2012-08-07 Council PacketCITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
August 7, 2012 – 8:00 p.m.*
Note Change in Start Time
Mendota Heights City Hall
1. Call to Order
2. Roll Call
3. Pledge of Allegiance
4. Adopt Agenda
5. Consent Agenda
a. Acknowledgement of July 17, 2012 City Council Workshop Minutes
b. Acknowledgement of July 17, 2012 City Council Minutes
c. Acknowledgement of July 24, 2012 Planning Commission Minutes
d. Approval of Sign Permit at 1408 Northland Drive – Tailored Living
e. Receipt of June 2012 Fire Department Synopsis Report
f. Approval of Fire Permit – 13th Annual Wacipi, St. Peters Church
g. Approval of Banking Authorization Signatory Change
h. Approval of Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Facility, Planning Case 2012-25,
ISD 197 and Sprint Communications
i. Approval of Par 3 Seasonal Hires
j. Approval of Resolution Calling for Sale of General Obligation Improvement
Bonds for 2012 Street Improvement Projects
k. Accepting of Feasibility Report for Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood
Rehabilitation
l. Approval of Resolution Accepting Work and Approving Final Payment for the
Wagon Wheel Trail Neighborhood Improvements
m. Approval of Traffic Safety Committee Recommendations
n. Receipt of June 2012 Treasurer’s Report
o. Receipt of July 2012 Building Activity Report
p. Approval of Contractors List
q. Approval of Claims List
6. Public Comments
7. Unfinished and New Business
a. Planning Case 2012-24, Wetlands Permit for Single Family Home, 755
Wentworth Avenue
b. Planning Case 2012-23, Critical Area Permit for Single Family Home, 1256
Wachtler Avenue
c. Planning Case 2012-22, Wetlands Permit, 953 Wagon Wheel Trail
d. License to Use Right-of-Way, Quehl Subdivision
8. Council Comments
9. Adjourn to Closed Session to Discuss Litigation Regarding Scott and Phyllis
Miller Assessment Appeal
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Council Workshop
Held Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a workshop of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights,
Minnesota was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The following members were present:
Councilmembers Duggan, Povolny, Petschel and Vitelli. Also in attendance were City Administrator
Justin Miller, Sgt. Brian Convery, City Attorney Tami Diehm, and City Engineer/Public Works Director
John Mazzitello. Members of the public in attendance included Ira Kipp, Tim Carlson, Dick Ball, Sue
Light, and Boyd Ratchie.
ROGERS LAKE ELETRIC MOTORS DRAFT ORDINANCE
Miller presented the item and stated that this was a continuation of discussion from the previous city
council meeting. The item was initiated by the Rogers Lake Property Owners Association. The council
began discussing potential conditions to allowing electric motors and asked staff questions about
emergency response and time limits at the adjacent park. Councilmembers also voiced concerns about
the proposed horsepower limit, public access, damage to the park and parking lot, and wake restrictions.
Members of the public voiced concerns about potential environmental damage from sunken batteries
and a lack of notice about this proposal from the homeowners association. Tim Carlson, representing
the homeowners association, stated that this request was presented to make boating in the lake easier and
more enjoyable for the residents along the lake.
No action was taken, and Mayor Krebsbach indicated that the discussion would continue during the
regular city council meeting following this workshop.
ADJOURN
Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m.
____________________________________
Sandra Krebsbach
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
pg 2
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Minutes of the Regular Meeting
Held Tuesday, July 17, 2012
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota
Heights, Minnesota was held at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights,
Minnesota.
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Krebsbach called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present:
Councilmembers Duggan, Povolny, Petschel, and Vitelli.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Council, the audience, and staff recited the Pledge of Allegiance.
AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Krebsbach presented the amended agenda for adoption. Councilmember Duggan moved
adoption of the amended agenda.
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Krebsbach presented the consent calendar and explained the procedure for discussion and
approval. Councilmember Duggan moved approval of the consent calendar as presented and
authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein; pulling items G) Approval of
Completion of Probationary Employment Period for Human Resources Coordinator Tamara Schutta; H)
Approval of Building Permit – 1440 Northland Drive; and I) Receipt of June Par 3 Update.
a. Acknowledgement of July 3, 2012 City Council Amended Minutes
b. Acknowledgement of July 10, 2012 Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes
c. Acknowledgement of July 11, 2012 Airport Relations Commission Minutes
d. Approval of Sign Permit, 750 Main Street – Be Well
e. Approval of Sign Permit, 774 Highway 110 – Sedona Skin Spa
f. Approval of Out of State Travel Request
g. Approval of Completion of Probationary Employment Period for Human Resources Coordinator
Tamara Schutta
h. Approval of Building Permit – 1440 Northland Drive
i. Receipt of June Par 3 Update
pg 3
j. Approval of Cancellation of August Parks and Recreation Commission Meeting
k. Approval of Amendment #1 to T-Mobile Cell Tower Lease Agreement
l. Approval of Time Change for August 7, 2012 City Council Meeting
m. Accept Quotes and Award Contract for 2012 Sanitary Sewer Cleaning and Televising Project
n. Approval of Plans and Specifications and Authorization to Advertise for Bids for 2012 Sanitary
Sewer Rehabilitation Project
o. Approve Massage Therapist Licenses
p. Approve Joint Powers Agreement with the MN BCA for Court Data Services Subscriber
Amendment (eCharging)
q. Receipt of June 2012 Building Activity Report
r. Approve the Contractors List
s. Approve the Claims List
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
CONSENT AGENDA TOPICS
G) APPROVAL OF COMPLETION OF PROBATIONARY EMPLOYMENT PERIOD FOR HUMAN
RESOURCES COORDINATOR TAMARA SCHUTTA
Mayor Krebsbach commended Ms. Tamara Schutta for completing her first year with the City of
Mendota Heights and stated that when Ms. Schutta joined last year she very quickly took on the search
process for the City Administrator. Typically a city would hire a consultant for this kind of search but
Mayor Krebsbach knew that Ms. Schutta could handle it and she did so very successfully.
Councilmember Duggan moved to Approve the Official Appointment of Tamara Schutta to the Position
of Regular, Full-time HR Coordinator Effective July 21, 2012.
Councilmember Petschel seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
H) APPROVAL OF BUILDING PERMIT – 1440 NORTHLAND DRIVE
Mayor Krebsbach requested City Engineer John Mazzitello explain what is happening in the former
Brown College building.
City Engineer Mazzitello explained that the request before the Council was a building permit submitted
by the contractor on behalf of the new owner of the old Brown College building. Councilmembers
received an architectural rendering of the proposed improvement in their meeting packet. They plan to
add an entrance to the front of the building, which would require some excavation and construction of
retaining walls. The entrance would be for a new tenant space; the owner would not be occupying the
entire portion of the building and would bring in a new business to occupy the front portion as a tenant.
Therefore, the owner requested a minor modification to put in a dedicated entrance to that portion of the
building.
pg 4
Councilmember Petschel moved Approval of Building Permit for Exterior Work at 1440 Northland
Drive and Grant Staff the Authority to Issue the Requested Building Permit.
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
I) RECEIPT OF JUNE PAR 3 UPDATE
City Administrator Justin Miller stated that June was a good month for the Par 3 Golf Course. When
looking at the year-to-date for 2012, the course brought in $78,865 in revenue versus expenses of
$69,022, for a positive performance of just under $10,000.
Councilmember Duggan moved Acceptance of the June Par 3 Update.
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
PUBLIC COMMENTS
The “Night to Unite” is scheduled to take place on the first Tuesday of August. The Council approved
in the Consent Agenda an 8:00 p.m. start to the Council meeting scheduled that same evening so they
could participate in the “Night to Unite” events.
Sergeant Brian Convery explained that it is not too late to sign up and register a neighborhood and have
members of the Police Department, Fire Department, HealthEast Ambulance, and Councilmembers to
stop by and visit. The event is scheduled to take place on Tuesday, August 7 from 6:00 p.m. to 10:00
p.m. There are seven neighborhoods already registered but it is expected that there would be a larger
number of neighborhoods participating this year than last year. There were fifteen registered
neighborhoods last year.
Mayor Krebsbach requested a schedule and list of neighborhoods that Councilmembers have been
requested to visit so that they can be sure to participate in as many as possible before their council
meeting scheduled that same evening.
In response to Mayor Krebsbach’s request for an update of what is happening in the area, Sergeant
Convery explained that the Police Department has been very busy. They currently have seven people in
custody for residential burglaries that have occurred over the past six months in the City of Mendota
Heights. They have already cleared in excess of ten cases as a result of that and they anticipate clearing
more. The information has also led to some cooperative efforts with surrounding agencies. One of the
arrests came from the tip of a watchful neighbor who actually saw people who did not belong at a
neighbor’s house and called 911. Officers responded and they took three people into custody.
Gretchen Becherer, a resident of Mendota Heights, stated that she has been a resident since 1967 and her
occupation is a special needs teacher. She presented her desire to see proper lighting and outdoor
security cameras installed in the Mendota Plaza and requested that the walls surrounding the dumpsters
be removed and the dumpsters be relocated away from the building. She requested these actions take
pg 5
place because of the recent break-ins that have taken place and the fear and anxiety this has caused the
business owners. Businesses have claimed that their insurance companies are threatening to drop them
when they call to make a claim on lost inventory due to burglaries or attempted burglaries. Gretchen
believes it would be a shame for Mendota Heights to lose these businesses because of these fearful
situations. She requested that the community be updated regularly on the progress and efforts made to
make the shopping area safer. She hopes the Council will respond as promptly to this request as they
did to the request for boats with motors be used on Rogers Lake.
Mayor Krebsbach stated that the City is very much aware of the break-ins that have taken place, the
Mendota Heights Police are investigating, and City Administrator Justin Miller has a meeting with
Mendota Plaza owners on July 18, 2012.
Ms. Mai Vu, partial owner of Mendota Liquor, stated there have been three break-ins at Mendota Liquor
within a three-month period resulting in a large amount of damage. They have spoken to their business
neighbors to petition Paster Enterprises, Mendota Plaza managers, to install outdoor cameras in the
shopping plaza for the safety of the businesses and customers. She expressed her desire to have the
Council support the business owner’s efforts and perhaps persuade Paster Enterprises to install the
cameras. Mayor Krebsbach replied that they certainly want everyone to be safe and they know that the
police have been making every effort to provide assistance, which Ms. Vu confirmed. As she stated
before, the Mayor said that the City has a very good record of pursuing, arresting, and prosecuting
burglaries; and there is a meeting with the Plaza owners on July 18.
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
A) ORDINANCE AMENDMENT REQUEST TO ALLOW ELECTRIC MOTORS
ON ROGERS LAKE
Mayor Krebsbach mentioned that there was a Council Workshop on this topic.
City Administrator Justin Miller reviewed the proposed ordinance. This request was brought to the City
by the Rogers Lake Property Owners Association (RLPOA) and was discussed at the last Council
meeting. Currently, no motors, electric or otherwise, are allowed on lakes in Mendota Heights. The
RLPOA proposed this be amended to allow electric motors on the part of Rogers Lake south of Wagon
Wheel Trail. At the last council meeting, Councilmembers discussed several conditions that might be
suitable if they were to allow this. Afterwards, City Administrator Miller spoke with Mr. Tim Carlson
from the association, who then presented some ideas he thought the association would be acceptable
with. This was presented to the Council in the form of a draft ordinance at the workshop.
The proposed changes that would be allowed would state that “Electric Motorboats Allowed on Rogers
Lake: Electric motorboats shall be permitted on that part of Rogers Lake that is south of Wagon Wheel
Trail subject to the following conditions:
a. Boats shall be restricted to a maximum length of 18’;
b. Motors shall not exceed the maximum equivalent of 10HP;
c. No motors shall be used outside of the posted Rogers Park hours; and
d. Any boat using an electric motor shall be required to have oars on board
pg 6
Mayor Krebsbach explained that there was an extensive discussion among the Council, staff, and the
neighborhood and everyone believes the topic was fully vetted.
Councilmember Duggan moved to Table the Approval of “AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6,
CHAPTER 6 OF THE CITY CODE” until such time as the Council has received answers to the
questions raised.
Councilmember Povolny seconded the motion.
Mayor Krebsbach opened the floor for comments and discussion. Councilmember Vitelli stated that he
would be voting no on the motion to table. He believes this should be denied instead of wasting more
time. Mayor Krebsbach also stated she would not be in support of tabling the item and called for the
vote.
Ayes: 2 (Duggan, Povolny)
Nays: 3 (Petschel, Vitelli, Krebsbach)
Councilmember Duggan moved Denial of ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 6, CHAPTER 6 OF THE
CITY CODE.
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Mayor Krebsbach stated the main reason for denial is the City’s lack of capacity for enforcement and the
local Police do not have watercraft to get on the water and are not trained in this type of enforcement.
Councilmember Petschel stated that initially she was leaning towards approval but nowhas concerns that
were raised not only by herself, but from other citizens; i.e. informal launching of boats, cross
contamination or invasive species from other lakes, damage to the park area, lack of capacity to do
inspections, lack of capacity for enforcement, etc.
Councilmember Povolny explained that he voted for tabling because he is still undecided on this issue.
He believes the ordinance is too evasive the way it is written, but he is open to looking at it in more
detail.
Councilmember Vitelli expressed his thoughts that Rogers Lake is not large enough to introduce electric
motors or any other type of motors. Also, he believes approval would open the City up to requests from
other lakes.
Councilmember Duggan asked if the ordinance that Council was asked to discuss and consider at the
Workshop had been published. City Attorney Tami Diehm replied that ordinances are published after
they have been adopted so this proposed ordinance had not been published.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
pg 7
B) REVISED TUITION REIMBURSEMENT POLICY
City Administrator Justin Miller explained that this was one of the goals established by the City Council
during their work session in February 2012. Staff has been working on this since that time.
Human Resources Coordinator Tamara Schutta stated that in 1985 the Council adopted the personnel
code and part of that code was Section 23 – Education Incentive Tuition Reimbursement policy. Ms.
Schutta explained that this benefit is an important part of the city’s benefits program and helps to attract,
develop, retain, and most importantly, invest in staff. The current policy provides tuition reimbursement
to all permanent and full-time city employees and reimburses the cost of tuition equal to the charge of
the University of Minnesota; that current rate being $448 per credit for undergraduate work and $1,167
per credit for graduate work. During the 2012 budget and goal setting session, the City Council asked
staff to review and amend the policy.
Presented to the Council was the revised Tuition Reimbursement policy and Ms. Schutta highlighted the
three major changes:
1. Employees may be eligible for reimbursement up to $5,250 maximum per calendar year, which
meets the guidelines of the qualified plan under IRS Code Section 127.
2. For budgeting purposes, employees will be asked to submit a Tuition Reimbursement
Application Approval Form to their department head during the budget cycle.
3. An employee who receives tuition reimbursement under this program and who later leaves
employment within one (1) year must repay the City 100% of the amount the City reimbursed
the employee for all tuition, books and fees related to the course(s).
All city staff as well as Labor Attorney Kevin Rupp have reviewed the revised Tuition Reimbursement
policy.
Mayor Krebsbach stated she did not believe the Council desired an open-ended budget amount. City
Administrator Miller replied that, if this policy were adopted, the department directors would
incorporate the request for next year into their budget request. So the request for 2013 Tuition
Reimbursement would be considered by the department director and included in their budget submitted
to the Council for consideration. Then within the training budget for each department there would be
money set aside as recommended by the director.
Mayor Krebsbach asked if, even though this policy says “employees may be eligible for reimbursement
up to $5,250 maximum per calendar year”, is there a limit to the budget in terms of how many people
could get reimbursed. Administrator Miller replied that would go to the City Council as a budget
decision.
Councilmember Duggan commented on some language challenges in the proposed Section 23 After
discussion by Councilmembers and staff, it was determined that, since the proposal had been drafted and
reviewed by Labor Attorney Kevin Rupp, the council did not want to alter the language, since that could
result in a different meaning other than what was originally intended.
pg 8
Councilmember Vitelli stated that he believes the city would not get enough benefit from an employee’s
education if they leave within one year. He believes that if an employee leaves within two years of
tuition reimbursement, they should be required to repay the city.
Councilmember Petschel said that she has seen other tuition reimbursement programs that require
repayment of one hundred percent if an employee leaves within one year and a repayment of fifty
percent if they were to leave within two years. She stated that she was surprised there was not
something like that in this program.
Administrator Miller stated that staff would be in agreement to change the policy if the council wishes.
Councilmember Vitelli moved Approval to Amend Section 23 - Tuition Reimbursement, of the Mendota
Heights Personnel Code with an effective date of January 1, 2013, adding the requirement of one
hundred percent repayment if an employee leaves within two years of the reimbursement.
Councilmember Duggan seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
C) BUILDING PERMIT FOR 745 SOUTH PLAZA DRIVE,
WHITE PINES SENIOR LIVING FACILITY
City Engineer John Mazzitello explained that staff is requesting a provisional building permit for 745
South Plaza Drive, White Pines Senior Living Facility. A building permit application has been received
and typically staff would wait for every item to be submitted before bringing it before the council.
However, with three weeks until the next council meeting and with the rapidly shortening construction
season, staff felt they could present a provisional permit to council. When the final few items are
received, staff would then be able to issue the final permit.
Staff received all of the plans, which were reviewed and found to be compliant with the Fourth
Amendment to the Planned Unit Development plans, which were approved as part of the settlement
agreement. What remains to be submitted to city staff is the determination of the number of Sewer
Availability Charge (SAC) units; the fees associated with those SAC units, a landscape letter of credit,
and other building permit fees. Once staff receives this information from the contractor, they would
then issue the building permit. There would be no alteration in the plans already received.
Mayor Krebsbach asked if the council were to approve this request, could the request be denied or
revoked if staff does not receive the items needed or something is found to not be in compliance.
Engineer Mazzitello replied that if the contractor fails to produce any of the items listed, then the
building permit could not be issued because what the council would be approving is provisional on the
receipt of these items.
Councilmember Duggan inquired as to the timeline of the receipt of the listed items. Engineer
Mazzitello replied that based on the way this provisional permit is written there is no timeline. They
cannot get their permit until the information is received; and they cannot build their facility without the
permit. Councilmember Duggan asked what happens if the contractor enters into a dispute with the Met
Council over the number of SAC units. Engineer Mazzitello answered that they would not receive their
pg 9
permit until that issue had been resolved. Councilmember Duggan asked if staff believes the permit
would be issued by the end of July. Engineer Mazzitello stated that based on his conversations and
knowing that the contractor is currently speaking with the Met Council, and the fact that staff has
received all of the plans for review and found to be in compliance – staff is comfortable proceeding in
this manner because the plans are not going to change without an amendment to the building permit.
The plans are the biggest component of a building permit.
Mayor Krebsbach asked when White Pines plans on breaking ground. Engineer Mazzitello answered
that they have already applied for their grading permit, which would allow them to start excavation and
soil corrections. They may actually be in the ground within a week.
Councilmember Povolny moved Approval of the Provisional Building Permit for 745 South Plaza Drive,
White Pines Senior Living Facility.
Councilmember Vitelli seconded the motion.
Ayes: 5
Nays: 0
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Petschel attended the Airport Relations Commission meeting with Senator Metzen and
Representative Atkins, which she found to be a wonderful meeting. She believed they were both
impressed with the quality of the work that the ARC does. In September, the Noise Oversight
Committee will receive from the MAC, Delta, and the FAA, the new RNAV headings off of the end of
runway 12L. She reassured everyone that the committee is on top of this and there would be many
opportunities for the public to inform themselves on this new procedure and how it might impact the
City of Mendota Heights.
In regards to the recent highway repair project on 35E and Highway 110, it was Councilmember
Petschel’s understanding that, once pavement was removed, issues were discovered that turned out to be
worse than was anticipated and so the process took longer than expected. However, based on her
observation and comments received by other residents, this project had the worst traffic control that she
has ever seen. The project even made the “Tainted” section in the Pioneer Press. Also, ramp impact
notifications to the City were not done in a timely way. She expressed her desire to see a letter sent
from the Council to MnDOT about this particular contractor; even though the end product might be
good, the process was not. Also, she expressed her displeasure in the condition of the cement pavement
on the overpass and the noise it generates inside vehicles because of the scoring.
City Engineer John Mazzitello stated that he would be happy to draft a letter for council review should
they desire to send comments to the Department of Transportation. He has had several conversations
with the area engineer specific to that project so she is fully aware that Mendota Heights is engaged with
how that project’s process was executed.
Councilmember Duggan applauded the citizens that came forward to encourage the City Council and
Police Department to work with the businesses in improving security at Mendota Plaza.
pg 10
He also mentioned that Connie Evingson would be performing at the Music At Market Square in The
Village on July 18, beginning at 6:30 p.m. Residents are encouraged to arrive early for dinner and wine
and then to find a good seat for the performance.
Councilmember Duggan mentioned that what the city and residents have done in clean up after the
storm damage was outstanding.
Also, the city made the news again for an outstanding young artist by the name of Jimmy Reagan. Art
has given Jimmy Reagan, who has autism, a communication outlet and he is very talented.
Councilmember Duggan also mentioned that he represents the city, in part, in the HPP Program and
handed out information in that regard.
Mayor Krebsbach expressed her appreciation to City Administrator Justin Miller for revising his plans
several times in terms of removing the large amount of debris from the storm so that it was safe over the
4th of July.
She also acknowledged Mr. Richard Goodspeed for being inducted into the President’s Club at
Mendakota.
City Administrator Justin Miller informed the residents that Council approved moving the start time of
the August 7, 2012 City Council Meeting to 8:00 p.m. so staff and Councilmembers could enjoy the
“Night to Unite”.
City Engineer John Mazzitello reported that the storm debris pile at Mendakota Park has been removed.
The tub grinder and equipment will be removed the morning of July 18, 2012.
ADJOURN
Mayor Krebsbach adjourned the meeting at 8:14 p.m.
____________________________________
Sandra Krebsbach
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
pg 11
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
July 24, 2012
The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, July 24, 2012, in the
Council Chambers at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve at 7:00 P.M.
The following Commissioners were present: Chair Norton, Commissioners Field, Hennes, Magnuson, Noonan, and
Viksnins. Those absent: Commissioner Roston. Those present were Assistant to the City Administrator Jake
Sedlacek, Public Works Director/City Engineer John Mazzitello and NAC Planner Stephen Grittman. Minutes were
recorded by Heidi Guenther.
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was approved as submitted.
Approval of June 26, 2012, Minutes
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO APPROVE
THE MINUTES OF JUNE 26, 2012, AS PRESENTED.
AYES: 4
NAYS: 0
ABSTAIN: 2 (FIELD AND MAGNUSON)
Hearings
PLANNING CASE #2012-22
Greg Quehl
953 Wagon Wheel Trail
Wetlands Permit
Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of Greg Quehl for approval of a wetlands permit
Mr. Grittman noted that the applicant received approval to re-subdivide two existing parcels along Wagon Wheel
Trail to create two buildable parcels as part of an application heard at the June planning commission meeting. The
two lots both have their frontage on Wagon Wheel Trail. The applicant has spoken with the city’s engineering staff
as to where clearing would occur on the lot near the wetland. Staff recommended the 25 feet closest to the wetland
remain undisturbed. However, the applicant has requested steps be allowed to approach the pond. It was noted this
would be a DNR consideration.
Mr. Grittman presented staff’s analysis of the request and while the applicant is still working on final plans,
Engineering staff is comfortable with a recommendation for approval at this time. Staff recommends the final
design and construction drawings be reviewed by city staff for approval prior to construction, grading and
excavation.
Commissioner Field questioned if the plans presented this evening differed from last month. Mr. Grittman indicated
the plans were new from last month and were placed on the dais for the commission to review this evening.
Commissioner Viksnins questioned the conditions for approval. Mr. Grittman suggested a condition for approval be
added stating the 25 feet closest to the wetland remain in an undisturbed state.
pg 12
Commissioner Hennes requested clarification on where the borings were proposed. Mr. Grittman recommended the
applicant address this concern.
