J:z::IU 0 '" ~ ii-! 0...< - '" ~ iirJ <.... Eo< 1 !~!!~ ~5 ~5i uo... - e o..~ rJ)~ ~ = g ~I ~~~ ~ ~!~ Q ~ qO:: < ~* ~ ~~e: ~ ~d Z~ t-i~ <J:z::I +' I!! 1m~ ....:10:: I1J I ~~I!!-t) U~~ ~ ~ "~I ...... E-< z~iI !i! ~I~; CI.J I ~ r ;:g ~ !i~~! < ~ ..: COol JOt ~ ..-< \ \ ~ ...... L C\1 Eo< 3 ! .. ~ ii I ; I ~bl) bO on .~ 0:: 0:: h ~ '>.'- :i:i ~ ~:3 n .~ ... 11$ S!i ~~ 5: f~ r<1 u :z; ~ .~ ~H!1 ~j z~ n ~ -6 .J~ o < ~ ~ ~ :} ~ i II t I ;a II~ : d!ill I' ail! ~ il:il! . _ d r a ~ \!5 ~i ~i ~~ h ~~ " ~ Z r.:ift z< p,J.. !> ~~ ~ < ~ f;3~ el < ~ !I ~5 ~ .P-. i I~ 0 ~~ I~ i ~ dO ~ ~ ~ <0:: all i~ .~ ~E-< z ~h ~ ~ <z P::o 0 iII~~ '0 $; ~U - E-< ~~I U ~; - .z 0 ~~!! II!~ f~ dO 0 1;Iol!! iII~I!!~~ z_ < ~;~ ~;i!~ -UJ ~~~ Ii !~ ~O ~ <P:: rn !~i i~~~~ P::J:;i:I ..... d ~3 dll~~ UJ :dtj~ ~: :::21 < ~ U;idiU ~ ~ i li!;51~~1 ~ ; !~I!:I!! UJZ d:::21 ..... Z .~ E=: t' ~ UJ ~ jJ:1 < ;:J ::r: 0 I ~ ~U C\I o (tj ~ 15 · -I:: ~ E-< '" h >-< 0 Y. ~~ E-<~ 3 IE -(tj ~ . u~ " J!! ~ ~ ! 111 i ~ I ~bDbDU .t:.~s II ~ ~"a !~ .~ .... '" Si! ~~c:: If: 1'1 -x-x, II I u z o ~~ ~!! p ~ ;-1 ~ ~I ~!/j r:-~1 L..-J I . j I 0 c Ii . Z I "" ~ ;a 1 0 = I . ~ ~ I~ I <co: C % \ i I 'I; ! ~ I ~t II I i ; I ,Ii I G '!'!IIII s i ! + M!r i I h w~ ~ · ~~tj . :1 I ~ r~~l ~~~ I ~. , II! , , , , , , , , , , , , , ---1 I /1 /1 / I / I / I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I .J !"'"--., l?~:.:~...-.I , 'M> ...~~:!t ~.Jn ~\i_"Qr"". --...(~t_ ~ I ~h ~~~ ~ii !lO~ i~1I :i~ ~~. ~ 5ii~ ;~~ ;Ij ~ ~ ~ i i: iil ~5; !!j~ !;j I~~!~ I;U a ~~ S~~ ~ ;~~ \ \ . \ "' ~ . ~. f~ ;:i. ,- '" \ \ I \ I I I I I I I I I I I , , , I ", " , , , , , , , , \ en ::21 < ...... ~ ~ ~ enZ 0::21 Z -~ E-<.,.., ~ en i=: ~ < ;j ~ Xo ""'u o ro C\l >< b E-< E-<~ 0 ...... ro ~ uQ ...... ~ ~ ~-8~~'M~~~.e oBooooooB ~~~~]~ ~~]]]~ m~~ 1111~~ Ij~~~t ~~~ .8 Q. ~ .8 H .8~ ~ ,U u u ~ VI .. >-< .. 0 ~ ! ..~ p:: a; ~.. :::> II iJ!; lf1 N.g....s ;.~Ba; I'c:I ~ 11 :B-= I'c:I ,~..Q1 ~)CQa. p:: ir!l!l E-< ~88 E-t ~'g~~ z "2~i- < ..~ ... u iq '2 .~ .; - ~ 'b!i - ]N,,~ Z + ~ .. ~~..:;; 0 - ~ ~ ;J :a lf1 !-o!u i.!:;;'= .' _.. >0 II( '0 Nof"&.>o ~~&!; _~! iii' g-~~ ~~~~ ..'" ... ~.a 0" u ~ ~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~9~~~~~2~~~~~~~b~~b~~~~~~~~~~2~~ ~~~~~~~i;~;;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~$~~~~~ I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ccco c cec C~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~ !~~~jijiijjjj~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ___________ _ m mm m v)v)V'lV'lV)V1v)v)V'lV1V1 U"J .!i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . :' ~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ :8 ~ ~ ~ ~~~O~20~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~ ,@ @ @ :@ e @ e @ - ~e. @ _.e @ @~@ @ @ ~- @ ~ I ~I~ I I ~ e @ I @ I I' I @) I I I I I ~ @ @ @) ~ @ @ @ ~~ 1;" s~ f~ e" ~!! ~~ ~= -< :5 r.:I" P<1. :I:.. 000 z o - E-< 25 ~ < ..., rn ..... lf1 :::!!1 < - ~ ~ ~ C\1 E-< :3 !; ! .. .. a I I i ~ODOD ';::.5.:: n G) >,..... ,!.,!. 8 ~ 2 '! ,~... I'd !is ~~c: f: rz:I t..i z ~ ~i p~~ ~ :-J p~ H ~ -6 . j u c .! ~ I -; .3 ~n~i 1"1 I ~~!It : il!il~ II i;I~I: ,e:i ~ . J~I J a " ..<2J~~ .NW 'S9NI1S'1H ZqZ xoa .Od Lg<2JZ"OO;"I~q .Hd ~~a~!4~JV 'spJeH '1 P!AeO '00l1li '@@oou.!!.noo UW'iI @OOUU@l@UOO~ ~@@oo@@ ~@OO~~l1wlJ .....: Z W r 0.... 0 .-1 , d)W zz""': r W 1-). Ow Z I .ZW --WZ Wo G:::W-IW G:::I<(Wd) 0 I- r Ol-Wl-d) LLI-\I)IW 0 Wo LLOQl."W \l)LL<(I-~O~ Z ~W. QZWZ(j[ W 0 . . -1. 0 <( <( :3d) >-W 3-o....WZ :3 \l)d)LLO- 00 I- W Z IW \l)I-Z\.'JOIG::: Z Wo.... (j[Gd)O\.'JWI-I ~fu9~0G:::~ 0 G:::O WN<(W(j)31-3. d) 0.... W I- W' Z <( I- 0 -1U\I)OO1':O<( >-01': OZ-1d) <(Z:3-1 CO d) o....-OOI<(W ZO-13WIr r 1-0.... O1':W -1'-I-I). Uw .0.... ~ ui d) & (Q W I- ~ 9u~CO~~G r I I- O1':w W-1Z I-(j[OW ,W:3 0 rl-""': Z\I)<(rLL).coOo.... OWOI~Z\I) U :3>-Z W<(300)-<(i=0.... r(j[ I-OW " f;;COw ~I<(:rl-ZI-<(<( W<(>-LLW:r" Z Z r >-Z G::: (1)1- WWrOO""I-~ Z roo.... >J.-O:3Wo<(G:::UW I-1t)w\I):rOci Z O~~ OG:::01':~IWWWCO I-U Ql.W!::>w <( I-OW <(WO \l)d)00....0 W<(I-:3G:::30(j[ -1 ro.... LL .000zX 0.... o<(). OOOO~O:3Ws I- G:::I- G:::- <(I-o<(j" :3 wo....W Ol.G:::~w~o>-wo (j[Zo....Z<(~O""O W \l)rO I LLo.... ~~Z-1-13 <(W o....ZW I- 0;=0 ",WI-COI- o....d)o....-1z -Ol. w:3<(_W :r o....-1W Gt~OOI-~<(Z WOl.\J)G:::\I)WOw I- 0-1(1) -WZZzO&,ZW \l)o....Z:3OV-G:::Ol. 0 G:::<(O I->-o<(z .or o -I- Z<(<( CO 0....:30.... OCOd)- w\J)o.... I-Ozo01':_Q I-d)O r:3rl-(i)-1o....<(o W<( l- I- . z50l. WU) O<fl~ W-1 d)1-,9!::oWZd) d)1- LLwG:::~Q:!3WG:::W -WI-IZG:::~W -Z ~ Wd)o.... Z-1<(O<(<(\I) 3 d)W Z' rWW OIWI-Z>-CO<(). 9co~G:::I-G:::QO d)r _w o....-I I-j!d)wwo W I-<(o<(d)ooz <(0.... Od) OI-l- Ol--ZWIU)WO -10 -10 G::: O<(W031--1).w <(~LLW>-OCO<( -1w>- -1-1 --30.... Wo....co O:tWUJ:uW-<;(<(I; ~~~I!::WI~ -w coG::: Gio -11-Ql.I-COW II- 0<( I-Ol-G:::<( 3). :3 LLzWd) 1-0 ow 00.... 001':0 <(-3WI-I--1.01- LL -1QwXO ZW<( :rwcow wO WLL LLO""~ --1r::3-1<( -r:3W W Qo ,,1-(1)-1- O:3I I-"I-\.'JI ~O 01-0 W zsG:::Ol.lTIrIOI- Oi=OZ\I)Z"~ ).w O""GZzm~ OCOO<( 0d)3d) W <(<( -- Od) (f) COiLCOwWOI-Ol.O IWLLIOow>- Ol.O O-<(OUr UI W-1Z G:::1--1d)<(- 0 !!::IWG:::O-W01': I-wUW3 -1 0....0.... o....<(o....OC>>- \l)O~I~OW~<( <( 0 0 wz zO (f) I-Z_I-XCOIO LL~W<(~-1 (l >- wI- 0-1 0 1--).0 I- 00l. J- <(&zl-U)ICOOz <(a'ozw~\I)w -0.... 0-10....0.... -1 ~ I- m \.'JO""<(t01':~ ~ow~ffi01':<(>-~ wwOl.w>-l-offi <(ill zxoooU) :J <(rII-IOOI-d) IOCO"").~01':WI rI - -illd) LL- (l I- I-COZG::: 1-1-0~<(OW3 0l.1- :r ffi"ooz). \l)WOZOI<(W>- 0" -1I 0 1-0....1- "WI- WLL~\.'J X Z 0(1) LL <(I-Zi=W~d)ou z). -G:::o z LLZ 2(1)<(~i=!!:! z- 0 \I)-1<(<(IWOCOC i=<(0d)\.'J w_ -I- W !::-1 <(I- 0-1tf1rI-ZWo....1L Z z- WI-O ill<( &fQo~~G::: o....<(<OG:::LL<(O 0 illI<(~Od)O-1 I:3 LL IW- ill Z ~d)Q:!oo>-~~d) d)- w:3<(- 1-.-1 ill .1--1Zd) :3 <( () \l)Xd)l-oo.... 0 O""-W~-1co>-l-ill O1':\I)O<(,,-1LLCO 1-). :J)w5~1L~ o....WillZ <(z <(ill - wl-Z WO--1 -10U :3><((j) _W 2=~ W I-LL <(-0.... J- LLZZd)<(1-1- X d)0 -:r 0l.0~1--1 ~ OO(j)Ql. .UU~W ~U)G:::d)WG:::OI- --1 <(woU)<(t) <fIWw - -owz W-1 :J Z \J)d)>-o<o>&01':Z G~o....j!d)~<(~ 0....- '-1WI-U ill:rI-\I)<fIO - OU Q G::::300i=\I) <( 0.... d)- W i=:30LL<(rOd) wOZWd)O >-1-(j)WZOl.wo....O zt~OI--1G:::ill :r~ W --1 l-ojZU)-o....o....OW >-0 ).~<(oi=o O1':Wd)-WI.f)-1Z W<(OI-U-1<(O :r n... I- w<(o- r::U OU~G:::~I ~wO<("'Ql.-W~ ZLLo....-1J \I) 0 U\J) W 0....0> 0.... X W~ww~i=~GiLn - 0::J0 Z \I)}- >-il101':Ln(j[~<(j -I- (f) ...... W :rOII<pZIOO rj!o....G:::o....<(:J)<( !::o I- I-I-_WI- ). ~ ~ ~ .. '" ., .. .. .. .. .. w. .. "" .. ... L .. .. .. L: a.. a... a.. Ai. A1 II,. II. II. .. .. .. ..., ..., .." .... .... .... ~. ~ ~ ~ _. d) \':J en z a 0. O! -1 '<( - ~ ::J (Q I- r en ::J en Z ~ r I- en () '<[ 0. ::t Z .., () a u & I- Z en ::J ill W > Q \S) oc en rC\- a '<[ .1., 3 t- ill U Jd) ): W ~ t- -. d) ~ ill ~ 0. u -1 iii & ::J ill (Q Z ~ ill '<( -1 en U ~ ii z ~ ill ~ ~ ill 6 :3 IL -<[ d) U :r -1 3 ~ <r:(c2I';~ 'NW '99N119'v'H c:q~ xoe .O'd L9!21Z"Q:l9p'I<SQ "Hd 'OOI!ll '\jHIDOOUUn un @OOUrHI<1lI;Ulmil ~@@OO@@ ~@OO~lliJl\wlJ . . . . a e. &. &. &. 111.. 111.. a. 111.. 111.. III. .. .. .. .. ., ., 1&' 1& 1& 1& 6J 6J 6J . iii ill ., e. IIJ, ., ... .JM., .",-,,,. .... ..... ..... ..OJ 18al!48JV SPJBH "1 P!ABO ~ ~ 10 <II <II '" '" >- >- 10 10 w Z Z ~ 1: d) d) 1: d) d) !!1 ~ !!1 <0 <0 ~ !!1 ..J - ..J !!1 CI IL IL CI -I W -I W E E IL 8 W IL W U E U E X U U X W U W U ~ l- I- Z Z OC W W II!: ~ OC 0 1: 1: OC o . 0,..: ~tt: &! &! 0"': I- ae~ u. ~u. ~d 8- ~ - 8 ~ . ~ ' t-- ~G ~~ lOG d) 10<0 .d) &! &! d) t: z\\) x\\) ~:ri x~ 0 -r <{r a a <(- 1:<1.) 1:<0 Z Z L !:' 1:.0 Q ,..:<{ w ,..: ,..: ,..: ,..: ,..: ~ ,..: ,..: ,..: ":&! ,..: ,..: ,..: u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. u. d) u. u. d d d d d ~<( d d d d w d d d) d) d) <0 d) d) d) d) Q <0 <0 ",-I d) ,g <II 01 '" 10 r \\)<{ ~ .... ~ '" '" ~ '" '" 01 ~ '" ~ ,,\1- \\) 10 ~~ '" r, "\ "\ ..<i 01 <'I. ,ga 10 <I.) C \\) ,g '" '" ",' '" -I- <II r' '" '" . '" '" .. W .. ill .. :i .. w,..: - '" 0"': - '" Q~ - '" U' - '" Q": d) d) <(u. d) d) d) d) OCw"': d) d) d) <0 ~d <0 <0 ~~ <0 <0 <{uu. <0 <0 u~ <{ <{ <{ <{ <{ <{ :f.~g <{ <{ <(-I -I ..J u.d) ..J -I u...J ..J ..J ..J ..J U U :I..J lJ lJ lJ U <(-I-I lJ U u.<{ I-<{ :I<{ ;, OCIL<{ 1-1- O!I- 1-1- d)a ~2 illLI- WI- aa >aa 3. Z'";" \ alJl- '"' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '"' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 01 ~ ~ ~ ~ !f! ~ ~ !f! ~ C ~ ~ ~ ill ~ !2 Q ~ !2 ~ :! <I.) -I 't 01 '" 10 >- >- >- >- >- >- >- >- <{ 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 w ~ :i :i :i :i :i :i :i :i ~ ..J 1: 1: 1: 1: 1: 1: 1: ill ill 1: -I l- I- <( d) <0 <0 d) <0 d) d) <0 d) d) <0 d) d) ~f Q 0 Q Q Q CI ill 0 !!1 0 !!1 ::i W W W W ill W :::i W iE ~ ~ W ..J IL d) W ill W W ill W IL ill ill IL 8 ~z lJ lJ lJ lJ lJ lJ E lJ 1: ~ ~ lJ E ~~ x x x x x x x a '" r X ill W W W W W U ill lJ 10 't ill U " ~o ~ <( d) '<l&! O!tt: oc CI!::: d) 0 ~ !:! <::! ill >- ad ~tt: w~ " " ~ ~G >~ '"' Q ~d) ~d '"' Q a:&! ~IO ~Ol ,..: ,..: '" IL Q ~ Q Q ~ Q '" <0 10'1" ,d) t: ILOC '" '" '" '" '" <(z :i-.\i x\\) lLa ~ ~ r I.') <{r 0 ~<O -r <(u. p L<I.) L<I.) r _ill lJO ~ ,..: 0 '" Olu., ~ X d) ,..: ,..: OlG u. u. <( ill ",d) d ,..: ,..: ,..: L U d u. u. <0 d) x~ U. I- Q Q -Q Q Q 't <( d) d) d d w ~ 19 Q IL a <1.\ d Q ,g '" d) r '" d) <0 '" '" '" '" N OC'" 'I" \\) d) ~ N :i N IL!:; 01, <1.\ '" '" ~ r 1: r ILU 01 d) 10 ~, '" <(<{ c \\) d) W ::J IL N a <{ -I , I- -<( U ~ .. ci ci Z &&! d) ~,..: - '" <00 l- I- I- ill ~<{ 0 ::J<O <(": d) d) ~ ill oc d)0 ~ W oc ~ oc t ~ ti~ci d) d) 'JL-I <{ 'JL-I <( d) <{ 1: ill uG <{ <{ >- ulO oc 0 W lJlO CI W W &! ~ a ill -I w<{CI <(d) -I -I I- <(I u. <0 OC <(I u. <0 OC ~ U. -I N -u ~oicl lL-I lJ U <0 101- ~ ill d5 -1<( -I<{ 1-<( 101- ill> ;:!& ;:!&! ~~OC Z I-OC Jli5 I- d)1- ill Wa <( <( I-W a O::J 2<( <(:o~ <(a 0 d)Z <0<0 I.') IL d5C1 -I 1-<0 WI- .."'55 'N!.J 'S9NllS'1H !9! xoa 'O'd L9"'l'OOv'[Q9 'Hd '0000 '~@li9uun IDOOW'iI @Ii9UU<!l~UOOIII\ ~@@OO@@ ~@OO~~~wlJ ~::>a~!4::>JV spJeH "1 P!^ea Q ~ ~ Q ill w >- W 111 W 3>-!({ 111 111 ~~~ (j)~ ~ (j)Q W XW-<(-<(IlWWI-OWW ~ W~:nO~&~illtJ50 I Z\.') ii 0 'Y. (j) Il Q ^' ,I -<(@I- _v -<(Wo.... ,Ud) !Ld)Z 31-Z0Q(j) ZO~WWLOW Oz d)0 :::J(j)- L -...lwi=W-<(I-i=O-...lO>-o...o...Q -...ld)-<(2=>-d)-<(~~2=-...l~OW 2 Ht & L ~ -<( & :0 "'t >- <i.o... td ~ w!LOO:::JWOZ~-...l~LiJ).-...l IWlLIlOl-lLO~Z_IWO I-OC~lL(j~~ONO>I-Q~ ~9399'9' ' J...L:::;I '9' l.O>l'9'Q ~ N'V1d J..3)J; .~ -= i f 1! ~ "~ W 9: ~ ~ ~I ~ :P:l S P "g! ...:I,ii~h~ s' ....:c3!1~! IJ) .!S.liTmto .it ~- ""&] ~ i~ U' [' ~ 'g~: j :' [ j= I '. [ d '. i i s " [ , I J p 4t;' ~! i O! j ~ ~JI i!l~! :.lle~ .~ . ~.j! .!!,a !:F~ 8: j ~ i f .5 s, ~. Xi en. ~ ~ Ws g:a: -05 0: h -g. ct::i ~ ~'" 2 ~ c~ g. 5 ::I 1:; 8 o .9!" o c1J:g S == o ~ III C .- e <J ... 'i -=1 ~ 1!J. ..1:1.._ 0' ei2 '"2] ! "!!!!, u. S v c .~Pip.: .191 ~:c3H! IJ) !1iiI..IIIO ,:. i1J Cs ~i '8= 5'" .15 Eo ~" :~ p Bi 8l8l~ [..":. [-~'..'. ' . [' : : J : : t : : ; 4t; ~ ' G) U) ; gJ ~ ..: ~ :'l ~ =3 .c ., a ] (JJ II 8 ~ a: C> '" z '" ir :5 NW <l) 2:~ ~ ~~ ~ 01() Z ~~I ~ ~~w~ ZI-c Z B a:::'l:5i:3i ., ] '" o C) '" Z '" ir :5 NW Il) '2:~ ~ ~~ ~ Oil) Z ~o i= ~~I (f) ~ ~W~t ~!:gl ~ -~....... .... "_~~.~".tl tl ~ ".L ~ Ai.. ...a... I( .....:...,.-tl':, ""6iL"_.L~A2..L>.,,,.r; ~ ":; cr .5 CD s, Ira -ia h ct::i ~'" c~ ::I o o S .,. 0 ~ III C '-----..... ... e 1~ j H <J u. S ! 11 . ~s1n~~ 1i..c3!1~! !1i1I.II.O ul ~ ""i] 'gl 5.! Um,. [;. :.-;. ~.c. h : ; U "E j ~ ~ i : : .,. j" , . . ~' ," ciS, . ; 81: III" ! ! ~ I~. 4t; ~ ! 8~ III e : OJ :::I ~ -. .s 0 .., ~ J: <( c.. ~ ':; cr .E oS s JU -iij h ct::i ~'" c.!l ::1.3 o o I'll ... o ~ III C ~ C :::J 8 " :g 3: .;-~~ \. ~.-' ... \, :' ./\. \ (:./ ') '. \'\\ ,J ~/<fr ~(. \ ~...7 \. / ..- ". tJ./ ,Y ./-/~~ % ,;t', ,/ / - \.{/" /9< - ~.../' .,/.;'1-- Ii! ../....... ~ /<..,/ ~ ~'~/~ '9< ~ ii .. 8: . " 1':1':<2><;<; "Nt.; '9"'NI19'1H /9/ xoa 'ad L""'l'<2>'WI<;9 'Hd ~@@oo@@ 'OOI!!l '@@OOUUI)(! ~OOI)'J'iI @oonlID~€I@nl)(!~ l~al!4~JV s!JJeH '1 p!Aea e Q ~ ~ -=i ~ !!J "tI ., . ~ ~a. 0 E ~ .,. ~ .. . g .B. ....~ 1 ~ h~ .....~;rO!o! il!DlIUleJO ~~ s.>< is .c !~ Gis Eo ~CJ $~ -~ ~ . oj ~&l&l [ [ ~, "" '" , m ~ : 6 :g ~ :I: <( a. ~)-.' 'E1 RI' -0 c .19, tfJ. ~ :; D' .5 CD - IV - .n~ -~ =1! a::g ~:3' c~ =0 o o .1! o ~ IV C ~)~ ~/ l)j~ ' g..c ../< E! ~ ~;~ u '" c '" c 2 b' Q. c:: o ::J ti a -m ~ en ,g 3: ,----_..-......, ,.J 'I, I, __" I,ry I. I\ r-;""i ;! ;3j , /,' ! , --_._J "<i< . ~~r--J C GD ... u -=.; Ii !! J 6~ ~ ~~ 01)$ & = 1 ~fh ..11,~ ;il~;r~o! il!GI.SIi!10 ,;. B.II !is I: Eis ~~ !~ a &f ~~~ [.. [-. -I. . . L ; , : ~ ~ ! ::J "'C .. ~ ~ ~ ~li. J!!j tfJ, ~ .S D' .5 CD - .1! 1/)' w~ -~ h a::t ~::J cJ! =.3 o o IV - o ~ IV C J ~!~'IC c::i -8: .:6- -.~ [i, oJ:: ~ ~ ~ ~ u '" c:: ~ >.' ~ b' Q. c:: o ::J ti a -m Q) en ~ . ~w F F // .J ,.~-"\ ..... ,/ (, ;~~<~ ~,\,..'>>' I~ \~ \.../' .f ("'_'_._, .)."\, t \ f '\~ '" I ,-1 ~'x,)., .----" I J r-~ ..<::7~>".'-~~~~Jd / '<'. ~ .~ ......... . "-......... "<i< "~~ 8: "' .c ] ~ ':03 CD 1\j :c: 0 .1- 0 0 N ~. ~~ i It>N OCD ~ , 0- , N..o CD ~ ~ :c'" ~ I ~ a. ..; , '" CD ~~ a.,2 '" '" d~, !!J> I- 1!jj "'~ g (1)0): >..0 0 ",- '" 8~ ~ ...x '" '" WI- <0.:3 <( 1~IQIt: ~J~ C) '" z '" 0 ii: It> "'W It> qa. z 0!Q ::i: ~~ en C) Olt> Z Mg i= ~ "1 en 0) 00, <( ~Ijl~~ 8 CD N N .,! "'~ "'0 .;..:j0 It>N ~~~ .,"'N :ccu~ ~~~;~~ : ~~~~~I mQ)~Q)m. > 1\PSI'" :., . ti~~o~I' Wl-:c<(oo. .;g8 CU]i Co 00'" 0 Q)' NNa.I->- C)'" z<'> _0 !X: It> ",wit> qa.z o~::i: ~~~ Olt>Z M~t= ;:I; . .11n ~~~ zl u >I -1"'''''1 ~@OO~lliJfAVMWIJ ,;. ~ ~ &l B.II .Q. !is [ [ ~ .c e . c '" u !~ ~ -=~ ~ I!~ :!. ''ij 10 = ~ . . 'E P .ai iii c:: ~CL ~ ~." RI f3 0 I- ~ ..$ II .B. -0 c ....~1u~.~ .19 .~ <n -" i'I'a.. c3. t! U &!11iI.1li1lifo U .- in Q) '" (HI '" I!! 5 ::J " Z 0 ~ 1i: :I: ~ 'S D' .5 CD S .n~ ii~ CDs a::-1I ~g c' =.3 o o ... ca .. o ~ IV C .., ..:g 3: . i ~1ij CD x a: o ~ o o .... oj .... .. ~~I .:-:J:5 ION 8~lg ~t~ ~~I~ I "'j'" a. ::J . ". It> Q)~~!~~ ~~lgIQjI~ >..01 I gJ- ..! ~~! ~I~: ctJlml WI 0"5! W!I-I~;<(CCi (giI8! ~]!! (o~ 0.01"'10'1'" N'N (l.,!-,- >- C)'" Z'" _0 !X: It> ",wit> c;>a.Z o!Q::i: :!?;;en oSC) Olt>Z ~~.~ ~ m!~ ...1,;;.... ~::gl~ a.:<('O , -- -- -- ., a; .. ., .~.L.". .... ... AIL. Ai. jj, ., .61 Ii, Ii. Ii,/!! . IE .lIi IIll' ll! _4' ~..: ~"~'~'ALJt ..ll. C GD .Q. -II -Ii. -=3 ~ I!;r e~ ~ IO! 01). & ! 1 ~HSh~ ;i..~!l0!.! il!rm.slilo si ~t 1:2 G~ EO ~<3 !~ -~ ~ . .c-! "~ ~~--s] u [ ~1 .... '" . 31 e i ::J "C .. ~ ~ ~ . 'E {!! c a! ~ 'S D' .5 .! as ~~ -~ =i a::~ ~~ ;.3 o o .1! o ~ IV C " c . ,c:. ..~., , !~. i.'~ -!i ~:..i ~; ". 13 '" c: '" c:: o "" Q.' o ti. CD CD en. ===-- . , €€0<,;<,; N-J '9!:'N119'1H Z'i1Z X08 'O'd LI10Z'<2I91'1<,;9 'Hd 'lUll 'noou.!!.@u nn UUUc!J\1!UIJU\ @@@!m@@ ~@!m~lliJI\WIJ 1:::>81!4:::>JV SPJBH "1 P!^ea ~ ... i -=1 ~ !!J ~~ ~ ~ ~ 101>_ g ~ i ~p Eill1I.~ w 8 Eli J '5 ;;-:8.ii!! cl!GJ.llilmlO ~i If '8: 'i'"' Eis ~~ I~ a ~i 8l~~ [ [ ~.~ ,.., co , CD co , ~ ~ ..1 o ~ ~ :z: <( n. ~ 'E: ca -0 ' C '" ~ ~ 'S cr .E .!! J!!. III~ w~ -iij lVi &!l ~~ 5~ o () J! o .\I: IV C ~~ -~~~ ---_.~. '" QJ .2 a: u -0 c: '" c: ~ ~ c. c: o :> t> 8 -i A! rn ,g ~ .c ~ ~ ,,~ ~ ~ 0' o ..,. ..; 0) ... ;;"1 ~ (I)~ ~ ~im! .~- ~~ ~I~ :;1~ ~cim ~I gjj'" ~'1110 ~ il~1 W I-'~:o <( OJ ~gjf8 mEI:. oo~ro~~ c ~ ... .,,-11 ~ E:s ~~ ~ ~<< if: g ~ '2 '""ii~;~~ ...:8,.ii!! cl!ffiJ.IIIElO ,;. :o~ it '8: oS'" -is Eo -ee> !; B 8 . ",-I!! u~ ~~]] ['1 [-:', l'" : . U : , i j j i oM; , iIi i, co ' ~ ~ ,,; o :g ~ :z: <( c.. ~~; ca' "gi .19; (J)! >. :; 2" ~~ fi~: :s' ~ C. .r:: ~ ~ ~ & u -g M '" ; f i i i/~ii o a 1 l!1 QJQJ~ ~~ ~ // !! ! 11 ' u~ i~ I)- 'I >." =~ ~ :) ) :II 5 " :II ::I ~ ~ ~ . . L L L L L . . . . . . . . ,; en .a ~:'Oi 0) 1ii'.11: : CI I- o o o i." ;og' "0 .,.,,,, ~~ ~ 0)" g :c m o. ~H~'~~~'~I u5~g~(j~ WI-",,_:o<(OJ ~gg ~SI"O) ao"t-.u 0 ",,,,~c..I->- ~ "" I- "" n. :5 N~ LI') 9:< Z 0:< :< g:::J ui 'rn C!) 8~ Z ~N i= r-;- 001 (J) ~:31 ~ ~I ~! gs i31 ~ 'S cr .E III ... J! .rI~ -iij h 0::-[ ~:> c~ =0 o () J! o .\I: III C ~i "8l S] &l ... 1is U [ ~ = 'S.ij .c i co ~ -=i ~ E~ i! oS:!! Jj ;j -is 1i: 5: ~ ~ 'E E~ ,0) ~ CI ~ .!ld a~) -E h 1I'~c:!.~.! &I -'8 !1iI..IIIO ~t oM; iIi CD II) 11)' e t :s -0 Z 0 -0 :z: <( 1i: , <~;.