The URL can be used to link to this page

1991-08-20CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA August 20, 1991 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Adoption 4. Approval of the July 16th and August 6th Council Minutes and the August 7th Adjourned Meeting Minutes 5. Consent Calendar a. Acknowledgment of the August 13th Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes b. Acknowledment of the July Treasurer's Report c. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91-45 - Approving Final Payment of Sibley Athletic Complex d. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91-46 - Ordering Bridgeview Shores 3rd Addition Feasibility Report e. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91-47 - Deferrment of Assessment for Margaret Perron f. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-48 - Resolution Providing for Public Sale of General Obligation Park Bonds of 1991 and RESOLUTION NO. 91-49 - Resolution Providing for Public Sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1991. g. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-50 - IRS Bonding Resolution of Intent h. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-51 - Resolution Adopting Proposed 1992 Preliminary Budget * i. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-52 - Resolution Approving Tentative 1991 Levy Collectible in 1992. j. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-53 - Resolution Approving Final 1991 Tax Levy for Special Taxing District No. 1 Collectable in 1992 k. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-54 - Resolution Revising Schedule of Fees for Planning Services 1. Consider Request by St. Thomas Academy to Temporarily Operate Motorized Boat on Roger's Lake m. Approval of the List of Contractors n. Approval of the List of Claims End of Consent Calendar 6. Public Comments 7. Presentation a. Presentation of 1990 Auditors Report 8. Bid Award a. Mendota Heights Road RESOLUTION NO. 91-55 9. Hearing a. Assessment Hearing - Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition - ** 8:00 ** RESOLUTION 91-56 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR SEWER, WATER, STORM SEWER, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION (IMPORVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1) 10. Unfinished and New Business a. City Hall Contract Payment Issues * b. Consideration of Centex Developer's Agreement - Kensington PUD c. Municipal State Aid Street Designation - Downtown Ring Road d. Disposition of City Owned Properties e. Discuss MSP Airport Issues 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 20, 1991 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administrator SUBJECT: Add On Agenda for August 20th Council Meeting Additional information is being submitted for two items already scheduled on the agenda, items 5i and lOb (*). 3. Agenda Adoption It is recommended that Council adopt the agenda printed on pink paper. 5i. Truth In Taxation Hearing See attached memo regarding available dates for 1992 tax levy public hearing. 10b. Final Draft of Kensington Developer's Agreement See attached letter from City Attorney Tom Hart and revised Developer's Agreement. lora CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA August 20, 1991 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Agenda Adoption 4. Approval of the July 16th and August 6th Council Minutes and the August 7th Adjourned Meeting Minutes 5. Consent Calendar a. Acknowledgment of the August 13th Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes b. Acknowledment of the July Treasurer's Report c. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91-45 - Approving Final Payment of Sibley Athletic Complex d. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91-46 - Ordering Bridgeview Shores 3rd Addition Feasibility Report e. Adopt RESOLUTION NO. 91-47 - Deferrment of Assessment for Margaret Perron f. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-48 - Resolution Providing for Public Sale of General Obligation Park Bonds of 1991 and RESOLUTION NO. 91-49 - Resolution Providing for Public Sale of General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1991. g. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-50 - IRS Bonding Resolution of Intent h. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-51 - Resolution Adopting Proposed 1992 Preliminary Budget i. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-52 - Resolution Approving Tentative 1991 Levy Collectible in 1992. j. Adoption of RESOLUTION NO. 91-53 - Resolution Approving Final 1991 Tax Levy for Special Taxing District No. 1 Collectable in 1992 k. Approval of Revised Planning Fees 1. Consider Request by St. Thomas Academy to Temporarily Operate Motorized Boat on Roger's Lake m. Approval of the List of Contractors n. Approval of the List of Claims End of Consent Calendar 6. Public Comments 7. Presentation a. Presentation of 1990 Auditors Report 8. Bid Award a. Mendota Heights Road RESOLUTION NO. 91-54 9. Hearing a. Assessment Hearing - Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition - ** 8:00 ** RESOLUTION 91-55 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR SEWER, WATER, STORM SEWER, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION (IMPORVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1) 10. Unfinished and New Business a. City Hall Contract Payment Issues b. Consideration of Centex Developer's Agreement - Kensington PUD c. Municipal State Aid Street Designation - Downtown Ring Road d. Disposition of City Owned Properties e. Discuss MSP Airport Issues 11. Council Comments 12. Adjourn Page No. 3055 July 16, 1991 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, July 16, 1991 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, was held at 7:3.D_o'clock P.M. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Mertensotto called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers Blesener, Cummins, Koch and Smith. AGENDA ADOPTION Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 APPROVAL OF MINUTES Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Blesener moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Councilmember Cummins moved minutes of the July 2, 1991 with corrections. Councilmember Koch seconded approval of the regular meeting the motion. Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the minutes of the July 9th Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgement of the Treasurer's monthly report for June. c. Acknowledgment of the Fire Department monthly report for June. d. Acknowledgment of a $3,386.70 contribution from Vasatka Goers VFW for the purchase of emergency lights and camera equipment for the Police Department. e. Approval of the issuance a 3.2 on -sale malt beverage license to St. Peter's Church in conjunction with its annual Father Galtier Days celebration on Page No. 3056 July 16, 1991 September 21/22, along with waiver of the license fee. f. Approval of a modified critical area site plan for Raymond Lundgren to allow a 20 by 16 foot deck to be attached to his home at 1190 Culligan Lane along with waiver of the critical area fee. g. Authorization of the purchase of personal protection gear (coats and bunter pants) for the Fire Department from Minnesota Conway for their low bid of $2,955.00. h. Adoption of Resolution No. 91-38, "RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1." i. Adoption of Resolution No. 91-39, "RESOLUTION ORDERING THE PREPARATION OF AN ASSESSMENT ROLL AND CALLING FOR HEARING ON THE ASSESSMENT ROLL FOR BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 92, PROJECT NO. 1)," the hearing to be held on August 20th. 7 Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated July 16, 1991 and attached hereto. k. Approval of the list of claims dated July 16, 1991 and totalling $1,594,331.12. 1. Acknowledgement of an announcement of the annual household hazardous waste collection day to be held on Saturday, September 21st at the Inver Grove Heights City Hall. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD Council acknowledged and briefly discussed IMPROVEMENTS (IMP. 91, the final plans and specifications for PROJECT 4) sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, street, and street light improvements along Mendota Heights Road from I -35E to Dodd Road and pedway construction along Mendota Heights Rod from Pilot Knob to T.H. 55. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 91-41, "RESOLUTION APPROVING Page No. 3057 July 16, 1991 FINAL PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS ON MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (M.S.A. PROJECT NOS. 140- 103-02 AND 140-013-04, IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT NO. 4)." Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 DODD ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Public Works Director Danielson reviewed preliminary layout design for he:,Dodd Road/T.H. 110 intersection, which includes the upgrading of Dodd from Mendakota Drive to Ridge Place. The proposed plan includes a right turn lane to T.H. 110 from northbound Dodd, a signalized left turn to -eastbound T.H. 110 from southbound Dodd and a protected left turn into the shopping center. Also included is a trail on the east side of Dodd separated by a six inch high curb with crossings to the west side of Dodd on the north side of the intersection to connect to the trail to Valley Park and on the south side at South Plaza Drive to connect to the Mendakota Park trail. He informed Council that additional right-of- way from Mendakota Country Club will be necessary and that representatives of the Club have indicated they will cooperate. Additional right-of-way will also be required from a residential property owner on Ridge Place. A retaining wall is proposed, to minimize impact on the golf course. He stated that Chuck Thomey, operator of the Mendota Heights Standard did not express concern over the plan and that the Standard corporate officials have not yet responded to the plan. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he feels the plan is good but that speeding must be curtailed, and suggested that the speed limit should be reduced to 30 miles per hour. Mr. Danielson responded that underground wiring for a future traffic signal at South Plaza Drive is included in the proposed upgrading. Councilmember Blesener asked if the trail can be moved to the west side of Dodd. Councilmember Cummins expressed concern that the existing striped area on the north side of Dodd is on the west and the trail is proposed to cross over to the east at the intersection and then to the west again at South Plaza. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING - CASE NO. 90-35, DUGGAN Page No. 3058 July 16, 1991 Councilmember Blesener suggested that there be trail on both sides. Mr. Danielson responded that Mn/DOT and the City engineering staff feel that the east side of the intersection is the safest side to cross T.H. 110 but that he will look into the suggestions for moving the crossing and for trail on both sides. Councilmember Blesener stated that the intersection improvement is proposed to better serve the commercial area but does not serve the long term needs for handling traffic in the south area of the City and does not address intercommunity transportation. She felt that the resolution approving the preliminary plan should include language to the affect that by approving the plan the City is not making any commitment with respect to abandonment of T.H. 149 right-of-way north of T.H. 110. It was the consensus that the issue of disposition of the additional right-of-way be discussed as an agenda item on the evening of the budget workshop. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 91-40, "RESOLUTION REQUESTING MN/DOT TO PARTICIPATE IN A COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT TO UPGRADE THE TRUNK HIGHWAY 149 (DODD ROAD) INTERSECTION WITH TRUNK HIGHWAY 110," revised to add that it be further resolved that the adoption of this resolution in no way commits the City in respect to the abandonment of the additional right-of-way held by the State and that the City reserves the right to revisit the issue of extending South Plaza Drive to the east of the shopping center with a potential cross-over to the north side of T.H. 110. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from Mr. and Mrs. Ultan Duggan for a wetlands permit to allow installation of a fence to enclose their rear yard and swimming pool at 2331 Copperfield Drive. He informed the audience that the application had been discussed at a previous meeting but the Page No. 3059 July 16, 1991 applicants had not met the criteria of submitting approvals of adjoining landowners, and therefore the public hearing was scheduled for this evening. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Council acknowledged letters from Mr. & Mrs. Ahto Niemioja, 2307 Copperfield, from Mr. Dick Putnam, representing CopperfigWAssociates and the Copperfield Architectural Review Committee, Mr. & Mrs. Jack Huber, and Mr. & Mrs. Patrick Tierney. Mr. Duggan stated a fence around his swimming pool is required by City ordinance and that he would like to construct the fence around the yard rather than just around the pool. Councilmember Cummins commented that at the prior Council discussion on the matter the Duggans had been asked to look at restricting the fence if possible. He asked if the applicants have considered fencing only the pool area. Mr. Duggan responded that he has rejected the idea after talking to architectural people and that he has taken a survey of people in the area, the majority of whom do not object to the fence even though at that time the fence was proposed to be mesh rather than wrought iron as is currently requested. Councilmember Cummins stated that one of the letters indicated that there have been a number of variances from the restrictive covenants to allow fences. Mr. Duggan responded that there is a fence at Delaware and Copperfield, at least three around the ponds and at least four others in the Copperfield area. He stated that the restrictive covenants require that there be nothing within 75 feet of the waterline. He pointed out that the City Planner's report stated that his proposed fence meets all of the criteria of the City's wetlands ordinance. Mr. Brent Baskfield stated that he owns a lot four lots west of the Duggans, and that he feels what the applicants propose is compatible with the style of their house and 1 Page No. 3060 July 16, 1991 landscaping. He stated that many of the restrictive covenants are routinely not met. He felt that the Duggan home and landscaping are excellent and that the fence proposed would be an enhancement to the neighborhood and that the Architectural Review Committee should look instead at the lots that are not sodded, etc. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that Council has received a letter from Coppe fieri -Associates saying that the proposal is a radical departure, but that this does not appear to be the case after listening to the comments this evening. Councilmember Cummins stated that if council approves the request it will be setting a precedent and opening the way for many other, less attractive fences. He asked Mr. Baskfield if he would object if someone else in the neighborhood came to the City with a request for a chain link fence. Mr. Baskfield responded that each application should be looked at individually. Mr. Duggan reviewed the fence plan, explaining that it is proposed to be located 27 feet from the scenic easement which is a 15 foot easement, and that they are undecided as to whether the fence height will be five foot or six foot. Mrs. Duggan stated that if the fence had to be 75 feet from the waterline as required in the covenants, it would need to be placed where landscaping already exists. Also, there is no good way to fence only around the pool area. Councilmember Blesener pointed out that other people do fence in their pools and stated that the applicants do not need another 60 feet beyond the pool area. Mr. Duggan responded that the fence would be much less noticeable where it is proposed. Councilmember Blesener felt that approval would definitely be precedent setting. While putting the fence where it is proposed may be best for the Duggans, if someone else were to do the same it could have a dramatic affect on the area. Page No. 3061 July 16, 1991 Mr. Ahto Niemioja, 2307 Copperfield, stated that one issue is what type of material should be used when building a fence. He stated that when the Duggans first proposed a chain link fence he objected. As the result, the Duggans changed the plan to wrought iron, which looks much nicer, but that some chain link is still proposed, so the issue has not been completely resolved. The second issue is that of the Copperfield covenants which say that no one can build fences within 75 feet-oQ the waterline. He felt that that condition should be respected by everyone who lives around the pond area so that the beauty of the area is not destroyed. He pointed out that there is considerable wildlife around the ponds that will eventually be destroyed if fencing is allowed. He informed Council that he had requested Architectural Review Committee (A.R.C.) review of the fence proposal. Mr. Duggan stated that every request for wetlands permit in the last five years has been approved by the City. Mrs. Cynthia Best asked why wrought iron is proposed for the sides and chain link at the back. Mrs. Duggan responded that they agreed to wrought iron because their neighbors requested it and that chain link is proposed for the back to save money, and that it will not be visible because of existing oak trees and flowers. It will be screened by vines and flowers and the area will be kept as natural as possible. Mrs. Joan Bjorklund stated that she lives on the same pond and is a member of the A.R.C. She stated that the reason the issue originally arose was that people in Copperfield are supposed to send any improvements on their land to Dick Putnam to get approval before it goes to the A.R.C., which has been part of the problem. Mr. Duggan did not submit any plans -to the ARC before it was approved by the Planning Commission last year or this year. She stated that when Mr. Duggan conducted his survey he did not indicate the distance from the pond. Mr. Putnam subsequently prepared and sent a survey to owners of all properties on ponds in Copperfield, 46 properties. 