Commissioner Hennes commented there was a high water table in this area and understood a great deal of fill was
needed on the lot. He asked if staff had cleared this issue with the applicant. Mr. Grittman stated this was being
resolved with the applicant prior to purchase of the lot.
Commissioner Noonan inquired if the pond access would require DNR approval. Mr. Grittman explained this was
the case.
Commissioner Field questioned if the city’s map of the site had the correct elevations. Mr. Grittman commented the
topography lines were correct on the city’ map and were based on a preliminary grading plan.
Chair Norton opened the public hearing.
Greg Quehl, 1361 Riverside Lane, stated he was the purchaser of the lot and would close on September 4, 2012
based on the recommendation of city council and based on soil borings. He noted the elevations have been
increased slightly to reduce sediment from the site going into the pond area. The pond access was requested to
allow him to access the waterway and he understood this approval was needed from the DNR. He stated the area
that would be cleared to access the pond would be minimal to allow him to use a canoe or paddleboat on the
waterway. Mr. Grittman recommended natural materials be used for the stairway and landing.
Commissioner Field asked if the stairs were necessary to access the pond. Mr. Quehl stated a ramp could be used
instead of stairs. He commented he was not looking to change the wetland in any way.
Commissioner Viksnins requested further comment on the 25-foot area near the wetland. Mr. Quehl indicated he
was raising the elevation to assure there was no runoff. He did not object to the recommended condition for
approval stating the 25 feet closest to the wetland remain undisturbed.
Commissioner Hennes inquired where the borings were proposed. Mr. Quehl explained the borings would be taken
from the proposed location of the home.
Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLAND PERMIT AT 953 WAGON WHEEL TRAIL AS
REQUESTED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THE APPLICANT WILL SUBMIT FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS FOR
CITY STAFF REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
2. THE 25 FEET CLOSEST TO THE WETLAND WILL REMAIN IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE.
Commissioner Noonan requested the commission not take action on the stairs at this time, as the plans were not
finalized. He recommended the applicant work further with the DNR and staff. Assistant to the City Administrator
Sedlacek indicated the egress down the graded area could be reviewed at a staff level and approved. If there were
significant changes to the grade, a wetlands permit would be necessary.
pg 13
Commissioner Field suggested an additional condition be added stating the stair plans would need to be reviewed
and approved by city staff.
Commissioner Viksnins questioned if the 25-foot setback was necessary. Mr. Grittman recommended the condition
remain in place to assure that no other improvements were made within the 25-foot setback.
Commissioner Magnuson clarified that the 25-foot setback would remain undisturbed except for the proposed stair
area, which would be subject to city staff approval.
Mr. Quehl inquired if a ramp could be used instead of stairs.
Commissioner Field suggested the condition be revised to state the egress area within the 25-foot setback to the
pond.
COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HENNES, TO REVISE
CONDITION 2 AS STATED BELOW:
2. THE 25 FEET CLOSEST TO THE WETLAND WILL REMAIN IN AN UNDISTURBED STATE
EXCEPT FOR THE PROPOSED EGRESS AREA, WHICH WOULD BE SUBJECT TO CITY
STAFF REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
AMENDED CONDITION VOTE:
AYES 6
NAYS 0
ORIGINAL MOTION VOTE:
AYES 6
NAYS 0
Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2012-23
Thomas Wieser
1256 Wachtler Avenue
Critical Area Permit
Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of Thomas Wieser for approval of a Critical Area Permit.
Mr. Grittman noted that the applicant is seeking a critical area permit to construct a new single-family home on a
parcel along Wachtler Avenue. The proposed construction site is on a relatively level portion of the property,
generally in the area of a previous structure. Due to the fact the property is located within the Mississippi River
Critical Area; a permit was required for all of the proposed improvements. The structure would utilize the existing
driveway and would extend to the new garage.
Mr. Grittman presented staff’s analysis of the request and recommended approval of the critical area permit as
proposed with conditions as the property makes use of the property consistent with the R-1 zoning regulations and
utilizes the property with the least impact on the vulnerable parts of the property.
Tom Wieser, 1524 Alameda Street in St. Paul, thanked staff and the Commission for reviewing his request this
evening.
Commissioner Hennes asked if the property was vacant. Mr. Wieser explained there was a home on the property,
which was removed last fall but utilities were on site.
pg 14
Chair Norton opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO CLOSE
THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO RECOMMEND
APPROVAL OF THE CRITICAL AREA PERMIT FOR 1256 WACHTLER AVENUE AS REQUESTED
BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY’S LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE DOCUMENT.
2. ANY FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY ENGINEER REGARDING
GRADING, EROSION AND STORMWATER CONTROL.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2012-24
David Williams
755 Wentworth Avenue
Wetlands Permit
Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of David Williams for approval of a Wetlands Permit.
Mr. Grittman noted that the applicants are seeking a wetlands permit to construct a new single family home and
swimming pool and related improvements at 755 Wentworth Avenue. The project would be located in proximity to
the former house on the site. The subject property is just under eight acres in size, has been occupied by a house,
and detached garage. The area of construction would be on the north side of a creek that runs through the property
from east to west. Nearly all of the building area is within 100 feet of this creek. Per city code, a wetlands permit
was required.
Mr. Grittman presented staff’s analysis of the request and recommended approval of the wetlands permit with
conditions as the proposed project should not have a negative impact on the wetland, especially the native vegetation
plantings which serve to filter the runoff into the wetland.
Commissioner Noonan requested further clarification on the required landscaping for all cleared areas. Mr.
Grittman explained any land cover that would avoid erosion would qualify. He stated this was common language
used in the past.
Commissioner Magnuson asked where the existing house and garage was located. Assistant to the City
Administrator Sedlacek clarified the buildings had been removed.
Alan Maas, 14551 Judicial Road, Suite 100, stated he was the general contractor that had been hired by the Williams
to build the proposed home. He thanked the commission for considering his request this evening.
Chair Norton opened the public hearing.
pg 15
Alan Weinblatt, 754 Upper Colonial Drive, noted his property abuts the subject property and expressed concern with
the clearing of the site. He also had concern with the disruption of the wildlife in the area through the construction
of the home. He requested the wildlife not be markedly changed through the project.
Chair Norton thanked Mr. Weinblatt for expressing his concerns and assured him that city staff would be following
the wetlands permit and building permit in accordance with city code.
Kevin Burns, 741 Wentworth Avenue, requested the culvert under Wentworth Avenue not be altered in any way
through the proposed project. City Engineer John Mazzitello assured Mr. Burns that storm water considerations
would be a part of the building permit review.
Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE WETLANDS PERMIT AS REQUESTED BASED ON THE
FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. EXISTING STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY ARE REMOVED.
2. AREA WITHIN THE 25 FOOT SETBACK IS LEFT UNDISTURBED AND IN ITS NATURAL
STATE.
3. DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION UTILIZES THE EXISTING CULVERT LOCATION AND
OTHERWISE COMPLIES WITH CITY REQUIREMENTS.
4. ALL CLEARED AREAS ARE LANDSCAPED TO MINIMIZE RUNOFF INTO THE CREEK.
5. POOL FENCING MEETS THE CITY’S FENCING REQUIREMENTS FOR MATERIALS,
OPENNESS, HEIGHTS, AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR SWIMMING POOL
ENCLOSURES.
6. ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES FOLLOW THE LAND DISTURBANCE GUIDANCE
DOCUMENT.
Commissioner Field was pleased with the proposed project on this parcel and was glad that the parcel was not being
subdivided.
Chair Norton agreed stating this was a beautiful property.
Commissioner Magnuson asked if the Land Disturbance Guidance Document addressed the concerns with the
culvert. Public Works Director Mazzitello indicated this was the case as the document provided guidance for the
contractor on how to develop the site. The current drainage would continue to function after the site was developed.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2012-25
Steve Stulz
1897 Delaware Avenue
Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Facility
pg 16
Planner Stephen Grittman presented the request of Steve Stulz for approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a
wireless facility at 1897 Delaware Avenue.
Mr. Grittman noted that Sprint was requesting approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) to allow modification to
their existing wireless telecommunications equipment located upon the roof of Sibley High School located at 1897
Delaware Avenue. The property currently has cellular antenna mounts for four other cellular carries including
AT&T, Nextel, Verizon and Qwest. The applicants are proposing to add three antennas and place two additional
cabinets of the existing platform. Once surrounding sites are operational, Sprint’s existing equipment would be
removed.
Mr. Grittman presented staff’s analysis of the request and recommended approval of the conditional use permit with
conditions as the proposed antenna and related equipment upgrades are expected to have no physical impact upon
neighboring properties.
Steve Stulz, agent for Sprint, thanked staff for their presentation this evening. He was pleased with the application
and conditions recommended by staff.
Chair Norton opened the public hearing.
Seeing no one coming forward wishing to speak, Chair Norton asked for a motion to close the public hearing.
COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO CLOSE THE
PUBLIC HEARING.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER NOONAN, TO
RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A WIRELESS FACILITY AS
REQUESTED BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT DETAILED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. THE EXISTING EQUIPMENT (TO BE REPLACED) BE REMOVED WITHIN SEVEN
MONTHS OF CUP APPROVAL. ANTENNA AND EQUIPMENT REMOVAL SHALL
INCLUDE THE REMOVAL OF UNUSED MOUNTING EQUIPMENT AND THE REPAIR OF
ANY DAMAGED WALL OR ROOF ELEMENTS (FROM EQUIPMENT ANCHORS).
2. THE NEW ANTENNAS AND ACCESSORY EQUIPMENT CABINETS BE PAINTED TO
MATCH THE COLOR OF THE BUILDING.
3. THE NEW ANTENNAS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL FCC
REGULATIONS.
4. THE NEW ANTENNAS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL
APPLICABLE ELECTRICAL CODES.
5. A LEASE AGREEMENT EXISTS BETWEEN THE APPLICANTS AND THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
Chair Norton advised the City Council would consider this application at its August 7, 2012, meeting.
PLANNING CASE #2012-13
City of Mendota Heights
Zoning Amendment pertaining to New Property Maintenance Code for Commercial/Industrial Properties
pg 17
Assistant to the City Administrator Sedlacek presented the request of the City for approval of a zoning amendment
pertaining to a new property maintenance code for commercial/industrial properties.
Mr. Sedlacek noted that a planning application was presented to the planning commission on June 26, 2012 to
amend Title 12 of city code to include a chapter on commercial property maintenance. At that meeting, the zoning
amendment was tabled and staff was directed to discuss the item further with the Chamber of Commerce and local
business/commercial property owners. Staff met with Ruthe Batulis and Bob Engelhart on the matter and feedback
was provided to staff.
Mr. Sedlacek recommended the planning commission discuss the matter further and make a recommendation to the
city council, who is anxious to discuss the topic.
Commissioner Hennes asked for staff’s recommendation on this issue. Mr. Sedlacek apologized for not including
staff’s recommendation from the June 26, 2012 meeting. He commented that staff’s position had not changed and
recommended approval of the zoning code amendment.
Commissioner Field noted he was not at the previous meeting and was not privy to the discussion held. He
questioned why the council had set a timeline for the matter. Mr. Sedlacek explained the council was anxious to
discuss the matter themselves and were looking for a recommendation from the planning commission.
Commissioner Magnuson indicated she was not in attendance at the June meeting either. She presented staff with a
list of proposed changes to the drafting of the ordinance. Mr. Grittman indicated this could be reviewed with the
City Attorney prior to the council meeting.
Commissioner Viksnins reviewed the July 24th staff memo concerning the comments made by the Chamber of
Commerce and Mr. Engelhart. He questioned if the suggested changes were made or if staff had retained the
language of the code. Mr. Sedlacek discussed the language changes that were made to the document by staff. He
commented the policy issues were left to the planning commission’s discretion.
Commissioner Viksnins encouraged the city to remain cooperative with the business community and noted that he
supported the ordinance amendment. He understood the council wanted to move along with the ordinance, but
wanted to be assured that all voices were heard prior to approval.
Commissioner Hennes commented this document could be discussed for the next six months; however he was in
favor of moving it along to the city council. He agreed with having the policy in place.
Commissioner Noonan was pleased with the changes made to the document based on the comments made by the
business community. He indicated all property within the community would now be treated equally, whether
residential or commercial/industrial. He stated the zoning ordinance would establish a level playing field of
reasonable expectations for property owners in Mendota Heights.
Commissioner Viksnins suggested the council consider the comments provided by the Chamber of Commerce
before approving the amendment.
Commissioner Field stated he would like to be assured this ordinance was done correctly and was in favor of
holding this off until comments could be received from Commissioner Roston.
Chair Norton agreed. He was in favor of tabling the matter until a full and complete discussion could be held by the
entire planning commission. This would also allow for the changes suggested by Commissioner Magnuson to be
completed prior to approval. He was concerned the ordinance amendment was a solution searching for a problem.
Commissioner Hennes asked if the 60-day time limit was a concern with this item. Mr. Grittman noted was a city
generated request and a waiver could be granted for the zoning amendment.
pg 18
Commissioner Hennes questioned if the commission would be any more comfortable with the proposed zoning
amendment in 30 days.
Commissioner Magnuson stated the language would be cleaned up, which would eliminate some of the concerns on
the vagueness of the terminology. She was uncertain that all objectives would be overcome, but the document
would be more complete.
Chair Norton stated the duty of the planning commission was to fully review the information and make a
determination accordingly. He was not in favor of rubberstamping the item based on the deadline set by the council.
Commissioner Noonan discussed the action taken by the commission at the June meeting as the item was delayed
already to allow for conversations between staff and the Chamber of Commerce. However, if the delay was
prolonging a denial the action should be taken this evening.
Chair Norton stated the final ruling would be taken by the council even if the commission recommended denial.
COMMISSIONER FIELD MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER MAGNUSON, TO TABLE
ACTION ON THIS ITEM TO THE AUGUST 28, 2012 MEETING AFTER REVISIONS ARE MADE TO
THE DOCUMENT LANGUAGE.
Commissioner Magnuson recommended any other language changes from the commission be sent to staff prior to
the August 28, 2012 meeting. Mr. Grittman recommended the commission provide comments to staff prior to
August 10, 2012.
Commissioner Viksnins stated he would be in favor of hearing staff’s opinion on the comments made by the
Chamber of Commerce. Mr. Grittman explained this could be completed prior to the August meeting.
Commissioner Hennes expressed concern with the assertions made by the Chamber of Commerce’s letter dated July
20, 2012. He did not feel that the City of Mendota Heights was hostile to local businesses.
AYES 4
NAYS 2 (HENNES AND NOONAN OPPOSED)
Chair Norton advised the Planning Commission would reconsider this application at its August 28, 2012, meeting.
Verbal Review
Mr. Sedlacek gave the following verbal review:
PLANNING CASE #2012-18 Greg Quehl Lot Line Adjustment and Wetlands Permit
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING CASE #2012-19 Scott Cottington Wetlands Permit and Critical Area Permit
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING CASE #2012-20 Orlando Ponce Critical Area Permit
• Approved by the City Council as recommended by the Planning Commission.
COMMISSIONER HENNES MOVED, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER VIKSNINS, TO ADJOURN
THE MEETING AT 8:12 P.M.
AYES 6
NAYS 0
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Guenther, Recording Secretary
pg 19
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council & City Administrator
FROM: Paul R. Berg, Code Enforcement Officer
SUBJECT: Sign permit approval 1408 Northland Drive
BACKGROUND
Staff has received a sign permit application for a 13.9 square foot non-illuminated building sign
from Spectrum Sign Systems, Inc. on behalf of the Cassidy Turley building owner. Please see
attached colored depiction of sign superimposed on the building.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the 13.9 square foot non-illuminated building sign. If Council
wishes to implement staff recommendation of approval it should pass a motion of approval and
grant staff the authority to issue the requested sign permit.
pg 20
pg 21
pg
22
pg 23
pg 24
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mike Aschenbrener, Chief of Police
John Maczko, Fire Chief
SUBJECT: 13th Annual Wacipi at St. Peter’s Church
BACKGROUND:
The Mendota Mdewakanton Dakota Community has sponsored a Traditional Wacipi, a non-
competitive pow-wow, for the past 13 years.
The Wacipi will be held on the grounds at St. Peter’s Church. The Wacipi is a family oriented
event that is open to the public. The City does not require permits for large scale activities, but
approval is required for the continual fire they plan on having. There is no alcohol allowed at the
event. It should not require any extra policing.
See attached flyer.
BUDGET IMPACT
There is no financial impact.
RECOMMENDATION
Pass a motion authorizing the Mdewakanton Dakota Community to have continual fire from
Friday, September 7 at 5:05 p.m. until the end of the event on Sunday, September 9, 2012.
pg 25
Mendota’s 13th Annual
Traditional
Wacipi
September 7, 8, 9, 2012.
St. Peter’s Church Grounds 1405 Sibley Memorial Hwy in Mendota,
Minnesota 55150
Emcee: Mitch Walking Elk
Arena Director: Windy Down Wind
Host Drum: Scotty Brown Eyes
Co Host Drum: Little Thunder Birds
Men's Head Dancer: Nick Anderson
Women's Head Dancer: Mary So Happy
Spiritual Advisor: TBA
Public Welcome
First 10 Drums Paid
Friday, Sept 07
5:05 pm .............. Lighting the Sacred Fire
(followed by a potluck dinner)
Saturday, Sept 08
12:00 am ............ Dancer's Registration
1:00 pm .............. Grand Entry
3:30 pm .............. Honoring Ceremony Dick
Bancroft & Norbe Blake
.......................... Other Honorings
5:30-6:30pm ....... Dancer Registration
7:00 pm .............. Grand Entry / Mexica Dancer
8:00 pm .............. Registered Dancers Payout
Sunday, Sept 09
12:00 am ............ Dancer's Registration
1:00 pm .............. Grand Entry
1:30 pm .............. Honoring Ceremony
2:00 pm .............. More Dancing
3:00 pm .............. Honoring Ceremony
5:00 pm .............. Closing Ceremony &
Thank You Feast
5:30 pm .............. Registered Dancers Payout
For more information call 651-452-4141
$5 Entry Button Donation
No one turned away!
NO DRUGS, ALCOHOL, FIREARMS, OR PETS ALLOWED
Please bring lawn chairs
.
Please note: This is a Traditional Wacipi not a Competition.
Sponsored by the Mendota Mdewakanton Dakota Community.
www.mendotadakota.com mmdc01@comcast.net
Donations Needed
Public
Welcome!
Public
Welcome!
pg 26
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director
SUBJECT: Banking Authorization Change
BACKGROUND
This memo is to update the Banking Authorization Resolution for American Bank and Gateway
Bank. We will need to add Lorri Smith, City Clerk and remove Sandie Thone from the list of
authorized signatures. The banks have provided us with the paperwork to make this change to
the city bank accounts.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Remove Sandie Thone and add Lorri Smith to the Banking Authorization Resolutions for both
American and Gateway Banks.
pg 27
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Jake Sedlacek, Assistant to the City Administrator
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2012-25, Conditional Use Permit for Wireless Facility
BACKGROUND
Steve Stulz made a planning application on behalf of Independent School District 197 and Sprint
for a conditional use permit to upgrade the wireless facilities located on the Henry Sibley High
School building. Because the work will result in a small change to the exterior of the building,
staff instructed Mr. Stulz to make application.
The planning commission heard the request at their regular meeting on Tuesday, July 24, 2012.
There were no questions on the application; Mr. Stulz affirmed for the commission that the
proposed conditions of approval were acceptable. There were no comments at the public
hearing.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
The planning commission recommended approval of the request on a 6:0 vote. This matter
requires a simple majority vote by the council. If the city council desires to implement the
recommendation, pass a motion adopting A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT FOR WIRELESS FACILITY AT 1897 DELAWARE AVENUE.
pg 28
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Bob Kirmis/Stephen Grittman
DATE: July 12, 2012
MEETING DATE: July 24, 2012
SUBJECT: Conditional Use Permit for a Wireless Antenna Modification
CASE NO: Case No. 12.25, NAC Case 254.04 - 12.13
APPLICANT(S): Sprint
LOCATION: 1897 Delaware Avenue (Sibley High School)
ZONING: R-1, One Family Residential
Guide Plan: Public
Background and Description of Request:
Sprint is requesting approval of a Conditional Use permit (CUP) to allow modification to
their existing wireless telecommunication equipment located upon the roof of Sibley
High School located at 1897 Delaware Avenue. The property currently has cellular
antenna mounts for four other cellular carriers including AT&T, Nextel, Verizon and
Qwest.
Specifically, the applicants are proposing to add three antennas (I per sector) and place
two additional cabinets of the existing platform. Once surrounding sites are operational,
Sprint’s existing equipment would be removed.
The Zoning Ordinance allows for wireless communication towers and antenna in all
zoning districts upon approval of a conditional use permit.
Analysis:
The applicants are proposing to add three antennas (I per sector) and place two
additional cabinets of the existing platform. As noted, the applicants intend to remove
pg 29
the existing cabinets and antennas once surrounding sites are determined to be
operational. The new antennas are to be six feet in height. Some of the existing
antennas being replaced are currently under 4 feet in height, however, the
replacements will not extend above the wall of the building. The applicant anticipates
that surrounding sites will be operational in approximately six months.
While the proposed antenna and equipment upgrades are not expected to have any
significant impacts upon the subject site and surrounding properties, two relatively minor
concerns exist.
For an approximate six month period, the amount of Sprint operated equipment will be
approximately double that which presently exists. From a visual standpoint, this may
not be considered the most desirable condition. To ensure prompt removal of the
existing equipment, it is suggested that a deadline for removal be established. In this
regard, it is recommended that the existing equipment be moved no later than seven
months from the date of CUP approval. To be noted is that the antenna and equipment
removal should include the removal of unused mounting equipment and the repair of
any damaged wall or roof elements (from equipment anchors).
The second issue relates to the appearance of the new antennas and cabinets. For
building mounted-installations, the Zoning Ordinance encourages antennae which are
painted to blend with the building. To minimize the aesthetic impacts of the new
antennas and equipment cabinets, it is recommended that they be painted to match the
color of the high school building.
Action Requested:
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may recommend one of the
following:
(1) Approve the Conditional Use Permit with conditions based on a finding that the
proposed antenna and accessory equipment modifications meet all of the Zoning
Ordinance requirements and are consistent with the intent of the Conditional use
Permit criteria allowing such features. Conditions may include:
a. The existing equipment (to be replaced) be removed within seven months
of CUP approval. Antenna and equipment removal shall include the
removal of unused mounting equipment and the repair of any damaged
wall or roof elements (from equipment anchors).
b. The new antennas and accessory equipment cabinets be painted to match
the color of the building.
c. The new antennas and related equipment shall comply with all FCC
regulations.
pg 30
d. The new antennas and related equipment shall comply with all applicable
electrical codes.
e. A lease agreement exists between the applicants and the School District.
(2) Deny the Conditional Use Permit, based on a finding from additional information
presented at the public hearing.
Staff Recommendation:
Planning Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit with conditions as
stated in Alternative number (1) above. The proposed antenna and related equipment
upgrades are expected to have no physical impact upon neighboring properties.
Supplementary Materials:
1. Site Location Map
2. Application Materials dated 7-2-12
pg 31
De
l
a
w
a
r
e
A
v
e
.
Do
d
d
R
d
Marie Ave
So
u
t
h
L
a
Tr
a
i
l
R
d
Wa
r
r
i
o
r
D
r
Hillt
o
p
R
d
Evergreen Kn
Callahan Pl
Wesley La
Bachelor Ave
Highway 110 Frontage Rd
Kn
o
b
R
d
Sutton La
Stanwich La
Va
l
l
e
y
C
u
r
v
e
R
d
S Plaza Dr
Ridge Pl
Fo
x
P
l
Az
t
e
c
L
a
Dodg
e
L
a
Wa
c
h
t
l
e
r
A
v
e
Freeway Rd
Sibley Ct
R
i
d
g
e
w
o
o
d
D
r
Ar
v
i
n
D
r
Mager Ct
G
r
y
c
C
t
Wa
c
h
t
l
e
r
A
v
e
1897 Delaware Ave.
Site Location Map
Water/Wetlands
Major Roads
City Roads
Municipal Boundaries
pg 32
pg 33
pg 34
pg 35
pg
36
pg
37
pg
38
pg
39
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING
A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR
UPDATES TO THE WIRELESS FACILITY AT 1897 DELAWARE AVE.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the Planning Commission of Mendota Heights will
meet at 7:00 P.M., or as soon as possible thereafter, on Tuesday, July 24, 2012 in the
City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota, to
consider an application from Steve Stulz on behalf of Sprint to update wireless antenna
at Henry Sibley High School, 1897 Delaware Ave.