<~' ~../ ,Y' >.~< "" 1-"" n.:5 ",I-L() 9~Z 0:<:< ~~(I)~ owC) Ol'Z ~~j::: d; ~;~ ..... Q).J: ..,'-1.., ~1:g1~ Q..; <(I 01 ~ ~ ,," ~! !i ~s": ,I 'HI /': ,~ ;/"" ~ , ~ 8: ~j "Sl ~ ~ is [ [ C .I> .C ~ i 'S- II) -c 1~ 1 H / oS:!! 'ii ~ OJ -is 'E Eo a; ~ :1i: ~ 101>_ g -1: ca ~e> CI -0 ~JI~.~~ c: ~~ ,....8.~! ~ -i !EI..SD li oM; iIi '" II) u~ co e :s -0 0 ~ z :z: a: ~ 'S C" .E III S 1/)' w~ C;~ lIIi 0::;; '8. ~:> c~ :sO o () J! o .\I: IV C .... ~.. ....,. ...' ...,. ..~ -~ .- .- - - - - _. , ..12>.... 'NW 'S9NI.I'3\tH z~r xoe 'ad Lg-I2>r:i2>\'/y'I..~ 'Hd ~::>a~!4~JV spJeH '1 P!^ea C <J & u "CI1 ~ 1!Jt ill c! ! ~ ff'o g -1 ..:IiH q 011, II wIiEII~.;! ;(..8~0!.! oI!a.smlo d frll~". lll~."" 1l~~'.' :g"~ . , : 1~ : ' I -e~ ! ' . "i! ' iJ:'5 , , : ,,~ ' i I ii~ _ .. 8-! 51 m ! t5~ " -6 .. ~ ~ ~ j:~.i.~; 0"",/11, ~JL' '. ',I-" ~~; IU' "C Ci .B' (1): ~ '5 1:1" .5 GI .. ra .. 11)"': .u~ -13 ra." GIs Oi:i ~" c~ ::J o tJ .!! o .:.: ra Q ~g. R' . _ C'I -", in f!~i lJ ~. I c '" c ,g b- e. c ~ 8 -m ~ 00 0 ~ '" '" '" '" '" N '" '" o '" '" z ::E en (!J z "'''' i= ...... .. en th ~I :2 ~,~, ... ~1~1t; ~ . e ... 'Iii l!._. -g! ~ H 'E ~ ~~ g . 1 '" ...~i p~ II 'g wI< II~~ GI ;(..831 c!J oI!O.I!lIilD ~j ~ ~ ~ HU;U!~' ~~ I ! U i ; i a .. ..' I l~ ': :g I u:g ~ ~ ..r ~ ~ ~ !:~.; >i--;~;~ [~".~ lit ~ '5 1:1" .E ell .. ra - 1/1"': w~ "ice eII:J1 !Xi c ::.,'" .2 ....c J! i5. ::J8 0 o 1ij tJ 8J ra .. o .:.: ra C . ......~ ~"'":'~ -...'.......- L _ _ _ = ~ ~ '5 1:1" .E GI - ra - .n~ -13 rail ~1i '8. b'" c~ ::J o (,) ra .. o ..:.: ra Q 'OOI!IJ 'UIU!!.nl)(! nw'il nUOOil@]\iiUI)(!~ ~@@OO@@ ~@OO~(M]b\fA\WlJ ... u -g! ~ 1!~ .... 0 ~ 101) . 0 'Z III- &: j "'SIU!3 .....8~0!.! oI!m.ISIII'D ~i !OJ! ~ii h .~ eO -e~ Ii "1 1i ]J~@J U-:" U--i.. '1 : ! ~' i ; i ; ! I i i i ..' ..' I "" III . ., gj I ~ -c z o "C _ :I: <>:: 11. ,~- 'Ei -g' .B II) ::.Q; , i~ L~ Iii' , -,'-:. -I:-~ !'i lJ "0' C '" C o :;:> e. o 1) ., Q; 00 ij .~ :~. a; . ~![ o 1-". o o "'. - C\I.;...:.j &t "0;$"1 ~~! iU ~~~. ii~g: ~ ~! ~! ~~ : ...... ~IO ~I ~I~: ."",10 .,'01"1' WlhC>.:cJ<>::IID' ~18io ~jgj roi . ~I~'~~)~i~! '" I-" '" 11. :5 NI-" '" 9:iE ~ ~~ cri cOO (!J 0'" z ~M ~ d;~: ~ ~ ~\ ~ ~!:g;)- .~ 11.:<(, .........."....' r'j "i ,,0':i.. 'NJ.I'9'::'NILWH Z'ilZ xexa 'ad LIIaIZ<<",WI..q 'Hd '00l1li 'nooouu un Uon@J@OCilI& @@@OO@@ ~@OO~lliJfRIA\WlJ ~::>a~!4::>JV spJeH "1 p!Aea ~ ...J ~ Q! w 0.. d) ~ d\ ~ ~ ...J ~ ii w 0.. d) ~ d\ Q [(\ w w ~ ~ ..J ..J ~ ~ ~ ii w 0.. w d) 0.. ~ d) ~ d\ d\ Q r c-. c-. ~ .. .. _ .. ., .. .. _, ~ au ., .... .., ... .. .. AI .,. .,\ .; .., ":. .,. .. .. .. .. ilIA .. ... lit! ... lilt. A ... 6. .. .. .. .. a, .~ .. '" 'I ~~!ZISS "NJ.I "S9N11SV'H Z'3Z Xog "ad L9!ZIZ!ZIeY"'S'3 "Hd '0000 'nOODun un nDUciJ~UIJIJi! @@@!m@@ ~@!m~fM]fAVA\WI] t~at!4~JV spJeH "1 p!Aea l- I- d) d) ~ ~ . ~ ~ t- ~ 0.. !:: 8 t- 8 () () ~ -' I: -' l- I: I- 0 0 w ~ w ..., ..., ~ ~ ~ 0... ~ 0... a a w w <D d) <D d) UJ ~ W () 0... ~ ~ I: ~ 0... 0 0... :I ~ :I ~ ~ ~ IL IL 3 3 W w t- ): t- ): ~~~..... ... . . . ... * * * .... . . . . . . . . ~ d & & _ _ . . _ _ ~~ w BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO / HOPKINS, MN 55343 / (952) 238-1667/ FAX (952) 238-1671 June 25, 2004 Refer to File: 03-44 MEMORANDUM TO: John Hinzman, City of Hastings FROM: Edward F. Terhaar RE: Results of Updated Traffic Study for Proposed Residential Development in Hastings, N:1N As requested, we have updated thetraffic study as presented in our July 8, 2003 report to account for the following two items: (1) traffic volume adjustments to account for traffic generated by the nearby High School and (2) trip generation adjustments to account for changes in development size. The resultant updated volumes were then used to update the Level of Service analysis for each intersection reviewed in the original study. Traffic volumes on both Featherstone Road and 4th Street were adjusted to account for traffic generated by the nearby High School. Traffic volumes as presented in the High School Traffic Impact Study dated March 4, 1 ~99 were used for our adjustments. This report assumed the school woUld contain-2,OOO students and 175 staff persons. The weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes presented in our report were increased by the amounts presented in the High School report. The development trip generation as presented in our original report was adjusted to account for the smaller size of the proposed development. In our original repot, we had assumed a development consisting of 90 condominium units. The current proposal consists of 72 condominium units. This adjustment resulted in a trip generation reduction of approximately 20 percent for this development. The resultant volumes were then used to update the Level of Service analyses presented in the original report. The updated analysis indicated that all levels of service as presented in the original report remain unchanged using the updated volumes. Therefore, the analysis intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service as presented in the original report. Traffc Count Reports I Street Name Location Time Date Total # of Vehicles 4th Street 100ft West of Pleasant Dr 48 hours 6/8/04 to 6/10/04 5900 4th Street 100ft East of General Sieben Dr. 48 hours 6/14/04 to 6/16/04 5630 4th Street 100ft West of Vermillion (61) 48 hours 6/16/04 to 6/18/04 8500 Pleasant Drive 100ft North of 15th St 48 hours 6/22/04 to 6/24/04 14500 Pleasant Drive 100ft South of 15th St 48 hours 6/16/04 to 6/18/04 11900 15th Street 100ft East of Westview Dr. 48 hours 6/14/04 to 6/16/04 15500 15th Street 100ft East of General Sieben Dr. 48 hours 6/7/04 to 6/9/04 3500 Pine Street 100ft South of Hwy 55 48 hours 6/15/04 to 6/17/04 10100 ------- -- --- --...- ------ Pine Street 100ft South of 2nd Street ,.-ttr 48 hours 6/8/04 to 6/10/04 5200 ;0 - -- . - .- Traffic Count Report Sheet &1 . FOSTER & BREVER, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS E. BREVER ROI:IEkT J. FOSTtK ERIC BREVER, LAW CLERK " DATE: TO: FROM: RE: MONDA Y, JUNE 28,2004 ROBERT FOSTER LUCIANA ZAMITH CITY OF HASTINGS - R-3 ZONING APT COMPLEX _"t 1. Should a Condominium Building, such as Lawrence Condos, be built in Block 1, Lot 2 of Williams First Addition? FACTUAL BACKGROUND Block 1, Lot 2 of Williams First Addition is located in a R-3 zone, otherwise known as a Medium- Density Residence Zone. The. intent of ~szone is to recognize "the growing demand for rental housing in Hastings" and to allow "increas'ed 'design flexibility' and a more compatible land use development pattern." . Art. 10.14, subd.1. However, as with any zoning area, subdivision ofland, otherwise known as platting, must comply With "good overall design." As Mr. TQm Harmening, City Planner, recognized in his memorandum of January 24, 1986, it is important for city deyelopment to use "transition uses," thereby creating "good overall design" that "could blend. . . well with the existing land use in the area." Building a Condominium Building in Block 1 Lot 2 does-not comply with the requirement of a "good overall design." . At the time Schumacher Realty first moved- for a "rezoning of the area known as Williams First Addition, froth AG land use, to R-3 zone, city council rejected its initial proposal, due to a "need to re-organize the site plan to provide high qUality design which is required by the P.R.D. Procedure." Memorandum From Tom " Loucks to City Council (Dec. 30, 1985). Among the reasons for its denial, Mr. Tom Loucks recommended that "a row of duplexes be located east of proposed Whispering Lane {Block 3, Lots 2-7] in order to serve as a transition between the multi-family housing units and proposed single family units on the western part of the site." Concerned with the "good. overall design" of the Williams First Addition, and the need for the use of land that "could blend. . . well with the existing land in the area," Mr. Tom Harmening stated in his Memorandum of January 24, 1986 that "[i]fthe city approves the rezoning and preliminary plat the developer will still be" required to receive site ~d building plan approval at the time of an actual construction proposal. Therefore, approval at this time is by no means approval of a final site plan." Concern for final approval is echoed in Ch. 11 Subdivision Regulation (Platting). A further illustration of the city's concern for the need of "transition uses"ls contained under the recommendation of Mr. Harmening, which states, "[i]t is recommended that approval be subject to the following conditions or understandings being implemented: 1. That the park land, single family homes, duplexes, townhouses, and apartment units be located on their respective lots as proposed Suite 200 . 2855 Anthony Lane South · St. Anthony, MN 55418 Telephone: (612) 789-1331 www.fosterbrever.com" )/~'ul b,Q'if/OC( cd c Jv115 2004 in the preliminary plat/development proposa1." Memorandum From Tom Loucks to City Council (Dec. 30, 1985). The concern for "transitional uses" and "good overall design" was made binding at the February 3, 1986 City Council meeting, when the City of Hastings approved the rezoning of Williams First Addition to R-3",use, subject to the condition recommended by Mr. Harmenings, that is, "[t]hat the park land, single family home::;, duplexes, townhouses, and apartment units be located onttheir respective lots as proposed in the preliminary. plat/development proposal." _" Yet, despite the conditions set forth at the February 3,1986 City Council meeting, on November 10, 1986, the city amended its development agreement, and changed the use of Lots 4-7, ,Block 3, from two family residential structures to single family residential structures. This change in land use undermined the goals of the City to maintain a "transitional use" and "good overall design" of the Willi,JIls First Addition. No longer was there a buffer zone between single family units and multi-family plats. However, even after the amendment of the development agreement, concern remained to keep a "good overall design" in Williams First Addition. In fact, on a June 3, 1987 memorandum by Mr. Harmening, in response to a request to change the status of Block 2, Lots 1 and 2, which were previously designated for the development of two duplex structures, Mr. Harmening stated, It would appear that one of the primary reasons for proposing duplexes on the subj ect lot was to provide a buffer between the high density multi family development to the west and the single family homes to the east. Although staff has concerns with the placement of single Jamily homes adjacent to a multi family development these concerns are somewhat lessened due to the fact that the subject lots would not appear to be affected by the multi family development as much as the other duplex lots along Whispering Lane. Melllorandum From Tom Harmening to Hastings Planning Commission (June 3, 1987) (emphasis added). In recommending the change of use in Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Mr. Harmening specifically stated, "Due to the fact that the development of single family homes on the Bubject lot would not be directly affected as much as the other duplex lots along Whispering Lane a recommendation is made for approval subject to the consideration of the above stated suggestions." Even if the concerns were fewer than if the proposal had been to change the land use in the duplex lots along Whispering Lane, the city still decided to implement techniques to lessen the absence of a buffer zone. Among these techniques was the "installation of berming, tree plantings and other screening devices on the multi family lot adjacent to the single family homes." Concerns for the elimination of the buffer zone is also echoed in Mr. Harmening's memorandum of March 17, 1988 to the Mayor and City Council. In this memorandum, Mr. Harmening states that __"[i]t would appear that one of the original reasons for proposing duplexes on [lots 4,5,6 & 7, Block 3] would be to provide a buffer between the multi family development to the west and the single family homes located to the east. From a basic planning principle this design made sense. . . A concern which staffhas pertains to the placement of single family homes adjacent to a multi family development. Ordinarily this type of situation is not overly desirable. I might add that the Hastings planned residential development requirements, which the multi-family project - 2004 would be bound to, does address situations where multi-family units are adjacent to single family homes." Also in this memorandum, Mr. Hannening recommends that ifthecity decides to grant this change"it should require the installation of techniques such as berming, trees and other screening devices on the multi-. family.lot. It specifically states that "[these techniques] should be taken into consid~ration at the time of site' . plan approval for the multi family project." -'" ANAL YSIS When considering whether'. a development plan should be ap~roved, the following factors are considered: 1. The density of the area, where construction is proposed; 2. The impact of transportation on existing traffic; 3. The minirriization of small roads leading up to larger streets. Further, "[even i]fthe city approves the rezoning and preliminary plat the developer will still be required to receive site and building plan approval at the time of an actual construction proposal. Therefore, approval at this time is by no means approval of a final site plan." Memorandum from Tom Harmening (January 24,1986). Concern for final approval is echoed in Ch. 11 ?ubdivision Regulation (Platting). The Condominium plans proposed by Lawrence Condos should not be built based on the considerations stated below. On February 3, 1986, the City Council adopted the following requirement: that "[t]he final site planjJr9posals to be in conformance with city regulatio~s. Specific attention to be paid to setbacks, screening an(landscaping, fire protection systems, screeniIig of'waste disposal systems, lighting, etc." The Lawrence Condos do not meet such standard. 1. The Building does not meet the condition that "berming, tree plantings and other screening devices [be installed] on the multi family lot adjacent to the single family homes." According to the Construction Plan submitted by Lawrence Condos, the building fails to satisfy the requirement that bermings be erected as a buffer between the condos, and the single-family homes located across the street. The only berming proposed to be erected is located on the bottom right corner of the plan. The center and northern edges of Lot 2 fail to adopt any techniques to seclude the buildings from the single- family homes. --Further, the Building does not have enough trees to screen the property. Section 11.06 of the City Code requires that "[a] street/boulevard tree shall be required for every 50 linear ft of street frontage in a subdivision. One front yard tree shall also be required for every lot in the subdivision, The subdivider shall submit a tree plan indicating the location and species of trees. Only those varieties of trees approved by the City Forester will be used. The minimum size shall measure 1-112 inches in diameter at ground line. No trees sp.all be planted .., 2004 within 30 feet of the intersection of curb lines on corner lots." Even if this requirement is satisfied, it is not enough to screen the property properly. The Building is three stories high and it is located on top of a hill. It is unlikely that the trees proposed in the Construction Plan will be enough to screen the property from the view of the adjacent single family homes. '" No other screening devices have been proposed by Lawrence Condos to seclude the Buildings fromthe . view of the single-family homes. If built, this bu,ilding will serve as a wall, since it is located on top of a hill,:..... and it is three stories in height. Such building will not confonn to the layout of the Williams First Addition. II. The Construction of Lawrence Condos will Cause a Nuisance to the Neighborhood. As illustrated above, the construction of the Building will be inconsistent with the layout of the neighborhood. However, even more seriously, Lawrence Condos threaten to become a nuisance to the Williams First Addition. The following are some of the problems that would result from the building of Lawrence Condos: 1. Because the building stands so tall on top of the hill, the lights shinning from the parking lots and edges of the buildings, will point directly down towards the houses near the property. 