25 surveys were returned, and 23 of the respondents said they Page No. 3062 July 16, 1991 did not want fencing to go down to the pond. She submitted the survey to Council. Mrs. Bjorklund stated that once a fence is approved it will set a precedent. She informed Council that the fence at the corner of Delaware and Copperfield was not approved by the ARC and the other fence in the area is hers, which was submitted to Mr. Putnam and approved before being submitted to the City for approval. The fence is 1Q. foot variance from the 100 foot setback requirement, and goes 4.5 feet beyond the concrete at the edge of their swimming pool. She stated that she has spoken to wrought iron companies and has been told that gates could be put in to make it easy to get from the pool area to the back yard. She stated that because the Duggans chose to berm their yard•so that the pool is in a valley and that the fencing should be around the pool area regardless of the landscaping. She informed Council that this is not a personal issue for the review committee and that the committee would take the same stance regardless of who made the request. Mayor Mertensotto asked whether there are any other fences as close to the wetlands as the Duggans request. Mrs. Bjorklund responded that there is one, a wooden fence, which never came before the ARC and was not approved. Mayor Mertensotto asked how far the proposed fence would be from the pond. Mr. Duggan responded that'it would be 25 to 30 feet from the pond. Mayor Mertensotto stated that this is a precedent -setting matter and asked whether there is a compromise possible. Mr. Duggan responded that no-one has told him why his request does not make sense. Councilmember Blesener stated that the request is precedent setting - the only existing fence in the area is at the 65 foot setback. She expressed concern that the Council entered into the original developer's agreement for the area with the intent that the park -like area around the ponds would be preserved and that the proposed fence is clearly in violation of that intent. She pointed out Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3063 July 16, 1991 that Council typically listen to neighbors who object. She did not feel that the Duggan situation is one which warrants such a big deviation from the setback requirement. Councilmember Smith asked whether this would be setting precedent for all ponds in the City or just Copperfield. Councilmember Blesener responded that she is talking only about Copperfield because of the history of the development - the request is glear-iy not consistent with the intention of Council when the development was proposed. Responding to a question from Mayor Mertensotto, Mr. Niemioja stated that fences can be built without surrounding an entire lot and that the berms the Duggans have built insure the privacy of the pool but the fence, which would be six inches from his lot line, would be seen all the way to the pond from his lot. There being no further comments, Councilmember Cummins moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Mrs. Duggan stated the Mr. Niemioja is suggesting the fence only go around the pool. She pointed out that she has the option to fence in the majority of her yard, which would not be what the neighbors want. If the wetlands permit were to be denied, the pool area must be fenced in some way and she would still want to fence the rest of the yard. She stated that fencing just around the pool area is not a consideration. Councilmember Cummins commented that what is proposed is an extraordinarily nice plan for fencing and landscaping, but that when he remembers all the time Council spent trying to make Copperfield unique by creating a natural pond and scenic easements to preserve the wildlife and the natural appearance, he thinks Council would be opening the door to a series of fences which would be just what Council tried to avoid in the planning of the development. He stated that he would be willing to consider tabling the matter to ,,allow the applicants to present a compromise. Ayes: 3 Nays: 2 Koch Smith HEARING, CASE NO. 91-15, ANDERSON Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3064 July 16, 1991 Mr. Duggan stated that Council must respect that Copperfield is a part of Mendota Heights and should not take action on the basis that Copperfield is different. Councilmember Blesener moved to deny the requested wetlands permit but to permit the applicant to come back before Council with a modified proposal within the next two weeks with the need for reapplication and additional fee. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on an application from Marvin Anderson Construction for wetlands permits in the Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition. Council acknowledged a report from the Public Works Director. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Administrator Lawell informed Council that he has met with Mr. Jim Losleben, who had requested at the June 4th Council meeting that a public hearing be scheduled on the matter. He stated that he had reviewed the application with Mr. Losleben and had informed him that the requested wetlands permit modifications were made by Marvin Anderson Construction because of a surveyor's mistake which was discovered during platting. Mr. Losleben informed staff that he can live with the wetlands setbacks recommended by the Planning Commission and indicated that he would try to get a letter to Council in time for the meeting but also asked that staff inform Council of his comments. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Koch moved that the hearing be closed. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Councilmember Cummins moved to grant wetlands permits for Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Lot 7, Block 1 at 50 feet and Lot 8, Block 1 at 68 feet. Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. CAT CONTROL Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE Page No. 3065 July 16, 1991 Council acknowledged reports from the Police Chief and Administrative Assistant with respect to a request from Mr. Ralph Johnson and Mr. John Mullen for adoption of a cat control ordinance. Mr. Johnson and Police Chief Delmont were present for the discussion. Chief Delmont informed Council that the cost and difficulty of enforcing a cat control ordinance would make it extremely difficult, and unless Council would wish to spend a great deal of money on a police officer or community service officer, the ordinance would not be enforced. He felt that Mr. Johnson would be happy if there were an ordinance which would allow the police department to respond to specific complaints about cats. Councilmember Cummins stated that he is not interested in adopting an ordinance that will create false expectations or enforcement problems. Mayor Mertensotto agreed that an overall, comprehensive ordinance to control cats is not the right approach. Councilmember Cummins moved to table the matter to August 6th and to direct Police Chief Delmont to meet with Mr. Johnson. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the purpose of a public hearing on the proposed recodification and amendment of the Zoning Ordinance. Council acknowledged the proposed ordinance, a memo from the City Clerk reviewing the history of the recodification process and changes proposed by the Planning Commission, and a proposed summary of the ordinance for publication. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the Planning Commission has recommended that the lighting standards section be revised to use lumens as a standard rather than distance. He felt that the ordinance examples submitted in response to the Commission recommendation are beyond the scope of a recodification process. Administrator Lawell stated that the examples represent a substantial change from what is contained in the draft ordinance. He further Li Page No. 3066 July 16, 1991 stated that he has been in contact with NSP about how to measure light intensity and they were very apprehensive about measuring intensity. He further stated that from a staff standpoint, distance is much easier to enforcement and that staff recommends the language in the draft. He pointed out that the City does not have light meters to measure intensity. It was the consensus that the language in the draft ordinance, which was agreed to at a joint Council/Commission workshop, remain as drafted. With respect to the Commission recommendation on wetlands credit, it was agreed that no credit should be given for wetlands. Staff was directed to revise Section 22.3(3) as recommended by the Commission and to revise Section 13.2(3) in a similar manner. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the Commission recommendation to delete the PUD District section (Section 13) is not within the scope of the recodification process, and that if it is desirous to delete the section, the Planning Commission and Council would have to conduct public hearings. Councilmember Smith stated that one section of the ordinance creates PUD's as a conditional use to existing zoning and the other creates PUD districts. She stated that a PUD district is not a zoning type and that she would be in favor of putting the appropriate provisions of Section 13 into Section 22 and create PUD's based on underlying zoning. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Council concurred in the Commission's housekeeping change recommendations with the exception of the recommended change to Section 2, Intent and Purpose. Council also directed that Section 22.3(6)d be revised to include reference to property values. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Cummins moved that the hearing be closed... -. Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 1992 BUDGET ADJOURN Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3067 July 16, 1991 Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Ordinance No. 276, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING, RESTATING AND RECODIFYING ORDINANCE NO. 401," revised as directed by Council. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Councilmember Blesener moved to approve the summary of Ordinance No. 276 for publication. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Council acknowledged and briefly discussed a memo from the City Administrator regarding the 1992 budget process. It was the consensus that Council conduct a budget workshop at 7:30 P.M. on Wednesday, August 7th. There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Blesener moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:14 o'clock P.M. Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL July 16, 1991 Asphalt License Blacktop Driveway Co., Inc. General Contractors Licenses Cities Home Improvement Co. -The Doyle Construction, Inc. Leisure Time Wood Design Stenerson Carpentry Walker Roofing Company Heating & Air Conditioning License Air Conditioning Associates, Inc. Page No. 3068 August 6, 1991 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Regular Meeting Held Tuesday, August 6, 1991 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the regular meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, was held at 7:30 o'clock P.M. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Mertensotto called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers Blesener, Koch and Smith. Councilmember Cummins had notified Council that he would be late. AGENDA ADOPTION Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CONSENT CALENDAR Councilmember Smith moved adoption of the revised agenda for the meeting. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Councilmember Blesener moved approval of the consent calendar for the meeting along with authorization for execution of any necessary documents contained therein. a. Acknowledgment of the draft minutes of the June 23, 1991 Planning Commission meeting. b. Acknowledgement of the Code Enforcement monthly report for June. c. Approval of the purchase of six Motorola Minitar III replacement pagers for the Fire Department through the Minnesota State Fire Consortium for a total cost of $2,502.00. d. Approval of the permanent appointment of Police Officer Neil Garlock, retroactive to July 16, 1991. e. Approval of the reservation of the Roger's Lake Park tennis courts by the Convent of the Visitation School for the period of August 12th through October 20th during the hours of 3 P.M. to 5 P.M., Monday through Friday. f. Approval of a modified critical area site plan for Mr. & Mrs. Dave Nelson, to allow g. Page No. 3069 August 6, 1991 construction of a new home on Lot 2, Block 1, Tuminelly's Hunter Lane Addition, along with refund of the $100.00 critical area application fee. Approval of a modified critical area site plan for Mr. John Polymeros to allow construction of a kitchen and deck addition at 1034 Mayfield Heights Lane, along with refund of the critical area application fee. h. Approval of the issuance of a wetlands permit to Mr. & Mrs. Raymond Ruble, to allow construction of a deck/patio to within 77 feet of the wetlands area at 629 Hampshire Lane. i. Approval of the issuance of a wetlands permit to Mr. & Mrs. Robert Flynn to allow construction of a porch at 1299 Laura Street to within 94 feet of Ivy Creek. 3 Approval of the list of contractor licenses dated August 6, 1991 and attached hereto. k. Approval of the list of claims dated August 6, 1991 and totalling $292,222.93. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 LENNOX BUILDING PERMIT Council acknowledged a report from Public Works Director Danielson and Administrative Assistant Batchelder regarding a request from United Properties for site plan approval and building permit. United Properties proposes to construct a 30,517 square foot office/warehouse in the Mendota Heights Business Park, across from the Big Wheel/Rossi building. It was noted that the applicant also requests reconfirmation of variances for sign setback and parking stall width, a change in street name from LeMay Drive to Commerce Drive, and approval to construct 42 of the required 51 parking spaces with associated approval on proof of parking for nine future spaces at the northwest corner of the building. In addition Council had previously approved "pay as You Go" TIF for the site. Staff recommended that Council also consider additiona],1.$25,000 of TIF for construction of Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 DEER CONTROL Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 3070 August 6, 1991 a storm water holding pond to be authorized as a credit against United Properties' assessments for public improvements to be installed to serve the plat. Councilmember Blesener moved to approve the site plan as presented, reaffirming previously granted variances for a 20 foot sign setback, a 4 per 1000 parking ratio, allowing an 8 1/2 foot parking stall width, approval of a nine stall "proof of parking" plan,_and a ten foot side yard setback variance adjacent to future T.H. 13, and to authorize staff to issue the building permit for the Lennox building contingent on future consent agenda approval of landscape and grading plans. - Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Councilmember Blesener moved to direct staff to prepare an ordinance renaming LeMay avenue to Commerce Drive and to authorize the Mayor to execute the ordinance. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Councilmember Blesener moved to authorize $25,000 of Tax Increment Financing for construction of the storm water holding pond as a credit against assessments. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Council acknowledged a request from the DNR for approval of a three year Alternative Deer Control Program and an associated report from the City Administrator along with a proposed resolution to adopt the program and specific regulations for deer control within the City. Councilmember Koch moved adoption of Resolution No. 91-42, "A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1991 - 1993 ALTERNATIVE DEER CONTROL PROGRAM AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND ADOPTING SPECIFIC PROGRAM REGULATIONS FOR DEER CONTROL ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE CITY." Councilmember Blesener seconded the motion. Page No. 3071 August 6, 1991 CATHOLIC CEMETERIES Council acknowledged an application from the VARIANCE (CASE 91-29) Catholic Cemeteries for variances to allow four temporary signs at the Resurrection Cemetery entrances located on Lexington Avenue and Highway 110, and associated staff reports. Mr. Dave Kemp, representing the Catholic Cemeteries, responded to Council questions. Councilmember Smith moved to_allowfour temporary signs as requested, with a total of 113 square feet of area, for a period of three years with an option for two additional years on the condition that the applicants request renewal of the variances on a City Council consent calendar at the end of the three years. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 91-25, KAYOUM Mr. Abdul Kayoum was present to request approval of a four foot, three inch variance from the front yard setback at 706 First Avenue to allow construction of a garage addition and to approve two side yard setbacks to his existing home to bring it into conformance. Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 91-27, STEHR Councilmember Blesener moved to approve a four foot, three inch variance to the front yard setback at 706 First Avenue to allow construction of a garage addition as proposed, along with a one foot sideyard setback variance along the easterly property line and a two foot sideyard setback variance along the westerly property line to bring the existing home into conformance. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Councilmember Cummins arrived at 8:00 P.M. Council acknowledged an application from Mr. & Mrs. Philip Stehr for a 4.2 foot side yard setback variance to allow construction of a garage addition at 6 Dorset Road. Councilmember Koch moved to grant a 4.2 foot side yard setback variance to allow the garage Page No. 3072 August 6, 1991 addition as proposed for 6 Dorset Road. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CASE NO. 90-35, DUGGAN Ayes: 3 Nays: 2 Blesener Cummins Council acknowledged a report from the Public Works Director and Administrative Assistant regarding a request from Mr. & Mrs. Ultan Duggan for reconsideration of the July 16th denial of their application for wetlands permit for a fence. Mayor Mertensotto stated that although he voted with the prevailing side, he has since viewed the site and can find no basis for the denial. He stated that City ordinances are applied in the same manner for all subdivisions in the City and Council has no authority with respect to private covenants and therefore has no basis to deny a wetlands permit as long as the fence does not encroach on the 15 foot easement area around the pond. He noted that the applicants have modified their plan so that the entire fence is wrought iron, and all chain link has been eliminated. Mayor Mertensotto moved to reconsider the July 16, 1991 denial of the Duggan wetlands permit application for fence. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Mrs. Joan Bjorklund presented the Duggans with a letter from the Copperfield Architectural Review Committee with respect to the covenants and restrictions relating to fences in the Copperfield Additions. Councilmember Blesener commented that on the same basis of not getting involved in enforcing restrictions and covenants, Council should not be getting involved in this type of issue when there is a neighborhood association bringing a recommendation to the City. She stated that she believes Council should take no action until the Architectural Review Committee and the homeowners association work things out - Council should not get involved in a neighborhood controversy. She also disagreed that there is no basis for denial, stating that the wetlands ordinance gives Council rights and discretion. Page No. 3073 August 6, 1991 Mayor Mertensotto responded that after viewing the property he can see no way that a wrought iron fence as proposed would cause an intrusion in the wetlands. Councilmember Blesener stated that the Council has acted repeatedly to deny variances, etc., when it has had objection from the neighborhood, even in cases where there has been overwhelming support from all but one or two individuals. A resident at 2354 Fieldstone Court, directly across the pond from the Duggan property, stated that he thinks he represents many silent neighbors who share a concern that the area's restrictions and covenants are going to be reviewed by the Council and who do not want that to happen. He stated that the fence is a neighborhood issue and should not be considered by Council, and that the Mayor has taken the right direction. He felt that if the wetlands issue has been resolved by the Planning Commission, Council should take its recommendation. Councilmember Cummins stated that he has reviewed the wetlands ordinance since the last meeting and would be reluctant to vote in favor of the application. He stated that he does not support what is proposed and hopes that the neighbors take action in respect to the private covenants, which Council cannot get involved in. Mr. Jack Huber stated that he is concerned about the wildlife and the covenants. He further stated that he would laud the Council's granting of the permit because that would be consistent with what has been done throughout the City and hopes that the ARC responds appropriately. He felt that the focus should be on other problems in the neighborhood, such as roaming dogs. Mr. Mike Dwyer, 558 Stone Road, stated that he is both Chair of the Planning Commission, which made a recommendation to grant the permit, and is a resident of Copperfield who feels Council has been mislead. He stated that the only residents of Copperfield who were surveyed by the ARC about fences were those who surround the pond. He felt that it would be arbitrary and capricious for Council Page No. 3074 August 6, 1991 to deny the application when it has approved similar requests throughout the community - Copperfield should not be treated any differently. Mayor Mertensotto stated that the fence is proposed to be wrought iron on all four sides, fifteen feet from the high water mark and at least 6 inches inside the property line. He asked Mr. Duggan if he intends to maintain both sides of the fence. Mr. Duggan responded that it is his intent. Mayor Mertensotto moved to approve the application for wetlands permit -to allow construction of the proposed fence on the conditions that it be wrought iron on all four sides, may not encroach -on the wetlands easement area and be at least 15 feet from the high water mark. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: 5 Nays: 1 Blesener RECESS Mayor Mertensotto called a recess at 8:22. The meeting was reconvened at 8:30 P.M. HEARINGS: CENTEX HOMES Mayor Mertensotto opened the meeting for the CASE 91-23; LOCKWOOD purpose of a public hearing on an application DRIVE STREET VACATION from Centex Homes for the vacation of Lockwood Drive within Kensington and for rezoning, conditional use permit for PUD for Kensington Phase II, and for approval of wetlands permits and preliminary and final plat approval. Administrative Assistant Batchelder informed the audience that the planning applications are the culmination of more than 1 1/2 years of effort which began in 1990 when a Centex application for rezoning was denied. Subsequent to the denial, Centex developed an alternative plan which was submitted to the Planning Commission. In January, 1991 Centex filed suit against the City for failure to rezone. Following the initiation of the suit, Council directed the City Planner to prepare a southeast area scoping study with respect to land use in the area. Centex attended the presentation of the study and indicated to the City thereafter that they would be willing to negotiate a settlement to the suit. The negotiations began in April and continued for a three month period, during which time Ayes: 4 Nays: 0 Page No. 3075 August 6, 1991 Council developed a set of criteria for the developer to meet in order for a plan to be acceptable. Council accepted a concept plan from Centex on July 2nd and ordered public hearings by Council and the Planning Commission. Staff conducted an open house on the proposed plan on July 18th, and the Planning Commission hearing was conducted on July 23rd. The Commission recommended approval of the plan currently proposed to Council. Mayor Mertensotto reviewed the street vacation request and asked for questions and comments from the audience. There being no questions or comments, Councilmember Cummins moved that the hearing on the application for vacation of a portion of Lockwood Drive be closed. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto informed the audience that the Council, in arriving at a compromise settlement set down a number of criteria to control the development. As far as the rezoning, the property is partly zoned R -1A, R-1 and B. In order to accomplish the proposed PUD for Kensington Phase 2, rezoning to HR and MR PUD is required. He stated that he has no problem in granting rezoning but that it must be conditioned upon a developers agreement between the City and Centex. Centex has submitted a proposed agreement to City staff, but the Council has not yet reviewed the proposed agreement - Council review and approval must be a condition of any approvals. With respect to the conditional use permit for planned unit development, he stated that he again has no problem, conditioned upon the successful negotiation of a signed agreement. He further stated that it has been the City practice in conditional use permits for PUD to change the underlying zoning for the PUD. Council would not rezone the subject land but for this project, therefore there must be a signed developer's agreement for the CUP. He stated that the developer has also asked for preliminary and final plat approvals but pointed out that the final plat has not been submitted. Council could approve the preliminary plat with conditions which must be Page No. 3076 August 6, 1991 met, but that the final plat must come before Council for approval. Mr. John Bannigan, legal counsel for Centex, stated that the ground rules the Mayor set forth are to the advantage of Centex as well as the City. He felt that it is fair to all sides to approve the requests subject to the developer's agreement execution. Mayor Mertensotto stated that _the_CUP would be the covenant for the development of the land and runs with the land, and so does the developers agreement. He pointed out that any subsequent developer of the project would be bound by the conditional use permit for PUD and the developer's agreement. Mr. Bannigan stated that he feels it is fair to both parties to proceed on the basis of a signed developers agreement. Mayor Mertensotto asked for questions and comments from the audience. Mr. Joe Malzarek, 2545 Concord Way, stated that when he purchased his property he purchased on the basis of a sales brochure. The new proposed plan changes the character of Heritage Drive from four manor homes and a parking space to 22 homes with access to Heritage Drive and no parking spaces. He informed Council that tonight there were 6 to 7 cars parked on the street from the existing manor homes on Heritage Drive, and that there will be a serious problem if there are 22 homes and no off-street parking spaces. He stated that he understood that the Planning Commission recommendation was going to be that the existing manor homes be protected from dumping a heavy density load onto their streets and into their neighborhoods. He stated that he would have no objection to the plan if there were four manor homes on Heritage Drive and some off street parking rather than 22 homes. Mayor Mertensotto expressed concern over the claim of inadequate parking for the existing manor homes. Mr. Bannigan stated that the entire project has been de -intensified - there were 280 dwelling units proposed in the plan which was Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3077 August 6, 1991 denied. He stated that Centex has substantially relieved pressure on the land and the streets and there are substantially fewer units than Mr. Malzarek would have been looking at if the project developed as proposed in the sales brochure to which he has referred. Mr. Tom Boyce, from Centex, showed Council the final plan on the sales brochure which shows a four -unit building on Heritage Drive in Phase I and another 4 unit building and one 8 unit building on Heritage in Phase 2. The new plan proposes a twelve unit building, six units of which face on Heritage, and a 10 unit building, five units of which face on Heritage. He stated that he would have no problem in trying to provide a couple of additional parking spaces for the existing manor homes. He also suggested that the residents start parking in their garages rather than on the street. Councilmember Cummins stated out that it appears that there will be less traffic on Heritage Drive under the current proposal because of the way the units face. Mayor Mertensotto pointed out that screening of the parking areas, etc., was discussed in the planning report and that Centex has agreed to staff review and approval of the landscaping plan and City engineering review and approval of sewer and water lines. There being no further questions Councilmember Cummins moved that be closed. Councilmember Smith seconded the or comments, the hearing motion. Mayor Mertensotto stated that Council would not be approving the rezoning but for the development proposed, therefore any action must be predicated upon entering into a signed developers agreement. The PUD will be the footprint for the development and cannot be changed without application for amendment. The PUD controls the development, whether it is in the hands of Centex or a future developer. The developers agreement will also control the development. The developer has indicated that a forester will mark existing trees. Lot adjustments can be made in the Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3078 August 6, 1991 final plat as Council is aware of them, and as long as the criteria is established which tells how many lots there must be of specific sizes. He stated that there must also be adjustment to the park areas in the preliminary plat. He stated that there are ground rules in force and that the developer has agreed that all of the single family lots will meet City ordinances with respect to setbacks, etc. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 91-43, "A RESOLUTION APPROVING VACATION OF STREET RIGHT OF WAYS AND DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS," on the condition that the vacation will not be certified until the developers agreement for Kensington Phase II has been executed. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Councilmember Smith moved adoption of Ordinance No. 277, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. -401," to rezone Centex property from R-1, R -1A and R -1B to MR -PUD, and Ordinance No 278, "AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 401," to rezone Centex property from R-1 and R -1A to HR -PUD, on the condition that the ordinances will not be published or effective until after execution of the developers agreement for Kensington Phase II. Councilmember Koch seconded the motion. Councilmember Cummins moved adoption of Resolution No. 91-44, "RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR KENSINGTON PHASE II," to approve a conditional use permit conditioned upon execution of a developers agreement. Councilmember Blesener stated that she feels Council has compromised to the point where it has lost some opportunities it will not have again. The development proposed in 1990 provided for 34 acres of park as opposed to 13 in the current plan, and also although the number of multiple family units have decreased, single family structures have increased and statistics show that greater traffic is generated by single family units. She felt that the City has lost its option to Page No. 3079 August 6, 1991 provide diversified housing for the community as its population ages. KENSINGTON PRELIMINARY It was noted that the preliminary plat for PLAT Kensington Phase II generally reflects the conditions of the settlement agreement but that the final plat must include drainage and utility easements. Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 KENSINGTON WETLANDS PERMITS Councilmember Smith moved approval of the preliminary plat for Kensington Phase II conditioned that it will not be effectively approved until after execution of a developers agreement. Councilmember Cummins seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto stated that a number of the proposed single family lots in Kensington Phase II do not meet the 100 foot wetlands setback requirement. Councilmember Smith stated that Council is being asked to approve a number of wetlands permits as the lots are shown on the preliminary plat. She asked whether the setbacks will need to be amended in the future if the plat needs adjustment to preserve trees and the scenic easement area. Mayor Mertensotto responded that lot lines cannot be amended once the final plat is approved and that he sees no reason why Council could not make adjustments in the wetlands setbacks in the future for proper reasons with the understanding that it is not a matter of right. Mr. Bannigan stated that the developers understand they must be sensitive to saving existing trees, as the Planning Commission had recommended, and understands that they can move building pads away from the wetlands and trees as long as they do not violate the basic criteria. He stated that, with respect to the trees, the developers will not necessarily know whether lot lines need to be shifted until grading occurs. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he does not want to build in hardships and would have no problem with changing wetlands permits because of shifting for trees, but that sideyard J Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 CAT CONTROL Page No. 3080 August 6, 1991 setbacks are adifferent matter. He stated that he appreciates the concern to save some of the trees but before the developer prepares the final plat he will know what needs to be shifted. It was recognized that the developer should have the right to request minor variances in the wetlands permit configurations where needed to preserve existing trees. Councilmember Cummins moved approval of wetlands permits in accordance with the exhibit presented to Council this evening (page four of the staff report dated August 2, 1991) and reaffirm the wetlands permits for Block 7 which have been previously approved, conditioned upon execution of a developers agreement. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he is concerned about balancing the soil amounts in the grading of the site. He stated that the City may wish to proceed with developing the park and asked how that would fit into the developers grading plans. Mr. Boyce responded that he does not know until he sees the City plan, and that he proposes to start with the single family and carriage homes right away. Councilmember Blesener stated that the City may well have to grade more of the site than it wants to in.order to balance quantities. Mr. Boyce stated that he will be balancing fill and that the City can have excess fill from the development. Grading plans will be submitted to the City next week. Council expressed the desire that construction access to the park property be available in 1992 and that paved public access be available in 1993. Council acknowledged a report from the Police Chief regarding a proposed cat control ordinance. Chief Delmont and Mr. Ralph Johnson were present for the discussion. Chief Delmont stated that Council had directed him to meet with Mr. Johnson and come up with a compromise between the proposed ordinance presented on July 16th and doing nothing. He Page No. 3083 August 6, 1991 meeting be adjourned to the August 7th budget workshop. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. Ayes: Nays: TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:17 o'clock P.M. Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL August 6, 1991 Concrete Licenses Concrete Specialists, Inc. Hart Masonry, Inc. Kroon Masonry Simon Brothers Cement Co. SteinKraus Construction Zierhut Brick & Stone Excavating Licenses Capitol Utilities Marty Brothers Schield Construction Co. Gas Piping Licenses Boehm Heating Company Horwitz, Inc. Johnson, Dale -Plumbing Suburban Air General Contractors Licenses All Poolside Services, Inc. Bald Eagle Siding Barrington Homes Bruggeman Construction Builders & Remodelers, Inc. Design 1 Ltd. Fenc-co, Inc. GenErik Htg. & Cooling, Inc. Heartland Industries Keystone Builders Corporation Kopp, C.E.-Const. Co., Inc. Lundgren Bros. Const., Inc. Pfoser Construction Co. Single Ply Systems Theis Construction Co. Van Horn & Son Const. Heating & Air Conditioning Licenses Horwitz, Inc. Suburban Air Conditioning Plaster License Hendrickson Bros. Drywall, Inc. Suburban Stucco Page No. 3084 • August 7, 1991 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA Minutes of the Adjourned Meeting Held Wednesday, August 7, 1991 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the adjourned meeting of the City Council, City of Mendota Heights, was held at 7:3 -0 -o'clock P.M. at City Hall, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. Mayor Mertensotto called the meeting to order at 7:30 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Mayor Mertensotto, Councilmembers Blesener, Cummins, Koch and Smith. 1992 BUDGET i Council acknowledged the preliminary 1992 budget as submitted by the City Administrator. Council discussed the proposed refurbishing of the 1978 fire pumper and 1970 squrt. Chief Maczko informed Council that he is in the process of establishing a capital replacement committee in the Fire Department to be charged with the responsibility of looking at capital replacement (equipment) needs over a 40 year period. Responding to a question from Councilmember Cummins, Chief Maczko stated that the 40 -year plan will be ready by the next budget process. It was the consensus that consideration of budgeting for the refurbishing be delayed until the 40 year plan is available for Council review. Council acknowledged a memo from the Fire Chief regarding a request that volunteer firefighter pay increases be in the form of additional retirement contribution. Jim Kilburg was present representing the Relief Association. It was proposed that the City contribute 4% of the total 1991 salary amount for the Fire Department to the pension program rather than increasing hourly rates by 4%. Council expressed concern that the Fire Department appears to assume that firefighters will receive automatic annual rate increases similar to non-union City employees. Concern was also expressed that if a pension increase Page No. 3085 August 7, 1991 is approved the department might come in at a future time and point out that it has fallen behind other departments in hourly rates and ask for increases to catch up. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he does not want the fire department to "bank" on getting automatic annual increases. Chief Maczko stated that the intent is not to ask for anything more than anyone else will receive. The department wants to get the same increase as City employees but the contention in the past is what form the increase would take - hourly rate or pension increase. Councilmember Cummins stated that Council has never given an increase in the pension and has resisted it because of the way the funding formula is set up. Treasurer Shaughnessy stated that relief association contributions have not increased much through the funding formula for the past two years but have been increased as much as $1,500 to $2,000 in past years. The State Revenue Department has discovered that it had been using the wrong numbers in the formula the last two years, and it should be up by $2,000 next year. Chief Maczko stated that it is proposed that the 4% of the 1991 salary amount be equally divided amongst the membership regardless of how many hours the individual members spend on department activities during the year. He stated that the members want to police those who are not pulling their weight and that each member is required to put in a minimum number of hours each month. Administrator Lawell stated that another issue is which dollar amounts to use as the basis for the 4% - the hours on fire runs only or fire runs and the discretionary amounts budgeted for training, etc. It was the general consensus to increase the fire pensions by $50 per man, from $350 per man per year to $400, for 1992 in lieu of increases in the personal services portion of the fire department budget. Alk Page No. 3086 August 7, 1991 Staff was directed to prepare a survey of fire department pension contributions and hourly rates. Treasurer Shaughnessy reviewed the status of current and projected equipment certificate bonding and the philosophy for use of equipment certificates for long-term capital equipment. Council reviewed and discusses --wjth' Police Chief Delmont a request from the City Attorney for an increase in fees for prosecutions. Council acknowledged a survey of legal fees recently conducted by the City of Moundsview. Councilmember Cummins suggested that Chief Delmont meet with the City Attorney to negotiate a new rate. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he will contact Attorney Hart. Council briefly discussed the public works budgets, acknowledging the need for a new backhoe for the street department and a new position and equipment for the park department. Council directed that staff investigate internship programs with the intent that an intern be hired to take a comprehensive approach to the issue of recreation programming, including surveying neighboring communities. Staff was also directed to notify the Park Commission that this approach is preferred over a community survey. Council directed the Administrator to contact the City Planner's Office, informing the principals that Council is reviewing its consultant relationships and desires that John Uban serve as the city's planner. It was noted that Howard Dahlgren was a principal of the firm and when he retired one of the other principals should have replaced him. Treasurer Shaughnessy reviewed revenues, informing Council of a proposal that a building permit fee surcharge be implemented to compensate for lost license fee revenues. He also informed Council that the MWCC will increase its fees by 20% in 1992 and that the FIRE STATION DOWNTOWN MENDOTA HEIGHTS ADJOURN Ayes: 5 Nays: 0 Page No. 3087 August 7, 1991 proposed Utility Fund budget anticipates a 10% increase in sewer rates. Staff was directed to proceed with getting quotes for demolition of the old fire station. Mayor Mertensotto stated that he will contact Harry Kirchner with respect to purchase of the Fischer's 66 property. Council briefly discussed the,issue.. of the release of the T.H. 149 right-of-way. Council was informed that the City has a potential funding option, in the form of MSA funding, for construction of an extension of South Plaza Drive along the right-of-way with a bridge across T.H. 110. Council was informed that MSA designation is possible as long as a street begins and ends at a state highway, a county road or another MSA road. Staff was directed to begin the process for MSA designation. There being no further business to come before the Council, Councilmember Koch moved that the meeting be adjourned. Councilmember Smith seconded the motion. TIME OF ADJOURNMENT: 10:30 o'clock P.M. Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk ATTEST: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION AUGUST 13, 1991 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Parks and Recreation Commission was held on Tuesday, August 13, 1991, in the City Hall Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. Chair John Huber called the meeting to order at 7:00 o'clock p.m. The following members were present: Huber, Damberg, Lundeen, Hunter, Kleinglass, Katz and Spicer. Staff members present were Parks Project Manager Guy Kullander and Administrative Assistant Kevin Batchelder. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Damberg moved to approve the minutes of July 9, 1991 Parks and Recreation Commission meeting. Commissioner Hunter seconded the motion. AYES: NAYS: PROPOSED 7 0 1992 BUDGET The Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the 1992 Proposed Park Maintenance Budget and the 1992 Special Parks Fund Budget. Specific items of discussion were the recreational contingency line item, the adopt -a -park line item, the trail map, and potential for a sign system. The Commission discussed whether it was appropriate to budget for a sign system for the new trails or to pay for that with referendum funding. The special park fund was discussed and the Commission decided to look at increasing the subdivision fee from the current $600 per lot. Commissioner Lundeen inquired if there was a maintenance plan for the new facilities that have been built with the parks referendum. Parks Project Manager Guy Kullander explained the fertilizer application procedures, the aeration procedures, and the regular schedule maintained by Parks Superintendent Terry Blum for fertilizing and weed killing. Commissioner Lundeen stated he_ was concerned that the new facilities were receiving the specialized attention necessary for turf management. Commissioner Lundeen also stated that he was concerned with the capital request for a snowblower attachment at $15,000. Lundeen stated that a $15,000 option seems to be very expensive. Kullander responded and explained the need for a new snow machine on the trails in order AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 MENDAKOTA PARK to keep them swept of snow in the winter. Kullander explained that the blower is a better option than the plow because in many portions the trail is less than eight feet wide which is the size of our plows. Commissioner Lundeen stated that he felt $15,000 for a single use attachment, as a snowblower, seems to be too much. Lundeen stated that he's not sure this is the only option that should be looked at, for $15,000 a multi -use vehicle should be considered. Kullander stated that City staff had researched snow clearing implements and checked with other cities and feel that this snowblower attachment is the best option. Kullander stated that this snowblower attachment will allow the new Toro lawnmower to be a piece of equipment that is used in the winter also. Chair Huber stated that the Commission has a concern about the $15,000 snowblower attachment. Chair Huber stated that a new employee is being added to the Parks maintenance. Chair Huber stated that capital equipment was being purchased and that new maintenance money was in the budget but that there was no money for a new recreation director. Commissioner Damberg stated that staff should work out a job description for a person to run a recreation program, and that this should be included in the 1992 budget. Commissioner Katz made a motion that the City Council should raise the park dedication fee and direct staff to prepare a proposal based on the appropriate amount in consideration of what other cities are charging. Commissioner Spicer seconded the motion. Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated that the consideration of an ice rink at Mendakota Park was the result of a constituent request of Councilmember Koch. A discussion ensued in which the Parks Commission reviewed which neighborhoods use which skating rinks throughout the City. Chair Huber stated the Commission would need to determine what population would be served by an ice rink at Mendakota. Kullander reminded the Commission that at the time the Mendakota Park design was being considered an idea had been floated about flooding Rogers Lake and using that as a free skating rink. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 KENSINGTON Parks Project Manager Kullander stated that the easiest area to site a free skating rink in Mendakota Park would be under the NSP easement. He stated there would be a cost for grading even though this area is fairly flat. A total estimated cost for lights, warming house, moving a water hydrant across the street and grading would be approximately $15,000 to $20,000. Chair Huber stated that a hockey rink would have to be constructed also. He felt that you can't have a free skating rink without a hockey rink -. it doesn't work if the uses aren't separated. Commissioner Lundeen inquired whether there really was a need to reconsider the decision not to have a free skating rink at Mendakota Park. The Commission responded that, no, they did not feel there was a need to reconsider this item. Chair Huber stated that the use of the other rinks could be monitored this coming winter to determine if our rinks are overcrowded, especially at Friendly Hills. Chair Huber stated that he doesn't find a need to make changes at this time, though it might be appropriate to have rink attendants monitor the use next winter. Commissioner Damberg moved to reaffirm the decision not to propose an ice skating rink for Mendakota Park and to monitor the use of the existing rinks this coming winter. Commissioner Spicer seconded the motion. PARK Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained the Kensington park dedication and the details regarding the park dedication that will be in the proposed developer's agreement. Batchelder stated that the intent for this park, at this time, was to build it in 1992 so it is ready for play in 1993. Chair Huber inquired even if the park was built in 1992, would the soccer teams be able to use it in 1993? Kullander responded that . . use of the fields would depend on the construction schedule in 1992 and that only limited use in 1993 would be considered. Chair Huber stated that staff should sketch out some soccer ideas and have Sting and Mend -Eagan come to a future Park Commission meeting to talk about the soccer design. The Park Commission felt that it would be appropriate for the Engineering staff to do the AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 RECREATION .1 design and bid construction for Mendakota Park. They felt that staff should put the pencil to the paper for some rough sketch ideas to bring forward at a future Park and Recreation meeting. The Commission felt it was important to determine a budget for this park and to begin examining amenities to be included. Commissioner Spicer moved that the City Council approve that the Engineering staff, at the direction of the Parks and Recreation Commission, design for grading and the construction of Kensington Park. Commissioner Damberg seconded the motion. -- SURVEY Administrative Assistant Batchelder explained that at the June meeting, based upon a discussion of the role of the Park Commission, the Park Commission had directed staff to prepare survey questions for inclusion in the Heights Highlights newsletter in order to survey the community about recreation needs. Batchelder stated that he felt a more comprehensive approach had to be taken to determining recreation needs in the City prior -to any type of survey. Batchelder stated he'd like to have an opportunity to research what other cities are doing with recreation programs, to inventory what programs exist in Mendota Heights, to explore cooperative avenues with West St. Paul and Independent School District 197 for co- sponsoring activities. Batchelder stated that the Commission should discover what they are willing to provide before we open up the universe to survey questions. Chair Huber stated that it was his recollection that the survey should be designed to query the community on the use of current facilities that we do have or that have been recently constructed. Huber stated that the survey should not be an open ended survey, but one that is designed to query about recreation uses just for Mendota Heights and its existing facilities. Chair Huber stated he thought it was not a bad idea to do the background research and use it as a springboard to future planning of City park resources. Commissioner Katz felt that it was important to have the survey and stated we need to have the community decide for us what recreation needs are and not to have seven Commissioners telling the community what the needs are. Commissioner Lundeen stated that he felt a recreation coordinator in the future might VERBAL UPDATES be necessary for Mendota Heights. Batchelder stated that he would begin the process of researching the recreation resources and possibilities and would bring items back to the Park Commission beginning next month on a monthly basis. Administrative Assistant Batchelder_stated that he had had six organizations adopt parks in Mendota Heights. He stated that they are: 1. Gopher State One Call Service Roger's Lake Park 2. Rotary Club - WPS/Mendota Hts. North Valley Park 3. Weissner Insurance South Valley Park 4. Mendota Heights Taxidermy Victoria Highlands Park 5. Centre One Dental/Dr. Hunter Marie Park 6. Robert Suchomel/Tracy Schabacker Wentworth Park Batchelder stated that letters had been sent to the homeowners he had identified on option three and option four for providing a trail length through Mayfield Heights to the City. Batchelder stated that he had not received a response to any of the letters that had been sent out, approximately ten days prior. Batchelder stated that the City Council had approved reservations of tennis courts at Roger's Lake Park for the girls fall tennis season for Visitation Convent. Batchelder stated that the tree planting grant at the Department of Natural Resources had not gone through as the City did not qualify as a Tree City for the grant money they had available. Batchelder stated that he had recently had two requests for the City to build a community pool. A few members of the Commission stated that a community pool had been looked at in the past and that the City had decided not to build one. Commissioner Kleinglass inquired what is the objection to a community pool. He felt that a pool was a good recreation use for the community. Batchelder stated that it was probably possible ..,for the City to build a City pool, but the tax burden for the yearly upkeep and operation of the pool probably would be quite an impact on the City's Budget and the taxpayers. Commissioner Kleinglass stated that he thinks a community pool should not be rejected as an idea and that it sounds attractive. He stated that he has seen smaller communities who have community pools and seem to be able to afford them. He stated that any research work in to recreational activities should include a look into a community pool. Commissioner Kleinglass stated that he had used the Grass Junior High swimming pool on quite a few occasions, however, he did not feel this is the type of facility to take your family on a nice summer day. Commissioner Spicer stated that he often works in Chaska and has used their community facility which has an indoor pool and is quite nice and it was his understanding that Chaska is similar in size to Mendota Heights. Guy Kullander explained the progress at Mendakota Park. He stated the contractor is finishing the irrigation and all that remains for the buildings is plumbing and electrical finish work. Kullander stated that Mendakota Park would need approximately 19 or 20 picnic tables to be included on the second deck of the comfort station and in the picnic pavilion. Kullander stated that he estimated the cost of purchasing these picnic tables to be approximately $4,000. Kullander stated that this item is not in the budget for 1992 and inquired of the Commission if they felt that this should be a referendum expenditure. Commissioner Lundeen stated that for the first year of operation it was probably appropriate to fill the upper deck of the comfort station, however, picnic tables could be phased in for the pavilion and outside areas. Kullander stated it was his intention to get the Commission discussing this item so that as other demands are made on the remaining referendum money, the picnic tables do not get left out. The Parks Commission was of a consensus that the referendum should provide picnic tables for Mendakota Park. Kullander discussed a signage system for Mendakota Park. He stated that a total sign plan is needed for the park and that would include signs such as a no motorized vehicle sign, field number signs, a sign stating the rules of the park, bathroom signs, a distance of the outfield signs, and a tackboard for the kiosk. Kullander stated that ADJOURN • the kiosk haseight sides for signage. Kullander also stated an address sign would be needed at the park. The Park Commission directed Kullander to prepare a proposed sign on park rules for Mendakota Park for the next meeting. Commissioner Spicer inquired about the lime rock that is being used to grade the infields on the softball fields this summer. He stated he felt the composition of the rock was not good and wondered if we should switch suppliers. The Commission directed Parks Superintendent Terry Blum to check the infield composition of the lime rock that is being used this year. There being no further business the Park and Recreation Commission adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kevin Batc CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TREASURER'S REPORT, JULY 1991 DAKOTA COUNTY STATE BANK Checking Account 4.85% Savings Account 4.75% C.D. Rep. Collateral - Bonds Gov't. Guar. CHEROKEE STATE BANK BALANCE COLLATERAL $ 39,207.88 531.00 $ 39,738.88 $592,581.00 $100,000.00 C.D. due 8/13/91 @ 5.75% $350,000.00 Savings Cert. 8/28/91 @ 6.0% 13,952.59 $363,952.59 Collateral - Bonds $600,000.00 Gov't. Guar. $100,000.00 U.S. Treasury 8 5/8% 5-15-93 Notes GNMA Mtg. Pool 9% $498,671.88 $273,590.29 $692,581.00 $700,000.00 Value 7-30-91 (est.) U.S. Treasury Money Mkt $2,104,287.55 (2,637,000.00) Gov't. Securities Fund $1,200,000.00 (1,855,000..00) TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: $4,480,241.19 Funds Available 12/31/90 $6,192,720.44 7/30/90 $4,250,000.00 Rates Money Market July 30 Bank 5.05% Fid 5.78% Escrow Funds (American National Bank) 6-30-91 City Hall Buildings $ 26,174.79 Railroad Crossing 165,413.51 TOTAL $191,588.30 LES:kkb CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGTS MEMO TO: Mayor, City Council and City Adminis FROM: James E. Dan Public Works Di A gust 13, 1991 tQ0— SUBJECT: Sibley Athletc Complex Job No. 8920F Improvement No. 89, Project No. 6F DISCUSSION: G.M.H. Aspahlt Corporation has now satisfactorily completed the Sibley Athletic Complex project and requests final payment. Tom Knuth and I met with Mr. Gary Harms to discuss the final settlement amount and we felt that Mr. Harms was very reasonable. He did not present us with any laundry list of extras, but he did request that we eliminate the 21 days of liquidated damages. Tom and I felt that some consideration could be given G.M.H. for their slow grading progress at Sibley due to the badly saturated soils which were encountered on site. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that the Sibley Athletic Complex project be accepted by the City and that the final payment be made with an assessment of 10 days of liquidated damages. ACTION REQUIRED: If Council desires to implement the recommendation they should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 91- , RESOLU- TION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR IMPROVE- MENT NO. 89, PROJECT NO. 6F (SIBLEY ATHLETIC COMPLEX). JED:dfw City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK AND APPROVING FINAL PAYMENT FOR IMPROVEMENT NO. 89, PROJECT NO. 6F (SIBLEY ATHLETIC COMPLEX) WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed with the City of Mendota Heights on July 23, 1991, G.M.H. Asphalt Corporation of Minne- tonka, Minnesota, has satisfactorily completed the Sibley Athletic Complex (Improvement 89, Project No. 6F) in accordance with such contract. - NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY 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 con- tract in the amount of $16,583.15, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor, Council, City Adminis FROM: Klayton H. Eckles Civil Engineer August 16, 1991 SUBJECT: Bridgeview Shores 3rd Addition Feasibility Report Job No. 9110 Improvement No. 91, Project No. 5 DISCUSSION The developer of the Bridgeview Shores subdivisions has requested that the City complete a feasibility report for the construction of utilities to serve the Bridgeview Shores 3rd Addition. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council direct Staff to prepare a feasibility report for the construction of utilities to serve the Bridgeview Shores 3rd Addition. ACTION REQUIRED If Council concurs with Staff's recommendation, Council should pass Resolution 91-_, RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF A FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 3RD ADDITION. KHE:dfw City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 3RD ADDITION WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City Council request- ing sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water and street improvements to serve the Bridgeview Shores 3rd Addition and adjacent areas. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows: 1. That the above described petition be and is hereby accepted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights. 2. That the City Engineer be and is hereby authorized and dir ected to prepare a feasibility study as to whether said proposed improvements are feasible, whether said improve- ments should best be made as proposed or in connection with some other improvement, and as to the estimated cost of said improvement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor, Council, City Adminis FROM: Klayton H. Eckles y Civil Engineer August 16, 1991 SUBJECT: Deferment of assessment for Margaret Perron Furlong areautility project Imp. 86-4 DISCUSSION At the Assessment hearing for the Furlong area utility project Ms. Margaret Perron requested that her assessments be deferred. She stated several reasons for the need for a deferment, all related to the fact that Ms. Perron is managing the property as an estate and she is trying to sell it. Council directed Staff to look into the possibility of allowing a deferment. If a deferment is to be granted, it must be done before the assessment roll is recorded at the county, which will take place in the next 4 to 6 weeks. Staff has checked on the property and it is currently on the market. If the Council chose to do so, a deferment could be granted until such time as the property is sold. When the property is sold, all the assessments would be due. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Council consider the Margaret Perron request for a deferment and decide whether it is warranted. ACTION REOUIRED If Council chooses to grant a deferment, then Council should pass Resolution 91- , RESOLUTION DEFERRING PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT (IMPROVEMENT NO. 86, PROJECT NO. 4) HCR 61 Box 288 Dixon, MO 65459 15 May 1991 Honorable Charles Mertensotto Mayor, Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto, r , sl sol 4 i; In response to the notice of hearing received 29 April 1991, I wish to ask you to consider waiving the fees associated with the installation of the sewer system at 2370 Highway 55, Mendota Heights. The proposed assessment at parcel # 27-04100-016-36 will cause an undue hardship on me and the estate of Margaret Perron. The system will be installed over 200 feet from the dwelling which will be a great expense. This system will be of no benefit to me or the selling of the said property. At this time the settlement of my mother's estate is incomplete and we still have many expenses that remain unpaid. Below is a list of some these unpaid. bilis: Attorney's Fee $1500-2000 Taxes for 1990 1600 Insurance 336 Funeral Expenses 2325 Dakota Co. Human Service claim 13554 $19815 The property is not marketable because of the restrictions placed on the property by the airport board and the condition of the dwelling itself. Please consider this request. If these requests are not acceptable, consider granting a deferment of these fees until the property is sold. Thank -you for your consideration. Sincerely, Margaret M. Walker Executor Estate of Margaret Perron t City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION DEFERRING PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT (IMPROVEMENT NO. 86, PROJECT NO. 4) WHEREAS, the City Clerk with the assistance of the City Engineer has calculated the proper amount to be specifically assessed for in Improvement No. 86, Project No. 4, construction of sanitary sewers, watermain, storm sewer and street rehabilitation; and WHEREAS, the hearing on said assessments was duly held at 8:00 o'clock P.M. on May 7, 1991, at the City Hall of the City of Mendota Heights; and WHEREAS, the proposed assessment roll for said improvements was duly adopted by the City Council on May 7, 1991; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be in the best interest of the City of Mendota Heights to defer the payment of the assessments with respect to the above referenced improvements in the following amounts and to the following parcel situated in Dakota County, Minnesota, to -wit: Tax Parcel 27-04100-017-36 Owner Deferred Margaret M. Perron 2370 Highway 55 Mendota Heights, MN 55120 $6,250.00 WHEREAS, that the assessment indicated above as being deferred would be deferred with the understanding that said amount, plus inter- est accrued from May 7, 1991, at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum, would become immediately payable upon the future sale, division or development of the above described parcel to which said deferred assessment relates. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, as follows: 1. That the assessment roll for Improvement No. 86, Project No. 4, be corrected as sort forth above. 2. That upon the future sale, division or development of the above described parcel will be immediately due and payable, together with interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum from May 7, 1991. 3. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this resolution in the office of the County Auditor and County Recorder of Dakota County, Minnesota so that any future purchaser or party interest relative to the above described parcels will be on notice relative to the deferred assessments described above. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk 4 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 13, 1991 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrato FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr. Treasurer SUBJECT: 1991 Bond Financing HISTORY: Park Bonds - In 1990„ we sold an issue of $1,700,000 of the $2,700,000 Park Bonds which were authorized. At this time, we are proposing an offering of $1,000,000 to complete the Bonds authorized under question number 1 of the referendum. Proceeds of the issue will be used to pay for Mendakota Park. Question number 2 Bonds will be sold for future development when needed. Improvement Bonds - At this time, we have four Improvement projects ready to finance. These are Bridgeview Shores #2 Furlong Area Improvements Patrick Subdivision Mendota Heights Road jassessable portion) $ 250,000 $ 475,000 $ 125,000 $ 180,000 Total $ 1,030,000 We tentatively plan to have the bond sale on October 15th. Interest rates are favorable for the sale at this time. ACTION REOUIRED: AdoptResolution No. 91- & 91- authorizing public sale of the two issues. LES:mlk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC SALE OF $1,030,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS OF 1991 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Finding; Amount and Purpose. It is hereby found, determined and declared that this City should issue $1,030,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds of 1991 (the "Bonds") to finance the construction of various improvements in the City. 2. Meeting. This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the form of notice hereinafter contained for the purpose of opening and considering sealed bids for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. 3.• Notice of Bond Sale. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and purpose of said meeting to be published in the official newspaper of the City and in Northwestern Financial review not less than ten -(10) days in advance of date of sale, as provided by law, which notice shall be in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. 4. Official Terms of Bond Sale. The terms and conditions of said Bonds and the sale thereof are fully set forth in the "Official Terms of Bond Sale" attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. 5. Official Statement. The City Clerk and Treasurer and other officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to participate in the preparation *of an official statement for the Bonds. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91 -- RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR PUBLIC SALE OF $1,015,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION PARK BONDS OF 1991 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Finding; Amount and Purpose. It is hereby found, determined and declared that this City should issue $1,015,000 General Obligation Park Bonds of 1991 (the 'Bonds") to finance the acquisition and betterment of parks, consisting-af<-: neighborhood and community parks, bicycle and pedestrian trails, and community ballfields. 2. Meeting. This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the form of notice hereinafter contained for the purpose of opening and considering sealed bids for, and awarding the sale of, the Bonds. 3. Notice of Bond Sale. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and purpose of said meeting to be published in the official newspaper of the City and in Northwestern Financial Review not less than ten (10) days in advance of date of sale, as provided by law, which notice shall be in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto. 4. Official Terms of Bond Sale. The terms and conditions of said Bonds and the sale thereof are fully set forth in the "Official Terms of Bond Sale" attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. 5. Official Statement. The City Clerk and Treasurer and other officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk L TO: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 12, 1991 Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr. Treasurer SUBJECT: City Bond Financing HISTORY: In the past, the City has used the method of consolidating financing projects to limit the issuance of bonds to once or twice a year depending on the type of bond. Recent IRS rulings have placed limitations on the City's ability to consolidate several projects into a single bond issue. To avoid the possible regulations, Bond Attorneys have recommended that we adopt a resolution of intent, whereby an administrative officer can declare that a project will be consolidated with others for future financing. Attached is a resolution prepared by Bond Council which should avoid any conflict with the Revenue Service regulations and permit us to continue financing as we have done in the past. ACTION REQUIRED: Adopt Resolution No. 91- an.'—a RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE. LES:mlk l RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Mendota Heights , Minnesota (the "City") , as follows: 1. pecitals. (a) The Internal Revenue Service has issued proposed Treasury Regulations Section 1.103-17 (as proposed and/or finally adopted, the "Regulations") dealing with reimbursement bond proceeds, which would include those proceeds of the City's bonds to be used to reimburse the City for any project expenditure paid by the City prior to the time of the issuance of those bonds. (b) The Regulations generally require that the City make a prior declaration of its official intent to reimburse itself for such prior expenditures out of the proceeds of subsequently issued taxable or tax exempt borrowings,•.that such declaration generally be made prior to but not more 'than two years before the time the expenditure is actually paid, that the bonding occur and the reimbursement allocation be made from the proceeds of such bonds within one year of the payment of the expenditure (or not later than the time that the project is placed in service, if that is a longer period) , and that the expenditure relate to property having a reasonably expected economic life of at least one year. (c) The City desires to comply with requirements of the Regulations and to establish certain procedures relating thereto. (d) The City's bond counsel has advised the City that the Regulations do not apply, and hence the provisions of this Resolution are intended to have no application, to payments of City project costs first made by the City out of the proceeds of bonds issued prior to the date of such payments. 2. Official Intent Declaration. The Regulations, in the situations in which they apply, require the City to have made a reasonable declaration of its official intent (hereinafter referred to as the "Official Intent Declaration" or the "Declaration") to reimburse itself for previously paid project expenditures out of the proceeds of subsequently issued taxable or tax exempt bonds or other borrowings. The Council hereby authorizes the City 19897 1 4 Treasurer to make the City's Official Intent Declarations or to delegate from time to time that responsibility to other appropriate City employees. Each Declaration shall comply with the requirements of the Regulations, including without limitation the following: 19897 (a) Each Declaration shall be made prior to the time the City pays the applicable project cost and shall state that the City intends to reimburse itself for the expenditure out of the proceeds of a "taxable or tax exempt" bond issuance, debt, or similar borrowing. Each Declaration may be made substantially in the form of the Exhibit A which is attached to and made a part of this Resolution. (b) Each Declaration shall and is hereby declared to be made and filed in the publicly available official books, records, or proceedings of the City, which shall be continuously available for inspection by the general public and maintained or otherwise supervised by the officials authorized herein to make such Declarations. (c) Each Declaration shall be available for inspection at City Hall during normal business hours of the City on every business during the period beginning on the earlier of 10 days after the making of the Declaration or the date of issuance of the reimbursement bonds and ending on the day after the issuance of such bonds. Each Declaration shall contain a reasonably accurate general functional description of the type and use of the property for which the expenditure to be reimbursed is paid, including sufficient information so that a person who is not familiar with the property would generally understand the nature and function of that property. (d) Each Declaration shall identify the reasonably expected source or sources of funds that will be used by the City to pay the reimbursement expenditure (prior to and in anticipation of the issuance of the reimbursement bonds), together with the reasonably expected source or sources of funds to be used by the City to pay the debt service on the reimbursement bonds (for example, project revenues, ad valorem tax revenues, special assessments, grant and loan receipts, utility revenues, tax increments, and/or other revenues). (e) Care shall be taken so that the City, or its authorized representatives under this Resolution, not make Declarations in cases where the City will not ultimately be issuing reimbursement bonds to provide long term financing for the subject project costs, and the City officials are hereby authorized to consult with bond counsel to the City concerning the requirements of the Regulations in general and their application in particular circumstances. 2 (f) The Council shall be advised from time to time on the desirability and timing of the issuance of reimbursement bonds relating to project expenditures for which the City has made Official Intent Declarations, including recommendations on the timing of the issuance of such bonds so that the "reimbursement allocation" described in the Regulations and in paragraph 3 below can be made within the time limits prescribed in the Regulations. (g) This Resolution shall be deemed to incorporate any amendments to'the proposed Regulations made in connection with their final adoption, and to the extent that the provisions of this Resolution may differ from those finally adopted Regulations, 'this Resolution shall be deemed to have been amended thereby and to incorporate said revised or additional requirements. 3. Reimburs1ement Allocations. The designated City officials shall also be responsible for making the "reimbursement allocations" described in the Regulations, being generally the transfer of the appropriate amount of reimbursement bond proceeds to reimburse the source of temporary financing used by the City to make payment of the prior expenditure. Each allocation shall be evidenced by an entry on the official books of the City maintained for such reimbursement bonds, shall specifically identify the actual prior expenditure being reimbursed, and shall be effective to relieve the bond proceeds involved from any restriction -under the bond resolution or other relevant legal documents for those bonds and under any applicable state statute which would apply to the unspent proceeds of such bond issue. 19897 Adopted this day of City Council. 3 , 199 , by the TO: FROM: SUBJECT: HISTORY: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 12, 1991 Mayor, City Council and City Administrator Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr. Treasurer Proposed 1992 Budget Tentative Levy Resolution Collectable 1992 Final Levy Resolution Street Light District Under the Truth in Taxation rules, it is necessary for the City to certify to the County Auditor our Tentative Levy Resolution prior to September 3rd. Base on the guidance of the Council workshop of August.8th., the tentative Resolutions for Budget and Tax Levy are attached. Also, the Levy Resolution for the Street Light District is attached. After September 15th, we will be advised as to the dates which we may select for the Budget Hearing. It would appear that December 3rd will'be the first available date. The County Audit is going to attempt to provide parcel specific notices to the residents this year which should help to clear up many of the questions that arose last year. ACTION REQUIRED: Adopt Resolutions No. 91- , 91- and 91- for certification to the County Auditor. LES:mlk a 1 1 1 1 f 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING PROPOSED BUDGET WHEREAS, State Statute requires City Council adoption of a proposed budget for 1992 on or before September 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received and reviewed the City Administrator's proposed 1992 budget; and WHEREAS, Council recognizes that the budget document was prepared on the basis of a preliminary levy which will be considered at public hearing in November or December of 1991; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights that the City Administrator's Proposed 1992 Budget appropriates expenditures in a manner consistent with service level needs and preliminary levy funding; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Council hereby adopts the Administrator's Proposed 1992 Budget dated August 20, 1991 as the preliminary budget for 1992, subject to amendment following budget and levy hearings and adoption of a final levy. - Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA1 RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL 1991 TAX LEVY FOR SPECIAL TAXING DISTRICT NO. 1 COLLECTABLE IN 1992 WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has, by Resolution No. 87-91, authorized the levy of taxes within Special Tax District No. 1 for the purpose of paying operating costs of the street lighting system established within said District; and WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights has determined that the sum of $10,000 will be required in 1992 for the purpose of paying such operating costs. . NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City council of the City of Mendota Heights adopt the following levy against all taxable property within said Special Taxing District No. 1 Operation and Maintenance Costs $10,000 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any tax exempt property with said District be billed for services at a comparable rate computed on the Assessor's market Value of such property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the Dakota County Auditor. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION APPROVING TENTATIVE 1991 LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 1992 WHEREAS, the 1990 State Tax Levy requires the City of Mendota Heights to certify a tentative tax levy for the year 1992 prior to September 3, 1991; and WHEREAS, the levy may be adjusted prior to December 28, 1991, to an amount not to exceed the adopted tentative levy. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council adopt the following tentative levy for the tax against all taxable property in the City of Mendota Heights for collection in the year 1992: General Fund Emergency Preparedness Fire Relief Infra Structure Reserve Watershed District Total General Levy subject to Limitation Special Debt Levies MWCC Sewer Debt Equipment Certificate Park Bonds Improvement Bonds $ 1,994,978 1,500 14,450 50,000 5,000 $ 2,065,928 30,000 106,000 280,000 17,400 $ 433,400 Total Tentative Levy $ 2,499 328 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the levy shall be amended following budget hearings to reflect the adopted City budget. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 15 To: Mayor, City Council and City Administ �D Q Gid 7a,,t (0 -G 91 From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assista Subject: Schedule of Fees for Planning Services DISCUSSION At the July 16, 1991 meeting, the City Council adopted a Zoning Ordinance Recodification that included some significant changes to the zoning codes. It has been my intention to also request a change in the schedule of planning application fees concurrently with the adoption of the new Zoning Ordinance. A new schedule for planning escrows is also being proposed. The new Zoning Ordinance goes into effect on August 21, 1991 when the summary publication appears in the Sun -Current. The new Zoning Ordinance states the following regarding application fees and escrows: 5.10(1) The base fees to be paid for each application shall be established by Resolution of the Council. Base fees shall be payable at the time applications are filed with the City Clerk and shall not be refundable unless said application is withdrawn prior to referral to the Planning Commission. 