This notice is pursuant to Title 12 (Zoning), Chapter 1 of the Mendota Heights City
Code. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to this request will be heard
at this meeting.
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
pg 40
Dakota County, MN
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not
guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,
appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 773 feet
pg 41
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIOANL USE PERMIT FOR WIRELESS
FACILITIES AT 1897 DELAWARE AVE.
WHEREAS, Steve Stulz, on behalf Independent School District 197 has applied for a conditional
use permit to complete updates to the wireless facilities located at Henry Sibley High School, 1897
Delaware Ave (PID 27-2500-030-10, Section 25 Township 28 Range 23, SE ¼ of NE ¼ Less Hgwy
98/100 A EX PT for St subj to CO R/W Par 1(352)) as proposed in planning case 2012-25; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular
meeting July 25, 2012.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a
conditional use permit as proposed in planning case 2012-25 is hereby approved with the following
findings of fact:
1. The proposed antenna and accessory equipment modifications meet all of the Zoning Ordinance
requirements.
2. The proposed antenna and accessory equipment modifications are consistent with the intent of the
conditional use permit criteria allowing such features.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a conditional use
permit as proposed in planning case 2012-25 is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. The existing equipment (to be replaced) be removed within seven months of CUP approval.
Antenna and equipment removal shall include the removal of unused mounting equipment and
the repair of any damaged wall or roof elements (from equipment anchors).
2. The new antennas and accessory equipment cabinets be painted to match the color of the building
3. The new antennas and related equipment shall comply with all FCC regulations.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of August 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
pg 42
ATTEST
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 43
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Tamara Schutta, HR Coordinator
SUBJECT: Par 3 Temporary Seasonal Hires 2012
BACKGROUND
Several weeks ago, Charles Lennon resigned as a Clubhouse Worker. He had recently retired from
his fulltime job and was beginning to travel. Also within the next month, several clubhouse workers
will be leaving for college. City staff recently completed interviews for two clubhouse worker
positions. Applicants were offered their position contingent upon a successful completion of a
criminal background check and council approval.
Staff is recommending the following individuals for employment effective August 1, 2012 for the
remainder of the 2012 golf season:
Position Name Rate of Pay:
Clubhouse Workers Thomas Clifford $8.25
Vicki Larson $8.25
BUDGET IMPACT
As noted above.
RECOMMENDATION
City staff recommends that city council approve the above mentioned part-time seasonal position
candidates for employment effective August 1, 2012 for the remainder of the 2012 Par 3 golf season.
If council concurs in the recommendation, a motion should be made to approve the above listed Par 3
seasonal hires. A simple majority vote is all that is needed on this issue.
pg 44
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Kristen Schabacker, Finance Director
SUBJECT: 2012 Bond Issue
BACKGROUND
The city has ordered four road improvement projects to be completed this construction season.
Tonight we will begin the process to issue bonds to finance these projects. The four projects are
the Lemay Lake Road project, Diane Road project, Marie Avenue project and the Mendota
Heights Road project. I have contacted Ehlers & Associates to assist us with the issuance of
these bonds. The schedule is as follows:
Pre-Sale Review by Council August 7, 2012
Distribute Official Statement Week of August 6th, 2012
Conference with Rating Agency Week of August 13th, 2012
Award Sale of Bonds August 21, 2012
Estimated Closing Date September 12, 2012
Ehlers has prepared a Pre-Sale report that is attached for your review. We will be issuing
$2,640,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds for these street projects with a term of 19
years.
BUDGET IMPACT
The bonds will be paid with a combination of special assessments and an amount levied each
year for the annual bond payments.
RECOMMENDATION
I recommend that council pass a motion to adopt Resolution 2012- “RESOLUTION
PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $2,640,000 G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES
2012A.”
pg 45
Prepared and Presented by:
Mark Ruff
Financial Advisor, CIPFA
And
Stacie Kvilvang
Financial Advisor, CIPFA
August 7, 2012
Pre-Sale Report for
$2,640,000 General Obligation Improvement
Bonds, Series 2012A
City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota
pg 46
Executive Summary of Proposed Debt
Proposed Issue: $2,640,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2012A
Authority: The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statues, Chapter
429 and 475. Because the City assessing at least 20% of the project
costs, the Bonds can be a general obligation without a referendum
and will not count against the City’s debt limit.
Purposes/Funding Sources:
The proposed issue includes financing for the following purposes:
• Marie Avenue Street Reconstruction
• Lemay Lake Neighborhood Improvements –
Reconstruction
• Diane Road / Mendota Heights Road Rehabilitation
For the Marie Avenue street project, it is the intent of the City to levy
the special assessments in the amount of approximately $108,800 for
the road reconstruction portion of the project to benefiting property
owners in 2012 for collection in years 2013 through 2031 at a rate of
6% (19 years). The City anticipates receiving approximately $43,520
(40%) in prepayments on the special assessments from the project
this fall.
For the Lemay Lake Neighborhood improvement, it is the intent of
the City to levy the special assessments in the amount of
approximately $338,946.64 for the road reconstruction portion of the
project to benefiting property owners in 2012 for collection in years
2013 through 2031 at a rate of 6% (19 years). The City anticipates
receiving approximately $101,683.99 (30%) in prepayments on the
special assessments from this portion of the project this fall.
For the Diane Road / Mendota Heights Road projects, it is the intent
of the City to levy the special assessments in the amount of
approximately $376,664.07 for the road rehabilitation portion of the
project to benefiting property owners in 2012 for collection in years
2013 through 2022 at a rate of 6% (10 years). The City anticipates
receiving approximately $150,665.63 (40%) in prepayments on the
special assessments from this portion of the project this fall.
The issue size has been reduced by the aforementioned prepayment
amounts. In addition, the City anticipates utilizing approximately
$1,150,506.29 from its Utility funds, $410,582.83 in MSA funds, and
$84,784.80 in Infrastructure funds for the projects.
Remaining debt service will be paid from a tax levy. A portion of the
levy will be deferred until another bond is paid off in eight years. The
information related to the up-front sources of funds for the 2012
projects is found in the attachments to this report.
pg 47
Term/Call Feature
The Bonds are being issued for a 19 year term. Principal on the
Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years 2014 through 2032.
Interest is payable every six months beginning August 1, 2013.
The Bonds maturing February 1, 2022, and thereafter will be subject
to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2021 or any
date thereafter.
Bank Qualification
Because the City is issuing less than $10,000,000 in the calendar
year, the City will be able to designate the Bonds as “bank qualified”
obligations. Bank qualified status broadens the market for the Bonds,
which can result in lower interest rates.
Rating:
The City’s most recent bond issues were rated “Aa1” by Moody’s
Investors Service. The City will request a new rating for the Bonds.
If the winning bidder on the Bonds elects to purchase bond insurance,
the rating for the issue may be higher than the City's bond rating in
the event that the bond rating of the insurer is higher than that of the
City.
Method of Sale/Placement:
In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will solicit
competitive bids for purchase of the Bonds from local banks in your
area and regional underwriters.
We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 1.0% of
the principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an
interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of its
compensation in the transaction.
If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid
amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to
lower your borrowing amount.
Risk Considerations:
If significant amounts of prepayments of special assessments are
received (above what has been anticipated), the levy may need to be
increased in future years because the City’s investment earnings on
additional prepayments will likely be less than 6%.
Review of Existing Debt:
We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find
one bond issue callable on February 1, 2013 that the City can prepahy
at that time. For the remaining debt, two issues are candidates for
refunding, savings are relatively small and the city may prefer options
other than an advance refunding.
We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the
City’s outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding
opportunities.
Continuing Disclosure:
Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt
(including this issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will
be agreeing to provide certain updated Annual Financial Information
pg 48
and its Audited Financial Statement annually as well as providing
notices of the occurrence of certain “material events” to the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), as required
by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The
City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing
bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports.
Arbitrage Monitoring: Because the Bonds are tax-exempt securities/tax credit securities, the
Issuer must ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) rules throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all
gross proceeds of the issue, including initial bond proceeds and
investment earnings in construction, escrow, debt service, and any
reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds and how they track
interest earnings on funds (arbitrage/yield restriction compliance) are
common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will
be detailed in the Nonarbitrage Certificate prepared by your Bond
Attorney and provided at closing. We recommend that you regularly
monitor compliance with these rules and/or retain the services of a
qualified firm to assist you.
pg 49
Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule
Pre-Sale Review by Council: August 7, 2012
Distribute Official Statement: Week of August 6th
Conference with Rating Agency: Week of August 13th
City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: August 21,2012
Estimated Closing Date: September 12, 2012
Attachments
Sources and Uses of Funds
Proposed Debt Service Schedule
Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed With Bond Sale
Ehlers Contacts:
Financial Advisors: Mark Ruff
Stacie Kvilvang
(651) 697-8505
(651) 697-8506
Bond Analyst: Kara Meverden (651) 697-8545
Bond Sale Coordinator:
Financial Analyst:
Alicia Aulwes
Alicia Gage
(651) 697-8523
(651) 697-8551
The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the Council Members at their home address or
e-mailed for review prior to the sale date.
pg 50
Resolution No. _______________
Council Member _________________ introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
Resolution Providing for the Sale of
$2,640,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 2012A
A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, has heretofore determined
that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $2,640,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds Series
2012A (the "Bonds"), to finance 2012 street reconstruction and rehabilitation projects in the City; and
B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its
independent financial advisor for the Bonds and is therefore authorized to solicit proposals in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to solicit proposals for the sale
of the Bonds.
2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:00 p.m. on August 21, 2012, for the
purpose of considering sealed proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds.
3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby
authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the
Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council Member
_______________________ and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the
following Council Members voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted.
Dated this 7th day of August, 2012.
_____________________________________________
City Clerk
pg 51
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,640,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 2012
Issue Summary
Table of Contents
Report
ISSUE SUMMARY
Total Issue Sources And Uses 1
Debt Service Schedule 2
Levy Schedule 3
MARIE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
Debt Service Schedule 4
Levy Schedule 5
LEMAY LAKE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS
Debt Service Schedule 6
Levy Schedule 7
DIANE / MENDOTA HGTS ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
Debt Service Schedule 8
Levy Schedule 9
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Issue Summary | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
pg 52
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,640,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 2012
Issue Summary
Total Issue Sources And Uses
Dated 09/01/2012 | Delivered 09/01/2012
Marie Avenue
Improvements
Lemay Lake
Neighborhood
Improvements
Diane / Mendota
Hgts Road
Improvements Issue Summary
Sources Of Funds
Par Amount of Bonds $550,000.00$1,290,000.00$800,000.00$2,640,000.00
Infrastructure Funding --84,784.80 84,784.80
MSA Funding 106,170.24 -304,412.59410,582.83
Utility Funding 614,282.61536,223.68 -1,150,506.29
Prepaid Special Assessments 43,520.00101,683.99150,665.63295,869.62
Total Sources $1,313,972.85$1,927,907.67$1,339,863.02$4,581,743.54
Uses Of Funds
Total Underwriter's Discount (1.000%)5,500.00 12,900.00 8,000.00 26,400.00
Costs of Issuance 7,500.00 17,590.91 10,909.09 36,000.00
Deposit to Project Construction Fund 1,296,728.991,897,847.361,323,565.914,518,142.26
Rounding Amount 4,243.86 (430.60)(2,611.98)1,201.28
Total Uses $1,313,972.85$1,927,907.67$1,339,863.02$4,581,743.54
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Issue Summary | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 1
pg 53
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,640,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 2012
Issue Summary
Debt Service Schedule
Date PrincipalCouponInterest Total P+IFiscal Total
09/01/2012 -----
08/01/2013 --52,868.76 52,868.76 -
02/01/2014 75,000.00 0.650%28,837.50 103,837.50 156,706.26
08/01/2014 --28,593.75 28,593.75 -
02/01/2015 95,000.00 0.750%28,593.75 123,593.75 152,187.50
08/01/2015 --28,237.50 28,237.50 -
02/01/2016 95,000.00 0.900%28,237.50 123,237.50 151,475.00
08/01/2016 --27,810.00 27,810.00 -
02/01/2017 95,000.00 1.150%27,810.00 122,810.00 150,620.00
08/01/2017 --27,263.75 27,263.75 -
02/01/2018 95,000.00 1.350%27,263.75 122,263.75 149,527.50
08/01/2018 --26,622.50 26,622.50 -
02/01/2019 90,000.00 1.600%26,622.50 116,622.50 143,245.00
08/01/2019 --25,902.50 25,902.50 -
02/01/2020 90,000.00 1.800%25,902.50 115,902.50 141,805.00
08/01/2020 --25,092.50 25,092.50 -
02/01/2021 90,000.00 1.950%25,092.50 115,092.50 140,185.00
08/01/2021 --24,215.00 24,215.00 -
02/01/2022 180,000.00 2.050%24,215.00 204,215.00 228,430.00
08/01/2022 --22,370.00 22,370.00 -
02/01/2023 180,000.00 2.150%22,370.00 202,370.00 224,740.00
08/01/2023 --20,435.00 20,435.00 -
02/01/2024 160,000.00 2.250%20,435.00 180,435.00 200,870.00
08/01/2024 --18,635.00 18,635.00 -
02/01/2025 165,000.00 2.350%18,635.00 183,635.00 202,270.00
08/01/2025 --16,696.25 16,696.25 -
02/01/2026 165,000.00 2.450%16,696.25 181,696.25 198,392.50
08/01/2026 --14,675.00 14,675.00 -
02/01/2027 170,000.00 2.500%14,675.00 184,675.00 199,350.00
08/01/2027 --12,550.00 12,550.00 -
02/01/2028 170,000.00 2.600%12,550.00 182,550.00 195,100.00
08/01/2028 --10,340.00 10,340.00 -
02/01/2029 175,000.00 2.700%10,340.00 185,340.00 195,680.00
08/01/2029 --7,977.50 7,977.50 -
02/01/2030 180,000.00 2.800%7,977.50 187,977.50 195,955.00
08/01/2030 --5,457.50 5,457.50 -
02/01/2031 185,000.00 2.900%5,457.50 190,457.50 195,915.00
08/01/2031 --2,775.00 2,775.00 -
02/01/2032 185,000.00 3.000%2,775.00 187,775.00 190,550.00
Total $2,640,000.00 -$773,003.76 $3,413,003.76 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $31,335.00
Average Life 11.869 Years
Average Coupon 2.4669021%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.5511529%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.5426546%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.4429532%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.6807942%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.4669021%
Weighted Average Maturity 11.869 Years
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Issue Summary | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 2
pg 54
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$2,640,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 2012
Issue Summary
Levy Schedule
DateCUSIPPrincipalCouponInterestTotal P+INet D/SNet DS * 1.05%Special Asmnt Levy Amount
02/01/2013 --------
02/01/2014 75,000.000.650%81,706.26156,706.26156,706.26164,541.57 (70,147.53)94,394.04
02/01/2015 95,000.000.750%57,187.50152,187.50152,187.50159,796.88 (67,924.23)91,872.65
02/01/2016 95,000.000.900%56,475.00151,475.00151,475.00159,048.75 (65,612.84)93,435.91
02/01/2017 95,000.001.150%55,620.00150,620.00150,620.00158,151.00 (63,301.45)94,849.55
02/01/2018 95,000.001.350%54,527.50149,527.50149,527.50157,003.88 (60,990.05)96,013.83
02/01/2019 90,000.001.600%53,245.00143,245.00143,245.00150,407.25 (58,678.66)91,728.59
02/01/2020 90,000.001.800%51,805.00141,805.00141,805.00148,895.25 (56,367.28)92,527.97
02/01/2021 90,000.001.950%50,185.00140,185.00140,185.00147,194.25 (54,055.88)93,138.37
02/01/2022 180,000.002.050%48,430.00228,430.00228,430.00239,851.50 (51,744.49)188,107.01
02/01/2023 180,000.002.150%44,740.00224,740.00224,740.00235,977.00 (49,433.10)186,543.90
02/01/2024 160,000.002.250%40,870.00200,870.00200,870.00210,913.50 (24,521.88)186,391.62
02/01/2025 165,000.002.350%37,270.00202,270.00202,270.00212,383.50 (23,566.48)188,817.02
02/01/2026 165,000.002.450%33,392.50198,392.50198,392.50208,312.13 (22,611.08)185,701.05
02/01/2027 170,000.002.500%29,350.00199,350.00199,350.00209,317.50 (21,655.68)187,661.82
02/01/2028 170,000.002.600%25,100.00195,100.00195,100.00204,855.00 (20,700.29)184,154.71
02/01/2029 175,000.002.700%20,680.00195,680.00195,680.00205,464.00 (19,744.88)185,719.12
02/01/2030 180,000.002.800%15,955.00195,955.00195,955.00205,752.75 (18,789.48)186,963.27
02/01/2031 185,000.002.900%10,915.00195,915.00195,915.00205,710.75 (17,834.08)187,876.67
02/01/2032 185,000.003.000%5,550.00190,550.00190,550.00200,077.50 (16,878.68)183,198.82
Total -$2,640,000.00 -$773,003.76 $3,413,003.76 $3,413,003.76 $3,583,653.95 (784,558.04)$2,799,095.91
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Issue Summary | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 3
pg 55
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$550,000 - Purpose 1
Marie Avenue Improvements
Debt Service Schedule
Date PrincipalCouponInterest Total P+IFiscal Total
09/01/2012 -----
08/01/2013 --11,515.63 11,515.63 -
02/01/2014 10,000.00 0.650%6,281.25 16,281.25 27,796.88
08/01/2014 --6,248.75 6,248.75 -
02/01/2015 15,000.00 0.750%6,248.75 21,248.75 27,497.50
08/01/2015 --6,192.50 6,192.50 -
02/01/2016 15,000.00 0.900%6,192.50 21,192.50 27,385.00
08/01/2016 --6,125.00 6,125.00 -
02/01/2017 15,000.00 1.150%6,125.00 21,125.00 27,250.00
08/01/2017 --6,038.75 6,038.75 -
02/01/2018 15,000.00 1.350%6,038.75 21,038.75 27,077.50
08/01/2018 --5,937.50 5,937.50 -
02/01/2019 15,000.00 1.600%5,937.50 20,937.50 26,875.00
08/01/2019 --5,817.50 5,817.50 -
02/01/2020 15,000.00 1.800%5,817.50 20,817.50 26,635.00
08/01/2020 --5,682.50 5,682.50 -
02/01/2021 15,000.00 1.950%5,682.50 20,682.50 26,365.00
08/01/2021 --5,536.25 5,536.25 -
02/01/2022 35,000.00 2.050%5,536.25 40,536.25 46,072.50
08/01/2022 --5,177.50 5,177.50 -
02/01/2023 35,000.00 2.150%5,177.50 40,177.50 45,355.00
08/01/2023 --4,801.25 4,801.25 -
02/01/2024 35,000.00 2.250%4,801.25 39,801.25 44,602.50
08/01/2024 --4,407.50 4,407.50 -
02/01/2025 40,000.00 2.350%4,407.50 44,407.50 48,815.00
08/01/2025 --3,937.50 3,937.50 -
02/01/2026 40,000.00 2.450%3,937.50 43,937.50 47,875.00
08/01/2026 --3,447.50 3,447.50 -
02/01/2027 40,000.00 2.500%3,447.50 43,447.50 46,895.00
08/01/2027 --2,947.50 2,947.50 -
02/01/2028 40,000.00 2.600%2,947.50 42,947.50 45,895.00
08/01/2028 --2,427.50 2,427.50 -
02/01/2029 40,000.00 2.700%2,427.50 42,427.50 44,855.00
08/01/2029 --1,887.50 1,887.50 -
02/01/2030 40,000.00 2.800%1,887.50 41,887.50 43,775.00
08/01/2030 --1,327.50 1,327.50 -
02/01/2031 45,000.00 2.900%1,327.50 46,327.50 47,655.00
08/01/2031 --675.00 675.00 -
02/01/2032 45,000.00 3.000%675.00 45,675.00 46,350.00
Total $550,000.00 -$175,026.88 $725,026.88 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $6,959.17
Average Life 12.653 Years
Average Coupon 2.5150552%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.5940876%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.5884937%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.4429532%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.7192869%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.5150552%
Weighted Average Maturity 12.653 Years
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Marie Avenue Improvements | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 4
pg 56
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$550,000 - Purpose 1
Marie Avenue Improvements
Levy Schedule
DateCUSIPPrincipalCouponInterestTotal P+INet D/SNet DS * 1.05%Special Asmnt Levy Amount
02/01/2013 --------
02/01/2014 10,000.000.650%17,796.8827,796.8827,796.8829,186.72 (7,341.71)21,845.01
02/01/2015 15,000.000.750%12,497.5027,497.5027,497.5028,872.38 (7,146.44)21,725.94
02/01/2016 15,000.000.900%12,385.0027,385.0027,385.0028,754.25 (6,940.30)21,813.95
02/01/2017 15,000.001.150%12,250.0027,250.0027,250.0028,612.50 (6,734.15)21,878.35
02/01/2018 15,000.001.350%12,077.5027,077.5027,077.5028,431.38 (6,528.00)21,903.38
02/01/2019 15,000.001.600%11,875.0026,875.0026,875.0028,218.75 (6,321.85)21,896.90
02/01/2020 15,000.001.800%11,635.0026,635.0026,635.0027,966.75 (6,115.71)21,851.04
02/01/2021 15,000.001.950%11,365.0026,365.0026,365.0027,683.25 (5,909.56)21,773.69
02/01/2022 35,000.002.050%11,072.5046,072.5046,072.5048,376.13 (5,703.41)42,672.72
02/01/2023 35,000.002.150%10,355.0045,355.0045,355.0047,622.75 (5,497.26)42,125.49
02/01/2024 35,000.002.250%9,602.5044,602.5044,602.5046,832.63 (5,291.12)41,541.51
02/01/2025 40,000.002.350%8,815.0048,815.0048,815.0051,255.75 (5,084.97)46,170.78
02/01/2026 40,000.002.450%7,875.0047,875.0047,875.0050,268.75 (4,878.82)45,389.93
02/01/2027 40,000.002.500%6,895.0046,895.0046,895.0049,239.75 (4,672.67)44,567.08
02/01/2028 40,000.002.600%5,895.0045,895.0045,895.0048,189.75 (4,466.53)43,723.22
02/01/2029 40,000.002.700%4,855.0044,855.0044,855.0047,097.75 (4,260.38)42,837.37
02/01/2030 40,000.002.800%3,775.0043,775.0043,775.0045,963.75 (4,054.23)41,909.52
02/01/2031 45,000.002.900%2,655.0047,655.0047,655.0050,037.75 (3,848.08)46,189.67
02/01/2032 45,000.003.000%1,350.0046,350.0046,350.0048,667.50 (3,641.93)45,025.57
Total -$550,000.00 -$175,026.88 $725,026.88 $725,026.88 $761,278.22 (104,437.12)$656,841.10
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Marie Avenue Improvements | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 5
pg 57
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$1,290,000 - Purpose 2
Lemay Lake Neighborhood Improvements
Debt Service Schedule
Date PrincipalCouponInterest Total P+IFiscal Total
09/01/2012 -----
08/01/2013 --26,438.96 26,438.96 -
02/01/2014 30,000.00 0.650%14,421.25 44,421.25 70,860.21
08/01/2014 --14,323.75 14,323.75 -
02/01/2015 40,000.00 0.750%14,323.75 54,323.75 68,647.50
08/01/2015 --14,173.75 14,173.75 -
02/01/2016 40,000.00 0.900%14,173.75 54,173.75 68,347.50
08/01/2016 --13,993.75 13,993.75 -
02/01/2017 40,000.00 1.150%13,993.75 53,993.75 67,987.50
08/01/2017 --13,763.75 13,763.75 -
02/01/2018 40,000.00 1.350%13,763.75 53,763.75 67,527.50
08/01/2018 --13,493.75 13,493.75 -
02/01/2019 40,000.00 1.600%13,493.75 53,493.75 66,987.50
08/01/2019 --13,173.75 13,173.75 -
02/01/2020 40,000.00 1.800%13,173.75 53,173.75 66,347.50
08/01/2020 --12,813.75 12,813.75 -
02/01/2021 40,000.00 1.950%12,813.75 52,813.75 65,627.50
08/01/2021 --12,423.75 12,423.75 -
02/01/2022 85,000.00 2.050%12,423.75 97,423.75 109,847.50
08/01/2022 --11,552.50 11,552.50 -
02/01/2023 85,000.00 2.150%11,552.50 96,552.50 108,105.00
08/01/2023 --10,638.75 10,638.75 -
02/01/2024 85,000.00 2.250%10,638.75 95,638.75 106,277.50
08/01/2024 --9,682.50 9,682.50 -
02/01/2025 85,000.00 2.350%9,682.50 94,682.50 104,365.00
08/01/2025 --8,683.75 8,683.75 -
02/01/2026 85,000.00 2.450%8,683.75 93,683.75 102,367.50
08/01/2026 --7,642.50 7,642.50 -
02/01/2027 90,000.00 2.500%7,642.50 97,642.50 105,285.00
08/01/2027 --6,517.50 6,517.50 -
02/01/2028 90,000.00 2.600%6,517.50 96,517.50 103,035.00
08/01/2028 --5,347.50 5,347.50 -
02/01/2029 90,000.00 2.700%5,347.50 95,347.50 100,695.00
08/01/2029 --4,132.50 4,132.50 -