2. Increase in the amount of traffic fl~owing onto Whispering Lane, Featherstone Road, and 4th Street will result in longer commutes f9r the present residents of Williams First Addition. 3. An increase in the population in the area, would adversely impact city services.. 4. The increase in the amount of traffic flowing on Whispering Lane will endanger the traffic conditions on that road,. as there are a number, of driveways .stemming from Whispering Lane, and an increase in traffic would increase the likelihood of accidents For these and other reasons, the construction of Lawrence Condos will cause a nuisance to the rest of the neighborhood. At a minimum, it will cause a decrease in the value of the single-family property. Therefore, the City Council should not approve the construction of Lawrence Condos. Property Value Comparison - Whispering Lane Area - Lyn Way Area I was asked by the Commission to document similar circumstances where condominiums were introduced into mature neighborhoods, and from that show impact on property values. " There is no equivalent circumstance that I could find. Condominium development has always been on the edge of new development on major roads, or surrounded by commercial or park land. ..:r But, one can look at property values in the most similar case. I compared the Whispering Lane neighborhood to the Lyn Way neighborhood where there is recent condominium development." In the case ofLyn Way, the most recent condo development is about 2 blocks from established houses; with the Whispering Lane development, it is immediately adj acent. I researched property values through Dakota County Tax Accessor records. I developed maps and spreadsheets which show the affected properties. The fIrst map shows the homes and values nearest to the 800 Lyn Way condos, the nearest new construction. The second map shows the 800 Lyn Way condos and their value (value is the appraised value or last sale price). The third map similarly shows the prqperties adjacent to the proposed Whispering Lane development. :. The average home price on Lyn Way is $182,281. The average condo price at 880 Lyn Way is $125,655. The condo is priced at 69%;of a single family home in the neighborhood. . - ,-';; The average home price in the Whispering Lane neighborhood is $248,375, including townhouses. At 875 Bahls Drive is a condo which is substantially similar to the Whispering Lane proposal; these units are priced from $129,900 (but there is little variation in price). This represents 52% of a nearby home. To reach price equivalence the condos would have to be priced at $171,396, a difference of $41,496. I believe that a price significantly lower than this would depress property values in the neighborhood (separating this from all of the other issues and objections raised). Substantial upgrades to these condominiums are necessary to reflect any semblance of fitting in with the established neighborhood. Meeting minimum standards is not acceptable in this case. I believe that the current design is at variance with surrounding structures and ean be refused based on the Planning Commission's duties as the Board of Design Control (see 205, subv. 5). If f2cuJ 0/J8Iaj r.~kMil.... Address Land Building 2004 Value Lot Size Yr Built Homestead Finished 1101 Park Lane 42,000 168,500 210,500 0.21 1971 Y 2452 1107 Park Lane 40,700 122,600 163,300 0.20 1969 Y 1844 1111 Park Lane 40,700 133,700 174,400 0.20 1970 Y 1238 1119 Park Lane 40,700 126,900 167,600 0.20 1969 Y 1693 1121 Park Lane 40,700 137,700 178,400 0.20 1970 Y 1649 1201 Park Lane 40,700 139,800 180,500 0.20 1970 Y 2152 1100 Lyn Way 40,700 110,400 151,100 0.21 1968 Y 1118 1106 Lyn Way 42,000 142,200 ' 184,200 0.20 1968 Y 1253 1112 Lyn Way 42,000 172,200 214,200 0.20 1970 Y 2303 1118 Lyn Way 42,400 195,200 237,600 0.20 1967 y 2572 1202 Lyn Way 42,000 132,000 174,000 0.20 1967 Y 1596 1206 Lyn Way 42,000 130,700 172,700 0.20 1967 Y 2088 11 01 Lyn Way 38,600 142,800 181,400 0.27 1969 Y 2148 1107 Lyn Way 38,600 134,400 173,000 0.27 1968 Y 1830 1111 Lyn Way 39,500 143,500 183,000 0.27 1970 Y 2093 1117 Lyn Way 38,600 145,000 183,600 0.27 1968 Y 2018 1121 Lyn Way 49,500 148,000 197,500 0.38 1969 Y 1980 Total 3,127,000 Avg Price 182,281 \ ~ J.JWY!~ 2004 Appraised Last Sa Ie Peak Address Land Building Value Amount Yr Built Homestead Value 880 Lyn Way #101 10,000 115,900 125,900 123,055 2003 N 125,900 102 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 103 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 104 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 N 122,900 105 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 106 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 107 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,200 2003 Y 126,200 108 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 109 10,000 115,900 125,900 125,000 2003 N 125,900 110 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,900 2003 N 130,900 201 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 202 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 203 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 204 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 205 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 206 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 207 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,400 2003 Y 126,400 208 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 209 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 210 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 301 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,400 2003 Y 130,400 302 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 303 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 304 10,000 106,300 116,300 124,900 2003 Y 124,900 305 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,200 2003 Y 126,200 306 10,000 106,300 116,300 125,900 2003 N 125,900 307 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,400 2003 Y 126,400 308 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 309 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 310 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,900 2003 Y 130,900 Total ~,769,900 Avg 125,655 2004 Appraised Last Sale Address Land Building Value Amount Yr Built Homestead Finished Peak Value 397 Whispering Lane 34,000 222,400 256,400 264,000 2002 Y 1732 264,000 393 Whispering Lane 30,600 223,100 253,700 276,837 2002 Y 1732 276,837 389 Whispering Lane 30,600 222,300 252,900 181,000 1999 Y 1724 252,900 377 Whispering Lane 34,000 172,200 206,200 183,000 1996 Y 1624 206,200 373 Whispering Lane 30,600 175,900 206,500 220,000 1996 Y 1624 220,000 369 Whispering Lane 30,600 174,300 204,900 177,500 1996 Y 1624 204,900 365 Whispering Lane 34,000 175,900 209,900 193,900 1996 Y 1624 209,900 355 Whispering Lane 72,900 217,300 290,200 380,115 2003 Y 1754 380,115 325 Whispering Lane 66,200 213,500 279,700 1993 Y 1804 279,700 305 Whispering Lane 66,200 238,000 304,200 184,846 1996 Y 2965 304,200 275 Whispering Lane 68,100 254,500 322,600 304,871 1995 Y 3064 322,600 225 Whispering Lane 69,500 237,400 306,900 .- 178,000 1987 Y 3404 306,900 205 Whispering Lane 68,100 231,200 299,300 - 260,000 1989 Y 2578 299,300 250 Crestview Drive 69,500 263,700 333,200 180,000 1998 Y 3332 333,200 283 Summit PI Dr 28,400 165,600 194,000 186,900 2000 y 1632 194,000 271 Summit pt Dr 25,500 165,700 191,200 196,164 2000 Y 1660 196,164 259 Summit pt Dr 25,500 167,400 192,900 193,900 2000 Y 1732 193,900 247 Summit Pt Dr 28,400 165,700 194,100 156,000 2000 Y 1660 194,100 235 Summit pt Dr 28,400 166,000 194,400 163,750 1999 Y 1710 194,400 223 Summit pt Dr 26,700 156,000 182,700 164,000 1999 Y 1710 182,700 211 Summit Pt Dr 28,400 165,600 194,000- 177,900 2000 Y 1632 194,000 209 Summit pt Dr 28,400 167,200 195,600_ 208,000 2000 Y 1632 208,000 353 Summit pt Ct 31,200 194,200 225,400 185,930 1999 Y 1710 225,400 341 Summit Pt Ct 29,300 241,100 270,400 233,198 1999 Y 3020 270,400 339 Summit Pt Ct 31,200 234,000 265,200 266,128 2000 Y 2738 266,128 327 Summit pt Ct 25,500 219,300 244,800 222,900 2000 Y 2430 244,800 315 Summit Pt Ct 25,500 196,300 221,800 222,765 2000 Y 1634 222,765 303 Summit pt Ct 28,400 232,300 260,700 307,000 2000 Y 2710 307,000 Total 6,954,509 Avg price 248,375 To: Hastings Planning Commission From: Jan Hanson Date: 6/4/04 Re: Proposed Development Whispering Lane & Crestview I am writing with concern about the proposed development of condominiums at Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive. I was informed about a meeting of the Planning Commission for 5/24/04 and this would be a time to voice concerns. Upon arrival I was told this project was not going to be discussed. I have received information from other concerned neighbors and I would like to share my opinion. Since our property value will be directly impacted by this development, I would like to request the planning commission seriously consider changing the zoning to only allow single family homes on the remaining property at this site. There is enough high density housing in this area along with the school and business developments. It would be appropriate for the planning commission to take a serious look at how the high density zoning and development is no longer appropriate for this area. Yes, I knew of this zoning when we chose to live here. I do believe, however, there are situations that require considering the impact of this type of development no longer being appropriate. " I am aware of proposed developm~nt along Pleasant Drive near the hospital area which will also increase traffic and density to this area. That also should be taken into consideration and also support the fact that on our street, single family homes would most appropriate. I appreciate the city council following the process of informing residents and allowing residents to share concerns. However, I don't think the opinions of the residents are always taken seriously. I have recently been informed that there is a possibility this project will be on the June 14th agenda. It would be important to know prior to arrival as to whether this will be discussed. Thank you for your consideration to this neighborhood. Sincerely, flL6 b(~ !eJj " " -" Objections to Proposed Project on Whispering Lane June 14, 2004 Larry Christianson 275 Whispering Lane 437-8082 Background I am the homeowner that lives at 275 Whispering Lane, the house directly across from the eastern driveway of the proposed condo/apartment building. I designed and built my home in 1996. I live there with my wife, daughter and father-in-law for whom we provide care. My home was recently appraised as being worth $350,000, which is about 10% more than its building cost 8 years ago. The. lot price was $40,000 when we built. This year's property taxes were nearly $4000 on a tax- appraised value of $315,000. I mention this only in support of the potential fmancial impact that this project' will have on me and my neighbors. ....."f The statements here are my own, and are, to the best of my knowledge correct. Naturally, I have an opinion about this project or I wouldn't be bothering with this; but I am trying to stay factual and to avoid hyperbole. Neighborhood History The bulk of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive were developed in the 1980s and 1990s. Most of the homes were in place for many years before we built in 1996. These are predominantly upscale, single-family homes. A few twin homes were added in 2002 on the lower end of Whispering Lane; these also are upscale. On the west side of the proposed development site are Summit Point Drive and Glenlou Way. This area has been developed in high-quality twin homes in the last few years (townhouses?). My understanding is that all this property was,oWned by a single owner who resided in Edina. Originally, the area plan called for townhouses and higher density housing. Apparently the city signed a contract with the owner of the property in 1985 which allows higher density housing (up to 90 units) on the lots in question. Why this was done, and whether this was proper, I don't know; it is not appropriate now in light of how the neigh1>orhood evolved. . The area's demand was for single-family homes. Over the years the large lots were re-platted and sold for single-family homes. The buyers were typically told that the neighborhood was to be single-family homes and townhouses. Although the zoning was still R-3, the universal expectation was that high-density wouldn't come because it is so vastly different than what existed. Now, the only remaining undeveloped land is the lot in question and smaller adjoining plots. The Whispering Lane/Crestview neighborhood was particularly unique in that these lots were independent of any particular builder. As a result, there has been a wide variety of designs, but of consistent quality and taste. The neighborhood is unique in its variety of styles, it is eclectic in a very good way. General Objections to the Project · The project doesn't fit the neighborhood. This neighborhood in nearly fully developed and consists of high-end single family and townhouses. Many homes have been in existence for over 10 years. The neighborhood is stable, turnover of housing is low and neighbors know neighbors. Consistent and appropriate development would consist of more homes of a similar nature. It is not fair to the existing residents to impose such a dramatic change of land use and population to the neighborhood. " · The developer says condominiums, but is it really? :.... A owner-occupied is more desirable than rental units because of the stability of the residents. But, there is no way to prevent the developer ITom declaring this to be apartments, or rental condominiums, or owner-rented condominiums. As you know, the City Council recently called for a moratorium on multi- unit developments to have time to sort this out; this is a recognized problem. · The area will not bear the traffic generated by 70-100+ new units. There is no quick ac'cess to a major road. All traffic will be put onto Whispering Lane. The nearest cross-streets are Featherstone Road and 4th Street which are feeder streets. To reach Highway 55, Pleasant Avenue and General Sieben Drive all require passing through multiple stop signs. A traffic study was done for a 30 unit building which was proposed for the adjoining lot. The road was found to be adequate, but I feel the study was flawed. The study was conducted at a time of low traffic; during the summer when the high school was out and people would be on vacation. :0 This project is over twice as large as the one for which the study was made. If this 72 unit project is allowed, almost certainly an addition 30-36 unit building will be put on the adjacent lot for a total of 102-108 units. If each unit has 2 cars, which might be a low estimate, it will introduce 200-250 cars (trucks, moving vans, etc.) into.a street whjch previously had about 25 cars using it for residential access. '. Whether this increase will necessitate street improvements, I don't know, but it is not fair to the existing residents to bear the cost of improvements to a road which already suits their needs. · The road is already difficult. Whispering Lane and Crestview both curve and rise sharply to the top, peaking at the intersection of Whispering Lane and Crestview. Visibility is limited and sometimes hazardous. I often have difficulty