5.10(2) Escrow deposits, in amounts established by Resolution of the City Council, will be required to be submitted with planning applications to defray anticipated City expenses incurred in connection with the application. Any expenses incurred by the City in excess of the escrow shall be billed to the applicant after all City costs have been determined. Failure of the applicant'' to reimburse billed expenses within thirty days may be cause for revocation of approval:action taken ,by ,the City.. Council. Any unused -escrow deposit amount shall'be`' returned to the applicant. - ' t _, Application Fees Periodically, a review of the -fees being charged for various city services is helpful to determine if we are in line with costs and with fees being charged at other metropolitan municipalities. In February 1990, the City revised its schedules for engineering, administration, building and police fees. At that time the planning fees were held over to be adopted to coincide with the Zoning Ordinance Recodification. The planning fees being proposed are based on a review of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities' Municipal License and Permit Survey - 1991 that includes the rates for all city services throughout the metropolitan area. Using this survey, our proposed planning fees were compared to those of cities in the 2,500 to 20,000 population range. The averages and the range of the various planning fees were computed to make the comparisons. In some cases our fee is proposed to remain the same. Our proposed fees compare favorably with metro cities and are listed as follows: Applications Existing Fee Proposed Fee Escrow Variance resid. $ 35 $ 50 none Com/ind. $100 $ 50 none Vacations $250 $250 none Wetlands Permits Resid. $131 $150 none Comm. $156 $175 none Critical Area Review $100 $100 none Minor CAO Review $100 Fee Waived none Zoning Ordinance Amendment $250 $250 .=-none Conditional Use Permit $350 $350 none Rezoning $250 $350 yes CUP for PUD $500 $500 yes Subdivision $335 $335 yes Comprehensive Plan Amendment no fee exists $500 yes Escrows For the planning applications involving major development, such as Rezoning, CUP for PUD, Subdivision and Comprehensive Plan Amendments, that typically involve intensive staff time we are also proposing an escrow that will cover expenses beyond the normal processing of a planning application. The base application fee will cover the processing of the initial application and the intent of the escrow is to cover subsequent staff time after the initial formal request. The pre -application meeting with the Planning Consultant is considered gratis. The base application fee is intended to cover the planning reviews by staff and planner, publication costs, report production, postage, -secretarial time, agenda privilege for the Planning Commission and the City Council. The escrow would be intended to cover any subsequent staff time and materials after the initial formal request and would include planning, legal, finance, and engineering consultants time and planning staff time. The escrows are proposed to be based on zoning districts and would be applied in the case of Rezonings, CUP for PUDs, Subdivisions and Comprehensive Plan Amendments as follows: R-1, R -1A, R -1B, R-2, R-3 0-10 Units $100 per unit 11-40 Units $50 per unit 40 + Units $2,500 maximum B-1, B -1A, I $1,000 B-2, B-3, B-4 $1,500 ACTION REQUIRED If the City Council desires to implement the proposed Schedule of Planning Fees, they should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 91- , A RESOLUTION REVISING SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR PLANNING SERVICES. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.91- A RESOLUTION REVISING SCHEDULE OF FEES FOR PLANNING SERVICES WHEREAS, the City of Mendota Heights adopted a Zoning Ordinance Recodification at the July 16, 1991 City Council meeting; and WHEREAS, the cost of services rendered is ever=increasing; and WHEREAS, it is appropriate that fees be revised to cover the increasing costs in providing the services and that new fees be established. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that Attachment A (Attachment A to Resolution No. 91- ) listing the Schedule of Fees is hereby approved and adopted. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk ATTACHMENT A TO RESOLUTION NO. 91 - Applications Fee Variance $ 50 Vacations $250 Wetlands Permits Resid. Comm. Critical Area Review Minor CAO Review $150 $175 Escrow none none none none $100 none Fee Waived none Zoning Ordinance Amendment $250 none Conditional Use $350 none Permit Rezoning $350 CUP for PUD $500 Subdivision $335 Comprehensive Plan Amendment $500 see below see below see below see below Escrows are based on zoning districts and are applied in the case of Rezonings, CUP for PUDs, Subdivisions and Comprehensive Plan Amendments as follows: R-1, R -1A, R -1B, R-2, R-3 0-10 Units 11-40 Units 40 + Units B-1, B -1A, I $1,000 B-2, B-3, B-4 $1,500 $100 per unit $50 per unit $2,500 maximum CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor, City Council and City Adminis FROM: James E. Danielson Public Works SUBJECT: St. Thomas - DISCUSSION: at Motor Variance A gust 16, 1991 Mr. Joe Reyman, Chairman of St. Thomas Academy's Science Depart- ment has requested a variance from the City's Ordinance No. 1201 (see attached) to allow the use of a motorized pontoon boat on Rogers Lake (see attached letter). The only problem I can see with the granting of this variance would be that it may cause some confusion by others, who upon seeing the motorized activity, may think that it is allowed for anyone. Mr. Reyman has agreed to notify all the surrounding land owners if the variance is granted; informing them of the situation. We hope that this would, for the most part, address that concern. There is a growing concern over the condition of the area lakes and wetlands and as part of our City Water Management Organization plan which is currently being prepared, we are promising to begin to monitor the conditions of some of our lakes. The tests that -Mr Reyman is proposing to take on Rogers Lake would satisfy that monitor- ing requirement for Rogers Lake. Mr. Reyman is promising to supply us with the results of all his tests. Ordinance No. 1201 is not part of the Zoning or Subdivision Ordinance, therefore I feel no Planning Commission review is required. ACTION REQUIRED: Review the variance with the applicant and take action on his request. JED:dfw ORDINANCE NO. 1201 r AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE OPERATION OF BOATS AND THE PROHIBITING OF MOTOR PROPELLED CRAFT WITHIN THE VILLAGE OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS AND PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF. SECTION 1. No person shall navigate, operate, dock, anchor any boat or watercraft upon any water or waterway within the Village of Mendota Heights except in accordance with the provisions of this. ordinance and all other rules and regulations made a part hereof by reference. SECTION 2. For the purpose of this ordinance, the term "person" shall mean any person, firm, partnership, corporation or other combination of persons. SECTION 3. , For the purpose of this ordinance, the term "boat" or "watercraft" shall:mean every boat, houseboat, barge, vessel, raft, canoe or other watercraft used as a support in or upon the water. SECTION 4. For the purpose of this ordinance, "water" or "waterway" shall mean any creek, • lake, drainage ponding area, swamp, marsh, drainage ditch; sump,- canal, or other accumulated standing or moving water. SECTION 5. For the purpose of this ordinance, the term "motor boat" shall mean any boat, canoe, water craft or other buoyant or floating object which is propelled by a gasoline, diesel, electric, steam or other type of mechanical engine. SECTION 6. No person shall operate or cause to be operated a motor boat upon any body of water within the corporate limits of the Village of Mendota Heights. SECTION 7. No person shall navigate, direct or handle any boat in such manner as to annoy, unnecessarily frighten or endanger the occupants of other boats or watercraft, or of persons in or upon any body of water within the corporate limits of the Village of Mendota Heights. (1201) 1 To: Mendota Heights City Council From: Joe Reymann 4c4 410'z 14 1 am the chairperson of the science department at St. Thomas Academy. Beginning in September of this year we will be offering a c(as, in cooperation with the Dodge Nature Center, in environ- _ mental studies. This class will be open to senior students from the Academy and from Visitation Convent. The purpose of this letter is to request from you a variance from the law prohibiting motors on boats on Rogers Lake. The major focus of this class will be water - lakes, rivers, creeks, wetlands, etc. We will use a pontoon boat on the lalce t� gather water and bottom samples do that we may conduct scientific `. '�- - analy s on these samples in our laboratory. Since our classes average 40 - 45 minutes in length we would like to use a motor so as to get students onto and back from the study sites as quickly as possible. The times we would be on the lake in the boat would be confined to the hours between one and three in the afternoon only and during the months of September, October, Noo~mber, April and May. We would be willing to advise all lakeshore residents as to what we are doing and shere with them a copy of your permission should you give it to us. We would also supply you, on an annual basis, a copy of the results of our tests and a resume of our work. 1 appreciate your consideration of this proposal and am willing to provide you with any additional information that you would require. ' 61,� c ^k ,�, � \ k 6 LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL August 20, 1991 Concrete License Lund, Gordon Gas Piping License Oak Grove Mechanical General Contractors Licenses D. G. Construction North Star Fence Company Sawhorse, Inc. Wescot Const. & Develop., Inc. Plaster License Spra-Tex Enterprises d i August 20, 1991 TO: Mayor and City Council • CLAIMS LIST SUMMARY: Total Claimer Significant Claimer $ 325,341 Med Centers Health Ins 9,209 MWCC Sac charges 9,875 Tripp Oil Gas 3,152 - Unusual Claims Earl Anderson Co Park equipment 66,857 Action Enterprises Tennis courts 7,100 Friedges Landscape Park Const 57,963 C. W. Houle Impr const 138,080 Jedlicki 12,795 Dale Wischnewski Park building 1,430 r Dept 10 -Adm Dept 50-Rds 15-Engr 60-Utilties 16 Auo 1991 8/20/91 Claims List 20 -Police 70 -Parks Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights 30 -Fire 80 -Planning 40 -CEO 85 -Recycling Ternp Check Number 1 90 -Animal Control Ternp. Check Number Vendor Name Account Code Pane 1 Comments Amount 1 Earl F Anderson & Assoc 09-4460-000-00 Parks signs 69.75 1 Earl F Anderson & Assoc 09-4460-000-00 solus 89-6F 36.66 1 Earl F Anderson & Assoc 01-4330-215-70 signs Tennis courts 164.40 1 Earl F Anderson & Assoc 09-4460-000-00 Re 89-6 I 1 playbooster 66,586.40 4 66.857.21 Totals Ternp Check Number 1 Ternp Check Number 2 2 AT&T 01-4210-020-20 Aug svc 2 Totals Ternp Check Number 2 Ternp Check Number 3 3 Action Enterprises 01-4330-215-70 resurface tennis courts 3 Totals Ternp Check Number 3 Temp Check Number 4 4 Albinson 73-4305-872-00 splys 91-4 4 Totals Ternp Check Number 4 Temp Check Number 5 5 B F I 01-4490-050-50 5 B F I 01-4490-050-50 5 B F I 01-4490-050-50 15 Totals Ternp Check Number 5 Temp Check Number 6 tire disposal tire disposal tire disposal 7.00 7.00 7, 100.00 7. 100.00 68.50 68.50 57.20 68.25 66.95 192.40 6 8 & J Auto Supply 15-4330-490-60 splys 15.33 6 8 & J Auto Supply 15-4330-490-60 splys 4.49 6 8 & J Auto Supply 01-4330-460-30 splys 56.18 6 8 & J Auto Supply 01-4330-490-70 splys 8.34 6 8 & J Auto Supply 15-4330-490-60 splys 46.86 6 8 & J Auto Supply 01-4330-490-50 splys 14.76 36 145.96 Totals•Temp Check Number 6 Ternp Check Number 7 16 Aug 1991 Fri 12:17 PM Temp Check Number Temp. Check Number Vendor Name 7 Claims List Page 2 City of Mendota Heights Account Code Comments Amount 7 Banyon Data Systems 01-4220-133-10 computer svc 520.00 7 Banyon Data Systems 15-4220-133-60 computer svc 195.00 7 Banyon Data Systems 05-4330-490-15 computer svc 195.00 7 Banyon Data Systems 01-4330-460-30 computer svc 65.00 7 Banyon Data Systems 01-4330-640-12 computer svc 390.00 35 1,365.00 Totals Ternp Check Number 7 Temp Check Number 8 8 Barefoot Grass 8 Totals Temp Check Number Temp Check Number 9 01-4335-315-30 8 7/2 svc 103.36 103.36 9 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-440-20 splys 3.77 9 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-490-50 splys 12.73 9 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-440-20 splys 7.55 9 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-460-30 splys 42.69 9 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-460-30 splys 294.76 9 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-440-20 splys 30.74 54 Totals Temp Check Number 9 Temp Check Number 10 10 Biffs Inc 01-4200-610-70 10 Totals Temp Check Number 10 Temp Check Number 11 11 Board of Water Commissioners 01-4425-315-30 11 Board of Water Commissioners 08-4425-000-00 11 Board of Water Commissioners 15-4425-310-60 33 Totais Temp Check Number 11 Temp Check Number 12 12 Bredemus Hdwe 12 Totais Temp Check Number Temp Check Number 13 01-4335-315-30 12 392.24 Aug rent 454.42 Jul svc Jul svc Jul svc rprs 454.42 203.06 152.48 7.13 362. 67 43.50 43.50 16 Aug 1991 Claims List Page 3 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Temp Check Nurnber 13 Ternp. Check Number Vendor Name 13 Case Power & Eq 13 Totals Ternp Check Number Ternp Check Nurnber 14 14 Chapin Publishing. 14 Account Code Comments Amount 15-4330-490-60 parts 16.98 16.98 13 73-4240-872-00 bid ad 91-4 84.00 84.00 Totals Ternp Check Number 14 Temp Check Number 15 15 City Motor Supply 01-4330-490-70 parts 73.29 15 City Motor Supply 01-4330-490-50 parts 11.07 15 City Motor Supply 01-4330-440-20 parts 152.52 45 236.88 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 15 Temp Check Number 16 16 Commercial Asphalt 01-4422-050-50 rnix 122.56 16 122.56 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 16 Ternp Check Number 17 17 Continental Cablevision 01-4200-610-20 Aug svc 17 Continental Cablevision 01-4200-610-30 Aug svc 34 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 17 Ternp Check Nurnber 18 5.95 5.95 11.90 18 Connect Inc 01-4200-610-30 Mendhtsrnnfd 37.90 18 37.90 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 18 Ternp Check Number 19 19 Corcoran Hdwe 01-4330-215-70 parts 64.89 19 64.89 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 19 Temp Check Number 20 20 Curtis Ind 01-4305-050-50 splys 17.75 16 Aug 1991 Claims List pane 4 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heiohts Ternp Check Number 20 Temp. Check Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount 20 Curtis Ind 01-4305-070-70 splys 17.75 20 Curtis Ind 15-4305-060-60 splys 17.73 60 53.23 Totals Ternp Check Number 20 Ternp Check Number 21 21 Custom Fire Apparatus 01-4330-460-30 21 Totals Ternp Check Number 21 Temp Check Number 22 part 2286 133.20 22 Dahlgren Shardlow Uban 01-4221-135-80 Jun svc 22 Dahlgren Shardlow Uban 01-4221-135-80 Jul svc 133.20 1, 408.00 1,408.00 44 2,816.00 Totals Ternp Check Number 22 Ternp Check Number 23 23 Discorn of Minn Inc 01-4330-440-20 rprs 2242 63.00 23 Discorn of Minn Inc 01-4330-440-20 rprs 31.50 23 Discorn of Minn Inc 01-4330-440-20 rprs 98.80 23 Discorn of Minn Inc 01-4330-440-20 rprs 2244 226.48 92 419.78 Totals Ternp Check Number 23 Temp Check Number 24 24 Dodd Technical Corp 24 Totals Ternp Check Number Ternp Check Number 25 Jaynes Dz i k 25 Totals Ternp Check Number 25 Ternp Check Number 26 01-4330-490-10 24 01-4330-490-70 25 26 Friedges Landscaping Inc 09-4460-000-00 toner cartridge reimb rprs expense pymt 4 89-6 I 88.00 88.00 46.58 46.58 57,963.02 26 57,963.02 Totals Ternp Check Number 26 16 Aug 1991 Claims List Page 5 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Ternp Check Nurnber 27 Ternp. Check Nurnber Vendor Narne 27 Goodyear Cornrnl Tire 27 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Ternp Check Nurnber 28 28 Goodwill Industries 28 Goodwill Industries Account Code 15-4330-490-60 27 01-4268-085-85 01-4268-085-85 Comments Amount parts 409 27.85 Jun svc Jul svc 27.85 487.50 307.50 56 795.00 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 28 Ternp Check Nurnber 29 29 Great Western Iron & Metal 01-4330-490-50 29 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 29 Ternp Check Number 30 solys 21.25 21.25 30 Gopher State One Call 15-4210-060-60 svc thru 7/31 509.46 30 Totals Temp Check Nurnber 30 Ternp Check Number 31 509.46 31 Hdwe Hank 01-4305-070-70 overpyrnt 31134 82.95cr 31 Hdwe Hank 01-4305-030-30 splys 25.05 31 Hdwe Hank 01-4305-030-30 credit 9.59cr 31 Hdwe Hank 15-4305-060-60 splys 2.52 31 Hdwe Harik 01-4305-030-30 splys 25.83 31 Hdwe Hank 01-4424-050-50 splys 20.97 31 Hdwe Hark 01-4424-050-50 splys 25.47 31 Hdwe Hark 01-4305-050-50 splys 6.89 248 14.19 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 31 Ternp Check Number 32 32 Holiday Inn 01-4400-020-20 32 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 32 Temp Check Number 33 33 Holden Business Forms 33 01-4300-020-20 MDIAI conv Wicks 87.60 87.60 envelopes 325.45 325.45 16 Aug 1991 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Claims List Pape 6 Ternp Check Nurnber 33 Ternp. Check Number Vendor Name Account Code Totals Ternp Check Number 33 Temp Check Number 34 34 C W Houle Inc 34 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Ternp Check Nurnber 35 72-4460-835-00 34 35 I 0 S 01-4490-109-09 35 I 0 S 01-4330-490-10 35 I 0 S 01-4268-085-85 35 I 0 S 01-4330-460-30 35 I 0 S 01-4330-445-40 35 I 0 S 01-4300-080-80 35 I 0 S 05-4330-490-15 35 I 0 S 15-4330-490-60 280 Totals Ternp Check Number 35 Ternp Check Nurnber 36 36 I CMA RT 36 I CMA RT 72 Totals Temp Check Nurnber 01-2072 01-4134-110-10 36 Comments Amount pyrnt 3 86-4 138, 079.65 Jul rntcn Jul rntcn Jul rntcn Jul rntcn Jul rntcn Jul rntcn Jul mtcn Jul mtcn 138. 