02/01/2030 95,000.00 2.800%4,132.50 99,132.50 103,265.00
08/01/2030 --2,802.50 2,802.50 -
02/01/2031 95,000.00 2.900%2,802.50 97,802.50 100,605.00
08/01/2031 --1,425.00 1,425.00 -
02/01/2032 95,000.00 3.000%1,425.00 96,425.00 97,850.00
Total $1,290,000.00 -$394,030.21 $1,684,030.21 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $15,822.50
Average Life 12.266 Years
Average Coupon 2.4903158%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.5718452%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.5649748%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.4429532%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.6992592%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.4903158%
Weighted Average Maturity 12.266 Years
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Lemay Lake Neighborhood I | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 6
pg 58
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$1,290,000 - Purpose 2
Lemay Lake Neighborhood Improvements
Levy Schedule
DateCUSIPPrincipalCouponInterestTotal P+INet D/SNet DS * 1.05%Special Asmnt Levy Amount
02/01/2013 --------
02/01/2014 30,000.000.650%40,860.21 70,860.21 70,860.21 74,403.22 (26,683.73)47,719.49
02/01/2015 40,000.000.750%28,647.50 68,647.50 68,647.50 72,079.88 (25,974.02)46,105.86
02/01/2016 40,000.000.900%28,347.50 68,347.50 68,347.50 71,764.88 (25,224.77)46,540.11
02/01/2017 40,000.001.150%27,987.50 67,987.50 67,987.50 71,386.88 (24,475.52)46,911.36
02/01/2018 40,000.001.350%27,527.50 67,527.50 67,527.50 70,903.88 (23,726.27)47,177.61
02/01/2019 40,000.001.600%26,987.50 66,987.50 66,987.50 70,336.88 (22,977.02)47,359.86
02/01/2020 40,000.001.800%26,347.50 66,347.50 66,347.50 69,664.88 (22,227.77)47,437.11
02/01/2021 40,000.001.950%25,627.50 65,627.50 65,627.50 68,908.88 (21,478.51)47,430.37
02/01/2022 85,000.002.050%24,847.50109,847.50109,847.50115,339.88 (20,729.26)94,610.62
02/01/2023 85,000.002.150%23,105.00108,105.00108,105.00113,510.25 (19,980.01)93,530.24
02/01/2024 85,000.002.250%21,277.50106,277.50106,277.50111,591.38 (19,230.76)92,360.62
02/01/2025 85,000.002.350%19,365.00104,365.00104,365.00109,583.25 (18,481.51)91,101.74
02/01/2026 85,000.002.450%17,367.50102,367.50102,367.50107,485.88 (17,732.26)89,753.62
02/01/2027 90,000.002.500%15,285.00105,285.00105,285.00110,549.25 (16,983.01)93,566.24
02/01/2028 90,000.002.600%13,035.00103,035.00103,035.00108,186.75 (16,233.76)91,952.99
02/01/2029 90,000.002.700%10,695.00100,695.00100,695.00105,729.75 (15,484.50)90,245.25
02/01/2030 95,000.002.800%8,265.00103,265.00103,265.00108,428.25 (14,735.25)93,693.00
02/01/2031 95,000.002.900%5,605.00100,605.00100,605.00105,635.25 (13,986.00)91,649.25
02/01/2032 95,000.003.000%2,850.00 97,850.00 97,850.00102,742.50 (13,236.75)89,505.75
Total -$1,290,000.00 -$394,030.21 $1,684,030.21 $1,684,030.21 $1,768,231.72 (379,580.68)$1,388,651.04
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Lemay Lake Neighborhood I | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 7
pg 59
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$800,000 - Purpose 3
Diane / Mendota Hgts Road Improvements
Debt Service Schedule
Date PrincipalCouponInterest Total P+I Fiscal Total
09/01/2012 -----
08/01/2013 --14,914.17 14,914.17 -
02/01/2014 35,000.00 0.650%8,135.00 43,135.00 58,049.17
08/01/2014 --8,021.25 8,021.25 -
02/01/2015 40,000.00 0.750%8,021.25 48,021.25 56,042.50
08/01/2015 --7,871.25 7,871.25 -
02/01/2016 40,000.00 0.900%7,871.25 47,871.25 55,742.50
08/01/2016 --7,691.25 7,691.25 -
02/01/2017 40,000.00 1.150%7,691.25 47,691.25 55,382.50
08/01/2017 --7,461.25 7,461.25 -
02/01/2018 40,000.00 1.350%7,461.25 47,461.25 54,922.50
08/01/2018 --7,191.25 7,191.25 -
02/01/2019 35,000.00 1.600%7,191.25 42,191.25 49,382.50
08/01/2019 --6,911.25 6,911.25 -
02/01/2020 35,000.00 1.800%6,911.25 41,911.25 48,822.50
08/01/2020 --6,596.25 6,596.25 -
02/01/2021 35,000.00 1.950%6,596.25 41,596.25 48,192.50
08/01/2021 --6,255.00 6,255.00 -
02/01/2022 60,000.00 2.050%6,255.00 66,255.00 72,510.00
08/01/2022 --5,640.00 5,640.00 -
02/01/2023 60,000.00 2.150%5,640.00 65,640.00 71,280.00
08/01/2023 --4,995.00 4,995.00 -
02/01/2024 40,000.00 2.250%4,995.00 44,995.00 49,990.00
08/01/2024 --4,545.00 4,545.00 -
02/01/2025 40,000.00 2.350%4,545.00 44,545.00 49,090.00
08/01/2025 --4,075.00 4,075.00 -
02/01/2026 40,000.00 2.450%4,075.00 44,075.00 48,150.00
08/01/2026 --3,585.00 3,585.00 -
02/01/2027 40,000.00 2.500%3,585.00 43,585.00 47,170.00
08/01/2027 --3,085.00 3,085.00 -
02/01/2028 40,000.00 2.600%3,085.00 43,085.00 46,170.00
08/01/2028 --2,565.00 2,565.00 -
02/01/2029 45,000.00 2.700%2,565.00 47,565.00 50,130.00
08/01/2029 --1,957.50 1,957.50 -
02/01/2030 45,000.00 2.800%1,957.50 46,957.50 48,915.00
08/01/2030 --1,327.50 1,327.50 -
02/01/2031 45,000.00 2.900%1,327.50 46,327.50 47,655.00
08/01/2031 --675.00 675.00 -
02/01/2032 45,000.00 3.000%675.00 45,675.00 46,350.00
Total $800,000.00 -$203,946.67 $1,003,946.67 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $8,553.33
Average Life 10.692 Years
Average Coupon 2.3844116%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.4779424%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.4652575%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.4429532%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.6163136%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.3844116%
Weighted Average Maturity 10.692 Years
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Diane / Mendota Hgts Road | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 8
pg 60
Mendota Heights, Minnesota
$800,000 - Purpose 3
Diane / Mendota Hgts Road Improvements
Levy Schedule
DateCUSIPPrincipalCouponInterestTotal P+INet D/SNet DS * 1.05%Special Asmnt Levy Amount
02/01/2013 --------
02/01/2014 35,000.000.650%23,049.17 58,049.17 58,049.17 60,951.63 (36,122.09)24,829.54
02/01/201540,000.000.750%16,042.5056,042.5056,042.5058,844.63 (34,803.77)24,040.86
02/01/201640,000.000.900%15,742.5055,742.5055,742.5058,529.63 (33,447.77)25,081.86
02/01/201740,000.001.150%15,382.5055,382.5055,382.5058,151.63 (32,091.78)26,059.85
02/01/201840,000.001.350%14,922.5054,922.5054,922.5057,668.63 (30,735.78)26,932.85
02/01/201935,000.001.600%14,382.5049,382.5049,382.5051,851.63 (29,379.79)22,471.84
02/01/202035,000.001.800%13,822.5048,822.5048,822.5051,263.63 (28,023.80)23,239.83
02/01/202135,000.001.950%13,192.5048,192.5048,192.5050,602.13 (26,667.81)23,934.32
02/01/202260,000.002.050%12,510.0072,510.0072,510.0076,135.50 (25,311.82)50,823.68
02/01/202360,000.002.150%11,280.0071,280.0071,280.0074,844.00 (23,955.83)50,888.17
02/01/202440,000.002.250%9,990.0049,990.0049,990.0052,489.50-52,489.50
02/01/202540,000.002.350%9,090.0049,090.0049,090.0051,544.50-51,544.50
02/01/202640,000.002.450%8,150.0048,150.0048,150.0050,557.50-50,557.50
02/01/202740,000.002.500%7,170.0047,170.0047,170.0049,528.50-49,528.50
02/01/202840,000.002.600%6,170.0046,170.0046,170.0048,478.50-48,478.50
02/01/202945,000.002.700%5,130.0050,130.0050,130.0052,636.50-52,636.50
02/01/203045,000.002.800%3,915.0048,915.0048,915.0051,360.75-51,360.75
02/01/203145,000.002.900%2,655.0047,655.0047,655.0050,037.75-50,037.75
02/01/203245,000.003.000%1,350.0046,350.0046,350.0048,667.50-48,667.50
Total -$800,000.00 -$203,946.67 $1,003,946.67 $1,003,946.67 $1,054,144.00 (300,540.24)$753,603.76
Ser 2012 Improvements Inc | Diane / Mendota Hgts Road | 7/25/2012 | 7:52 AM
Page 9
pg 61
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, PE, Assistant City Engineer
Michael Albers, PE, Civil Engineer
SUBJECT: Accepting of Feasibility Report for Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood
Rehabilitation
BACKGROUND
The purpose of this memo is to request that the Council approve the feasibility report and
schedule a public hearing for the Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood Rehabilitation.
Staff identified the Crown Point Drive Neighborhood Rehabilitation as a 2013 street
rehabilitation project in the 2012-2016 Street Improvement Plan (SIP). The Overlook Road
Neighborhood Rehabilitation was also identified as a 2013 street rehabilitation project in the
2012-2016 SIP. Staff anticipates that the proposed improvements for these two neighborhoods
will be similar in nature and that combining the two neighborhoods into one project would
reduce staff time and could produce lower unit prices during construction due to the project size.
The combined project will be called the Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood Rehabilitation.
The preparation of a feasibility report for the Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood
Rehabilitation was authorized by the Mendota Heights City Council by adopting Resolution
2012-32 at the City Council meeting held on May 1, 2012. This project includes rehabilitating,
Crown Circle, Crown Court, Crown Point Drive, Lilac Road between Marie Avenue and
Douglas Road, Overlook Lane, Overlook Road, and Summit Lane between Marie Avenue and
Overlook Road. The proposed project also includes street preventative maintenance including
crack sealing and seal coating on Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane.
A copy of the feasibility report is attached to this memo.
Street Rehabilitation – Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court were constructed in 1978. Concrete curb
and gutters were installed on these streets and the roadway widths currently measure 33 feet
from face of curb to face of curb. All streets have a pavement cross-section consisting of a 2”
bituminous surface over a 6” aggregate base. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were
also constructed on these streets in 1978.
pg 62
Proposed improvements for Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court Road will
include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2.5” bituminous
base course and a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material, curb and
gutter repair, and catch basin repair.
Street Rehabilitation – Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane
Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane were constructed in1969.
Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane were eventually extended south to connect to
Marie Avenue in 1976. Concrete curb and gutter was installed on these streets under and the
roadway widths currently measure 33 feet from face of curb to face of curb. All streets have a
pavement cross-section consisting of approximately 3” bituminous surface over a 6” aggregate
base. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were also constructed on these streets in
1969 and 1976.
Proposed improvements for Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane
(north of Marie Avenue) will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the
placing of a 2.5” bituminous base course and a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed
pavement material, curb and gutter repair, and catch basin repair.
Preventative Maintenance - Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane
The Highway 110 Frontage Road was constructed in 1965 by MnDOT during the I35E
construction. The roadway width is approximately 20 feet measured from edge of road to edge
of road. A bituminous curb was installed on the south side of the street. The pavement section
consists of a 1.5” bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. In 1994, MnDOT placed a 2”
bituminous overlay on this street. Also in 1994, a cul-de-sac named Carmen Lane was added to
the end of the Highway 110 frontage Road. In 2010, MnDOT turned back this street to the City
of Mendota Heights from Highway 110 to the cul-de-sac.
Proposed improvements for Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane will include crack
sealing and seal coating.
BUDGET IMPACT
The attached report indicates the estimated costs for the project, along with preliminary
assessment estimates. At the end of the feasibility report, a project financing summary is
included to show project cost splits and funding sources. The total estimated cost of the project is
$913,453.50.
Street improvement projects are proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners.
Pursuant to the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy, the benefiting properties
should be assessed 50% of the street rehabilitation costs. The following tables show the
estimated unit assessments based on the City policy and proposed unit assessments that are being
recommended by staff.
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS - STREET REHABILITATION - CROWN POINT NEIGHBORHOOD
Assessable Costs $336,801.30
Assessment $168,400.65
50%
Assessable Units 34
Estimated Unit Assessment per City Policy $4,952.96 $168,400.64 50%
Proposed Unit Assessment $3,650.00 $124,100.00 37%
pg 63
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS - STREET REHABILITATION - OVERLOOK NEIGHBORHOOD
Assessable Costs $427,602.30
Assessment $213,801.15
50%
Assessable Units 48
Estimated Unit Assessment per City Policy $4,454.19 $213,801.12 50%
Proposed Unit Assessment $3,650.00 $175,200.00 41%
The estimated unit assessments for the street rehabilitation are higher than the rates that staff
anticipates for future rehabilitation projects with pavement reclamation due to the anticipated
sub-grade correction. Staff proposes to assess the benefiting properties $3,650/unit in order to
bring the rate closer to anticipated rehabilitation projects costs.
All units with a driveway located on one of the proposed streets that are to be seal coated will not
be assessed due to seal coating being preventative maintenance which the City finances 100% of
the project costs.
Project Financing
The Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood Rehabilitation is proposed to be financed by special
assessments and municipal bonds. Funding sources and amounts are shown below:
FUNDING SOURCES
ITEM
COST
ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT
MUNICIPAL
BONDS
Street Rehabilitation- Crown Point Neighborhood $336,801.30 $124,100.00 $212,701.30
Street Rehabilitation- Overlook Neighborhood $427,602.30 $175,200.00 $252,402.30
Curb Replacement & Trails $142,861.50 $142,861.50
Preventative Maintenance $6,188.40 $6,188.40
Totals $913,453.50 $299,300.00 $614,153.50
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that council accept the feasibility report and schedule the public hearing for
September 18, 2012. A neighborhood informational meeting is scheduled for August 27, 2012.
If city council wishes to implement the staff recommendation, pass a motion adopting A
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING ON THE CROWN POINT & OVERLOOK NEIGHBORHOOD
REHABILITATION (PROJECT #201207). This action requires a simple majority vote.
pg 64
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND CALLING FOR A PUBLIC
HEARING ON THE CROWN POINT & OVERLOOK NEIGHBORHOOD REHABILITATION
(PROJECT #201207)
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution 2012-32, the City Council, on May 1, 2012, ordered a
feasibility report to be prepared by the City Engineer with reference to the improvement of Crown Circle,
Crown Court, Crown Point Drive, Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane, Lilac Road between Marie
Avenue and Douglas Road, Overlook Lane, Overlook Road, and Summit Lane between Marie Avenue
and Overlook Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has submitted a report to the City Council with respect to the
Crown Circle, Crown Court, Crown Point Drive, Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane, Lilac Road,
Overlook Lane, Overlook Road, and Summit Lane improvements which include: removing the existing
bituminous surface, placing a new bituminous surface, concrete curb and gutter repair, catch basin repair,
and appurtenant work; and
WHEREAS, in said report the City Engineer reported that the proposed improvements and
construction thereof are desirable and necessary, technically and economically feasible, cost effective,
and further reported on the estimated cost of the proposed improvements; and
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council as
follows:
1. The City Council hereby accepts the Feasibility Report as submitted.
2. The Council will consider the improvement of such streets and areas in accordance with the
report and the assessment of property as described in the report for all or a portion of the cost
of the improvements pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of
the improvements of $913,453.50.
3. A Public Hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 18th day of September,
2012 at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota at 7:00 p.m.
Statutory notice and publication requirements shall be followed.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of August, 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 65
FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR
CROWN POINT & OVERLOOK
NEIGHBORHOOD REHABILITAION
WHICH INCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS TO:
CROWN POINT DRIVE, CROWN CIRCLE, CROWN COURT,
LILAC ROAD, OVERLOOK LANE, OVERLOOK~ ROAD, AND
SUMMIT LANE
City of
Mendota Heights
CITY PROJECT #201207
AUGUST 2012
I hereby celiify that this Feasibility Report was prepared by me or
under my direct supervision and that I am a duly licensed
Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Milmesota.
~~L '6fz/IL
Ryan E. Ruzer, P.E. Date
License Number: 44990
Michael J. Albers, P.E.
License Number: 47074
1{ /)./f d-
Date
pg 66
Feasibility Report Page 2
Project No. 201207
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. 2
INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................................... 3
AUTHORIZATION .......................................................................................................................... 3
SCOPE .......................................................................................................................................... 3
LOCATION .................................................................................................................................... 3
EXISTING CONDITIONS .......................................................................................................... 4
STREETS ....................................................................................................................................... 4
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court ............................................................ 4
Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue) ..... 4
Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane ........................................................................... 5
PARK IMPROVEMENTS .................................................................................................................. 5
SANITARY SEWER ........................................................................................................................ 5
WATER MAIN .............................................................................................................................. 5
STORM SEWER ............................................................................................................................. 5
PRIVATE UTILITIES ...................................................................................................................... 5
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ................................................................................................ 6
ROADWAY REHABILITATION........................................................................................................ 6
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court ............................................................ 6
Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue) ..... 6
PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE .................................................................................................... 6
Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane ........................................................................... 6
SANITARY SEWER ........................................................................................................................ 7
WATER MAIN .............................................................................................................................. 7
STORM SEWER ............................................................................................................................. 7
PRIVATE UTILITIES ...................................................................................................................... 7
FUNDING ...................................................................................................................................... 7
FEASIBILITY ................................................................................................................................. 7
FUNDING SOURCES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ........................................................ 8
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS ........................................................................................................ 8
PROPOSED ESTIMATED ASSESSMENTS ......................................................................................... 9
PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE ...................................................................................... 10
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 10
APPENDIX A: CROWN POINT AND OVERLOOK NEIGHBORHOOD
REHABILITATION PROJECT AREA
APPENDIX B: REHABILITATION TYPICAL SECTION
APPENDIX C: ENGINEER’S OPINION OF ESTIMATED COSTS
APPENDIX D: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
pg 67
Feasibility Report Page 3
Project No. 201207
INTRODUCTION
Authorization
The preparation of this report was authorized by the Mendota Heights City Council by adopting
Resolution 2012-32 at the City Council meeting held on May 1, 2012. This street rehabilitation
project has been designated as City Project No. 201207. The improvements to Overlook Road,
Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue) are located in the
southwest quarter of Section 23, Township 28, Range 23. The improvements to Crown Point
Drive, Crown Court, Crown Circle, are located in the northeast quarter of Section 26, Township
28, Range 23.
Scope
This report addresses the feasibility of rehabilitating Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, Crown
Court, Lilac Road, Overlook Lane, Overlook Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue).
Opinions of estimated costs for the associated improvements are noted herein and project
funding strategies have been developed within this report.
Location
The proposed street rehabilitation area is shown in Appendix A.
pg 68
Feasibility Report Page 4
Project No. 201207
EXISTING CONDITIONS
Streets
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court were constructed in 1978 under Project
Number 7728 as part of the Crown Point Improvement. Concrete curb and gutters were installed
on these streets and the roadway widths currently measure 33 feet from face of curb to face of
curb. All streets have a pavement cross-section consisting of a 2” bituminous surface over a 6”
aggregate base. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer, and water main were also constructed on these
streets as part of Project Number 7728.
These streets currently have a failing bituminous surface and are in relatively poor condition. All
of these streets appear to be near the end of their useful life and the cost to maintain and repair
the roadways is steadily increasing. These streets no longer meet the City’s minimum design
standards and it is no longer cost effective to continue to repair these streets.
Based on the extent of fatigue cracking, a rehabilitation of Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and
Crown Court is recommended by the pavement management system. Street rehabilitation will
consist of reclaiming the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a new bituminous
surface over the reclaimed pavement material. Pavement cores will be obtained for these streets
to verify the existing street cross-section and that the material will be suitable for pavement
reclamation. Overlaying or seal coating the existing pavement is no longer a feasible alternative.
Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue)
Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane were constructed in 1969 under
Project Number 6735 as part of the Highland Heights South Addition. Overlook Lane, Lilac
Road, and Summit Lane were eventually extended south to connect to Marie Avenue in 1976
under Project Number 7410. Concrete curb and gutter was installed on these streets under and
the roadway widths currently measure 33 feet from face of curb to face of curb. All streets have
a pavement cross-section consisting of approximately 3” bituminous surface over a 6” aggregate
base. The sub-grade was corrected, as needed, with class 4 material. Storm sewer, sanitary sewer,
and water main were also constructed on these streets in 1969 and 1976.
These streets currently have a failing bituminous surface and are in relatively poor condition. All
of these streets appear to be near the end of their useful life and the cost to maintain and repair
the roadways is steadily increasing. These streets no longer meet the City’s minimum design
standards and it is no longer cost effective to continue to repair these streets.
Based on the extent of fatigue cracking, a rehabilitation of Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac
Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue) is recommended by the pavement management
system. Street rehabilitation will consist of reclaiming the existing bituminous roadway and the
placing of a new bituminous surface over the reclaimed pavement material. Pavement cores will
be obtained for these streets to verify the existing street cross-section and that the material will
pg 69
Feasibility Report Page 5
Project No. 201207
be suitable for pavement reclamation. Overlaying or seal coating the existing pavement is no
longer a feasible alternative.
Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane
The Highway 110 Frontage Road was constructed in 1965 by MnDOT during the I35E
construction. The roadway width is approximately 20 feet measured from edge of road to edge
of road. A bituminous curb was installed on the south side of the street. The pavement section
consists of a 1.5” bituminous surface over an 8” aggregate base. In 1994, MnDOT placed a 2”
bituminous overlay on this street. Also in 1994, a cul-de-sac named Carmen Lane was added to
the end of the Highway 110 frontage Road when Tuminelly’s Carmen Court was platted.
In 2010, MnDOT turned back this street to the City of Mendota Heights from Highway 110 to
the cul-de-sac.
Based on the maintenance history of the street, staff recommends crack sealing and seal coating
this street.
Park Improvements
Proposed improvements to the Marie Park include placing a 2” overlay over the existing parking
lot and trail.
Sanitary Sewer
The sanitary sewer located within the limits of the project site was cleaned and televised as part
of a Mendota Heights City project in 2008 on Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and
Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue) and in 2007 on Crown Point Drive, Crown Court, and
Crown Circle. Vitrified clay sewer pipes (VCSP) are located on Crown Point Drive, Crown
Court, Crown Circle, Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane (north of
Marie Avenue). Overall, the pipes throughout the proposed project site are in good condition
with very few instances of leaking located near the manholes. This project does not include
replacing any of the existing sanitary sewer lines.
Water Main
The existing water main in the Crown Point Neighborhood is 6” ductile iron pipe and is currently
in good condition with no need for replacement.
The existing water main in the Overlook Neighborhood is 6” cast iron pipe and 6” ductile iron
pipe. The water main pipes are currently in good condition with no need for replacement.
Storm Sewer
All streets have existing storm sewer. The storm sewer pipe is currently in good condition with
no need for replacement.
Private Utilities
Providers of privately owned gas, electric, communications and cable television utilities are
present in the neighborhood.
pg 70
Feasibility Report Page 6
Project No. 201207
PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
Roadway Rehabilitation
The rehabilitation of Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, Crown Court, Lilac Road, Overlook
Lane, Overlook Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue) requires a 7-ton street design
per the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy. Any damaged concrete curb and
gutter along these streets will also be replaced as part of the roadway restoration. Driveways that
may be disturbed due to the street rehabilitation will be replaced in kind. Disturbed boulevard
areas will be restored with topsoil and sod.
The existing right-of-way is 60 feet wide throughout the entire project. No additional right-of-
way or easements are anticipated with this project.
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court
Proposed improvements for Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, and Crown Court Road will
include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the placing of a 2.5” bituminous
base course and a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed pavement material. By using
the reclaimed pavement material as a base there is a cost savings versus importing a new
aggregate base material. This method should rehabilitate the streets to like new condition and
extend the life of the pavement an additional 20-30 years with continued preventative
maintenance. See Appendix B for the rehabilitation typical section.
Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue)
Proposed improvements for Overlook Road, Overlook Lane, Lilac Road, and Summit Lane
(north of Marie Avenue) will include the reclamation of the existing bituminous roadway and the
placing of a 2.5” bituminous base course and a 1.5” bituminous wear course over the reclaimed
pavement material. By using the reclaimed pavement material as a base there is a cost savings
versus importing a new aggregate base material. This method should rehabilitate the streets to
like new condition and extend the life of the pavement an additional 20-30 years with continued
preventative maintenance. See Appendix B for the rehabilitation typical section.
Preventative Maintenance
Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane
The Highway 110 Frontage Road/Carmen Lane was constructed in 1966 and received a 2”
bituminous overlay in 1994 by MnDOT. Based on this streets maintenance history, staff
recommends crack sealing and seal coating this street.
There are two main reasons for seal coating streets:
1. The first main reason for seal coating is to seal the bituminous surface against the
elements. The older a bituminous surface gets the more porous it becomes. This is due to
the wearing away of the surface due to air, sunlight, rain and traffic. The rougher the
surface becomes due to these factors, the more vulnerable it is and the more rapidly it
deteriorates. Water trapped in the surface and freezing at night and thawing during the
pg 71
Feasibility Report Page 7
Project No. 201207
day over a few days begin the formation of potholes. One method of avoiding this result
is to routinely seal coat the streets to keep the water out.
2. The second reason to seal coat streets is to coat the bituminous surface with a wear
resistant material such as a hard material like granite. This not only minimizes damage
done by normal traffic wear, but it also protects our streets from damage that might be
done by scraping them several times a year with snowplows. Consequently seal coating
does not add strength to the street; therefore, it is not used on older streets that need other
type of repair such as overlaying or total reconstruction.
Sanitary Sewer
As mentioned before, the existing sanitary sewer is in satisfactory condition. This project does
not include replacing any of the existing sanitary sewer lines.
Water Main
As mentioned before, the existing water main is in satisfactory condition. This project does not
include replacing any of the existing water main lines.
Storm Sewer
As mentioned before, the existing storm sewer is in satisfactory condition. This project does not
include replacing any of the existing storm sewer lines.
Private Utilities
No utility companies have indicated they will be making improvements to their distribution
networks in conjunction with our proposed improvements.
Funding
Per the City’s Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy, it is proposed that the benefiting
property owners will be assessed for street construction. Municipal bonds will be used to finance
the City’s portion of the street reconstruction.
Feasibility
From an engineering standpoint, this project is necessary, cost-effective, feasible, and can be
accomplished as proposed.
pg 72
Feasibility Report Page 8
Project No. 201207
FUNDING SOURCES AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
The area proposed to be assessed is every lot, piece, and parcel within the city limits benefiting
from said improvement, whether abutting or not, within the following described areas:
Crown Point Drive, Crown Circle, Crown Court, Lilac Road, Overlook Lane, Overlook
Road, and Summit Lane (north of Marie Avenue).
Specific property descriptions included in the above-described area, but not inclusive, are as
follows:
Buril and Holmes, Carroll F. Small First Addition, Crown Point, Highland Heights South,
Tilsen’s Highland Heights Plat 3.
The roadway improvement costs can be assessed on a unit basis to the benefiting properties as
per the Street Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Policy adopted by the City council on June 16,
1992. All units with a driveway located on one of the proposed streets that are to be rehabilitated
will be assessed.
The following sections discuss the assessment distribution for the streets based on the City’s
policy.
Estimated Project Costs
The following costs were prepared based upon an Engineer’s Opinion of Estimated Costs
(Appendix C) and are subject to change, depending on the final design of the project, soil
conditions, bids received, and actual work performed.
PROJECT COSTS
ITEM CONSTRUCTION INDIRECT* TOTAL
Street Rehabilitation – Crown Point $280,667.75 $56,133.55 $336,801.30
Street Rehabilitation – Overlook Road $356,335.25 $71,267.05 $427,602.30
Curb Replacement & Trails $119,051.25 $23,810.25 $142,861.50
Preventative Maintenance $5,157.00 $1,031.40 $6,188.40
Totals $761,211.25 $152,242.25 $913,453.50
* Includes 20% indirect costs for legal, engineering, administration, and finance.
pg 73
Feasibility Report Page 9
Project No. 201207
Proposed Estimated Assessments
The estimated total assessable amount for the project is based on specially assessing 50% of the
following costs: mobilization, traffic control, bituminous removal/reclamation, bituminous base
course, bituminous wear course, tack coat, valve and manhole adjustments, and appurtenant
work. City costs include curb and gutter replacement, sod restoration, Marie Park parking lot
overlay, Marie Park bituminous trail overlay and appurtenant work.
The estimated unit assessment for this project was determined by calculating the number of
assessable lots and dividing them into the total assessable project cost. The preliminary
assessment roll listing the assessable parcels is provided in Appendix D.
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS - STREET REHABILITATION – CROWN POINT
Assessable Costs $336,801.30
Assessment $168,400.65
Assessable Units 34
Estimated Unit Assessment per City Policy $4,952.96$168,400.64 50%
Proposed Unit Assessment $3,650.00 $124,100.00 37%
ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS - STREET REHABILITATION – OVERLOOK ROAD
Assessable Costs $427,602.30
Assessment $213,801.15
Assessable Units 48
Estimated Unit Assessment per City Policy $4,454.19$213,801.12 50%
Proposed Unit Assessment $3,650.00 $175,200.00 41%
The estimated unit assessments for the street rehabilitation are higher than the rates that staff
anticipates for future rehabilitation projects with pavement reclamation due to the anticipated
sub-grade correction. Staff proposes to assess the benefiting properties $3,650/unit in order to
bring the rate closer to anticipated rehabilitation projects costs.
The costs and funding sources for the projects are summarized in the following table:
FUNDING SOURCES
ITEM
COST
ESTIMATE ASSESSMENT
MUNICIPAL
BONDS
Street Rehabilitation – Crown Point $336,801.30 $124,100.00 $212,701.30
Street Rehabilitation – Overlook Road $427,602.30 $175,200.00 $252,402.30
Curb Replacement & Trails $142,861.50 $142,861.50
Preventative Maintenance $6,188.40 $6,188.40
Totals $913,453.50 $299,300.00 $614,153.50
With a total estimated project cost of $913,453.50, the assessed amount of $299,300.00 would be
equivalent to 32.8% of the total bond issue. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 Special Assessment
Bond Issue requires that a minimum of 20% of the total bond issue amount be recovered through
special assessments.
pg 74
Feasibility Report Page 10
Project No. 201207
PROPOSED PROJECT SCHEDULE
The following project schedule outlines an approach to complete the assessable project in 2013:
ACTIVITY DATE
Accept Feasibility Study/Call for Public Hearing August 7, 2012
Hold Neighborhood Informational Meeting August 27, 2012
Conduct Public Hearing/Accept Project/Order Plans and Specifications September 18, 2012
Approve Plans and Specifications/Order Advertisements for Bids January 2013
Open Bids March 2013
Accept Bids/Award Contract April 2013
Begin Construction May/June 2013
Complete Bituminous Pavement August 2013
Authorize Amount to be Assessed/Schedule Assessment Hearing October 2013
Conduct Assessment Hearing/Adopt Assessment Roll October 2013
CONCLUSION
The proposed improvements are necessary, cost effective, and feasible from an engineering
standpoint and should be made as proposed.
The total estimated cost of the recommended improvements is $913,453.50. A portion of this
project is proposed to be assessed to the benefiting property owners and the remainder through
other funding sources.
pg 75
Feasibility Report
Project No. 201207
APPENDIX A: Crown Point and Overlook Neighborhood
Rehabilitation Project Area
pg 76
1780
1956
1952
918
1960
1968
1948
1972
1964
871
919
906
913
879
999
1044
1985
1094 1054 1038
912
1791
1088 1060
1936
1050
872
1004
875
1001
1068
100710211015103310271039
1010
1981
1977
1043
1017
1915
1916
1049
99810801018
1083
1980
1089
1924
1077
1932
1791
1923
1053
1793
1778
1794
10651057
1779
1071
1030
1067
1792
1965
1781
1029
1920
195119411933
1783
1081
19441940
1928
I3
5
E
HWY 110
MARIE AVE W
WA
L
S
H
L
N
LE
X
I
N
G
T
O
N
A
V
E
DOUGLAS RD
SU
M
M
I
T
L
N
OVERLOOK RD
AVANTI DR
MENDOTA RD RAMP
T
W
I
N
C
I
R
C
L
E
D
R
VICTORIA RD S
LI
L
A
C
R
D
KAY AVE
H
I
L
L
T
O
P
R
D
JAMES RD
STRATFORD RD
V
A
L
L
E
Y
C
U
R
V
E
R
D
E
A
G
L
E
R
I
D
G
E
D
R
DIAN
E
R
D
TR
A
I
L
R
D
WA
C
H
T
L
E
R
A
V
E
VAIL DR
FA
R
O
L
N
RI
D
G
E
P
L
HWY 110 LOOP
HIGHVIEW
C
I
R
S
MARIE AVE
ORCHARD HL
ORCHARD PL
MEND
O
T
A
R
D
L
O
O
P
PRIVATE ROAD
OV
E
R
L
O
O
K
L
N
VICTORIA RD
RO
L
L
I
N
G
G
R
E
E
N
C
U
R
W CIRCLE CT
AR
V
I
N
D
R
OXFO
R
D
C
T
VICTORIA CT
BWANA CT
CROWN CIR
CROWN C
T
WIN
D
W
O
O
D
C
T
SU
M
M
I
T
L
N
HWY 110
VI
C
T
O
R
I
A
R
D
S
I35E
HWY 110
C
R
O
W
N
P
O
I
N
T
D
R
HIGHVIEW CIR N
VICTO
R
I
A
C
U
R
KINGSLEY C
I
R
N
KINGSLEY CIR S
HILLTOP C
T
VIC
K
I
L
N
LILAC LN
COVE
N
T
R
Y
C
T
DAKOTA DR
DA
K
O
T
A
D
R
DOUG
L
A
S
C
T
I3
5
E
DOUGLAS R
D
TRAIL
R
D
RIDGE PL
Crown Point & Overlook Neighborhood Rehabilitation
August 2, 2012
City ofMendotaHeights0600
SCALE IN FEET
Legend
Assessments
Crown Point Rehabilitation Assessment
Overlook Rehabilitation Assessment
Improvement Type
Crown Point Street Rehabilitation
Overlook Street Rehabilitation
Crack Sealing/Seal Coating
pg
77
Feasibility Report
Project No. 201207
APPENDIX B: Rehabilitation Typical Section
pg 78
pg 79
Feasibility Report
Project No. 201207
APPENDIX C: Engineer’s Opinion of Estimated Costs
pg 80
CI
T
Y
O
F
M
E
N
D
O
T
A
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
PR
O
J
E
C
T
:
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
PR
O
J
E
C
T
#
:
20
1
2
0
7
DA
T
E
:
8
/
2
/
2
0
1
2
PR
O
J
E
C
T
TO
T
A
L
LO
C
A
L
J
O
B
2
0
1
2
0
7
,
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
CR
O
W
N
P
O
I
N
T
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
LO
C
A
L
J
O
B
2
0
1
2
0
7
,
R
O
A
D
W
A
Y
OV
E
R
L
O
O
K
N
E
I
G
H
B
O
R
H
O
O
D
LO
C
A
L
J
O
B
2
0
1
2
0
7
CU
R
B
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
M
E
N
T
&
T
R
A
I
L
S
LO
C
A
L
J
O
B
2
0
1
2
0
7
PR
E
V
E
N
T
A
T
I
V
E
M
A
I
N
T
E
N
A
N
C
E
IT
E
M
N
O
.
S
P
E
C
.
N
O
.
I
T
E
M
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
U
N
I
T
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
QU
A
N
T
I
T
Y
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
U
N
I
T
PR
I
C
E
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
AM
O
U
N
T
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
QU
A
N
T
I
T
Y
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
AM
O
U
N
T
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
QU
A
N
T
I
T
Y
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
AM
O
U
N
T
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
QU
A
N
T
I
T
Y
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
AM
O
U
N
T
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
QU
A
N
T
I
T
Y
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
'
S
ES
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
AM
O
U
N
T
SC
H
E
D
U
L
E
'
A
'
-
S
T
R
E
E
T
R
E
H
A
B
I
L
I
T
A
T
I
O
N
1
2
0
2
1
.
5
0
1
M
O
B
I
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
L.
S
.
1
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
$
2
5
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
0
.
5
$
1
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
0
.
5
$
1
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
2
2
1
0
4
.
5
0
5
R
E
M
O
V
E
C
O
NC
R
E
T
E
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
S.
Y
.
3
$
8
.
0
0
$
2
4
.
0
0
3
$
2
4
.
0
0
3
2
1
0
4
.
5
0
5
R
E
M
O
V
E
C
O
NC
R
E
T
E
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
S.
Y
.
8
3
$
7
.
0
0
$
5
8
1
.
0
0
4
3
$
3
0
1
.
0
0
4
0
$
2
8
0
.
0
0
4
2
1
0
4
.
5
0
5
R
E
M
O
V
E
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
PA
V
E
M
E
N
T
S.
Y
.
1
6
0
$
4
.
0
0
$
6
4
0
.
0
0
5
3
$
2
1
2
.
0
0
1
0
7
$
4
2
8
.
0
0
5
2
1
0
4
.
5
1
1
S
A
W
I
N
G
C
O
NC
R
E
T
E
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
L.
F
.
1
5
0
$
6
.
0
0
$
9
0
0
.
0
0
7
8
$
4
6
8
.
0
0
7
2
$
4
3
2
.
0
0
6
2
1
0
4
.
5
1
3
S
A
W
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
PA
V
E
M
E
N
T
(
F
U
L
L
D
E
P
T
H
)
L.
F
.
4
3
0
$
3
.
5
0
$
1
,
5
0
5
.
0
0
7
3
$
2
5
5
.
5
0
3
5
7
$
1
,
2
4
9
.
5
0
7
2
1
0
4
.
5
1
3
S
A
W
I
N
G
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
L.
F
.
2
8
8
$
3
.
0
0
$
8
6
4
.
0
0
9
6
$
2
8
8
.
0
0
1
9
2
$
5
7
6
.
0
0
8
2
1
0
5
.
6
0
7
C
O
M
M
O
N
E
X
C
AV
A
T
I
O
N
(
P
)
C.
Y
.
2
,
2
8
5
$
2
0
.
0
0
$
4
5
,
7
0
0
.
0
0
8
8
9
$
1
7
,
7
8
0
.
0
0
1
,
3
5
9
$
2
7
,
1
8
0
.
0
0
3
7
$
7
4
0
.
0
0
9
2
1
0
5
.
5
0
7
S
U
B
G
R
A
D
E
/
A
G
G
R
E
G
A
T
E
BA
S
E
C
O
R
R
E
C
T
I
O
N
E
X
C
A
V
A
T
I
O
N
O
U
T
S
I
D
E
T
H
E
AR
E
A
O
F
I
N
F
L
U
E
N
C
E
O
F
C
O
N
T
R
A
C
T
O
R
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
D
U
T
I
L
I
T
Y
T
R
E
N
C
H
E
S
(
S
E
E
SP
E
C
I
A
L
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
-
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
2
)
C.
Y
.
2
,
1
5
0
$
3
0
.
0
0
$
6
4
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
1
,
3
3
4
$
4
0
,
0
2
0
.
0
0
8
1
6
$
2
4
,
4
8
0
.
0
0
10
2
1
1
2
.
6
0
4
BA
S
E
P
R
E
P
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
(
S
E
E
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
C
O
N
D
I
T
I
O
N
S
-
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
2
)
S.
Y
.
2
0
,
2
3
6
$
0
.
7
5
$
1
5
,
1
7
7
.
0
0
8
,
0
0
3
$
6
,
0
0
2
.
2
5
1
2
,
2
3
3
$
9
,
1
7
4
.
7
5
11
2
1
1
2
.
6
0
4
T
R
A
I
L
S
U
B
G
R
A
D
E
P
R
EP
A
R
A
T
I
O
N
S.
Y
.
4
0
$
1
.
5
0
$
6
0
.
0
0
40
$
6
0
.
0
0
12
2
1
2
3
.
5
0
1
C
O
M
M
O
N
L
A
B
O
R
HR
1
0
$
6
0
.
0
0
$
6
0
0
.
0
0
5
$
3
0
0
.
0
0
5
$
3
0
0
.
0
0
13
2
1
2
3
.
5
0
9
D
O
Z
E
R
W
I
T
H
O
P
E
R
A
T
O
R
HR
1
0
$
1
2
5
.
0
0
$
1
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
5
$
6
2
5
.
0
0
5
$
6
2
5
.
0
0
14
2
1
2
3
.
5
1
4
2
C
U
Y
D
F
R
O
N
T
E
N
D
L
O
A
D
E
R
W
I
T
H
O
P
E
R
A
T
O
R
HR
1
0
$
1
2
5
.
0
0
$
1
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
5
$
6
2
5
.
0
0
5
$
6
2
5
.
0
0
15
2
1
2
3
.
6
1
0
S
K
I
D
S
T
E
E
R
(
B
O
B
C
A
T
)
W
I
T
H
O
P
E
R
A
T
O
R
HR
1
0
$
9
0
.
0
0
$
9
0
0
.
0
0
5
$
4
5
0
.
0
0
5
$
4
5
0
.
0
0
16
2
1
2
3
.
6
1
0
B
A
C
K
H
O
E
W
I
T
H
O
P
E
R
A
T
O
R
HR
1
0
$
1
5
0
.
0
0
$
1
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
5
$
7
5
0
.
0
0
5
$
7
5
0
.
0
0
17
2
2
1
1
.
5
0
1
A
G
G
R
E
G
A
T
E
BA
S
E
C
L
A
S
S
5
(
V
I
R
G
I
N
,
10
0
%
CR
U
S
H
E
D
)
,
I
N
P
L
A
C
E
TO
N
1
,
0
5
0
$
1
5
.
0
0
$
1
5
,
7
5
0
.
0
0
5
0
0
$
7
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
5
0
0
$
7
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
5
0
$
7
5
0
.
0
0
18
2
2
3
2
.
5
0
1
M
I
L
L
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
(
1
.
5
"
N
O
M
I
N
A
L
D
E
P
T
H
)
(
P
R
I
O
R
T
O
W
E
A
R
S.
Y
.
9
5
$
7
.
0
0
$
6
6
5
.
0
0
1
6
$
1
1
2
.
0
0
7
9
$
5
5
3
.
0
0
19
2
3
3
1
.
6
0
4
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
PA
V
E
M
E
N
T
R
E
C
L
A
M
A
T
I
O
N
(
1
0
"
N
O
M
I
N
A
L
D
E
P
T
H
)
S.
Y
.
2
0
,
2
3
6
$
3
.
0
0
$
6
0
,
7
0
8
.
0
0
8
,
0
0
3
$
2
4
,
0
0
9
.
0
0
1
2
,
2
3
3
$
3
6
,
6
9
9
.
0
0
20
2
3
5
0
.
5
0
1
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
F
O
R
C
R
A
C
K
F
I
L
L
I
N
G
-
F
I
N
E
M
I
X
TO
N
3
5
$
1
5
0
.
0
0
$
5
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
35
$
5
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
21
2
3
5
7
.
5
0
2
B
I
T
U
M
I
N
O
U
S
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
F
O
R
T
A
C
K
C
O
A
T
GA
L
2
,
1
5
4
$
3
.
2
5
$
7
,
0
0
0
.
5
0
8
0
0
$
2
,
6
0
0
.
0
0
1
,
2
2
4
$
3
,
9
7
8
.
0
0
1
3
0
$
4
2
2
.
5
0
22
2
3
6
0
.
5
0
1
T
YP
E
S
P
W
E
A
24
0
C
W
E
A
R
I
N
G
C
O
U
R
S
E
,
I
N
-
P
L
A
C
E
TO
N
2
,
0
4
1
$
7
0
.
0
0
$
1
4
2
,
8
7
0
.
0
0
7
4
3
$
5
2
,
0
1
0
.
0
0
1
,
1
3
5
$
7
9
,
4
5
0
.
0
0
1
6
3
$
1
1
,
4
1
0
.
0
0
23
2
3
6
0
.
5
0
2
T
YP
E
S
P
N
W
B
23
0
B
N
O
N
W
E
A
R
I
N
G
C
O
U
R
S
E
,
I
N
-
P
L
A
C
E
TO
N
3
,
2
7
2
$
5
5
.
0
0
$
1
7
9
,
9
6
0
.
0
0
1
,
2
9
4
$
7
1
,
1
7
0
.
0
0
1
,
9
7
8
$
1
0
8
,
7
9
0
.
0
0
24
2
3
6
0
.
5
0
3
3
"
T
YP
E
S
P
W
E
A
23
0
B
W
E
A
R
I
N
G
C
O
U
R
S
E
F
O
R
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
S
S.
Y
.
1
6
0
$
2
3
.
0
0
$
3
,
6
8
0
.
0
0
5
3
$
1
,
2
1
9
.
0
0
1
0
7
$
2
,
4
6
1
.
0
0
25
2
5
0
4
.
6
0
2
A
D
J
U
S
T
V
A
L
V
E
B
O
X
,
I
N
C
L
U
D
I
N
G
P
A
R
T
S
Ea
c
h
21
$
3
5
0
.
0
0
$
7
,
3
5
0
.
0
0
9
$
3
,
1
5
0
.