exiting my driveway, which is adjacent to this intersection, because of the lack of visibility. To add a 4th and 5th intersection to an already problematic corner is bad planning. See the attached photos for reference, and come and take a look. Featherstone Road is a sharp incline, the top of which is about 100 feet west of the intersection with Whispering Lane. There is already a 'Blind Intersection' sign posted there. Featherstone Road is a main feeder to this area, this intersection will be truly hazardous if the volume of traffic is expanded by 5x or more. There are a lot of children in the area. They like to ride their bikes and some play in the street. In particular, the lower portion of Whispering Lane (south of 4th Street which connects to Pleasant) often has street hockey and ad hoc baseball games going on. Sure, they shouldn't play in the street, but this is what makes a neighborhood. I believe that there is the significant risk of someone being hit if traffic volume is high. · Parking will be problematic. The plan calls for 72 garages (one per unit) and approximately 72 lot spots; One can reasonably expect that many of the garages will be used for storage units and the cars will be stored outside. If there are more than 2 cars per unit, which is a reasonable expectation, they will spill out into the street. Cars permanently parked in the street is unsafe and unsightly. No doubt the residents of the building will have guests too, adding to the congestion. The street is a normal width, but it feels very full now any time that there are cars parked on both sides. It is not fair or safe to the existing residents to put up with this and to potentially take away parking.for their guests. In addition, emergency vehicles could be impaired with the congestion. . . There may be a strain on basic services. There are times of day when I notice a drop in water pressure. Will the addition of 72-100+ households in one small area make service levels sub-standard? Has any study been made to check that appropriate quantity and quality of water will be available to serve the area? The City Council, on June 7th, directed the city engineer to hire an outside consulting firm to plan water requirements for near and long-term needs in Hastings. -" Will sidewalks now be necessary? Should the existing residents, who have lived without, now have to pay an assessment in order to satisfy this extraordinary influx of residents? Will fire and police coverage for the area be impacted? High-density housing usually also demands above average attention from these services. · This will have a negative impact on p{operty values. I have been told that I can expect a 10 to 30% decrease in property value depending upon the use and execution of the project. Residents ~ho are closest will suffer the most, those who live on non- connecting streets can expect about a 5% decline in value. - If one takes the 5% figure and applies it to t4e surrounding 110 properties and allows an average home .~ value of$250,000 you derive an equity loss to the neighborhood of $1,375,000. This figure is probably low, it certainly is in my case where I can expect to lose around $100,000. I'm sure my property tax will go down (sarcasm). It is not fair to transfer the hard work of long-term residents to developers and non-residents. · The people of the area do not want this project. They see it as destructive to the neighborhood and completely undesirable., Opposition to last year's 30 unit proposal was strong, but too late. It was only good fortune that it did not happen. Opposition to this proj ect has been even stronger based on responses I received. I have had calls from about 70 different households opposing this project and supporting my efforts to stop it. Many were prepared to attend the last Planning Commission meeting, but when this proj ect was pulled from the agenda did not (as appropriate). Even after trying to spread the word around that the project was pulled, I talked to over 20 people in the hall to explain the situation. I hope that a good turnout will be at the meeting, that they get the word and are not put off by the 'false alarm' of the last meeting. · You may be impacting a future historic neighborhood. This neighborhood; especially on Whispering Lane and Crestview, are some of the best and most unique homes built in Hastings in the past 20 years. The homes are all individuals and indicators of the style of the decade in which they were built. This is not tract housing where they are all the same with differing veneer; they were built to fit the needs and personalities of the residents. In 50 years time, these homes could be examples of the best of the late 20th century. History has a starting point and the neighborhood has driven its stake down in time. Contrast this with the proposed apartment buildings. What kind of care and interest will these buildin.gs engender? Probably not much, perhaps they will be viewed as what was wrong with large scale development. _Of Specific Objections to this Project . It is ugly. There is nothing of architectur8.l interest in the plan. The facade is plain and uninteresting. It is completely maximized and utilitarian. It screams apartment building, not home. It is nothing more than a warehouse for people, a barracks. . It is far too large. It fills the lot and will tower over the neighborhood. It is located on some of the highest land in Dakota county. It will be like having the Government Center in our yards. It is out of scale to its surroundings, and would be more appropriate adjacent to commercial property. The current residents will have no privacy. 'QIey will be in constant view of the new buildings. This effectively takes away the use of their yards unless they are exhibitionists. These buildings will dominate the vi~w from the neighborhood and will be visible from throughout the city. Is this what people want to see? . Parking is inadequate. ..:' I know I mentioned this before, but it bears repeating. 72 garages and 72 parking stalls won't even begin to serve the residents. It will overflow into the street and be a detriment and hazard. This goes to the 2nd point, this project is too big for its space. . What about water run-off? Approximately 70% of the lot is developed or paved. The water run-off will be tremendous. There is no provision for capturing or draining the water except into the street. Will the sewer system be able to handle this? This project is at the top of a hill, will adjacent properties be flooded? Will 4th Street be flooded? . Landscaping is minimal. Although the current plan shows the lot packed with trees Gust throw them in to show they're doing something), it is just putting lipstick on a pig. No amount of trees or shrubbery will make the property more attractive or less noticeable. From my front window I will now have a direct view of36 garage/storage units. . There is no recreational space. There is no play yard, pool, tennis courts, or even just a plain yard. A home has a place where one can enjoy being outdoors. Here there is a slab of asphalt and a green space which is so full of trees as to unusable for any purpose (if grass will even grow there). Are the children who live there going to play in the streets (if the street isn't full of cars)? · This project won't be the last Whatever is established here will carryover into the adjacent lot. There are 72 units being proposed now, there will be 100+. That is wh~t is really being proposed. Personal Objections · The driveway points directly into my front window and is adjacent to my driveway. It's hard enougn to get out without the introduction of a new major traffic source. I don't want lights in my front windows all night. I can only speculate on car horns, stereos, people shouting and talking; it's possible to sleep , -" with the windows open now, I doubt if it will be when this is built. My view will be maximum ugly. I get to look right into the garage and parking area. Surely something could be done about this. · I will take a huge hit in property value, probably in excess of $70-1 00,000. I saved and worked hard to get my home. To transfer its value to someone else is manifestly unfair. What can be done? · This is the wrong project for the neighborhood. Deny this project on its own merits. It is a flawed design and will have strong negative impact on its surrounding area. · Order studies to support the questions of support. Traffic, safety, utility use, drainage, access to emergency services are all real concerns. · " Resolve the legal question. The City has made a~eement with a previous owner of the land to allow up to 90 units on this property. Can this be challenged? I'm not a lawyer, but I think this agreement can be challenged or modified. Direct the city legal counsel to investigate legal remedies or negotiate to rescind the contract. · The neighborhood is vastly different than originally planned. The original plan and agreement are null and void (the original owner didn't follow the plan when the lots were sold helter-skelter for single family homes). · The agreement was with the original owner and not transferrable (maybe). · Development in this manner will have a significant monetary impact on long-standing residents. It amounts to a 'taking' if this development is permitted. · Services can not be supported in this area for a development this large. Impossibility is a valid reason to void a contract. · Re-zone the lots (including the one to the south) to appropriate use. R-l or R-2. Adjacent lots were just re-zoned to R-2. This reflects the nature of the neighborhood. You could re-zone and condemn my house to be a park if you wanted to, it is not impossible. · Direct that existing residents be compensated for their loss in property value and loss of use of their property . · Look at the attached low density plat proposals. These are viable alternatives which show what could be done to keep the neighborhood intact. The Bigger Picture - what can be done · Really plan, and stick to it. Be sure that all new developments fully disclose the use of land around them. The recent Pulte development is a good example. Simply allowing big contractors to buy large plots and fill them in is not the way to go. · Is more high-density housing desirable for Hastings? It seems to be being developed in several areas right now. I don't think it is just market forces at work here. There needs to be a balance to provide' step-up opportunities in housing. . Keep apartment buildings in buffer areas. Keep them adjacent to appropriate roads and in scale with their surroundings. ...'If · Don't allow higher density housing to go into established areas. Ifhomes have been present in the immediate area for (e.g.) 5+ years, the residents have a right to expect consistency in their neighborhood. There needs to be a policy which protects the existing residents. · Allow new neighborhoQds go grow up around the high-density and commercial, rather than the other way around. Lead with it, don't follow with it. An Appeal to the Developer I've said a lot of disparaging things about this project, but it's not personal, the project is just a very bad idea. I don't think you want to be known as the company which forces itself down everyone's throat for the sake of a buck. It is much better to have the reputation of a company concerned with quality and value. There- '.lie good alternatives in low-density housing. The existing lot could be platted into 20-24 single family hOme plots; the adjacent lot a dozen more. There is a great opportunity to complete a desirable, upscale neighborhood with houses the owners would be proud to have, and neighbors the neighborhood would be glad to welcome. I don't know the price of the lot involved, but I would think that a profit of lOk per lot and a profit of 25k per house is probably in line. Over 24 houses that's 850k profit, that and the valuable intangible of doing the right thing. , I,_____~ .l::::: t:J J __ ::::: ~:_:~::}:: ::F-~"fHERS~e: R~::: :::::L_-~ .... , ' I I I I I I , I I I I I , I I I I , . I I I I I . , \ I' II \ I " \I II " "t I' /I J I . :'.; ./I" ) ~. " Note: Map is out of date, approximately from 1994. Virtually all lots are filled except subject property. , . ,. I , I I , i I f I . I t I , , , I I , j\ j r K Letters indicate position and direction that photos illustrate. '"',. -" J A) Whispering Lane. View towards south and proposed driveway. Note curve and downward slope. " _or , B) Whispering Lane. View towards Crestview Drive. Curved and sloped C) Comer of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive, towards Whispering Lane and Featherstone Drive and 2nd driveway.. D) View from 275 Whispering Lane towards proposed driveway and garages. '" ~.. E) Comer of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive towards Crestview Drive. F) Comer of Whispering Lane and Crestview down Whispering Lane iIi~- G) Whispering Lane towards Featherstone. View towards 2nd proposed driveway. "'\. -" H) Corner of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive towards proj ect I) Crestview Drive towards Whispering Lane towards project J) View up Whispering Lane towards project. Note upward slope. . '" -'" K) View towards project and comer of Whispering Lane and Crestview L) View towards project and Summit Point Drive " ;--. NW. cor. of NW1/4 of NE1/4, Sec. 29, Twp. 115, Rge. 17 ~N. line .of ~ (Dakota Count~ Cast Iron MonumeRt Found In Place.) --------I.;l,..,..,.j, --- L3 I ..... I.' '--275.62 gJ g ,---- Fif(ST 24...J L-- scCoo I I o o (T) (T) (T) -" .... .... FIRST. STREET- \' I I o o w Z <t -l 60 j I l fi 11 I j I,: .~ (T) (T) (T) ..... -. .... W :z: .... o ......'.. ..... .... :x :z: .... o CD c - ~ ,Ii> - .... .... ., - 0> .; a:: u a '" Ln ~ .... "- .... C . ... Q. :a:'d I- C ::s a 0 O\IJ.. N ... .; <: '" ., e VI ::s <: a 0' ....::0: ..... .... <: I ..... 0 :z: ... I -- !\ .... 0..... '" .... '" -.u .... .... :.:>, N :z: ..... '" <: 0 '" .... ::s ? 0 c u ':1 ..: ,a 0..... u c ... .:z: .1 It 'Z,.. I s 439.65 :::; C: }"i tJ tv1 p~ (: i"1 E: F~ 3f(C~ ,t..\!) fJ ~ or; c:: r.J EXEPTION "', '" '" NW-. cor. of NWI/4 of NEl/4, Sec. Z9, Twp. 115, Rge. Ii!... - ~H' line .of HI (Dakota Count:y Cast Iron MO=t Found .:..:ace.J _ ~__ L3 !40TH '--275.62 ~ ~ ,- i=IF<S"r 24-' L- I FIRST. STREET ~a.oa I \ g ~ ~ I ~ :5 ~ \ 60 _or . ! , ~ ;""-0 I o S. 1 ine . of NWI, 3 . '~~ .... . - ... W :z: ~ <> .... ..: ...... ... . ~ ~ <> CD '" - ..... ...... ... CD - 0> ..; c:: u . III Ll> ..... ... <>. ... C .- ~~I 1'-'" ::> . <> en ...... N .... U c '" '" e VI ::> c . <> ....:E ...... '" ... I ..... <> :z l- I - ~\ ~ 0.... '" .... III ......u .~ ... :.:>-, N :z .... on '" 0 '" .... '" ? 0 0 u ~I ..: '" I:'...~ (, S B9"53'51"W 439.65 :::;(::}"i t.J~A .L~(:: 1'1 E:F~ :3 f~ [) ,L\ {) f) ; ..r ! c:: r .J EXEPTION --NW. cor. of NW1/4 of NE1/4, Sec. 29, Twp, 115, Rge. 17 (Dakota County Cast Iron MonumeRt Found In Place.) ~N' line.of NW1/4 of NE1/4 _______ HE, cor. of NW1/4.of NE ... -I~:I -------- L2 .' L3 ."":"',,: I r1 ~T::::i="=~ . ~ __ '--275.62--':' __ '" 0 _' . . . ~J ..~ L23 I I IN'" \ --- 'I=!';:;';;:" ---2231.00--- , . . __~_4...J L-- I I " '-' I 172.6011 I FIRST. STREET' - ~o.oo I I : 10 "0 6 I ......' 0 '0 W 0 -\ lTi (TJ Z (TJ I 72.Eig ~ ~ :5 ~ I I :d I ?- - ;; 60 UJ g ;.;:g 0 ;. g.(!) g;' o .. : 0 ? ~ 0 Z 0 ~ 0,1--'00 0 "',,......, I'" ...-'" - 0'<1' I ..... II 0 ..-t a:: '" ..-t --1\ '0 '0 W 0 t-! 0 0 0.. 0 ~I ~ ~ 01 I "I I II :> I 'I ~;:>- 72.60 ...J ~ "'. I I I Ul ..-t I( po J N T 91 1.00 FEE T (A S MEA s.u R, E C-' AT A RIGHT ANGLE) YleST OF TH-e 'EAS _'< LJ N E O'F SA 1'0: N, W, 1/4 0 F THe N, e. 1 871.3 ")..... . '-( ;1..2- CD (I) CJ) UJ o o o 00 . U1 00) o~ f I '1 \ ~ \ \ I I_- I I " l 17 /(. 15 /0( s <:t t'" ~ t, 5 H .3 1- 15 :- 407. Cf :5 %- 5 8 ~ [0 1 (. S 8S'53'51"W 439.65 I J! o. o ~::; (:: }"i tJ r~A t"~ C: 1.-1 E:: F~~ ;> , , , . , ~ < o " .... N It) 1<1 :3f{[: .i-\[) f) ;.r !C;f.J o o o o tII I I EXEPTION , LNORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 33' OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE.NE 1/4 _-ti- ~~____' ~EC.29.TW~G~ ~I .... "'--"'"!" - -- ., . ___ .... -:-644.61-- "r'! l:,:.:' __...,.J .... ---N'BS'53'51'E .... ---APPL..~.-r ~(~ 7~rXQ~f---1'!/:.: A...tI'C:>I....... ~I~ 3<:. t' '18 / ",:!.' r--~- -- / . -NW. cor. of Nlil/4 of NE1/4. Sec. 29, Twp. 115, Rge. 17 (Dakota County Cast Iron Monument Found In Place.) ~N' line of Nli1/4 of NE1/4 _---- NE. cor. of Nlil/4.of NEl/4 ---- --------- L2 ." L3 14()T1-1 ~T;:"';::;:''''' .l- ..' 'J . ',.-:- I . 'N I __ __275.62-- -- OJ 0 \____ .-....~.- . _":"_223100'- L23 r N 24 ~ L- I \-! t{,:;. i . --- I 72.60i I 1 FIRS T. STREET !!iICOO I I jl 00 6 \ <(i ~ 0 ~ 0 \ \ ~ C'J c:( C'J E-.!g C'J ~ -1 g; \ ~ ,,' "f - "f " ~. ' o ....g 0 ~ ~'CD g. ~ o .. \o? ," ,., /I. POINT 911.00 FEET (AS MEA5.UnEO' o .,1-- '0 0 ' 0 Z 0 . . . "'. 1"'"\ I'" <<r ~ - o'f AT A RIGHT ANGLE) VlEST O.F TH'E .EAS.T-, I ....: I 0 ..... 0:: "'..... LJNE O.F SAI1): N;W. 1/4 OF THE N.E, 1-/4 ~\ 'g , ~ g ~ ::> i [J) Cf) U1 S. line of N. 333.00 ft. O! \ :r: "1 . of Nli1t4 of NE1/4; I \1 I re3 - I ---N 8.9'43'36""E 871.38 72.60 -N ..J ~ 1: l- .., :3 'Z- .~:..~ ~ 4 It.> I' . S 8S'53'51"W 438.65 I ~\ o o ::; C:l-i tJ r~A j.~C.: ~.~ E: F~ ? , ) , ,..r N '" '" :5F([:: ~\ I' LNORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 33' OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE ,NE 1/4 _...1.l- . . OF ~EC, 29, TWP. 115, RGE,17 ~I ~---- -~~:-;:;-- .... .. ___ "'. --644.61-- ~'1 ;:.,:' I ----' . __ . ;., '.' . . ___N'BS'S3'Si'E 1323.66--':- '" . -----~-----1. f--~- \ / l;Y J.. . .'.:r / . ;::..! I EXEPTION :J: en o ID o .l-\ [:: [::; ~'T !C}t'J . . ~ ~ o " o o F:C:L: F~::r!'i <-:..= LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF HASTINGS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 4th Street East, Hastings, MN 55033 Phone: 651.480.2350 Fax: 651.437.7082 Address of Property: W\.\~~ L~t,; Legaf Description of Property: LOT '2. ~LDC...\L l \N\l.L~/^~ \ ~r~OOI,\ol\J Applicant: Name Address Phone Fax Email Owner (If different from Applicant): L~,v{2.GIUCG' P;:{)\LOEQ'::;, lUC. Name \I ~ ~ ~. ~('20".l'rG. e ~D. Address ~, ] i Go. to I ",U. ~ O~~ ~~lt._~:~~J;'L OE.Ut ~e L~I@M~U. CQ(A Phone Fax Email Description of Request (include site plan, survey, and/or plat if applicable): (LE ~gEbT ~\~ f'~ h~-'f;;~~R. '1. I ~ ~~~~11lJ IT C.DIU OLA\IU\O P.:o DI Q \&~T~L' - P;vlLDU.JG? . d . Check applicable box(es): - .- , X "I.. Final Plat Minor Sub. Rezone Spec. Use Variance Annexation EAW Prelim Plat Site Plan TOTAL: Signature of Applicant Note: All fees and escrow amounts due at time of application. $600 $500 $500 $500 $250 _ $500 plus legal expenses $500 plus $1000 escrow $500 plus escrow: - Under 10 acres: $3000 ($500 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - Over 10 acres: $6000 ($1000 Planning + $5000 Engineering) $500 plus escrow: - 0 - 5,000 s.f.: $1500 (Engineering) - 5,000 - 10,000 s.f.: $2500 ($500 Planning + $2000 Engineering) - 10,000 - 50,000 sJ.: $3250 ($750 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - 50,000 sJ. +: $4000 ($1000 Planning + $3000 Engineering) Administrative Lot Split Camp Plan Amendment House Move Lot Line Adjustment Vacate ROW/Easement $50 $500 $500. $50 $400 Date Signature of Owner Date ~~ IJ ~ ~L,)("eJA.LfL- 'f /27 /0'-1 , I Official se Only . File # ?.DO Lj ~ 2-\ Fee Paid~i,;)OO. (J7) OWner Name - Please Print tC.L Rec'd By: Ib Receipt # ~ () W Date Rec'd 1-11 Jtll 0 ~ App. Complete 4/23/2003 VIII-B-4 Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 1 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: Kris Jenson, Associate Planner Date: September 7,2004 Resolution - Glendale Heights 3rd Addition -Preliminary and Final Plat #2004-44 - 31st Street and Spiral Blvd east of Enterprise Avenue - Tom Ryan Subject: REQUEST Tom Ryan seeks Preliminary and Final Plat approval of Glendale Heights 3rd Addition located on 79.59 acres owned by Sai"nuel Hertog and William Crist, located along Spiral Blvd and 31 st Street east of Enterptise Avenue as foUows: · 80 Villa Homes (8 unit buildings) _._ · 89 Coach Homes (3-5 unit buildings) · 22 Twin Homes · 10 Common Ownership Lots The request constitutes Phase II of the overall Glendale Heights Development Plan. The concept plan was reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the platting of the first addition of Glendale Heights. Glendale Heights 2nd Addition was approved late last year and construction has started on home units within the 2nd Addition. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission reviewed this item at their August 23rd meeting. No one spoke at the public hearing. One Commissioner expressed concern with the Glacier Way cul-de-sac length. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat on a vote of 5-1-1 (Commission Truax dissenting, Commission Mcinnis abstaining). Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS . Location Map . Preliminary Plat . Final Plat . Application Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION History Glendale Heights 2'd Addition - Approved late last year. Plat consisted of 109 units, including twinhomes, coach homes, and villas. Construction has started on all three styles of homes. Glendale Heights 1st Addition - Approved by the City Council on August 18, 2003. Plat consisted of street right-of-way and outlots only. No buildable lots of record were created. A concept plan for site development was presented for review and comment. The plan was a major revision to the Original Glendale Heights Preliminary Plat reviewed in July of 2002. Original Glendale Heights - 2002 Plan - Reviewed but never approved by the City Council in 2002. The overall plan contained more apartment and single family units. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EA W) - A mandatory EA W was conducted for the site and road improvements. Notice was published in the EQB Monitor for comment. The city received comments from seven parties, primarily state and federal agencies. The Council reviewed the EAW findings and comments at the July 1,2002 meeting, concluding that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) would not be warranted, and directing staff to provide responses to agencies, and incorporate comment in the development of the preliminary plat. Conditions have been added to address sensitive bluff land and woodland areas, as well as storm water runoff. _ C.omprehensive Plan Classification .' The Plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The property is guided U-II, Urban Residential (4-8 units per acre). The General Development Plan density of 7.3 units per acre is consistent with the plan. Zoning Classification The Plan is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance. The property is zoned R-3 - Medium High Density Residence. The applicant proposes to develop the property as a Planned Residential Development to allow for clustering of units and preservation of open space. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abut the property: Direction Existina Use North Agriculture East Shooting Range\ Aggregate Industries Agriculture Vacant City Park Zonina A - Agriculture Comp Plan R-Rural South West A - Agriculture Marshan Twp I - Industrial Park P-1 - Park R-Rural I - Industrial P-Public Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 3 Existing Condition The southern 1/3 and northeast corner of the site is wooded. The remainder of the site is open agriculture. The eastern portion of the site is located on a bluff, approximately 100 feet above the elevation of the eastern adjoining land. As stated earlier, construction has started on the units in the 2nd Addition, and Spiral Boulevard is open and connected to Glendale Rd. Proposed Condition Development occurs most predominately in the open areas. Woodland areas are most impacted by the Spiral Blvd connection to the east and the proposed 40 unit apartment building on Outlot A. Changes from Original Glendale Heights Plan Total number of units and density has decreased from the 2002 Plan. Major changes include the large reduction of apartment buildings, elimination of single family homes, and the spreading of density to attached townhome buildings. The following changes have been made since the 2002 Glendale Heights Plan: 2002 Glendale Hei hts 45 ' " 78' o o 500 623 7.83 units er acre 2003 Glendale Hei o 44 128 128 280 580 7.3 units er acre hts The area of the site impacted by development is slightly larger. The most sipnificant change is the addition of a 40 unit apartment building between Spiral and 31 S Streets instead of proposed open space\park. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT REVIEW Phasing Plan The developer proposes to phase construction of the site as follows: Unit Phase I Phase II Phase III Total Apartments 0 0 280 280 Villas (8 unit bldgs) 48 80 0 128 Coach Homes (3-5 unit bldas) 39 89 0 128 Twin Homes 22 22 0 44 TOTAL 109 191 280 580 Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 4 All components with the exception of the 40 unit apartment building have been included in the Preliminary and Final Plat of Glendale Heights 2nd Addition. Planned Residential Development Section 10.14, Subd.2 allows Planned Residential Developments (PRO) in the R-3 District. PROs allow flexibility in the application of minimum lot size and setback standards within the development, allow for a clustering of uses and preservation of open space. The intent is to provide a process, whictl will encourage the following: 1) Variety: Within a comprehensive site design concept a mixture of land uses, housing types and densities. 2) Sensitivity: Through the departure from the strict application of minimum lot requirements and other performance standards associated with traditional zoning, planned residential developments can maximize the development potential of land while remaining sensitive to its unique and valuable natural characteristics. 3) Efficiency: The consolidation of areas for recreation and reductions in street lengths and widths and other utility related expenses. ~ 4) Density Transfer: The project density may be clustered, basing density on number of units per acre versus specific lot dimensions. The preservation of bluff woodlands through the clustering of units warrants the -implementation of the Planned Residential Development. Approval of the Planned 'Residential Development would set a cap on the maximum density allowed for the entire project at 8 units per acre. Spiral Boulevard Extension Spiral Boulevard has been constructed and is open for use. The extension provides a critical access link to the County Road 54 - Ravenna Trail bridge across the Vermillion River, providing an alternate to the Vermillion Street Bridge. Access and Circulation Spiral Boulevard and 31 st Street will provide primary western access to Highway 316. Primary eastern access will be from Spiral Boulevard to Glendale Road. Temporary cul-de- sacs are proposed along the northern, southern, and western boundaries to provide further connectivity in the future. Direct driveway access to Spiral Blvd and 318 Street is not proposed. Access and circulation is acceptable, subject to the following: 1) All private roads must be constructed to city specifications. Cul-de-Sac Lengths The following roads exceed the 500 foot cul-de-sac length requirement: Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 5 · North of Spiral Boulevard - All units north of Spiral Boulevard would be served by a single road access. Olympic Way has been stubbed at the northwest corner of the plat for future connection and development of a secondary access. The developer has widened the Voyageur Parkway at the intersection with Spiral Boulevard to accommodate two lanes in each direction to improve emergency access. The cul-de-sac length is acceptable provided construction of a temporary emergency access road linking Olympic Way to Enterprise Avenue to the specifications of the Fire Marshall. · Glacier Way - The cul-de-sac would be approximately 1 ,100 feet in length. Provisions have been made to connect the cul-de-sac upon future development to the south, however the property is not within the city or Comprehensive Plan for development and is currently owned by the State DNA. During review of the Concept Plan, the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed alternative alignments to 31 st Street to eliminate the cul-de-sac length, but concluded they would more severely impact sensitive slope areas (the proposed alignment of 31 s Street occurs in a pre-existing ravine - realignment would create another ravine cut). Because the property is developed as a Planned Residential Development - a formal variance is not needed - however the Planning Commission and Council should review the reasons for the deviation to assess th~ir merit. Staff recommends approval of the deviation based on the existing site topography and to limit impact on sensitive slope areas. , Parking Parking for the site is acceptable. Each unit would have a two stall garage and driveway -access to park two additional vehicles. Overflow on-street parking will be available on ;' Yellowstone Drive, Voyageur Parkway, Rushmore Road, Glacier Way, and Yukon Circle. Lot Layout Lot layout is acceptable. Care has been taken in developing a grading plan that limits impacts to existing slopes and bluff land trees. All units will be platted as "lot boxes" that incorporate the unit and limited surrounding land. The majority of land between units will be held in an association controlled and operated by the owners of the property. Outlots No outlots are being platted as part of this plat. There are still three outlots for future development. Development of outlots would be prohibited, until replatted as a lot and block of record. Site Plan Review All buildings consisting of three or more units will be subject to Site Plan Approval by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to construction. Due to the current moratorium on site plan reviews of multi-family units, the review will have to wait until the moratorium expires or is lifted by the City Council. The applicant has indicated that there will be no changes to the future units from what has already been approved by the City Council. Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7,2004 Page 6 Pedestrian Access and Circulation Pedestrian access and circulation is acceptable. Spiral Boulevard will contain a sidewalk and trail; trails are also included on 31st Street, and Voyageur Parkway. A sidewalk is proposed along Rushmore Road. Tree Preservation & Landscape Plan A revised Tree Preservation and Landscape Plan has been submitted per the conditions of approval for Glendale Heights 2nd Addition. 1) Prior to City signature-of the Final Plat mylars, the revised landscape plan shall be approved by the City Forester. 2) Replacement of removed trees shall be required at the amount specified in the Tree Preservation Guidelines at the discretion of the City Forester. Hastings Industrial Park Buffer A fifty foot building setback buffer must be maintained along the western boundary of the plat adjacent to the Hastings Industrial Park. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plan ;, The City's consultant engineer has,reviewed the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans. Approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat is subject to approval of the Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and Utility Plans by the Public Works Director, and _ r~imbursement for any fees involved in plan r~view as well as resolution of the following ,issues: .- 1) All structures shall be provided with roof gutters to direct flow into interior stormwater storage basins. 2) The association shall be fully responsible for maintenance of ravine slopes. A clause must be included in the association documents to memorialize association responsibility . 