0
0
1
2
$
4
,
2
0
0
.
0
0
26
2
5
0
6
.
5
1
6
C
A
T
C
H
BA
S
I
N
C
A
S
T
I
N
G
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
,
I
N
-
P
L
A
C
E
Ea
c
h
2
$
8
0
0
.
0
0
$
1
,
6
0
0
.
0
0
1
$
8
0
0
.
0
0
1
$
8
0
0
.
0
0
27
2
5
0
6
.
6
0
2
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
&
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
C
A
T
C
H
BA
S
I
N
C
A
S
T
I
N
G
,
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
R
I
N
G
S
Ea
c
h
28
$
5
5
0
.
0
0
$
1
5
,
4
0
0
.
0
0
1
3
$
7
,
1
5
0
.
0
0
1
5
$
8
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
28
2
5
0
6
.
6
0
2
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
&
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
M
A
N
H
O
L
E
C
A
S
T
I
N
G
,
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
R
I
N
G
S
Ea
c
h
49
$
6
5
0
.
0
0
$
3
1
,
8
5
0
.
0
0
3
0
$
1
9
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
1
9
$
1
2
,
3
5
0
.
0
0
29
2
5
2
1
.
5
0
1
4
"
C
O
NC
R
E
T
E
W
A
L
K
S.
F
.
1
1
5
$
4
.
2
5
$
4
8
8
.
7
5
11
5
$
4
8
8
.
7
5
30
2
5
3
1
.
5
0
1
C
O
NC
R
E
T
E
C
U
R
B
&
G
U
T
T
E
R
D
E
S
I
G
N
B
6
1
8
L.
F
.
2
4
5
$
1
1
.
0
0
$
2
,
6
9
5
.
0
0
24
5
$
2
,
6
9
5
.
0
0
31
2
5
3
1
.
5
0
7
6
"
C
O
NC
R
E
T
E
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
P
A
V
E
M
E
N
T
S.
Y
.
8
3
$
4
7
.
0
0
$
3
,
9
0
1
.
0
0
4
3
$
2
,
0
2
1
.
0
0
4
0
$
1
,
8
8
0
.
0
0
32
2
5
3
1
.
6
0
3
R
E
M
O
V
E
A
N
D
R
E
P
L
A
C
E
CU
R
B
&
G
U
T
T
E
R
-
B
61
8
(
I
N
2
0
1
3
)
L.
F
.
3
,
8
2
9
$
2
3
.
0
0
$
8
8
,
0
6
7
.
0
0
3,
8
2
9
$
8
8
,
0
6
7
.
0
0
33
2
5
3
1
.
6
1
8
T
RU
N
C
A
T
E
D
D
O
M
E
P
A
N
E
L
S.F
.
2
4
$3
8
.
00
$9
1
2
.
00
24
$9
1
2
.
0
0
34
2
5
4
0
.
6
0
4
S
A
L
V
A
G
E
A
N
D
R
E
I
N
S
T
A
L
L
PA
V
E
R
D
R
I
V
E
W
A
Y
S.
Y
.
1
4
$5
0
.
0
0
$7
0
0
.
0
0
14
$7
0
0
.
0
0
35
2
5
6
3
.
6
0
1
T
R
A
F
F
I
C
C
O
N
T
R
O
L
L.
S
.
1
$
1
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
$
1
2
,
5
0
0
.
0
0
0.
5
$6
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
0.
5
$6
,
2
5
0
.
0
0
36
2
5
7
3
.
6
0
2
S
T
O
R
M
D
R
A
I
N
I
N
L
E
T
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
DU
R
I
N
G
C
O
N
S
T
R
U
C
T
I
O
N
Ea
c
h
30
$2
0
0
.
0
0
$6
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
13
$2
,
6
0
0
.
0
0
17
$3
,
4
0
0
.
0
0
37
2
5
7
5
.
5
0
5
S
O
D
D
I
N
G
T
YP
E
L
A
W
N
S.
Y
.
8
5
1
$6
.
0
0
$5
,
1
0
6
.
0
0
85
1
$5
,
1
0
6
.
0
0
38
2
5
7
5
.
5
0
5
SE
E
D
M
I
X
T
U
R
E
25
0
W
I
T
H
F
I
B
E
R
B
L
A
N
K
E
T
S.
Y
.
5
0
$3
.
0
0
$1
5
0
.
0
0
50
$1
5
0
.
0
0
36
2
5
7
5
.
5
3
5
AP
P
L
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
O
F
W
A
T
E
R
F
O
R
T
U
R
F
,
A
F
T
E
R
3
0
D
A
Y
S
MG
1
0
0
$3
0
.
0
0
$3
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
10
0
$3
,
0
0
0
.
0
0
37
2
1
2
3
.
6
1
0
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
W
EE
P
I
N
G
HR
5
$1
5
0
.
0
0
$7
5
0
.
0
0
5.
0
$7
5
0
.
0
0
38
2
3
3
1
.
6
0
3
C
R
A
C
K
SE
A
L
I
N
G
L.
F
.
1
,
9
5
0
$0
.
5
0
$9
7
5
.
0
0
1,
9
5
0
.
0
$9
7
5
.
0
0
39
2
3
5
6
.
6
0
4
C
L
AS
S
A
A
G
G
R
E
G
A
T
E
S
E
A
L
C
O
A
T
S.
Y
.
2
,
2
8
8
$1
.
5
0
$3
,
4
3
2
.
0
0
2,
2
8
8
.
0
$3
,
4
3
2
.
0
0
SU
B
T
O
T
A
L
$7
6
1
,
2
1
1
.
2
5
$2
8
0
,
6
6
7
.
7
5
$3
5
6
,
3
3
5
.
2
5
$1
1
9
,
0
5
1
.
2
5
$5
,
1
5
7
.
0
0
EN
G
I
N
E
E
R
S
O
P
I
N
I
O
N
O
F
E
S
T
I
M
A
T
E
D
C
O
S
T
S
Pa
g
e
1
o
f
1
pg 81
Feasibility Report
Project No. 201207
APPENDIX D: Preliminary Assessment Roll
pg 82
CI
T
Y
O
F
M
E
N
D
O
T
A
H
E
I
G
H
T
S
-
A
S
S
E
S
S
M
E
N
T
R
O
L
L
Jo
b
#
2
0
1
2
0
7
St
r
e
e
t
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
=
1
0
Y
e
a
r
s
IN
T
E
R
E
S
T
R
A
T
E
=
Co
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
0
2
3
0
0
-
53
-
0
1
3
Ge
o
f
f
r
e
y
A
.
M
a
s
o
n
&
J
e
n
n
i
f
e
r
F
a
r
b
e
r
Ma
s
o
n
17
9
1
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
4
01
3
5
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Se
c
t
i
o
n
2
3
T
w
n
2
8
R
a
n
g
e
2
3
E
1
8
9
f
t
o
f
W
41
1
.
0
f
f
t
o
f
N
1
1
0
f
t
o
f
S
2
2
0
f
t
o
f
S
W
1
/
4
of
S
W
1
/
4
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
L
a
n
e
27
-
0
2
3
0
0
-
53
-
0
3
1
Ba
r
b
a
r
a
K
.
N
e
l
s
o
n
10
8
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
03
1
5
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Se
c
t
i
o
n
2
3
T
w
n
2
8
R
a
n
g
e
2
3
E
2
0
1
.
3
f
t
o
f
W
4
3
5
.
6
f
t
o
f
S
1
1
0
f
t
o
f
S
W
1
/
4
o
f
S
W
1/
4
e
x
M
a
r
i
e
A
v
e
.
e
x
E
2
4
.
5
5
f
t
t
o
c
i
t
y
Ma
r
i
e
A
v
e
.
W
.
27
-
0
2
3
0
0
-
54
-
0
2
0
Ci
t
y
o
f
M
e
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
11
0
1
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
6
7
02
0
5
4
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Se
c
t
i
o
n
2
3
T
w
n
2
8
R
a
n
g
e
2
3
p
t
o
f
S
1
/
3
o
f
S
1
/
2
o
f
S
E
1
/
4
o
f
S
W
1
/
4
o
f
S
W
1
/
4
l
y
i
n
g
E
o
f
S
e
x
t
o
f
E
p
r
o
p
R
/
W
L
i
l
a
c
L
a
n
e
e
x
t
e
x
E
2
9
3
f
t
t
h
e
r
e
o
f
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
C
u
r
v
e
27
-
1
5
5
5
0
-
01
-
0
1
0
Da
n
i
e
l
W
.
B
u
t
l
e
r
&
E
l
i
z
a
b
e
t
h
A
.
B
u
t
l
e
r
17
9
2
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
3
01
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Bu
r
i
l
a
n
d
H
o
l
m
e
s
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
L
a
n
e
27
-
1
5
5
5
0
-
01
-
0
2
0
Ma
r
k
B
r
i
a
n
S
k
u
g
r
u
d
10
6
7
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
1
02
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Bu
r
i
l
a
n
d
H
o
l
m
e
s
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
1
Ma
r
i
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
27
-
1
5
5
5
0
-
01
-
0
8
0
Al
e
k
s
a
n
d
r
B
a
b
i
n
&
L
y
u
b
o
v
B
a
b
i
n
a
17
9
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
6
08
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Bu
r
i
l
a
n
d
H
o
l
m
e
s
L
o
t
8
B
l
k
1
Su
m
m
i
t
L
a
n
e
27
-
1
5
5
5
0
-
01
-
0
9
0
St
e
v
e
n
P
.
&
N
e
s
s
a
K
l
e
i
n
g
l
a
s
s
10
2
9
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
1
09
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Bu
r
i
l
a
n
d
H
o
l
m
e
s
L
o
t
9
B
l
k
1
Ma
r
i
e
A
v
e
.
W
.
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
1
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 83
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
1
6
5
0
0
-
01
-
0
1
0
Ku
n
a
l
&
S
t
e
p
h
a
n
i
e
M
a
d
h
o
k
17
9
4
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
5
01
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Ca
r
r
o
l
l
F
.
S
m
a
l
l
1
s
t
A
d
d
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
1
Su
m
m
i
t
L
a
n
e
27
-
1
6
5
0
0
-
01
-
0
2
0
Ro
b
e
r
t
A
.
M
c
A
d
a
m
s
&
S
u
s
a
n
S
u
e
s
s
Mc
A
d
a
m
s
10
1
7
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
2
8
02
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Ca
r
r
o
l
l
F
.
S
m
a
l
l
1
s
t
A
d
d
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
1
Ma
r
i
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
27
-
1
6
5
0
0
-
01
-
0
4
0
Do
u
g
l
a
s
&
M
e
g
a
n
M
o
g
e
l
s
o
n
17
9
3
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
0
04
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Ca
r
r
o
l
l
F
.
S
m
a
l
l
1
s
t
A
d
d
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
1
Li
l
a
c
L
a
n
e
27
-
1
6
5
0
0
-
01
-
0
5
0
Jo
h
n
T
.
&
J
e
a
n
L
.
B
e
n
k
e
99
9
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
2
8
05
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Ca
r
r
o
l
l
F
.
S
m
a
l
l
1
s
t
A
d
d
L
o
t
5
B
l
k
1
Ma
r
i
e
A
v
e
.
W
.
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
1
0
Ca
r
o
l
P
.
K
i
n
g
&
R
o
b
e
r
t
R
.
R
u
b
b
e
l
k
e
19
8
5
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
3
01
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
2
0
Jo
h
n
&
M
a
r
i
a
K
e
l
l
e
r
19
8
1
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
3
02
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
3
0
Al
e
x
a
n
d
e
r
T
s
t
e
H
u
s
h
c
h
a
&
A
n
n
a
T
s
t
e
Hu
s
h
c
h
a
19
7
7
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
3
03
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
3
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
4
0
Jo
h
n
M
.
&
P
e
g
g
y
A
.
K
e
n
n
e
d
y
19
1
6
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
2
0
04
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
2
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 84
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
5
0
Jo
a
n
L
.
W
i
l
h
e
l
m
y
19
2
0
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
5
05
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
5
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
6
0
Th
o
m
a
s
&
N
a
n
c
y
R
o
e
d
e
r
19
2
4
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
5
06
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
6
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
7
0
Vl
a
d
i
m
i
r
&
S
e
r
a
f
i
m
a
L
a
m
i
n
90
6
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
1
07
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
7
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
o
u
r
t
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
0
8
0
Da
n
i
e
l
J
.
&
P
e
n
n
y
S
.
M
a
l
e
c
h
a
91
2
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
1
08
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
8
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
o
u
r
t
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
0-
1
0
9
0
Th
o
m
a
s
&
B
o
b
i
j
e
a
n
Q
u
i
n
l
a
n
91
8
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
1
09
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
9
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
o
u
r
t
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
1
0
0
Sh
a
w
n
e
M
.
C
o
s
t
e
l
l
o
91
9
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
1
10
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
0
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
o
u
r
t
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
-
1
1
0
Le
r
o
y
D
.
J
r
.
&
R
h
o
n
d
a
B
u
r
l
i
n
g
91
3
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
1
11
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
1
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
o
u
r
t
27
1
8
6
0
0
0
11
2
0
Pe
t
e
r
D
.
&
A
l
e
j
a
n
d
r
a
M
a
d
l
a
n
d
PO
B
We
s
t
S
a
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
12
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
2
B
l
k
1
18
1
3
1
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
1
-
3
0
Th
o
m
a
s
&
C
y
n
t
h
i
a
J
.
W
e
e
k
s
19
3
2
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
13
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
3
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
3
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 85
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
1
8
6
0
-
00
1
1
-
4
0
Te
r
e
s
s
a
&
B
r
a
n
d
o
n
K
a
d
l
e
c
19
3
6
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
14
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
4
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
1
-
5
0
Da
v
i
d
J
.
W
i
l
k
e
19
4
0
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
15
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
5
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
1
-
6
0
La
w
r
e
n
c
e
G
.
W
a
d
d
e
l
l
19
4
4
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
16
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
6
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
1
-
7
0
Jo
n
i
M
.
&
C
h
a
r
l
e
s
F
.
B
r
o
s
t
19
4
8
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
17
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
7
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
1
-
8
0
Ne
i
l
.
J
.
&
C
a
t
h
i
e
D
e
n
b
l
e
y
k
e
r
19
5
2
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
18
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
8
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
1
-
9
0
Wi
l
l
i
a
m
A
.
G
a
v
i
n
19
5
6
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
19
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
9
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
0
0
Ne
d
i
n
e
F
.
G
l
a
n
z
e
r
T
h
e
r
a
19
6
0
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
20
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
0
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
1
0
We
n
d
e
M
.
D
i
a
z
R
i
e
t
h
&
T
i
m
o
t
h
y
P
.
R
e
i
t
h
19
6
4
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
21
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
1
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
2
0
Pa
u
l
L
e
r
o
y
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
19
6
8
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
22
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
2
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
4
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 86
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
3
0
La
n
c
e
C
.
&
J
u
d
i
t
h
R
.
B
o
u
g
i
e
19
7
2
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
23
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
3
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
4
0
Pe
t
e
r
M
.
&
K
i
m
b
e
r
l
y
K
.
K
r
o
n
s
c
h
n
a
b
e
l
87
9
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
4
4
24
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
4
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
i
r
c
l
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
5
0
St
e
v
e
n
A
n
t
h
o
n
y
S
m
o
l
i
k
87
5
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
4
4
25
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
5
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
i
r
c
l
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
6
0
Da
v
i
d
L
.
&
S
t
a
c
y
A
.
D
r
e
e
l
a
n
87
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
4
4
26
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
6
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
i
r
c
l
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
7
0
Mi
c
h
a
e
l
W
.
M
a
c
z
k
o
87
2
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
4
4
27
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
7
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
C
i
r
c
l
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
01
2
-
8
0
Ja
m
e
s
W
.
T
s
t
e
S
m
a
l
l
&
A
n
n
i
e
L
.
T
s
t
e
Sm
a
l
l
19
8
0
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
4
28
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
8
B
l
k
1
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
02
0
-
1
0
Th
o
m
a
s
S
.
&
K
a
t
h
l
e
e
n
M
a
l
e
i
t
z
k
e
19
2
3
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
6
01
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
2
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
02
0
-
2
0
Wi
l
l
i
a
m
&
J
e
a
n
S
t
.
M
a
r
t
i
n
19
3
3
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
3
02
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
2
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
5
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 87
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
02
0
-
3
0
Ad
a
m
L
.
C
o
y
n
e
&
K
r
i
s
t
i
n
J
.
C
o
y
n
e
19
4
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
03
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
3
B
l
k
2
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
02
0
-
4
0
Ju
d
i
t
h
M
.
F
u
n
k
19
5
1
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
3
04
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
2
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
02
0
-
5
0
Mi
c
h
a
e
l
&
C
.
E
s
t
e
l
l
e
C
l
e
a
r
y
19
6
5
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
3
05
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
5
B
l
k
2
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
1
8
6
0
0
-
02
0
-
6
0
Ca
r
o
l
e
M
.
D
e
v
l
i
n
-
S
m
i
t
h
&
J
o
h
n
E
.
D
i
e
t
z
19
1
5
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
2
0
6
06
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
L
o
t
6
B
l
k
2
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
D
r
i
v
e
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
00
0
-
1
0
Ci
t
y
o
f
M
e
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
11
0
1
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
6
7
A
$3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
O
u
t
l
o
t
A
Vi
c
t
o
r
i
a
C
u
r
v
e
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
2
0
Da
n
i
e
l
P
.
M
c
C
o
l
l
a
r
10
8
9
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
02
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
3
0
Er
i
c
C
.
&
J
o
a
n
n
a
R
.
H
e
s
s
e
10
8
3
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
03
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
3
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
4
0
Sh
a
w
n
E
.
&
M
o
l
l
y
B
.
M
e
y
e
r
10
7
7
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
04
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
5
0
Pa
u
l
R
.
B
l
y
10
7
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
05
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
5
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
6
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 88
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
6
0
Ad
a
m
&
R
a
c
h
e
l
S
p
i
l
k
e
r
10
6
5
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
06
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
6
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
7
0
Ji
m
m
y
S
.
&
S
t
e
p
h
a
n
i
e
L
e
v
i
n
e
10
5
7
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
07
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
7
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
8
0
Sh
a
r
o
n
A
b
r
a
m
o
w
i
c
z
10
5
3
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
08
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
8
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
0
-
9
0
Th
o
m
a
s
P
.
&
E
l
l
e
n
S
.
S
t
i
l
l
m
a
n
10
4
9
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
09
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
9
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
0
0
St
u
a
r
t
C
.
B
e
a
r
&
M
a
r
s
h
a
J
.
S
c
h
o
e
n
k
i
n
10
4
3
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
10
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
0
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
1
0
Ro
b
e
r
t
L
.
&
J
e
n
n
i
f
e
r
K
a
p
l
a
n
10
3
9
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
11
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
2
0
Ja
m
e
s
C
.
&
K
a
t
h
l
e
e
n
S
c
h
m
i
d
t
10
3
3
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
12
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
2
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
3
0
Da
v
i
d
B
.
&
A
r
l
e
n
e
P
e
r
k
k
i
o
10
2
7
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
13
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
3
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
4
0
An
n
a
M
a
r
i
e
O
g
a
r
a
10
2
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
14
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
4
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
7
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 89
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
5
0
Fr
e
d
C
.
&
L
i
n
d
a
A
.
M
o
r
g
a
n
10
1
5
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
15
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
5
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
6
0
Mi
c
h
a
e
l
J
.
&
D
i
n
a
B
.
S
a
l
m
e
n
10
0
7
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
16
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
6
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
7
0
Ab
b
y
L
.
M
i
l
l
e
r
10
0
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
17
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
7
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
01
1
-
8
0
Ab
b
y
L
.
M
i
l
l
e
r
10
0
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
18
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
8
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
2-
7
3
2
8
0
0
-
02
0
-
1
0
St
e
v
a
n
C
.
&
E
v
e
R
.
K
a
f
i
t
z
10
9
4
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
4
01
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
2
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
02
0
-
2
0
Jo
n
a
t
h
a
n
C
.
&
A
b
i
g
a
i
l
G
e
w
i
r
t
z
10
8
8
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
4
02
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
2
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
02
0
-
3
0
Ga
i
l
M
.
T
s
t
e
W
i
l
l
o
x
10
8
0
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
03
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
3
B
l
k
2
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
02
0
-
4
0
Kr
i
s
t
i
n
C
o
l
e
e
n
R
e
i
l
l
y
17
7
9
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
04
0
0
2
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
2
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
L
a
n
e
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
1
0
Jo
h
n
K
.
&
J
u
l
i
e
A
.
K
o
r
t
e
10
6
8
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
3
01
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
8
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 90
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
2
0
Ch
a
r
l
e
s
M
.
&
L
i
s
a
P
e
r
l
m
a
n
17
7
8
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
3
02
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
2
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
L
a
n
e
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
3
0
Ki
m
b
a
l
l
J
.
&
L
u
z
D
e
v
o
y
10
6
0
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
3
03
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
3
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
4
0
Ma
r
g
i
e
T
s
t
e
S
c
h
e
r
z
e
r
10
5
4
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
3
04
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
5
0
An
d
r
e
w
L
.
M
y
e
r
s
10
5
0
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
05
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
5
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
6
0
Br
a
d
l
e
y
F
.
&
K
e
r
r
y
V
.
W
i
l
l
i
a
m
s
10
4
4
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
3
06
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
6
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
7
0
Br
i
a
n
P
.
&
A
n
n
J
.
G
l
e
e
s
o
n
10
3
8
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
3
07
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
7
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
8
0
Kr
a
s
i
m
i
r
G
.
B
o
j
a
n
o
v
10
3
0
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
3
08
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
8
B
l
k
3
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
03
0
-
9
0
Be
r
n
a
r
d
&
J
a
y
l
e
n
e
K
a
r
o
n
17
8
1
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
4
1
3
6
09
0
0
3
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
9
B
l
k
3
Su
m
m
i
t
L
a
n
e
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
04
0
-
1
0
Mi
c
h
a
e
l
E
.
&
M
a
r
g
a
r
e
t
D
e
m
u
s
e
10
1
8
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
1
01
0
0
4
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
1
B
l
k
4
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
9
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 91
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
04
0
-
3
0
Th
o
m
a
s
R
.
&
M
a
r
y
K
.
L
o
n
g
f
e
l
l
o
w
10
1
0
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
1
03
0
0
4
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
3
B
l
k
4
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
04
0
-
4
0
Ma
r
g
a
r
e
t
&
D
a
v
i
d
A
n
d
r
e
w
s
10
0
4
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
1
04
0
0
4
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
4
B
l
k
4
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
04
0
-
5
0
Th
o
m
a
s
R
.
&
L
i
s
a
B
.
N
i
l
s
e
n
99
8
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
1
05
0
0
4
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
5
B
l
k
4
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
27
-
3
2
8
0
0
-
04
0
-
6
0
Pa
t
r
i
c
k
J
.
&
K
i
m
M
.
S
m
i
t
h
17
8
3
Sa
i
n
t
P
a
u
l
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
0
06
0
0
4
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Hi
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
S
o
u
t
h
L
o
t
6
B
l
k
4
Li
l
a
c
L
a
n
e
27
-
7
6
4
0
2
-
01
2
-
3
0
Ab
b
y
L
.
M
i
l
l
e
r
10
0
1
Me
n
d
o
t
a
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
,
M
N
5
5
1
1
8
-
3
6
5
2
23
0
0
1
$
3
,
6
5
0
.
0
0
$3,
6
5
0
.
0
0
Ti
l
s
e
n
s
H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
H
e
i
g
h
t
s
P
l
a
t
3
L
o
t
2
3
B
l
k
1
Ov
e
r
l
o
o
k
R
o
a
d
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
1
0
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 92
Pa
r
c
e
l
N
o
:
R
e
p
u
t
e
d
O
w
n
e
r
:
Su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
:
Re
h
a
b
:
To
t
a
l
:
Bl
o
c
k
:
Lo
t
:
Nu
m
b
e
r
o
f
P
r
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
:
82
To
t
a
l
R
e
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
a
t
i
o
n
:
$2
9
9
,
3
0
0
.