3) Severe grades and slopes must be reforested with naturally occurring trees and shrubs to recreate the existing habitat and environment and stabilize the slopes. 4) All off site drainage must be controlled to detain as much run-off as possible on site. In instances where runoff cannot be contained onsite special measures such as filter dames, rock check dames and French drains must be used. Temporary Easements A temporary drainage, utility and access easement must be granted to facilitate construction of the water line, and temporary road across outlot areas. Homeowner Association\Covenants A homeowner association and covenants' must be established to ensure continued Glendale Heights 3rd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat City Council Memo - September 7, 2004 Page 7 maintenance of all outlots and common areas prior to release of the final plat mylars. Park Dedication The Natural Resources and Recreation Committee has recommended the following. 1) Cashin lieu of land shall be paid to satisfy park dedication requirements in the amount of $222,200 ($1,100 x 169 multi-family units = $185,900 + $1,650 x 22 twinhome units = $36,300) prior to the release of Final Plat mylars for recording. Sewer Interceptor Fees The following shall be paid for sewer interceptor fees 1) Sewer interceptor fees in the amount of $63,985 ($335 x 191 units) shall be paid prior to release of the final plat mylars for recording. HASTINGS CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 09-_-04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS APPROVING THE GLENDALE HEIGHTS 3RD ADDITION PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT WHEREAS, Ryan Contractin~ has requested approval for the preliminary and final plat of GLENDALE HEIGHTS 3 D ADDITION, a subdivision consisting of 129 lots on property legally described as Outlots B, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, GLENDALE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION, Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on August 23, 2004, a public hearing was conducted before the Planning Commission of the City of Hastings, as required by state law, city charter and . city ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and Final Plat subject to the conditions contained herein. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: The Final Plat of GLENDALE HEIGHTS 3RD ADDITION is approved subject to the following conditions: 1) Development of the platted outlots shall be prohibited until replatted as lots of record. 2) All buildings consisting of three or more units will be subject to Site Plan by the Planning Commission and City Council prior to construction 3) All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 4) Final approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans by the Public Works Director, and reimbursement for any fees incurred in review of the 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11 ) 12) 13) 14) 15) development. The owner assumes all risks associated with the grading and utility placement prior to formal approvals. All structures shall be provided with roof gutters to direct flow into interior stormwater storage basins. The association shall be fully responsible for maintenance of ravine slopes. A clause must be included in the association documents to memorialize association responsibility. Severe grades and slopes must be reforested with naturally occurring trees and shrubs to recreate the existing habitat and environment and stabilize the slopes. All off site drainage must be controlled to detain as much run-off as possible on site. In instances where runoff cannot be contained onsite special measures such as. filter dames, rock check damns and French drains shall be used. The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City's property maintenance ordinance. Further exactions may be required as a condition of replatting outlots. All private roads constructed to city specifications. Prior to City signature of the Final Plat mylars, the revised landscape plan shall be approved by the City Forester. Replacement of removed trees shall be required at the amount specified in the Tree Preservation Guidelines at the discretion of the City Forester. A fifty foot building setba~k buffer must be maintained along the western boundary of the plat adjacent to the Hastings Industrial Park. A declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions or the equivalent document shall be submitted for review and approval by the City before release of the final. plat mylars to ensure maintenance of open space, common drives, and common utilities. The declaration shall include, but is not limited to, the following: (a) A statement requiring the deeds, leases or documents of conveyance affecting buildings, units, parcels, tracts, townhouses, or apartments be subject to the terms of the declaration. (b) A provision for the formation of a property owners association or corporation and that all owners must be members of said association or corporation which may maintain all properties and common areas in good repair and which may assess individual property owners proportionate shares of joint or common costs. The association or corporation must remain in effect and may not be terminated or disbanded. (c) Membership in the association shall be mandatory for each owner and any successive buyer. (d) Any open space restrictions must be permanent and may not be changed or modified without city approval. (e) The association is responsible for liability insurance, local taxes and the maintenance of the open space facilities deeded to it. 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21) 22) (f) Property owners are responsible for their pro-rata share of the cost of the association by means of an assessment to be levied by the association which meet the requirements for becoming a lien on the property in accordance with Minnesota Statutes. (g) The association may adjust the assessment to meet changing needs. Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to recording of the Final Plat mylars. Preliminary Plat approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void. Execution of a development agreement to memorialize the conditions of the plat and to establish any applicable escrow amounts to guarantee the completion of site plan activities. Payment of cash in lieu of land for park dedication in the amount of $222,200 ($1,100 x 169 multi-family units = $185,900 + $1,650 x 22 twin home units = $36,300) prior to release of final plat mylars. Payment of sewer interceptor fees in the amount of $63,985 ($335 x 191 units) prior to release of final plat mylars. Any uncompleted site work (including landscaping) must be escrowed for prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The Final Plat shall be recorded with Dakota County within 90 days of approval by the City Council, or the approval is null and void. Adopted by the Hastings City Council on September 7,2004 by the following vote: Ayes: ..~Nays: Absent: ATTEST: Michael D. Werner, Mayor Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative AssistanVCity Clerk (City Seal) I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on September 7, 2004, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative AssistanVCity Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (KKJ) 101 4th S1. East Hastings, MN 55033 ;, "~ ~ "r.,..... C)...ca -- 0 ft (I);:;w. ::I:=6Cij CI) -c c: Cij<CU: -C-cQj c: ... ... . CD M D.. - C) ~ G ~ N ~ ~ - N - ~ <<:'" Oodo6~:L...L d.a: 01 o""lo'~oo " c . Q) G CD ~ ~ ~ I ~ .5 ... . 'fi Z. ~ ~ l o ;!: () 0- U) .. () ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-C~> O~OO f !Ol(t 0000 v ~ :.....~z.tI) ~ , "B o ~ ~ ...J C> ~ ::s U5 <C Q) ..... CO o Q. co ~ ... " :1 T~IL__ ,,; "'~ '$'0- 0" .... 00. ~~ ~b U.... "'0- "'::> ",0 "'", ....:1: ....0- ~~ ~~ Z "'''' "'" "'0: "'X ~~ >-.... 0-" 2~ ::>0- "CQ ~z" 0"", ~~~ ~~g ~Ct:i1i "'0 <>- . ~~~ ~~~ gj~5 ~~::t ~,,< -....,-- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~I 3, ~: ~, ~I ii!: I I -'~'---~----, --- I I I I :, I :1 ~ 11 I :1 I I I I I Q ~ a ~ a 0- "'>-, "'" ",....... '$'00. o--:~ C~f- ~::Ez <00 ~~~ g;:!~ '" '" ~~~ ~J:.i "'u <0 O-Oz ~u< ~.vf~ "'<" ~:Hf: >->... >-",0 :JOf- ~L...z :)V)Q ~~g~ >-" '" o z'" Zwos= I-~~V) ~~O--' ~~U;i ~~~~ -~ ~.,,=- -.-, \ ri-h'r-r~-,_,~ \ \ \ g " " " :: : : : :\. \ .\, j I fll:/~/1 ~J;l:I"I'I\_-_I.-..J_ l..-l..-J_.....J ~_I..._I_...I_.J ~~ ~~ ~~ :3~ ~ '~ -- --1'A!\dS ~~ ~~ I~ "" ~r-T-) ...-<: \ I %/" / \ ,\~ '{ I " __, r-......', '",,)....J.--t-_ !t I I ......,... \ ___-I ,'-,<. V7 i-'_J z< '}/ r'-==~-i r-----{ I ___~ I r i-- f I i-:--i g ~__==~ "r==~..Ji i-- -"_~ t~;~~), F~~:~ i-I 0---,--: i-~--i L __J L_ __J ........'<- ~ ~ ~~ ~~ h I!i~ a GLACIER WAY "- \ \ I I I ~~ ~~ ~5 ~s ~ o W f- <{ o is ~ w VJ ~ Q:: W ~ o W Q:: <{ VJ <{ W Q:: <{ U1W j:~ S?o- w<( J: . W'" W-'w ~G:~ ~a@ c3~a:: ...<(~ O",Z ~~5 "'00 ~~~ ..,...0 -:o~ z ~za 8 ~ow ~ ~~~ ~ cD~ t:s o ~~~ < "" 8G: ~ 5~:S 0- i5 " a. o ~ '" o w u Z '" o Vi w '" o w Z Z < ...J a. "- '" u Z w '" Vi '" '" J: " r " ,,~ z", ~~ N. o "", Za. F=~ ~J ~ E:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b:j ~ ~ ~ t:3 . t ; JU \ ~1i'~e'12V7.00 III~ .e...... 3$3,'" II \ (IHV^-'f1n08 mUdS J;J~ II SI!I1 _ _ _ _ J,- - - - - - III1 ---. ~l.f !m ~!1) Ii!i lib' ~i!! JI" 'I i1h I~.. liIif IUI' II.il '~I~ ~ Ii i 11~ jl 'f] f1J J r ~'I~ ~~ filii · ; i ~~ /,(' " ~ " " /' I -- ;x- I ,;; / . A- I I I It I A- Ji!'!:1 / t I . J it I :1 . f I t 1,; ~-,;-+ I I If J ~I . 11 ~I f 1 .t <\':1 z ~l J ~;? t ; Ii f f! II~ I i;:;: I! ~~ I ~~~ 1 i I~ ~I I; ! J II r.:~ .1 !' I :;.:: U if C'.I ~J ], i I 1 tt J01 JO 1l't ~ OOIUSVJ .I.1I'11UI C>><< ]9YNMfO I ro ;Ii i) Ii IJ ~.I~~~I I ~j:: " !f I! I i:i:i ri ::I:: ~I ,. . .Iv l. 0 I t. ;1 81~ I I~:I ~I' " II : · · J Ji I '1:(, ~J ! f . II It! L It ~~ II . I :;.:': I II q .~ ~.,.I ' I:~:I ~I' 1~ g~~ .. OJ ~ ," , ,; .. .. .. " bJ II If wi -J r JI!IL t:: I . f ! ~ ~, L II L__________ ... JHJrOMI ~~4Q ;: =-"4- ~ II ).IfM :JldYl.J..l0 II ---~~..! (..- " ~ ! ~.~ ! ~~=~i ".~!i! j~o ~~ ~~~h i;-! bI~ s ~ ~ 1;; i ~ol' \ .-.. ~ \ \ ~\ t\ 1\ NOt 'I"""! i\ , ,I,I\,I<,;\r' (tN.'; S.i,I'I::'J!3;..; ~~"\i'" \ 8 . ..". 'MI I. ..d\!1f1r.) \ ./.\....7.!.no .. \ ,... ':\i;~~, ::'1 t\l ~ 'G\ Tn R i ~ t: ~~ ;;; 5 ~~ Ii ,1.()'7.IJ)O g i; ,~ ~ .8 ~ ~~~ <:~.a!i! ~~~~~ ~~"; ft~~Ai. r~~r~ \ \"~~""'''''::: la"B1St '".ltADS ocrov ].tlr..".,8H..L..../ -r-----T------, -5: J( : 41r : ~ ~! -:;~ ! -;~ I IS -' . ~ ~~u___ I!! a l;/f _ ; 11 ~I -; T "u /!! e: ~ : I ~r.li S Ii > L___u-Lu _.J ~ ~ ~ \:~}.: (,:t\ 'f...') y;1P"f. ~.r~ ~ ~ w S ~rS!:~ !~ ~ : ~ ~ u I ~! ~ !!!:' ~ ~~H I;~;!~ !~; ~ . - ~ - ~ ~" '.~ 0 !'.gR~~ h~ ~ H ~ ~ I ~ ~ S~~ . !1 !!~~~.~ o . I 1 1 I , I J I f ~ ! J r . " f A- J . f I , f I I ! j f I I 1 f , .J. f I I } S 1 ~ 1 J J ~ j . 1 JL f ~ J I f ~ I H ' f jJ i 1 11 ~ It I ~ I i J f !i Ii '" ~ L8'Rt "'-[O,nARS ----------- g H ~ ~ ! ~ 11M ~ S ""I ;u ~ ~ ~N (f) a" I~ ! ~~ ::1 ~ ii II ~ I~ ~~ 0 o o , t I .! iJ ~ I ~ :t ~ f"- ";j . ~ f t c:J. Ii J I " i Ii Ij f Is ) i ! I '1 i ~I · f I! ~ ; ~ J , J , j t }; j ,I ~ Ii j H f '. J H J }j I f fl J If. J !L )U '" ~ c E:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::t: ~ ~ ~ t3 Ii! ~ ~ !.; i ; ~w ~ !! N ~ h I' ~. ~~ 1:3 . . .~ 1 !I +-' ~~ ~R~ ~~ 0 (\) ~~1 (\) I LL ~! i!!:~! ~~~ ~ i~a~h !~ g .s ~;! ~ h~~~ I~ i~I!~ ~.~.~ " II Q) \: li~ ~ I~<~i~~ (; Ii ~ ~ iin~!~ ~~ u ~~ (f) ~ 0 ~ ~ :3 .Wl.l.nO ~ 'S'Olt "'.tot,KalN ~ 00'" ].tt,SUIIS 00"11 :J.tt',I~_ ~ fi (;;1-:::- 8 ~ 8 OO't11 M.Lt.tt.IIS 8 ~ , , i ~. Ii ...... Ii <::> i ... ! ! It> fQ It> ~ ~ ~ ~ 't ~ ~ ~ fi OO'!:II 1.L.....88H i ~:~:~~H 00'" 00'" ].tt,I!:.IIS ~!:.~~~ 00'" ].tt,IIILlSIS ~ CtJ i' ~ f.) iia ~, .I.Oll.nO .1$Y] t i 9 00'11 .LSY3 ~~ Ii ~ fQ I'-. 't 't 't 8 ;I ~ ~ /' i i' I~~ j~~ s oo'n .1SY] on'1S't] 8 a ~... 5~ 5~ 00 ~~ ~~ ~ , , , I ~~T ~~~Dt.88N I' \ GltO!:! :3!:!Of'iHsn!:J gLut M.[g,D.HS .. anti 1,00......'" oo"ltl 3.oa.....'" 00'.((' oo'Zt OO'ts: 00'1.1: 00'1.(' 01)"1:(' oo'/'.:(' OO'.(t ~~~~ n ~~~ ~ ~~~ "'~ 't~ It>~ ~ fQ~ I'-.~ ~~ "'~ iiii;H ~~i i OO'l.[ 001:t oo'n: OO'Lt OO'l.t 00"1:[ D01:t 00'1.[' 00"(1 J'OO....SItN l:' ./..,,00'1[1 J.OO,...nH IO'IU3"I,....I.W-" '(,.'l/,. ~ ~rGM' ~~::::uo ")0 ,,- ~ /" ~ t\2 :~1 u 9::" u- :;:.::~ ~e -') I; 5..!i! It. 0; lOiI} /ill .I.()"(. 1./1"0 II'" 3.EV,RU8N ~8"Ztt 3.R.atMN 3E ~r-h_hTu_u: ~ C l..r . .,y I a:: ~ I -:;~ I -:; I !: '1-- ~ : z ~ J--~--~ ~ 2' ~i ~ h- ~, ~ I I ~ L___u.l_ _22: ~ ,.: ,,; '" c .2 U . III 0 a ; ~. ~ M ~ ~ ~( I:~ . . ~ rl' +' .1. !~ I : H il Q) '.:~~:.. Q) ~~~ ~! I H ~ ~ ~ -g "- "I~l. :~ (,). ~~~ ~ C~~h . ~! 0 .!: . ~ ...c~ ~r 2 ~ ~ ~ h i'~~ tJ;. n ~ r ..L '\ 'c'\' '1.'1 '.~ I ~.!11~~ Q) ',1- "t\ \<~:>. in iSn~l; ~b 0 0 d '1:,\. U ')., ~" U1 ~::;::) ,,\ 'f~}. 0 ~~ D · "'0 ....., g (~t. 51 ,,\ t\! ',!) ~ ~ E-.t ~ q ~ ~ OJ ~ ~ ~ b:i ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~- ~~ o~ ;~ ~ 8 ~ one ;:........N ~ 8 I!i OCt's, :l:h,tt.'1H1::i If ~ 8 .. 8 ~ r ::f0ll1l. tt..,,...etHJ.i r ~ ~ .. 8 ~ 1:;00"" .:t,t..IIS~ .- /,,~ r Sonl J.Lt....I.NS t:~ ~ :! ~ ~"18 oo-Sl 3 "..UN 81 a -~ .. ~_ t:: ...... ~ ~8 3r ;; i Jtonl -Ht.lt" i ~~ ~ .. ~ ~.._ 00'91 -'-Ltt...IINPt " q lion. 1.l.t.u.... (~ ~ II ~ _!~ = 800'0' 1,I..,"...OH 8 ~ ~ LI.' ~ ~oo.. Jt.......~ ~ r, ,8 II 8~ 5~ i JtOO'CI LLt,...I8Ns:f i vi ~ II ~ ~ 00'" 1.Lt......IHr:t .. :~:: (.) ~j~ q .~. f~~ ~~ II> 5:: " Lj] ::I:: :~J .. !:s Z ~!J (!) ;,; ~I---~-T---hl ~ ~i \ i ~ j"' zJ ~ I ~ I Z ;~h___ I I ~ ",. ~i ~ 5: ~ : I 5' L_____--L_ ~:<E ~ t-' \ " \ " # JOOC{-q0/ LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF HASTINGS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 4th Street East, Hastings, MN 55033 Phone: 651.480.2350 Fax: 651.437.7082 Address of Property: Legal Description of Property: OutLots B, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, GLENDALE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION Dakota County, Minnesota Applicant: Ryan Contracting Co. Name Tom Ryan Address 8700 13th Avenue East Shakopee, MN 55379 Phone 952-894-3200 Fax 952-894-3207 Email Owner (If different from Applicant): Name Address Phone Fax Email Description of Request (include site plan, survey, and/or plat if applicable): Site Plan Check applicable box(es): x Final Plat Minor Sub. Rezone Spec. Use Variance Annexation EAW Prelim Plat & nrJ- CA. ({ efl- S l'le P/(Y" d", e. -\(). . (V\or{) -JoI'IA /" x Site Plan TOTAL: .,... Note: All fees and escrow amounts due at time of application. $600 $500 $500 $500 $250 $500 plus"legal expenses $500 plus $1000 escrow $500 plus escrow: - Under 10 acres: $3000 ($500 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - Over 10 acres: $6000 ($1000 Planning + $5000 Engineering) $500 plus escrow: - 0 - 5,000 s.f.: $1500 (Engineering) - 5,000 - 10,000 s.f.: $2500 ($500 Planning + $2000 Engineering) -10,000 - 50,000 s.f.: $3250 ($750 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - 50,000 sJ. +: $4000 ($1000 Planning + $3000 Engineering) Administrative Lot Split Camp Plan Amendment House Move Lot Line Adjustment Vacate ROW/Easement $50 $500 $500 $50 $400 Tom Ryan, President I' ?bD4 r ) U: t1 u fVtvl1 f5~/(A 1~412312003 /d't 10 '-\J Official Use Only . File #~~) . J. -4 Rec'd By: Fee Paid u' ( . Receipt # ':1 (Ill-I-"'" Date Rec'd App. Complete VIII-C-1 - CITY OF HASTINGS Parks and Recreation Department 920 W. 10th Street Hastings, MN 55033 Phone 651-480-6176 Fax 651-437-7082 Date: 8/31/04 To: Honorable City Council Members From: Barry Bernstein, Parks and Recreation Director Subject: Shelter Construction Bids Back!!:round Information: At the August 16, 2004 City Council meeting, there was a proposal to award construction contracts to construct two new shelter buildings in 2004. Due to the high cost estimates after the bid opening to construct these buildings, the City Council decided to refer this issue to the Parks and Recreation Committee of the Council for further discussion. On Monday, August 23, 2004, the ,Parks and Recreation Committee of Council and I met to discuss any and all alternatives in attempt to resolve the shelter building construction. It was decided by the Parks and Recreation Coqunittee of the Council, at this time, with the current bid pricing, that we" could afford to possibility build one building. It was further discussed as to what location would be first priority and what building would possibility be constructed in 2005. The two locations that were discussed both by the NRRC and the Parks and Recreation Committee of Council are Wallin and Lions Parks. It was determined by the Parks and Recreation Committee of Council that if one building is to be constructed in 2004, Lions Park would be the first priority and Wallin Park shelter would be possibility be constructed in 2005. Council Action Reouested: 1) Approval to seek a new bid to construct one building at Lions Park 2) Approval to instruct bidders to bid on one building (Wallin) and an alternative building for 2005 (Lions). 3) Not to pursue this project at this time and allow for further discussion. REF: city counciVmemo of proposed park shelter bids 3 August 2004 VIII-C-2a,b,c & d To: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers From: Char Stark, Interim Finance Director Date: 9/1/2004 Re: 2005 Budget Recommended City Council Action Staff recommends that the City Council take action approving the following resolutions regarding the preliminary 2005 Budget: 1. 2005 Proposed City Budget 2. 2005 Proposed City Property Tax Levy 3. 2005 HRA Tax Levy 4. Set Truth I Taxation Public Hearing Dates Backaround The Finance Committee of the .City council has conducted two meetings in the last two months in an ~ffort to provide direction to the City Staff on the 2005 budget. The recommendation of the Finance Committee is to adopt a preliminary budget with an increase to the City's Tax Capacity Rate of 2.0% with additional encouragement to lower the tax rate as much as possible without cutting too deep into tl'1e needs of the City departments. Further meetings with Administration, Finance and the Department head are schedule for the end of September to prioritize the requests of the departments in order to cut the budget to the preliminary levy amount and to see if additional cuts can be made without jeopardizing the services and programs offered to the residents of the City of Hastings. Final adoption is scheduled as well as the Truth in Taxation Hearing in December. CITY OF HASTINGS RESOLUTION # 09- -04 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A PROPOSED YEAR 2005 CITY BUDGET WHEREAS, the Finance Committee of the City Council has met with individual department and division directors to discuss their proposed 2005 budget requests. The Committee has also met to discuss and approve a preliminary year 2005 City budget and preliminary Tax Levy; and WHEREAS, provisions of the Minnesota Truth and Taxation Law require Cities to certify a Proposed Property Tax Levy and City Budget to the County Auditor by September 15, 2004; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the preliminary 2005 City's budget for the City of Hastings is hereby set at: $ 24,858,595. ,...fI!' ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS, THIS 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2004. Ayes: Nays: Absent: Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, City Clerk CITY OF HASTINGS RESOLUTION # 09- -04 RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE PROPOSED 2005 CITY PROPERTY TAX LEVY WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota as reinstated levy limits for 2005 for local governments, and the Finance Committee has met to discuss a proposed 2005 City Levy; and WHEREAS, provisions of the Minnesota Truth and Taxation Law require Cities to certify a proposed Property Tax Levy to the County Auditor by September 15, 2004 for the 2005 budget and levy year; and WHEREAS, the Finance Committee of the City Council has directed staff to prepare this resolution resulting in a 2005 Proposed Property Tax Levy; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the proposed Property Tax Levy of the City of Hastings, for the 2005 City Budget to be certified is hereby adopted as follows: Proposed "General "Levy Proposed Debt Levy Total Proposed Tax Levy Proposed . Levv * $ 6,481,082 2.260,000 8,741,082 * Amount Certified to the State of Minnesota and to Dakota and Washington County Auditors. This is the :' amount the Counties will use for the calculations of the Truth in Taxation notices mailed to property owners in mid November - December 2003. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS, THIS 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2004. Ayes: Nays: Absent: Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, City Clerk CITY OF HASTINGS Resolution # 09- -04 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS APPROVING A PROPOSED 2005 HRA SPECIAL TAX LEVY WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Hastings adopted Resolution 3-04. This Resolution authorizes the Levy of a Special Benefit Tax pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.033 Subdivision 6; and WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Hastings (the "Authority") was created by the City Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.001 to 469.047 (formerly, Section 462.411 to 462.711) ("the Act"); and WHEREAS, Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, of the Act permits the Authority to levy and collect a special benefit tax of up to .0144 percent of taxable market value in the City upon all taxable property, real and personal, within the City; and WHEREAS, the Authority desires to levy such tax based upon the limit of .0144 % of the taxable market value, and WHEREAS, the levy of such a special benefit tax is subject to consent by Resolution of the City Council of th,e City of Hastings. , NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Hastings City Council that the City of Hastings HRA Special Levy be granted, subjected to the limit of .0144 percent of .. taxable market value as per Minnesota Statue." ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS THIS 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2004. Ayes: Nays: Absent: Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, City Clerk ~. ...~_.~_._-_." ~.~_.._-_.__.._-,:,':'::;:;;'...~;:~::~-' HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY IN AND FOR THE CITY OF HASTINGS Resolution No. 3-2004 August 12,2004 AUTHORIZING THE LEVY OF A SPECIAL BENEFIT TAX PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES. SECTION 469.033, SUBDIVISION6, AND APPROVAL OF A BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 Commissioner Keena adoption: introduced the following resolution and moved its WHEREAS, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the city of Hastings (the "Authority) was created by the City Council ofthe City of Hastings (the "City") pursuant to the Municipal Housing and Redevelopment Act, Minnesota Statutes. Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (formerly, Sections 462.411 to 462.711) (the "Act"); and WHEREAS, Section 469.033;0 Subdivision6, of the Acts permits the Authority to levy and collect a special benefit tax'ofup to .0144 percent oftaxable market value in the City upon all taxable property, real and personal, within the City; WHEREAS, the Authopty desires _to lev.}' such tax in the amount of .0144 percent of taxable market value in the City; and WHEREAS, the levy of such a special benefit tax is subject to the consent by resolution of the City Council of the City; and WHEREAS, the Authority is required pursuant to Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, of the Act to, in connection with the levy of such a special benefit tax, formulate and file a budget in accordance with the budget procedure of the City in the same manner as required of executive departments of the City or, ifno budgets are required to be filed, before August 1, and the amount of the tax levy for the following year shall be based on that budget and approved by the City Council of the City; and WHEREAS, the Authority has before it for its consideration a copy of a budget for its operations for the fiscal year 2005 NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the Authority. G:\Budgets\HRA.levy.resol.ann.doc Section 1. The budget for the operations of the Authority presented for consideration by the Authority is hereby in all respects approved. Section 2. Staff of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to forward said budget to the City for its approval. Section 3. There is hereby levied, subject to the approval ofthe City Council, a special benefit tax pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. Section 469.033, Subdivision 6, in the amount of .0144 percent of taxable market value within the City. Section4. Staff ofthe Authority are hereby authorized and directed to seek the approval by resolution ofthe City Council of the City ofthe special tax benefit so levied pursuant to this Resolution ~d to take such other actions as are necessary to levy and certify such tax. Commissioner Ho 11 pnhP~k to a vote it was adopted: seconded the resolution and upon being put Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 ~~ Chair Attest: ~./~ ./ ~ ExecutIve D tor G:\HRA\1evy.resol.ann G:\Budgets\HRA.levy.resol.ann.doc CITY OF HASTINGS RESOLUTION # 09- -04 RESOLUTION SELECTING DATES FOR THE YEAR 2005 CITY BUDGET AND TAX LEVY TRUTH IN TAXATION PUBLIC HEARING WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has certified levy limits to the Hastings City Council for the proposed 2005 City Levy, WHEREAS, the City Finance Committee members of the City Council and individual departments have met and reviewed the proposed budget for 2005, and WHEREAS, provisions of the Minnesota Truth and Taxation Law require Cities to select dates (that do not conflict with County, School or Special Taxing Districts public hearing dates) for a public hearing to receive public comment on the proposed 2005 City Budget and Tax Levy; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Hastings City Council will conduct a public hearing on the proposed 2005 City Budget and Tax Levy at 7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 6, 2004 in; the Council Chambers of the Hastings City Hall; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that should a continuation public hearing on the _ proposed 2005 City Budget and 2005 Tax Levy need to be conducted, It shall be held at __'7:00 p.m. on Monday, December 20, 2004 in the Council Chambers of the Hastings City Hall. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS THIS 7th DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2004. Ayes: Nays: Absent: Michael D. Werner, Mayor ATTEST: Melanie Mesko Lee, City Clerk VIII -C-3 Debt Management Policy City of Hastings, Minnesota September 7, 2004 - cITY' OF HASTINGS -~ Table of Contents Paae(s) I. PURPOSE .......... ..... ........ ........ ............ .......................... ........................ ......................... ..... 1 II. POLICY STATEMENT..... ........................................................................................... ..... 1 III. DEBT ADMINISTRATION POLICIES ............................................................................... 1-2 IV. DEBT PLANNING POLICIES ...................................................................................... ..... 1-2 V. TYPES OF INSTRUMENTS .............................................................................................. 1 List of Standard Disclosure Documents ..................................................................... APPENDIX A Definitions ....................... ........... ......~..... ..:.... ....... ............ ............. ......... .................... APPENDIX B Authorized Debt Limitations Upda~e............................................................................ APPENDIX C Page 1-0 Purpose Section I The purpose of this policy is to establish parameters and provide guidance governing the issuance, management, continuing evaluation of and reporting on all debt obligations issued by the City of Hastings, and to provide for the preparation and implementation necessary to assure compliance and conformity with this policy. Page 1-1 Policy Statement Section II The City of Hastings faces a continuous stream of infrastructure demands from citizens and business interests. These demands upon the capital resources of the City must be met in an orderly and balanced manner that allows the City to: . Acquire capital at the lowest possible borrowing cost. . Preserve debt capacity for future capital needs. . Maintain the best possible credit standing. . Administer its obligations in an efficient manner. · Improve coordination between C.I.P. fund expenditures and debt-financed projects. . To provide for limits on debt to avoid potential pitfalls in servicing the debt. Page 11-1 Debt Administration Policies Section III In developing, offering and administering its debt obligations, the City of Hastings will adhere to the following policies: A. Competitive and open process will be the standard related to the planning, structuring, approving, and selling of general obligation and revenue bonds, and other obligations issued by the City. However, the City reserves the right to choose to use a "negotiated sale" method, in the rare circumstances that it is deemed to be more advantageous to the City. B. Communications with the investing public and the national bond rating community will be given a high priority in order to maintain credibility through the flow of information both by personal contact and electronic means. C. Complete and full disclosure of all financial and economic operations will be met through the timely distribution of the comprehensive annual financial report, debt offering statement, operating budget, capital improvement plan, and the immediate transmission of information and details related to any material event. D. Compliance with the terms, conditions, and covenants of all outstanding bond or lease transactions will be continually monitored and followed by the Finance Department. :. E. Complex financial transactions requiring City limited or unlimited guarantees may be publicly sold through negotiation with a syndicate of investment banks, provided credit rating agency communications and disclosure responsibilities are'closely coordinated with the Finance Department. . .F: Determination of type and security of debt should be made based upon a review of the following factors: · Direct and indirect beneficiaries of the project. . Useful life of the project to be funded. · Ability of a project to fund itself through user fees. G. Refunding and advance refunding. Savings opportunities will be monitored by the Finance Department and the City's financial advisor and action will be taken when determined financially advantageous. Net Present Value debt service savings of a minimum of five percent (5%) will be the target savings threshold. Refunding at the time of the call or in advance of the call may be considered from time to time to remove restrictive covenants of revenue bond issues. Page 111-1 Debt Planning Policies Section IV In planning capital facility and equipment needs, the City of Hastings will establish policies that promote balance as follows: A. General obligation bond proceeds will not be employed to fund the general operation of the City. B. Monitor trends of key financial, economic, and debt ratios such as: . Annual debt service for general obligation direct debt and capital leases will not exceed 25% of total general expenditures. . The principal amount outstanding for direct general obligation debt and capital leases will not exceed three and one-half percent (3.5%) of Assessor's Market Value of taxable property. . Direct general obligation debt and