0
0
Gr
a
n
d
T
o
t
a
l
:
$2
9
9
,
3
0
0
.
0
0
Th
u
r
s
d
a
y
,
A
u
g
u
s
t
0
2
,
2
0
1
2
Pa
g
e
1
1
o
f
1
1
Dr
a
f
t
Cr
o
w
n
P
o
i
n
t
a
n
d
O
v
e
r
l
o
o
k
pg 93
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Ryan Ruzek, PE, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Accepting Work and Approving Final Payment for the Wagon Wheel
Trail Neighborhood Improvements
BACKGROUND
The contract work for the Wagon Wheel Trail Neighborhood Improvement project has been
inspected, approved and is ready for final payment (this will start the one year guarantee period).
Total contract costs for this project were $1,601,999.92 not including indirect costs for legal,
engineering, administration, and finance. The original contract amount was $1,650,534.93.
Staff recommends that council accept the project and approve the final payment of $258,448.32
to McNamara Contracting, Inc. of Rosemount, Minnesota.
ACTION REQUESTED
If City Council wishes to implement the recommendation, pass a motion adopting A
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR THE
WAGON WHEEL TRAIL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENT. This action requires a simple
majority vote.
pg 94
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-
A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR
THE WAGON WHEEL TRAIL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS
WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Mendota Heights on
May 17, 2011, with McNamara Contracting, Inc. of Rosemount, Minnesota they have
satisfactorily completed the improvements for the Wagon Wheel Trail Neighborhood
Improvements – job #201002, S.A.P. 140-106-006, in accordance with such contract.
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HERBY RESOLVED; by the City Council of the City of
Mendota Heights that the work completed under said contract is hereby accepted and approved;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Clerk are hereby directed to
issue a proper order for the final payment on such contract in the amount of $258,448.32, taking
the contractor’s receipt in full.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th day of August 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 95
pg 96
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator
FROM: John R. Mazzitello, PE, PMP – Public Works Director/City Engineer
SUBJECT: Traffic Safety Committee Meeting Notes and Recommendations.
BACKGROUND
The Traffic Safety Committee (TSC) was formed by the City Council as an advisory Committee
to the Council. The TSC serves as a mechanism for technical review and evaluation of traffic
requests brought forward from area residents. The TSC meets periodically throughout the year
(typically quarterly) and makes recommendations to the City Council on actions to address the
requests.
The traffic Safety Committee (TSC) met on July 1 7, 2012 to discuss four new traffic issues
brought to City Staff by concerned parties and to review three other issues carried over from
previous meetings. In attendance were Police Sergeant Convery, Fire Chief Maczko, Public
Works Director/City Engineer Mazzitello, Council Member Vitelli, and Planning Commissioner
Field. Public Works Superintendent Olund and Police Chief Aschenbrener were not present.
Of the issues discussed, only one requires an official Council action at this time. Item 1C would
require passage of the attached Resolution if Council chooses to follow the TSC recommended
action for the issue.
A summary of the issues discussed and TSC recommendations are summarized below.
1. Follow-Up on Past Discussion Items
A. Request to change Yield Sign to a 4-Way Stop Sign at the – Requested by Ms. Melissa
Brown of 1640 James Road via e-mail through City web page.
Issue: Resident concern was over drivers’ inability to see yield sign at intersection due to
vegetative growth in the westbound right-of-way of Douglas Road.
Analysis: Sight distance to the yield sign on westbound Douglas Road is obscured by thick
vegetative growth in the right-of-way. Sight distance could be met if the entire right-of-way
were cleared of vegetation. Alternatively, a second yield sign on the southeast corner of the
intersection would be visible by drivers on westbound Douglas without obstruction.
Recommendation: TSC recommends installing a second yield sign on the southeast corner of
Douglas Road and James Road to provide adequate advance warning of the intersection.
pg 97
B. Request for pedestrian safety and/or speed control signage on Sylvandale Road –
Requested by Ms. Alexandra Polo of 699 Sylvandale Court via e-mail through Mayor
Krebsbach.
Issue: Resident concern was over pedestrian safety along Sylvandale Road, specifically near
Sylvandale Court and Sylvandale Court South.
Analysis: A sight distance analysis was completed for Sylvandale Road form Emerson Avenue
to Ivy Falls Avenue. The only sight distance limiting areas on Sylvandale are from northbound
Clement Street at Emerson and both directions of Sylvandale at Laura Court (relatively sharp
curve in the road). On street parking is sporadic along Sylvandale, and there is adequate
pavement width to accommodate pedestrian traffic.
Recommendation: TSC does not believe any modifications to Sylvandale Road are needed at this
time.
C. Pedestrian Crosswalk on Lexington at Victoria - Requested by Ms. Sally Lorberbaum of
890 Douglas Road via e-mail.
Issue: “As you know, there are a number of people in the Overlook, Walsh, Eagle Ridge area of
the city that walk to Beth Jacob weekly. The question has come up that we have a number of
crosswalks that parallel Victoria on Walsh and other nearby streets but lack a crosswalk at
Victoria and Lexington to connect the walking paths on either side of Lexington.” – Quote
directly from requestor’s e-mail.
Analysis: Staff requested the crosswalk through Dakota County. Dakota County commissioned
a speed study of Marie Avenue which came back with the result of speeds too fast to warrant a
crosswalk. Dakota County followed up on this report by offering to reconfigure the intersection
by installing an island in Lexington Avenue (see the attached diagram). The Island would
provide a safe haven for pedestrians, making a crosswalk more viable. The island would
sacrifice the left turn lane from southbound Lexington to eastbound Victoria, but may be able to
create a left turn lane from northbound Lexington to westbound Victoria. (The city would be
asked to pay 45% of the construction cost for the new island).
Recommendation: TSC recommends City Council request Dakota County construct the island as
proposed and stripe the crosswalks as outlined in their proposal. TSC further recommends the
request of Dakota County include a request to advance the project to construction as quickly as
possible. The attached Resolution makes the aforementioned request. If Council chooses to
implement the TSC recommendations, pass the attached Resolution by a simple majority vote.
2. New Business
A. Speed limit signage in The Summit development - Requested by The Summit
Homeowners Association.
Issue: The Summit Homeowners Association believes traffic through their development is
travelling in excess of the speed limit (30 mph). The Association is requesting speed limit signs
placed at the entrances to the development.
pg 98
Analysis: There is little or no “cut-through” traffic in this development, so most of the vehicles
perceived of speeding likely belong to the residents of the development. Subsequently, these
residents would be members of the Association.
Recommendation: TSC recommends against speed limit signs at this time. TSC recommends
utilizing the speed trailer to monitor traffic in the development and provide the results to the
Association.
B. No Parking on north side of Pueblo Lane adjacent to Friendly Hills Park – Requested by
the Mendota Heights Police Department.
Issue: Controlling parking on streets that are adjacent to parks can benefit pedestrian safety for
those using, travelling to, or travelling form the parks. At Mendakota Park there is a parking
plan that prohibits parking on Mendakota Drive across from the park, but permits parking
adjacent to the park. The Police Department is asking for a similar parking pattern for Pueblo
Lane at Friendly Hills Park.
Analysis: By allowing parking only on the park side of the road, pedestrian traffic crossing the
street (often coming out form between parked cars) to get to their vehicles is eliminated; thus
reducing the chances of a vehicle/pedestrian accident.
Recommendation: TSC recommends implementing the parking pattern proposed for Pueblo
Lane. Before doing so, however, TSC recommends sending correspondence to the affected
property owners, reviewing their responses, and bringing the results to City Council at a future
date. Pending the feedback form the area residents, an Ordinance amendment may be brought
forward to add this area to the list of no parking areas in the city and the area will be resigned to
reflect the ordinance change.
C. No Parking for ~30 feet of Concord Way at Heritage Drive – Requested by Phil Stephan
of 2591 Bedford Court, a resident of the Kensington Development.
Issue: Resident concern is that pedestrian and bicycle traffic cannot be seen when there is
parking on both sides of Concord Way. Coupled with a relatively blind corner for drivers and
only room for a single lane of traffic when cars are parked on both sides of the street.
Analysis: When cars are parked on both sides of Concord Way, there is not enough room for
two lanes of traffic. Also, anytime there is a dense population of parked cars it can make it hard
to see pedestrians and/or bicyclists. This request is in contrast to an earlier issue brought forth by
Kensington residents about speed on Concord Way. Eliminating the parking would potentially
increase speed, so one resident’s request is contrary to another request from residents in the same
area.
Recommendation: TSC recommends the issue be remanded to the Kensington Homeowners
Associations (there are actually three different Associations) for them to debate and decide what
action they would like to request.
D. Installation of a traffic signal at Dodd Road and Wagon Wheel Trail – Requested by
Heidi McEllistrem of 1025 William Court via e-mail.
pg 99
Issue: “I am a home owner and biker in Mendota Heights. I really enjoy the new bike path
along Wagon Wheel. It is a much appreciated improvement for bikers and walkers in the
city. Any chance there would be a traffic light installed at the intersection of Wagon Wheel and
Dodd? It is a tricky spot when crossing Dodd on a bike or walking to get to Decorah Ave. A
pedestrian light would be very useful at that location.” – Taken verbatim from Ms.
McEllistrem’s e-mail.
Analysis: Dodd Road is not a city asset. This request could only be honored by the Minnesota
Department of Transportation (MnDOT). Further, looking at the traffic numbers, there is far
more traffic on Dodd than on Wagon Wheel and Decorah combined. MnDOT would not honor
such a request.
Recommendation: TSC recommends forwarding the request to MnDOT for their consideration.
Dodd Road is a MnDOT owned right-of-way, and their jurisdiction to decide. TSC does not
believe MnDOT will honor the request.
BUDGET IMPACT
If the Council choses to approve the TSC recommendations, the only potential cost would be the
City’s 45% cost share of the median installation on Lexington Avenue in a fiscal year yet to be
determined (City share could be in the $20,000 - $30,000 range). In addition, cost of a new
Yield sign at Douglas Road and James Road would cost approximately $300.00 and can be
expended as part of the Streets Department annual Signage and striping budget.
RECOMMENDATION
The TSC recommends Council approve the recommended action listed above and adopt the
attached RESOLUTION FORMALLY REQUESTING PROJECT INCLUSION IN
THE DAKOTA COUNTY 2013-2017 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, which will be
forwarded to Dakota County. A simple majority vote is required for recommendation approval.
All other TSC recommendations listed need no formal Council action at this time.
pg 100
HW
Y
1
1
0
LEXINGTON AVE
VI
C
T
O
R
I
A
C
U
R
VI
C
T
O
R
I
A
R
D
S
Lexington Avenue and Victoria Road Crosswalk
July 30, 2012
City ofMendotaHeights080
SCALE IN FEET
Legend
Median
Striping
pg
10
1
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-__
RESOLUTION FORMALLY REQUESTING PROJECT INCLUSION IN
THE DAKOTA COUNTY 2013-2017 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, Dakota County has a Capital Improvement Plan that forecasts projects for
five years in to the future; and
WHEREAS, annually Dakota County seeks requests from cities for desired projects
within their respective municipal boundaries; and
WHEREAS, area residents have expressed concern over pedestrian safety while crossing
County Road 43, also known as Lexington Avenue, at Victoria Road; and
WHEREAS, the City Council established the Traffic Safety Committee to analyze traffic
safety requests brought forward by the public; and
WHEREAS, Dakota County, as the responsible party for Lexington Avenue, has
developed a potential design solution to allow for a marked pedestrian crosswalk that would
involve a cost sharing allocation of 45% for the City of Mendota Heights; and
WHEREAS, The Traffic Safety Committee recommends the solution provided by
Dakota County as a positive method to increase pedestrian safety at the intersection.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED; by the Mendota Heights City Council That
a formal request is being made of Dakota County to:
1. Include the construction of a median on County Road 43 (Lexington Avenue), north of
Victoria Road, and a pedestrian crosswalk to connect the trail access point on the east and
west sides of County Road 43 in the County 2013-2017 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
2. Include this pedestrian safety improvement in the CIP in as early a fiscal year as possible.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of August 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
_________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 102
pg 103
pg
10
4
pg
10
5
pg 106
pg 107
pg 108
pg 109
pg 110
pg 111
pg 112
pg 113
pg 114
pg 115
pg 116
pg 117
pg 118
pg 119
pg 120
pg 121
pg 122
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Jake Sedlacek, Assistant to the City Administrator
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2012-24, Wetlands Permit for Single Family Home
BACKGROUND
Al Maas made a planning application on behalf of David Williams to a construct a single family
home at 755 Wentworth Avenue.
The planning commission heard the request at their regular meeting on Tuesday, July 24, 2012.
Planner Grittman reminded the commission that this request is for a single family home only,
there is no request for a subdivision of the lot.
The commission asked if there needed to be more detail in the conditions of approval,
specifically what type of vegetation may be included in landscaping. Staff replied that more
detailed plans would be necessary for the grading permit. Staff is comfortable recommending
the application as proposed, and will work with the applicant on further detail as the process
moves along.
Alan and Gloria Weinblatt, 754 Upper Colonial Drive, spoke at the public hearing, asking that
the commission consider the impact of the new home upon the fauna on the property. Chair
Norton reminded the commission that the property is privately held and could be developed
within code requirements.
Mr. Kevin Byrnes, 740 Wentworth Avenue, also spoke at the public hearing, expressing support
for the proposed single family home, but wanted to ensure that the applicant and city staff were
aware of storm water drainage issues in the area. John Mazzitello, Public Works Director/City
Engineer responded that storm water drainage issues are subject to the Land Use Disturbance
Guidance Document, and will be addressed in closer detail as the permits for the development
are pulled. The proposed single family house was not seen as having any impact on the storm
water issue Mr. Byrnes pointed out.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
pg 123
RECOMMENDATION
The planning commission recommended approval of the request on a 6:0 vote. This matter
requires a simple majority vote by the council. If the city council desires to implement the
recommendation, pass a motion adopting A RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS
PERMIT PERMIT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 755 WENTWORTH AVENUE.
pg 124
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE
FAMILY HOME AT 755 WENTWORTH AVENUE.
WHEREAS, Al Maas, on behalf of David Williams has applied for a wetlands permit to
construct a single family home at 755 Wentworth Avenue (PID 27-03800-33-010, Lot 33 Auditors
Subdivision No 3) as proposed in planning case 2012-24; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular
meeting July 24, 2012.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a
wetlands permit as proposed in planning case 2012-24 is hereby approved with the following findings of
fact:
1. The project meets the intent of the Wetlands Ordinance.
2. The project retains an extensive existing vegetative buffer adjacent to the wetland edge.
3. The driveway over the creek/wetland will utilize the existing culver locations, minimizing
grading work within the wetland itself.
4. The wetland itself will otherwise be untouched.
5. With the conditions listed, the project will comply with all zoning and wetland ordinance
requirements of the city.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a wetlands permit as
proposed in planning case 2012-24 is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. Existing structures on the property are removed.
2. Area within the 25 foot setback is left undisturbed and in its natural state.
3. Driveway construction utilizes the existing culvert location and otherwise complies with city
requirements.
4. All cleared areas are landscaped to minimize runoff into the creek.
5. Pool fencing meets the city’s fencing requirements for materials, openness, height, and other
requirements for swimming pool enclosures.
6. All construction activities follow the Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of August 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
pg 125
___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 126
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Stephen Grittman
DATE: July 18, 2012
MEETING DATE: July 24, 2012
SUBJECT: Wetlands Permit for New Home and Pool
CASE NO: Case No. 12-24; NAC Case 254.04 – 12.16
APPLICANT(S): Alan Maas/David and Kim Williams
LOCATION: 755 Wentworth Avenue
ZONING: R-1, One Family Residential
GUIDE PLAN: LR – Low Density Residential
Background and Description of Request:
The applicants are seeking a wetlands permit to construct a new single family home and
swimming pool and related improvements at 755 Wentworth Avenue. The project would
cover much of the existing lawn area behind the house. The subject property is just
under 8 acres in size and has been occupied by a house and detached garage.
Although the application is not specific on this point, the existing structures would need
to be removed as a part of the new construction. The area of construction would be on
the north side of a creek that runs through the property from east to west. Nearly all of
the building area is within 100 feet of this creek and associated wetland.
The property is zoned R-1, One Family Residential. Section 12-2-6 of the Zoning
Ordinance requires a Wetlands Permit for any work conducted within 100 feet of a
wetland.
Analysis:
The new home would rely on an existing driveway from Wentworth, to be upgraded as a
part of the project. The driveway crosses the creek over an existing culvert. The
applicants suggest that this crossing will remain – thus little or no impact to the wetland
pg 127
would be expected from this part of the project. The applicants should otherwise clarify
what is intended for the remainder of the driveway “upgrade”, particularly within the
wetland buffer area.
The site plan shows that the home and pool area will retain a 25 foot setback from the
creek edge. This is typical staff-recommended setback from wetland areas, along with
the recommendation that this area be left in a natural state, or planted with natural
materials to minimize and filter runoff from the project into the water body. The
applicant have not specified what would be done within the setback area, however, the
area is relatively steeply sloped, and it is presumed that the intent is to leave this area in
its current condition. This should be verified with the applicants.
The applicants have provided a topographic survey of the property showing that the
building site lies on steeply sloped portion of the property. Extensive grading is
anticipated to accomplish the project, although no grading plan has been submitted.
The applicants have included a general area of clearing and silt fence line to the west of
the home and pool, along with extensive clearing to the east of the home and driveway,
to within 25 feet of the creek. They have indicated that all cleared areas will be
landscaped and sodded. A total area of about 2 acres will be within the construction
limits of the project.
The Wetlands Ordinance requires that any land alteration or construction within 100 feet
of any designated wetland requires approval of a Wetlands Permit. The purpose of the
Wetlands Ordinance is to ensure that alterations within the buffer area adjacent to
wetlands do not degrade or threaten the water quality of the wetland area. While
grading details have not been provided, the construction and clearing are permissible
provided the applicants comply with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document.
The City’s engineering department staff will evaluate and monitor this aspect of the
proposal.
Action Requested:
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider one of the following
recommendations:
1) Approval of the wetlands permit to construct a new single family home,
swimming pool, associated pool decking and graded lawn area, tree removal,
and driveway improvements - an area of approximately 2 acres of disturbed area
- based on the attached findings of fact, and subject to a the following conditions:
a. Existing structures on the property are removed;
b. Area within the 25 foot setback is left undisturbed and in its natural state;
c. Driveway construction utilizes the existing culvert location and otherwise
complies with city requirements;
d. All cleared areas are landscaped to minimize runoff into the creek;
e. Pool fencing meets the City’s fencing requirements for materials,
openness, height, and other requirements for swimming pool enclosures;
and
pg 128
f. All construction activities follow the Land Disturbance Guidance
document.
-OR-
2) Denial of the wetlands permit, based on a finding that the projected work will
have negative impacts on the existing wetland and is inconsistent with the intent
of the Wetlands Ordinance.
Staff Recommendation:
Planning staff recommends approval of the wetlands permit with the listed conditions.
The proposed project, while extensive in area, should not have a negative impact on the
wetland, especially with the native vegetation plantings which serve to filter the runoff
into the wetland. The project appears to meet the intent of the Wetlands Ordinance and
will not degrade or threaten the water quality of the wetland.
Supplementary Materials:
1. Application Materials Dated 7/2/12
2. Site Location Map
pg 129
4
Draft Findings of Fact for Approval
Wetlands Permit
755 Wentworth Avenue
The following Findings of Fact are made in support of approval of the above Wetlands
Permit:
1. The project meets the intent of the Wetlands Ordinance.
2. The project retains an extensive existing vegetative buffer adjacent to the
wetland edge.
3. The driveway over the creek/wetland will utilize the existing culvert locations,
minimizing grading work within the wetland itself.
4. The wetland itself will otherwise be untouched.
5. With the conditions listed, the project will comply will all zoning and wetland
ordinance requirements of the City.
pg 130
Do
d
d
R
d
Marie Ave
1st Ave
3rd Ave
D
i
a
n
e
R
d
Tr
a
i
l
R
d
2nd Ave
Evergreen Kn
Bachelor Ave
Callahan Pl
Va
n
d
a
l
l
S
t
Syl
v
a
n
d
a
l
e
R
d
Emers
o
n
A
v
e
M
e
d
o
r
a
R
d
Sutton La
4th Ave
Stanwich La
C
h
e
r
r
y
H
i
l
l
R
d
K
n
o
l
l
w
o
o
d
L
a
Will
o
w
L
a
Fa
r
m
d
a
l
e
R
d
Sunset La
C
e
l
i
a
D
r
Brookside La
La
u
r
a
S
t
Upper Colonial Dr
Park Place Dr
C
l
e
m
e
n
t
S
t
Wa
c
h
t
l
e
r
A
v
e
Pa
r
k
C
i
r
Nina Ct
Barbara Ct
Ar
v
i
n
D
r
Mager Ct
G
r
y
c
C
t
Bo
a
r
d
w
a
l
k
C
l
e
m
e
n
t
S
t
755 Wentworth Ave.
Site Location Map
Water/Wetlands
Major Roads
City Roads
Municipal Boundaries
pg 131
pg 132
pg 133
pg 134
Dakota County, MN
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not
guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,
appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 310 feet
pg 135
pg 136
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Jake Sedlacek, Assistant to the City Administrator
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2012-23, Critical Area Permit for Single Family Home
BACKGROUND
Thomas Wieser made a planning application on behalf of Dan and Mary Caruso to a construct a
single family home at 1256 Wachtler Avenue, which Mr. Wieser is in the process of purchasing
from the Caruso’s.
The planning commission heard the request at their regular meeting on Tuesday, July 24, 2012.
There were no questions on the application. There were no comments at the public hearing.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
The planning commission recommended approval of the request on a 6:0 vote. This matter
requires a simple majority vote by the council. If the city council desires to implement the
recommendation, pass a motion adopting A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA
PERMIT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 1256 WACHTLER AVENUE.
pg 137
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE
FAMILY HOME AT 1256 WACHTLER AVENUE.
WHEREAS, Thomas Wieser, on behalf of Dan and Mary Caruso has applied for a critical area
permit to construct a single family home at 1256 Wachtler Avenue (PID 27-30700-00-100, Lot 10
Goodrich Happy Hollow) as proposed in planning case 2012-23; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular
meeting July 24, 2012.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a critical
area permit as proposed in planning case 2012-23 is hereby approved with the following findings of fact:
1. The required maximum building height of 25 feet (as measured from average front grade to
average roof height) is met by the proposal.
2. No construction will occur on slopes of greater than 18%.
3. No construction will occur within 40 feet of the top of the bluff (defined as land that exceeds 40%
slope).
4. Use of natural, or natural-looking, materials wherever practical.
5. There are no visual impact of the construction from view of the river.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of August 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 138
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Stephen W. Grittman
DATE: July 18, 2012
MEETING DATE: July 24, 2012
SUBJECT: Critical Area Permit for Construction of New Single Family
Home
CASE NO: Case No. 2012-23; NAC Case 254.04 – 12.15
APPLICANT(S): Tom and Kim Wieser
LOCATION: 1256 Wachtler Avenue
ZONING: R-1 Single Family Residential
GUIDE PLAN: Low Density Residential
Background and Description of Request:
The applicant is seeing a Critical Area Permit to construct a new single family home on
a parcel along Wachtler Avenue. The proposed construction site is on a relatively level
portion of the property, generally in the area of a previous structure.
Because the property is located within the Mississippi River Critical Area, a Critical Area
Permit is required for all of the improvements proposed. The structure will utilize the
existing driveway for access to Wachtler, extending it to the new garage. The limits of
construction on the site is an area of about 5,000 square feet, including new home,
garage, and additional driveway.
Analysis:
In the critical area, new construction and other land disturbance is required to comply
with the terms of the Critical Area Ordinance, and includes the following standards
applying to this application:
pg 139
• Maximum building height of 25 feet (as measured from average front grade to
average roof height).