capital leases will not exceed $1,800 per capita. . City Legal Debt Margin/Limit . A report of these trends and a report of the Year End Outstanding City Indebtedness must be submitted to City Council and to the City Administrator during the annual budget preparation. C. Structural considerations: . Preservation of statutory debt capac:lty will be a primary consideration. The minimum debt capacity (debt margin) to be preserved for future projects and contingencies will be thirty percent (30%). . Scheduled maturities of long-term debt may not exceed the expected useful life of the capital project or asset acquired. ;, . Average life of City general obligati9n property tax-supported bonds should not exceed twenty (20) years. . Call features should be utilized to allow maximum future debt management flexibility, but maintaining sensitivity to bond market need_so . Bids for bonds will be compared on a "True Interest Cost" basis. . Variable rate bond structures may be considered on revenue-based financings where credit and liquidity agreements are available. . Variable rate debt will not make up more than thirty percent (30%) of the combined debt portfolio of the City. . Variable rate transactions will be structured by considering the prevailing fixed interest rates, and the interest spread accrued between the fixed and variable rate cost will be used to call bonds. D Timing considerations: . Need for Cacital: The City's ability to currently fund construction or acquisition. . Market Volume: Similar types of debt and credit ratings that will be offered in the targeted sale period. . General Market Condition: The State, regional and national economy; the bond market; and its ascending or descending trends. . Reaulatorv Comcliance: The City's ability to meet federal arbitrage spend-down requirements. . Advance Refundina Occortunities: Carefully evaluate the optimal time including analysis of optional scenarios through the call date. . Bond Files: Included in closing file should be a pre-sale (recommendations) and a post-sale (bond record) report. Page V-1 City of Hastings, Minnesota E. Construction of Utility Improvements for new development. . The City of Hastings will contribute funding for the construction of utility improvements for new commercial or residential development within the City, only for the oversizing of water and sanitary sewer trunk mains as defined in Section 11.06, Subdivision 3 of City Code. . Developers shall fund all of the costs necessary to construct required street and utility improvements within their development (except water and sanitary sewer main oversizing), including improvements that abut City park property, ponding basins, easement areas or any other City property. . The Developer shall be responsible for funding the construction of Public Street and utility improvements across City property to serve new development commercial or residential development within the City. The city may consider granting a right of way easement across its property to serve new commercial or residential development. . The City of Hastings will not fund improvements to existing Public Street and utility infrastructure required to support adjacent new commercial or residential development. Developers shall fund all additional traffic lanes, turning lanes, medians, traffic signals, street lighting, storm sewer, looping water main, sidewalk, trail, landscaping and any other street or utility improvement to existing right of way required as part of the preliminary plat and site plan approvals for new commercial and residential development. . This public improvement funding policy does not apply to redevelopment of existing devel~ed property nor does it apply to industrial development within the City's Industrial Park. F. Construction of Utility Improvements for new RE -development. . The City of Hastings will consider incurring debt to assist with funding of public infrastructure costs, such as public street and utility-improvemeRts for'commercial and industrial redevelopment projects, based on the following criteria: . The project provides an opportunity for increased tax base for the City of Hastings. . The project increases the employment opportunities in the City of Hastings. . The public improvement must provide a community wide benefit. . The project must eliminate or reduce blight. . Providing any or all of the above criteria can be met, the City will then determine to what extent, if any, it shall incur debt to assist with the funding of public infrastructure costs. Under no circumstances will the City incur debt in such a manner that results in a return on investment, through increased property tax, that extends beyond five years. G. Coordination of capital needs with overlapping or other units of government should be undertaken to avoid periodic marketing conflicts as well as increase awareness of the impact of debt on property tax- paying entities. Page IV-2 Types of Instruments Section V A. General Obligation Debt - Property Tax-Supported . Used to finance only capital facilities and equipment that are essential to the continued maintenance or development of the City. Directly supported by property tax-base generated revenues, such as general property tax. B. General Obligation Improvement Special Assessment Bonds . Used to finance street and utility improvements that are essential to the continued upkeep, maintenance and/or development of the City. Bonds supported primarily by special assessment revenues but usually also carry the City's general obligation backing (Le. authority to levy). C. Special Obligation Revenue Bonds (Conduit debt) . Revenue bonds for which the City grants it's tax exemption, but for which no direct financial or moral obligation pledge of the City is assumed. . These bonds should be issued when the proposed development is expected to be financially feasible and contributes to the general welfare or development of the City. D. Revenue Bonds . Bonds, which are supported wholly by revenues, not based on real estate property values, such as sales taxes, enterprise revenues, and other user fees. These bonds may also carry the City's general obligation backing. · E. Equipment Certificates . These bonds are for short-term durations (five year~. or less) and are for the purchase of certain equipment. These bonds are used sparingly and only when a pay-as-you-go funding is not feasible. Equipment Certificates are general obligations of the City - supported wholly by property values. F. Lease Transactions . Appropriate when borrowing costs for capital facilities or equipment are equal to or less than the borrowing costs of general obligation capital notes. . Appropriate for the financing of capital facilities or equipment when no other general statutory authority exists but adequate general or enterprise revenues are available to service the payments. . Centralized in the Finance Department, lease transactions for periodic equipment acquisitions funded under a master lease program are preferable to single vendor leases. . Full disclosure of total lease payments and transaction costs for the life of the obligation are required for all proposed lease transactions. . Secondary disclosure responsibility must be clear on any potentially pooled lease. Page V-1 Appendix A List of Standard Disclosure Documents 1. Comprehensive Annual~inancial Report This report shall contain audited financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles of the City's reporting entity. 2. Annual Disclosure Report This report shall include all required items listed in the continuing disclosure undertaking for existing bond issues. Typically the content of this report will be included with the information presented in an Official Statement issued during a bonding process. If no debt is issued during a year, the Finance Department will cc1mpile the information or will contract with its financial advisor to provide the information in a separate report or include the information with the comprehensive annual financial report. This report will be submitted to the Nationally Recognized Municipal Securities Information Repositories, as required by the SEC. 3. Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Upon completion of this report, it will present a schedule of improvements, rationale for the project priorities, and the recommended method of financing. Cumulative information on past performance and justification for changes in programming or project priority should be included in the detailed sheets describing the individual projects. Appendix B Definitions General Expenditures: Total expenditures from General, Special Revenue, Capital Projects and Debt Service Fund types. General bonded debt: Total bonded debt less general obligation revenue debt. Market Valuation: County Asses50r's assessed market value. Net Bonded Debt: Total gross debt less debt service fund balance. Net Interest Cost (NIC): A common method of computing the interest expense to the issuer of bonds. NIC allows for premium and discount and represents the dollar amount of interest payable over the life of an issue, without taking into account the time value of money. While net interest cost actually refers to the dollar amount of the issuer's interest cost,jt is also used in reference to the average net interest cost rate, which reflects the overall rate of interest to be paid by the issuer over the life of the bonds. Overlapping Debt: The issuer's proportionate s~are of the debt of the other local governmental units, which either overlap it (the issuer is located either wholly or partly within the geographic limits of the other units) or underlie it (the other units are Ipcated within the geographic limits of the issuer). The debt is generally apportioned based upon relative assessed value. Total (Gross) Bonded Debt: All debt less general obligation revenue bonded debt. "Total Bonded Debt" - does not include overlapping debt or deduct debt service fund assets. True Interest Cost (TIC): Under this method of computing the borrower's cost, interest cost is defined as the rate, compounded semiannually, necessary to discount the amounts payable on the respective principal and interest maturity dates to the purchase price received for the bonds. TIC computations produce a figure slightly different from the NIC method, since TIC considers the time value of money and NIC does not. Appendix C Authorized Debt Limitations Update (2003) City of Hastings, Minnesota Legal Debt Limit Estimated Market Value Times 2.0% $1,029,278,500 xO.02 Legal Debt Limit Less: Outstanding General Obligation Debt ;, $ 20,585,570 3,842.892 100.0% 18.6 Legal Debt Margin $ 16.742.678 81.3% Note: Debt margin ~hown is no~ net ot debt service funds which, when applied to reduce outstanding debt, will increase the debt margin. AePendix D III-I-A: Key Financial, Economic, And Debt Ratios Limit * Current** . Total annual debt service for general obligation direct $5,032,092 debt will not exceed 25% of total budgeted expenditures. 35% $3,597,309 17.87% . Net Bonded debt outstanding will not exceed three and $36,024,748 one-half percent (3.5%) of Assessor's Market Value of taxable property. 3.5% $23,997,699 2.33% . Gross bonded debt will not exceed $1,800 per capita. $1,800 $1,466 * Limit is based upon 2003 Year end numbers. for Assessor's Market Value of taxable property and 2004 budgeted expenditures. **Current is as of December 31,2003. -,Wherupon said policy was declared duly adopted. .. Michael D. Werner, Mayor Attest: Melanie Mesko Lee, Adm. Asst./City Clerk CITY OF HASTINGS COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, September 7,2004 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: III. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of Minutes for the Regular Meeting on August 16, 2004 V. COUNCIL ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED: Youth Recycling Award-Boy Scout Troop #23 VI. CONSENT AGENDA: The items on the Consent Agenda are to be acted upon by the City Council in a single motion. There will be no discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event the items will be removed from the Consent Agenda to the appropriate department for discussion. ..-~ 1. Pay Bills As Audited 2. Margie Reuter Fence Agreement 3. Resolution-Approve One-Day Raffle Permit (Hastings Hockey Boosters) at Hastings Civic Arena on~December 4, 2004 4. First Reading/Order r;>ublic Hearing-Annexation #2004-51: South Frontage Road (0.5 acres) 5. Amend Resolution-Site Plan Review #2004-23: Riverwood ih Addition (MW Johnson) 6. Amend Resolution-Site Plan Review #2004-24: South Oaks of Hastings 2nd Addition (MW Johnson) 7. Approve Subrecepient Agreement-CDBG Agreements (Dakota CDA) 8. Resolution-Adopt Home Occupation Fees 9. Accept Resignation of Building Official 10. Approve Extension of Unpaid Leave of Absence VII. AWARDING OF CONTRACTS & PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Public Hearing-City Code Amendment #2004-43: Accessory Structures VIII. REPORTS FROM CITY STAFF: A. Public Works 1. Appeal Restriction of Fencing in Ponding Basin Easement-1336 Eagle Bluff Drive (tabled from August 2nd meeting) 2. Appeal Removal of Landscape Retaining Wall and Fill in Ponding Basin-1328 Eagle Bluff Drive (tabled from August 2nd meeting) B. Planning 1. Second Reading/Ordinance Amendment-City Code Amendment #2004-43: Accessory Structures 2. Resolution-Variance #2004-47: Front Yard Setback at 532 th Street West (Kenneth Warner, Jr.) 3. Resolution-Site Plan Review #2004-21: Whispering Lane Condominiums at Whispering Lane & Crestview (Lawrence Builders) 4. Resolution-Preliminary and Final Plat #2004-44: Glendale Heights 3rd Addition (Ryan Contracting) C. Administration 1. Park Shelter Buildings 2. Resolutions-2005 Preliminary Budget a. 2005 Proposed City Budget b. 2005 Proposed City Property Tax Levy c. 2005 HRA Tax Levy d. Set Truth I Taxation Public Hearing Dates 3. Approve Debt Management Policy IX. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE: X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: XI. NEW BUSINESS: XII. REPORTS FROM CITY ,COMMITTEES, OFFICERS, COUNCILMEMBERS: XIII. ADJOURNMENT: Next City Council Meeting on Monday, September 20, 2004 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Osberg, City Administrator September 2, 2004 Youth Recycling Program At the City Council meeting on September 7, 2004 Ed Plant, and representatives from the Boy Scout Troop # 23 will be in attendance to receive their check from Waste Management for the most re.cent quarterly youth recycling program. Also, Jamie Schanus, and representatives from Girl Scout Troop #1335 will be in attendance, as they will be involved in the program for the next quarter. I have also attached information received from Waste Management summarizing the results of the program since its inception in early, 2002. o LO 0 LO LOLO LO 0 00 LO OCO CO CO "- 0 C'\I C") C'\ILO C") o "- CO CO T'"" OC'\lC'\lO T'"" Q) C") CO o T'"" "- LOC")COoq-CO LO C")C") oq-oq-oq- LOCOLOCOCO 0 LO <(EI7E17E17E17E17E17E17E17E17E17 EI7 ~OT'""C'\IQ)LO"-LOC'\ICOO c: C! LO T'"" "- ~ CO T'"" cq CQ" ~ l-~oq-"-"-T'""COC'\lCOC'\loq- "... C'\I C'\I C'\I C") C") ~ C") ~ ~ Q) C'\I I"- C") C") C'\IC'\I C'\I C")C")C")C") oq-oq-oq- 00 0 0000 000 CO: )~- t5 C:"--t5 C:"-- - c..:J CO c.. ::J +-' 0 CO c.. :J 0 0 "t: <( """') """')<("""') """')<("""') l- I I I I D...C'\IC'\I C'\I C'\I C") C")C")C")~~ <1> +-' 0000 0 00000 CO ..0 >- C) > ..0 >- C) > ..0 >- 0 <1> CO ::J 0 <1> CO :J 0 Q) CO 0 LL~<(Z LL ~<(ZLL~ I- C")oq-oq- OC")CO LOLO~ ..0 ::J U I U ~ I- ..o~ D... :J+-'CJ) ~ f' I:: C) CO '\J:Jc:T'""T'""+-, (,)o~C'\Icoc: ~UCJ)COC'\lQ) en CO C'\I LO E c..c..c..co~I c..c.. 0001::1::......8"8"<1>00 e e e E ~ 0 0 0 w e 0 1-1-1- >-0..0 "- "- >-I-~ +-,+-,+-,{9I-:JI-I-"C+-,+-, 5 5 5 CJ) en U ~ ~ ~ 5 5 oou 00(,) (,) g> g> .en .c .r:: c: (,) (,) OO~~E3=3=Q)OOoo >->-L: en CJ) 0 o~ >-- o 0 .- CO CO 0 "- "- LL 0 .: mm(9II~mm"""')m(9 LO C")C") C'\I~