• No construction on slopes of greater than 18%.
• No construction within 40 feet of the top of the bluff (defined as land that exceeds
40% slope).
• Use of natural, or natural-looking, materials wherever practical.
• Minimize visual impacts of the construction from view of the river.
The proposed home is measured by the applicants at just over 17 feet in height. The
building height is consistent with the applicable zoning regulations.
In this case, the proposed home will be located on an area of the lot that shows slopes
of approximately 2-4 percent. The existing driveway grade (on the west side of the lot)
is minimal, and is not proposed to change. The building area is below the steep slopes
on the lot. The proposed home sits more than 50 feet from the toe of the slope,
consistent with slope setback requirements.
The applicants proposed to use cedar siding, fiber cement siding, and stucco as the
primary building materials. All of these are consistent with the intent of the Critical Area
ordinance.
Finally, the site itself is visible from Sibley Memorial Highway, although it is obscured by
existing vegetation, most of which is to remain on the property. Due to the elevation of
the building site, it is not visible from the river itself, and as such, does not raise issues
for impacts on the river.
Action Requested:
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider one of the following
recommendations:
A. Approval of the Critical Area Permit for 1256 Wachtler Avenue, based on the
draft findings attached to this report. With this recommendation, staff would
suggest the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City’s Land Disturbance Guidance Document
2. Any further recommendations of the City Engineer regarding grading, erosion
and stormwater control.
B. Denial of the Critical Area Permit, based on a finding that alterations to the
property raise concerns over consistency with the Critical Area Ordinance.
pg 140
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the Critical Area Permit as proposed, with the conditions
cited above. The proposal makes use of the property consistent with the R-1 zoning
regulations, and utilizes the property with the least impact on the vulnerable parts of the
property, such as the steeper areas to the rear. Reuse of the existing driveway will also
reduce impacts resulting from the construction.
Supplementary Materials:
1. Application Materials dated 6-29-12
pg 141
Draft Findings of Fact for Approval
Critical Area Permit
1256 Sibley Memorial Highway
1. The required maximum building height of 25 feet (as measured from average
front grade to average roof height) is met by the proposal
2. No construction will occur on slopes of greater than 18%.
3. No construction will occur within 40 feet of the top of the bluff (defined as land
that exceeds 40% slope).
4. Use of natural, or natural-looking, materials wherever practical.
5. There are no visual impacts of the construction from view of the river.
pg 142
Do
d
d
R
d
1st Ave
3rd Ave
2nd Ave
Evergr
e
e
n
K
n
Syl
v
a
n
d
a
l
e
R
d
Va
n
d
a
l
l
S
t
Maple Park Dr
Emers
o
n
A
v
e
M
e
d
o
r
a
R
d
4th Ave
Ivy Falls Ave
C
h
e
r
r
y
H
i
l
l
R
d
K
n
o
l
l
w
o
o
d
L
a
Fa
r
m
d
a
l
e
R
d
Sunset La
Brookside La
Arcad
i
a
D
r
La
u
r
a
S
t
Upper Colonial Dr
So
m
e
r
s
e
t
R
d
Park Place Dr
C
l
e
m
e
n
t
S
t
Wa
c
h
t
l
e
r
A
v
e
Park Cir
Lower Colonial Dr
Ivy Fa
l
l
s
C
t
Bluff Cir
S
y
l
v
a
n
d
a
l
e
C
t
G
r
y
c
C
t
Maple Park C
t
K
n
o
l
l
w
o
o
d
C
t
La
u
r
a
S
t
C
l
e
m
e
n
t
S
t
1256 Wachtler Ave.
Site Location Map
Water/Wetlands
Major Roads
City Roads
Municipal Boundaries
pg 143
pg 144
pg 145
pg
14
6
pg
14
7
pg
14
8
pg
14
9
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
NOTICE OF HEARING
A PUBLIC HEARING ON A REQUEST FOR A CRITICAL AREA PERMIT TO
CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AT 1256 WACHTLER AVENUE.
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
NOTICE is hereby given that the Planning Commission of Mendota Heights will
meet at 7:00 P.M., or as soon as possible thereafter, on Tuesday, July 24, 2012 in the
City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota, to
consider an application from Thomas and Kim Wieser to construct a single family home
at 1256 Wachtler Avenue.
This notice is pursuant to Title 12 (Zoning), Chapter 1 of the Mendota Heights City
Code. Such persons as desire to be heard with reference to this request will be heard
at this meeting.
Lorri Smith
City Clerk
pg 150
Dakota County, MN
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not
guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,
appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 310 feet
pg 151
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Jake Sedlacek, Assistant to the City Administrator
SUBJECT: Planning Case 2012-22, Wetlands Permit 953 Wagon Wheel Trail
BACKGROUND
At the July 3, 2012 city council meeting, the council passed a resolution approving planning case
2012-18, a request to subdivide the parcels of land at 953 Wagon Wheel Trail by adjusting the
lot line between those parcels. Planning application 2012-22 was presented to the planning
commission on July 24, 2012 for a wetlands permit to construct a new single family home on one
of the two lots at 953 Wagon Wheel Trail. The affected parcel is zoned residential, guided for
low density residential and has been undeveloped.
The planning application was deemed complete June 15, 2012. The 60 day review period is set
to expire on August 14, 2012. Public notice was published in the city’s legal newspaper and
mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the parcel.
Planner Grittman reviewed his report on the request, stating that while the application does not
provide fully engineered plans, it does provide for the scope of the project, and does not appear
to raise any issues of concern for a wetlands permit. As the applicant moves forward with the
project, all building and grading permits must adhere to the requirements of the Land
Disturbance Guidance Document, as applied by engineering staff.
The commission sought clarification on the nature of the buffer area to the wetland edge, and
about a set of stairs proposed on the application. The applicant intends to maintain a vegetated
25 foot buffer between the wetland edge and the proposed home. The steps are requested to
access the pond with a canoe or paddleboat. The commission was supportive of this idea, and
crafted a condition of approval for staff to have review over final plans for the access.
Staff clarified that any work within the wetland itself would require review and approval by the
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
There were no comments at the public hearing.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
pg 152
At their July 24, 2012 meeting, the planning commission voted 6:0 to recommend approval of
the wetlands permit with the findings provided by the city planner, and an additional condition,
as worded in the attached resolution. If city council wishes to implement this recommendation,
pass a motion adopting the attached resolution, A RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS
PERMIT AT 953 WAGON WHEEL TRAIL. This action requires a simple majority vote.
pg 153
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION 2012-54
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A WETLANDS PERMIT AT 953 WAGON WHEEL TRAIL.
WHEREAS, Greg Quehl has applied for a wetlands permit to construct a new home at 953
Wagon Wheel Trail (PID 27-16400-00-140, Lot 14 CAROLINE’S LAKE VIEW and PID 27-16400-00-
151, Lot 15 CAROLINE’S LAKE VIEW) as proposed in planning case 2012-22; and
WHEREAS, the planning commission held a public hearing on this matter at their regular
meeting July 24, 2012.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a
wetlands permit as proposed in planning case 2012-22 is hereby approved with the following findings of
fact:
1. The project meets the intent of the Wetlands Ordinance.
2. The project retains a 25 foot vegetative buffer adjacent to the wetland edge.
3. The wetland itself will otherwise be untouched.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by the Mendota Heights City Council that a subdivision as
proposed in planning case 2012-18 is hereby approved with the following conditions:
1. The applicant submit final design and construction drawings for city staff review and approval
2. The 25 feet closest to the wetland will remain in an undisturbed state except for the proposed
egress area, which would be subject to city staff review and approval.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this seventh day of August 2012.
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS
___________________________
Sandra Krebsbach, Mayor
ATTEST
______________________________
Lorri Smith, City Clerk
pg 154
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Stephen W. Grittman
DATE: July 18, 2012
MEETING DATE: July 24, 2012
SUBJECT: Subdivision and Wetlands Permit
CASE NO: Case No. 2012-22; NAC Case 254.04 – 12.14
APPLICANT(S): Gregory Quehl
LOCATION: 953 Wagon Wheel Trail
ZONING: R-1, One Family Residential
GUIDE PLAN: Low Density Residential
Background and Description of Request:
The applicant received approval to re-subdivide two existing parcels along Wagon
Wheel Trail to create two buildable parcels as part of an application heard at the June
Planning Commission meeting. The two lots both have their frontage on Wagon Wheel
Trail.
The re-subdivision created a new 20,000 square foot lot in the southeast corner of the
parcel, with 100 feet of frontage on Wagon Wheel, and 200 feet of depth from north to
south. The applicant’s materials refer to this parcel as Lot B1. The remaining lot
(labeled “A1” in the subdivision application) has approximately 312 feet of frontage on
Wagon Wheel, and extends behind the other parcel to the depth of the original lot. This
lot has more than 4 acres of land, although much of that would be covered by the
wetland as noted. About half of that 4 acres would appear to be upland.
The applicant proposes to construct a new home on the northeast portion of Lot A1, and
gain access to the new home over a private driveway to be constructed on the
unimproved right of way that forms the east boundary of the subject property. This right
of way would be shared by the adjoining property owner to the east, who utilizes a
pg 155
portion for his own private driveway. Construction of a new home in the proposed
location requires a wetlands permit, the subject of this report.
Analysis:
Wetlands Permit. For any construction or land alteration within 100 feet of a wetland,
the City requires a wetlands permit to ensure that the activity is completed in a manner
that has no negative impact on the water body. In this case, the applicant would
construct a new home within about 35 feet of the wetland edge, indicating also that the
25 feet along the wetland would be retained and treated as buffer to minimize direct
runoff.
Along with the construction, the applicant indicates that he would alter the existing
grade with fill from the excavation for the home to create a look-out basement above
what is a relatively shallow water table. Because details of the grading, construction,
and subsequent landscape cover are not available, the wetland permit was originally
withheld at the June Planning Commission meeting. The concern was that until those
plans can be prepared and reviewed by City staff, a recommendation on the Wetlands
Permit was premature.
Since the original review, the applicant has discussed his plans in more detail with City
staff. Although formal construction details have not yet been developed, the City’s
Engineering staff believes that the extent of wetland buffer impacts is within a range that
can be addressed through final building permit plans.
Action Requested:
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider the following
recommendations:
Wetlands Permit.
A. Recommendation for approval, with the condition that the applicant submit final
design and construction drawings for City Staff review and approval.
B. Recommendation for denial, based on a finding that the applicant has not
submitted adequate information for review ensuring protection of the wetland.
C. Recommendation to table the Wetlands Permit, providing time for the applicant to
submit design and construction drawings for staff review, and Planning
Commission consideration.
pg 156
Staff Recommendation:
Although the applicant is still working on final plans, Engineering staff is comfortable
with a recommendation for approval at this time. With this recommendation would be
the condition noted in Alternative A above, requiring final design and construction
drawings for City Staff review and approval prior to construction, grading, or excavation.
Supplementary Materials:
1. Application materials dated 5-23-12
pg 157
Dodd
Road
Le
x
i
n
g
t
o
n
A
v
e
Wagon Wheel Tr
Lake Dr
Ti
m
m
y
S
t
Cheri La
Th
e
r
e
s
a
S
t
Wi
l
l
i
a
m
C
t
Bluebill Dr
Dakota Dr
Sw
a
n
D
r
Pa
t
r
i
c
i
a
S
t
Cullen St
Kay Ave
Sw
a
n
C
t
Carmen La
Ro
g
e
r
s
C
t
Al
i
c
e
L
a
Mendakot
a
D
r
Victoria
C
v
Su
m
m
i
t
L
a
Mary Adele Ave
Wa
l
s
h
L
a
M
e
n
d
a
k
o
t
a
C
t
Crown Cir
953 Wagon Wheel Trail
Site Location Map
Water/Wetlands
Major Roads
City Roads
Municipal Boundaries
pg 158
pg 159
pg 160
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mendota Heights Planning Commission
FROM: Stephen W. Grittman
DATE: June 22, 2012
MEETING DATE: June 26, 2012
SUBJECT: Subdivision and Wetlands Permit
CASE NO: Case No. ; NAC Case 254.04 -
APPLICANT(S): Gregory Quehl
LOCATION: 953 Wagon Wheel Trail
ZONING: R-1, One Family Residential
GUIDE PLAN: Low Density Residential
Background and Description of Request:
The applicant is seeking to re-subdivide two existing parcels along Wagon Wheel Trail
to create two buildable parcels. The current two lots both have their frontage on Wagon
Wheel Trail. The easterly parcel contains a single family home to be removed if the
subdivision is approved. The westerly parcel is covered by wetland and is currently
unbuildable, although it is a separate legal parcel.
The proposed re-subdivision would combine the two lots, then carve out a new 20,000
square foot lot in the southeast corner of the parcel, with 100 feet of frontage on Wagon
Wheel, and 200 feet of depth from north to south. The applicant’s materials refer to this
parcel as Lot B1. The remaining lot (labeled “A1”) would have approximately 312 feet of
frontage on Wagon Wheel, and extend behind the other parcel to the depth of the
original lot. This lot would have more than 4 acres of land, although much of that would
pg 161
be covered by the wetland as noted. About half of that 4 acres would appear to be
upland.
The applicant proposes then to construct a new home on the northeast portion of Lot
A1, and gain access to the new home over a private driveway to be constructed on the
unimproved right of way that forms the east boundary of the subject property. This right
of way would be shared by the adjoining property owner to the east, who utilizes a
portion for his own private driveway. Construction of a new home in the proposed
location would require a wetlands permit.
Analysis:
Subdivision. The proposed subdivision of the two parcels would result in no additional
lots overall, however, the currently lot line arrangement precludes development of the
westerly parcel due to the wetland. Although the total area of the subdivision is more
than 4.7 acres, there is just over 2 acres of upland, and usable frontage on Wagon
Wheel Trail is also limited due to the extend of the wetland coverage.
The rearrangement as proposed appears to be reasonable, and meets the City’s lot size
requirements of at least 100 feet of frontage and 15,000 square feet of lot area. Both
lots would meet or exceed these dimensions.
The applicant has made two other requests in relation to the subdivision. First, he has
noted a request to remove a street easement that exists in the southwest corner of the
subject property. The process to consider vacation of an easement is separate from
any planning action. As such, staff has directed the applicant to make this request
independently of the planning application.
The second request relates to the construction of the new home and the provision of
public services. The applicant proposes to locate the home to the north along the
unimproved right of way. Access to the home would then be via a private drive within
that right of way, eventually joining with an existing private drive serving the adjoining
property. The City Engineer has expressed a willingness to consider this arrangement.
To accomplish this, the applicant must negotiate a maintenance agreement with the
current driveway user – this agreement should address shared costs of ongoing
maintenance as well as long-term reconstruction. The City Attorney should review the
agreement to ensure that it does not bind the City in any way, including the City’s right
to improve the right of way to City street standards and assess those costs to the
property owners, or to abandon or vacate the right of way in the future. In addition, the
agreement should specify that the property owners hold the City harmless for any
liability relating to the private improvements
The private use of the right of way is accompanied by a request to provide sewer and
water service via private service lines from Wagon Wheel Trail, rather than extend any
new City trunk or main lines. The City Engineer has likewise indicated the acceptability
pg 162
of this service arrangement, so long as the private utilities are not located in any right of
way.
Wetlands Permit. For any construction or land alteration within 100 feet of a wetland,
the City requires a wetlands permit to ensure that the activity is completed in a manner
that has no negative impact on the water body. In this case, the applicant would
construct a new home within about 35 feet of the wetland edge, indicating also that the
25 feet along the wetland would be retained and treated as buffer to minimize direct
runoff.
Along with the construction, the applicant indicates that he would alter the existing
grade with a substantial amount of fill to create a walk-out basement above what is a
relatively shallow water table. Because details of the grading, construction, and
subsequent landscape cover are not available, it would appear that the wetland permit
should be withheld until those plans can be prepared and reviewed by City staff, and a
recommendation can be made to the Planning Commission.
Based on the staff’s preliminary discussions with the applicant, it is presumed that an
acceptable plan can be worked out, however, a more complete application package
would be necessary to make any formal comments.
Action Requested:
Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission may consider the following
recommendations:
Subdivision.
A. Recommendation for approval, based on findings of fact attached to this report,
and subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant enter into a maintenance agreement for use of the public right
of way with the City and adjoining property owner, to be approved by the City
Attorney.
2. The need for drainage and utility easements is reviewed and addressed by
the City Engineer.
3. The applicant obtain a certificate of survey with final legal descriptions for
recording with Dakota County.
B. Recommendation for denial, based on a finding that the proposed subdivision
would be premature without more detailed development plans for the two
parcels.
pg 163
Wetlands Permit.
A. Recommendation for approval, with the condition that the applicant submit fina l
design and construction drawings for City Staff review and approval.
B. Recommendation for denial, based on a finding that the applicant has not
submitted adequate information for review ensuring protection of the wetland.
C. Recommendation to table the Wetlands Permit, providing time for the applicant to
submit design and construction drawings for staff review, and Planning
Commission consideration.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the subdivision, with the conditions noted. The
subdivision meets the technical dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance and
will provide two parcels with appropriate buildable areas. Access and utility service can
be accommodated, provided the applicant address the maintenance issues noted in this
report.
With regard to the Wetlands Permit, staff recommends tabling action until the
appropriate plan detail can be completed and submitted for review. It appears that
there will be appropriate opportunities for construction and land alteration as describe d
by the applicant in his materials, however, detailed plans need to be submitted to verify
the conditions of any permit to be issued, particularly in this case where a new home,
combined with significant amounts of fill and grading are expected.
Supplementary Materials:
1. Application materials dated 5-23-12
pg 164
Draft Findings of Fact for Approval
Subdivision
953 Wagon Wheel Trail
1. The subdivision results in a net increase of no new parcels.
2. The subdivision provides lots that meet and/or exceed all of the applicable zoning
criteria for lots in the R-1 zoning district.
3. The subdivision can be accommodated with existing public services.
4. The access and services to the parcels are acceptable, provided the required
agreements are executed governing construction and maintenance as noted in
the staff report.
pg 165
Aerial Photo with Existing Lot Lines and Dimensions
pg
16
6
pg 167
pg 168
pg 169
pg 170
pg 171
pg 172
pg 173
pg 174
DATE: August 7, 2012
TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator
FROM: Jake Sedlacek, Assistant to the City Administrator
SUBJECT: License to Utilize Right of Way, Quehl
BACKGROUND
Mr. Greg Quehl has a purchase agreement for the two parcels located at 953 Wagon Wheel Trail.
Mr. Quehl has previously submitted a request for subdivision/lot line adjustment and a request
for a wetlands permit to build a single family home on one of the lots. There is adequate room to
construct a driveway upon the lot in question, but Mr. Quehl would prefer to access the property
from an unimproved Right of Way (ROW) which lies to the east of 953 Wagon Wheel Trail.
Mr. Quehl would like to orient the new home towards the right-of-way, in the event that the city
allows a public road to be constructed.
Staff discussed this request with Mr. Quehl, including the concept of a license to utilize the right
of way. The attached document is based upon license the city has approved in the past. A
license allows the licensee to utilize the property, but spells out clearly that the city still has
ownership and development rights to the property. Any investments the licensee makes would
be at their own risk.
BUDGET IMPACT
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff is recommending approval of the license. If city council wishes to implement this
recommendation, pass a motion authorizing the mayor to execute the attached document, A
LICENSE TO UTILIZE UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY. This action requires a simple
majority vote.
pg 175
LICENSE AGREEMENT
This License Agreement (the “LICENSE”) is made this Seventh day of August, 2012, between THE
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “CITY”) and Gregory Quehl (the
“LICENSEE”).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, LICENSEE owns real property in the CITY located at 953 Wagon Wheel Trail
(LICENSEE’S PROPERTY); and
WHEREAS, LICENSEE’S PROPERTY is contiguous to an unimproved right of way owned by the
CITY (the “LICENSED PREMISES); and
WHEREAS, LICENSEE intends to build a single family home on the lot, which would be positioned
to access the right of way if improved at a future date; and
WHEREAS, the CITY desires to allow LICENSEE to utilize the unimproved right of way for a
private drive until such time as the right of way is improved.
LICENSE
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions contained herein, and $1.00 and other
good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as
follows:
1. Grant of License. The CITY does hereby grant LICENSEE a non-exclusive revocable license to
maintain a driveway within the unimproved right of way shown in Exhibit A east of the 935
Wentworth Avenue. Such license shall extend to LICENSEE only.
2. No Interest Created. LICENSEE certifies, represents and acknowledges that it has no title in or to
the LICENSED PREMISES, nor to any portion thereof, and has not, does not and will not claim any
such title nor any easement over said land of the CITY. LICENSEE acknowledges that is not
acquiring any easement by necessity or otherwise over the LICENSED PREMISES.
3. Improvements. Licensee shall not make any additions or improvements in or to the LICENSED
PREMISES without the CITY’s prior written consent.
4. Indemnification. LICENSEE shall hold the CITY harmless from and indemnify and defend the CITY
against any claim or liability arising in any manner from LICENSEE’s use of the LICENSED
PREMISES, or relating to the death or bodily injury to any person or damage to any personal
property present on or located in or upon the LICENSED PREMISES, including the person and
personal property of LICENSEE or LICENSEE’s employees, invitees and guests. LICENSEE agrees
to pay all sums of money in respect of any labor, service, materials, supplies or equipment
furnished or alleged to have been furnished to LICENSEE in or about the LICENSED PREMISES,
and not furnished on order of the CITY. LICENSEE may contest any lien for such services,
materials, supplies or equipment, on the condition that LICENSEE first provides to the CITY cash,
bond, or other security against such lie which the CITY reasonably determines to be sufficient.
pg 176
5. Assignment or Sublicensing. LICENSEE shall not sublicense any portion of the LICENSED
PREMISES or transfer or assign this LICENSE without obtaining the prior written consent of the
CITY, which consent the CITY may grant or deny at the CITY’s sole discretion. The CITY’s consent
to any sublicensing or assignment of this LICENSE shall not be a waiver of the CITY’s right under
this Section as to any sublicensing or assignment. LICENSEE’s assignment of this LICENSE or
sublicensing of the LICENSED PREMISES shall not relieve LICENSEE from any of LICENSEE’s
obligations under this LICENSE.
6. Notices. All communications, notices and demands of any kind that either party may be
required or desires to give to or serve on the other party shall be made in writing and personally
delivered or certified U.S. mail, return receipt requested to the following addresses:
To the City:
City of Mendota Heights
1101 Victoria Curve
Mendota Heights, MN 55118
Attention: City Administrator
With a copy to:
Winthrop and Weinstine, P.A.
Suite 3500
225 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Attention: Mendota Heights City Attorney
To Licensee:
Greg Quehl
953 Wagon Wheel Trail
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
7. No Reliance on CITY’s Representations. Neither the CITY nor any agent or representative of the
CITY has made any warranty or other representation with respect to the LICENSED PREMISES.
8. Termination and Surrender. The CITY reserves the right to terminate this LICENSE at will and
upon termination of this LICENSE by the CITY LICENSEE shall peaceably surrender the LICENSED
PREMISES.
9. Miscellaneous.
a. Choice of Law. The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern the validity,
performance and enforcement of this LICENSE.
b. Counterparts. This LICENSE may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of
which, when taken together will be deemed to be an original.
pg 177
c. Amendment or Modifications. This LICENSEE may not be changed or modified orally,
but only upon written agreement signed by the party against whom enforcement of any
waiver, change, modification or discharge is sought.
d. Severability. If any term or provision in this LICENSE is deemed to be invalid or
unenforceable, the remainder of the LICENSE shall remain in effect and be enforceable
to the fullest extent permitted by law.
e. Time is of the Essences. Time is of the essence in the performance of all obligations
under this LICENSE.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the CITY and LICENSEE have caused these presents to be executed in
form and manner sufficient to bind them at law, as of the day and year first above written.
CITY: LICENSEE:
CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, _______________________________________
A Minnesota municipal corporation Gregory Quehl
By: ____________________________________
Its: ____________________________________
pg 178
pg 179