079.65 12.85 81.65 3.45 14.30 12.85 29.00 55.65 20.25 230. 00 7/26 payroll 175.72 7/26 payroll 91.32 267.04 Ternp Check Nurnber 37 37 Intl Inst Municipal Clerks 01-4404-110-10 dues 80.00 37 80.00 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 37 Temp Check Nurnber 38 38 Interstate Diesel 01-4330-460-30 rprs 2282 442.95 38 442.95 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 38 Temp Check Nurnber 39 39 F F Jedlicki Inc 33-4460-841-00 pymt 3 89-7 12,794.60 J9 12, 794.60 Totals Temp Check Nurnber 39 16 Aug 1991 Claims List Page 7 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heiohts Temp Check Number 40 Ternp. Check Number Vendor Narne Account Code Comments Amount 40 Langula Hdwe 15-4330-490-60 splys 7.40 40 7.40 Totals Ternp Check Number 40 Ternp Check Number 41 41 Laser Quipt 41 Totals Ternp Check Number Ternp Check Number 42 01-4330-440-20 41 rntcn 42 M R Sign Co Inc 01-4420-050-50 splys 42 M R Sign Co Inc 01-4420-050-50 splys 84 Totals Ternp Check Number 42 Ternp Check. Number 43 43 M A Associates 43 Totals Ternp Check Number Ternp Check Number 44 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 44 Med Centers H P 396 Totals Ternp Check Number Ternp Check Number 45 15-4305-060-60 43 01-2074 01-4131-110-10 01-4131-020-20 01-4131-040-40 01-4131-050-50 01-4131-070-70 05-4131-105-15 08-4110-000-00 15-4131-060-60 44 184.50 184.50 7.19 57.18 64.37 splys 19.91 Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem Sept prem 45 Mendota Heights Rubbish 01-4280-310-50 Jul svc 45 Mendota Heights Rubbish 01-4280-310-70 Jul svc 45 Mendota Heights Rubbish 15-4280-310-60 Jul svc 45 Mendota Heights Rubbish 01-4280-315-30 Jul svc 180 Totals Ternp Check Number 45 19.91 1,896.45 1,244.80 2,750.35 500.00 1,161.45 205.75 872.40 122.40 455.80 9, 209.40 59. 65 59.65 59. 63 42.60 221.53 16 Aug 1991 Claims List Page 8 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Ternp Check Nurnber 46 Temp. Check Number Vendor Narne Account Code Comments Amount 46 MDIAI 01-4400-020-20 regr Wicks 75.00 46 75.00 Totals Ternp Check Number 46 Ternp Check Nurnber 47 47 Metro Waste Control 15-4448-060-60 Jul sac chgs 9,975.00 47 Metro Waste Control 15-3615 Jul sac chgs 99.75cr 94 9,875.25 Totals Temp Check Number 47 Ternp Check Nurnber 48 48 Midwest Photo Svc 01-4305-020-20 Jul svc 24.55 48 24.55 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 48 Ternp Check Nurnber 49 49 Midwest Siren Service 07-4330-000-00 Aug Mtcn 49 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 49 Ternp Check Nurnber 50 50 Minn Dept of Revenue 01-4320-050-50 Jul fuel tax 50 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 50 Ternp Check Nurnber 51 51 Minn Mutual Life Ins 01-2072 8/9 payroll 51 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 51 Ternp Check Nurnber 52 52 Minnesota Teamsters Loc 320 01-2075 Aug dues 52 return Totals Temp Check Number Temp Check Number 53 Minnesota Toro Inc 53 52 01-4330-490-70 62.40 62.40 27.40 27.40 400.00 400.00 222.00 222.00 20.78cr 16 Auo 1991 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Claims List Page 9 Temp Check Nurnber 53 Ternp. Check Nurnber Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount 53 Minnesota Toro Inc 01-4330-490-70 splys 53 Minnesota Toro Inc 01-4330-490-70 splys 159 Totals Ternp Check Number 53 47.45 20.54 47.21 Ternp Check Number 54 54 Duane Nielsen Co 15-4330-490-60 LS rors 112.20 54 112.20 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 54 Ternp Check Nurnber 55 55 Nelson Rudie & Assoc 73-4220-872-00 Re 91-4 375.00 55 375.00 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 55 Ternp Check Nurnber 56 56 Northern State Power 01-4212-315-30 Auo svc 56 Northern State Power 01-4212-310-50 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 01-4212-310-70 Aum svc 56 Northern State Power 15-4212-310-60 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 01-4212-320-70 Rua svc 56 Northern State Power 15-4212-400-60 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 08-4212-000-00 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 01-4211-315-30 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 28-4211-000-00 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 01-4211-420-50 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 08-4211-000-00 Aug svc 56 Northern State Power 01-4211-320-70 Aug svc 672 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 56 Ternp Check Nurnber 57 57 Northern State Power 15-4211-400-60 57 Northern State Power 01-4211-310-50 57 Northern State Power 01-4211-310-70 57 Northern State Power 15-4211-310-60 228 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 57 Ternp Check Nurnber 58 58 Oxygen Service Co 01-4305-030-30 Aug svc Aug svc Aug svc Aug svc oxy 36.11 7.55 7.55 7.54 72.59 14.00 22.30 524.79 514.58 144.50 1,322.85 93.08 2.767.44 411.56 184.20 184.18 184.18 964.12 59.18 16 Aug 1991 Claims List Page 10 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Ternp Check Nurnber 58 Temp. Check Nurnber Vendor Narne 58 Oxygen Service Co 116 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Temp Check Nurnber 59 Account Code 01-4305-030-30 58 59 Public Ernpl Ret Assn 01-2074 59 Public Ernpl Ret Assn 01-4131-110-10 118 Totals Ternp Check Number 59 Ternp Check Nurnber 60 Comments Amount act thru 7/15 13.50 Sept prern Sept prern 72.68 48.00 9.00 57.00 60 S & T Office Products 05-4300-105-15 splys 98.78 60 S & T Office Products 01-4300-030-30 splys 5.81 60 S & T Office Products 01-4300-020-20 solus 88.50 60 S & T Office Products 01-4300-020-20 splys 26.43 240 219.52 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 60 Ternp Check Nurnber 61 61 S K B Inc 15-4305-060-60 61 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 61 durnoino fee 45.00 Ternp Check Nurnber 62 62 Shamrock Cleaners 01-4410-020-20 Jul clno 62 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 62 Ternp Check Nurnber 63 63 Shade in a Day 72-4460-835-00 treern removal 86-4 63 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber 63 Ternp Check Nurnber 64 64 Station Nineteen Arch, Inc 09-4220-000-00 Jul svc Re Park shelter 45.00 43.70 43.70 350.00 350. 00 79.64 64 79.64 Totals Temp Check Nurnber 64 Ternp Check Nurnber 65 16 Aug 1991 Claims List Page 11 Fri 12:17 PM City of Mendota Heights Temp Check Number 65 Ternp. Check Nurnber Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount 65 Suri Newspapers 01-4240-080-80 Re Kensington PUD 26.04 65 Sun Newspapers 01-4240-080-80 Re Centex 87.42 65 Sun Newspapers 73-4240-872-00 bid ad 91-4 43.40 65 Sun Newspapers 01-4220-130-10 fin rot 204.50 65 Sun Newspapers 05-4220-130-15 fire rpt 36.45 65 Suri Newspapers 15-4220-130-60 fin rot 32.20 65 Sun Newspapers 03-4220-130-00 firs rpt 32.20 65 Sun Newspapers 10-4220-130-00 fin rot 10.90 65 Suri Newspapers 21-4220-130-00 fin rpt 10.90 65 Sun Newspapers 14-4220-130-00 fin rpt 45.42 65 Sun Newspapers 16-4220-130-00 fin rpt 100.85 715 630.28 Totals Ternp Check Number 65 Ternp Check Nurnber 66 66 Tractor Supply 01-4305-070-70 splys 49.24 66 49.24 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Ternp Check Nurnber 67 67 Tripp Oil 67 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Ternp Check Nurnber 68 66 01-1210 67 68 Trophy House 01-4435-200-70 68 Trophy House 01-4435-200-70 136 Totals Temp Check Number 68 Ternp Check Nurnber 69 gas splys splys 69 U S West Communications 01-4210-020-20 Aug svc 69 U S West Communications 15-4210-060-60 Aug svc 69 U S West Communications 01-4210-050-50 Aug svc 69 U S West Communications 01-4210-070-70 Aug svc 69 U S West Cornrnunications 01-4210-110-10 Aug svc 69 U S West Comrnunications 01-4210-020-20 Aug svc 69 U S West Communications 01-4210-040-40 Aug svc 69 U S West Communications 05-4210-105-15 Aug svc 69 U S West Communications 15-4210-060-60 Aug svc 621 Totals Temp Check Nurnber 69 3,152.00 ,1 3. 152.00 16.42 23.90 40.32 111. 64 324.25 28.76 28.76 287.22 365.71 52.61 156.98 50.56 1.406.49 16 Aug 1991 Fri 12:17 PM Ternp Check Nurnber Ternp. Check Number Vendor Name 70 Uniforms Unlimited 70 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Ternp Check Nurnber 71 Vision Energy 71 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Temp Check Nurnber 72 Russ Wahl 72 Totals Ternp Check Nurnber Temp Check Number 73 Dale Wischnewski 73 Totals Temp Check Nurnber 6579 Grand Total 70 71 72 73 Claims List City of Mendota Heights Account Code 01-4410-020-20 70 01-4422-050-50 71 01-4231-040-40 72 09-4460-000-00 73 MANUAL CHECKS: 13254 13255 13256 13257 13258 13259 13260 13261 261,49 500.00 3,614.52 300.00 7,995.24 13,709.63 3,150.31 42,064.03 71,595.22 G.T. 396,935.89 Comments splys splys insp fees Re 89-6 I2 Dennis•Delmont 144, - a,m ;Mulvihill State Capitol C. U. Dakota County Bank PERA Dakota County Bank Commissioner of Revenue Payroll a/c exp reimb earnest money 8/9 payroll deductions 7/26 payroll 8/9 w/h 8/9 SIT 8/9 net payroll Pane 12 Amount 39.95 39.95 22.95 22.95 180.00 180.00 1.430.00 1,430.00 325, 340.67 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 15, 1991 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Treasurer SUBJECT:City Audit Report HISTORY: Several weeks ago, a copy of the City audit by Peat Marwick was given to each of you. Steve Laible will be at our Council meeting on August 20th to answer any questions you might have regarding the report. ACTION REQUIRED: None. LES:mlk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor, Council, City Adminis FROM: Klayton Eckles Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Mendota Heights Road Bids Job No. 9013 Improvement No. 91, Project No.4 August 15, 1991 DISCUSSION Staff recieved bids for the construction of watermain, storm sewer, pedestrian trails, street lights, and street widening along Mendota Heights Road between I -35E and Dodd Road today at 10:00 A.M. Only three bids were recieved and the low bid was received from Brown & Cris, Inc. in the amount of $632,342.50. I am concerned with the bids recieved for several reasons. First, the engineer's estimate was $600,000, so the low bid was 5% over our estimate. Second, the lowest bidder, Brown and Cris, added a clause in the bid which stated that the completion date is not guarranteed due to pipe supply problems. Apparently, the specified pipe is currently not available in town, so there could be up to a 30 day delay. This probably dissuaded many contractors from bidding. These facts alone are enough to make me question the advisability of awarding the contract. In addition, several other issues have arisen just in the last couple of weeks which also make the awarding of a contract less urgent. Just as this project was going out for bid, I recieved a letter from Mn/DOT which stated that the maximum MSA money which can be "banked" has been increased. This means we won't lose any MSA money if we don't award a contract this year. We would still have to complete a project next year. The other issue which has arisen concerns our overall city water system. HNTB is studying our water system, and they have found a need for a larger trunk line to the water tower. They have suggested we install a portion of this trunk line under this segment of Mendota Heights Road (so instead of a 16" watermain, we install a 24" watermain). B delaying the project, we would have more time to examine this issue. RECOMMENDATION Given that the lowest bid is over the engineer's estimate, and contains an unacceptable clause, and given the low contractor participation of only three bids, I recommend we reject all bids, and rebid this project this winter for construction next spring and summer. ACTION REOUIRED If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation they should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 91- , RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND REJECTING BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (PILOT KNOB ROAD TO TRUNK HIGHWAY 149, IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT NO. 4) KHE:dfw City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION RECEIVING AND REJECTING BIDS FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR MENDOTA HEIGHTS ROAD (PILOT KNOB ROAD TO TRUNK HIGHWAY 149) (IMPROVEMENT NO. 91, PROJECT NO. 4) WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bid for the im- provements for Mendota Heights Road (Pilot Knob Road to Trunk Highway 149), bids were received and tabulated according to law and the following bids were received complying with the adver- tisement: Brown & Cris, Inc. F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. Northdale Construction $632,342.50- 642,511.50 654,133.90 WHEREAS, there were eleven planholders and only three of the eleven bid the project; and WHEREAS, the above bids were higher than the engineer's estimate; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended that the bids be rejected on the basis of the number of bids and the amount of the bids; and WHEREAS, the City Engineer has recommended that the bids be rejected and rebid at a later date. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mendota Heights that the bids for the above project are hereby received and rejected based on the reasons stated above. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 13, 1991 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Adminisj.1 — FROM: Klayton H. Eckles Civil Engineer K� -/ SUBJECT: Assessment Hearing Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Job No. 9007 Improvement No. 90, Project No. 1 DISCUSSION: The improvements for the above project are completed and staff has prepared the final assessment roll. In a previous memo we stated that the cost per lot would amount to $12,202.71. In the reevaluation of the roll it was determined that trunk costs were included in this amount and those trunk costs were assessed as part of Bridgeview Shores 1st Addition. The revised assessment for each lot has been reduced $2,212.10 to an amount of $9,990. RECOMMENDATION: I recommend that Council adopt the attached assessment roll as submitted. ACTION REQUIRED: Conduct the public hearing and if Council concurs with the staff recommendation they should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 91- , RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR SEWER, WATER, STORM SEWER, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1) KHE:dfw ASSESSMENT PERIOD Sanitary Sewers & Services - 19 years watermaio & Services - 19 years Storm Sewers - 19 years Streets - 10 years PARCEL NO. 27-15151- 010-01 27-15151- 020-01 27-15151- 030-01 z7-1n1n1- 000-o1 27-15151- 050-01 27-15151- 060-01 27 -15151- 070 -01 7 -151n1 - REPUTED OWNER Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South ozoomi"yton, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 6901 Lyndale Avenue South nzuvmington, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, Mw 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South amomington^ MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South nlnomi^9ton, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South oloowinYton, MN 55420 ASSESSMENT ROLL BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION JOB No. 9007 IMPROVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1 ADOPTED: DESCRIPTION LOT BLK. SANITARY SEWER NO. NO. & SERVICE co' Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co' Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co' Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores Co.2nd Addition Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition 2118.83 ASSESSMENT RATES Sanitary Sewer & Service - *c,uo'no per lot watermain & Service - Storm Sewer - Streets - c,nno'ca per lot 1,553.03 per lot 3,968.47 per lot w«rExnAIwo & STORM STREETS TOTAL SERVICE SEWER 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 *9,990.61 2 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 3 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 4 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 *9,990.61 o � 2118'83 2350.28 1553'03 3968.47 w9,990.61 6 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 7 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 PARCEL REPUTED OWNER -15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction 0-01 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 -15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction 0-01 8901 Lyndale Avenue South nzoominnton, MN 55420 -15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction 0-01 o901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 -15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction 0-01 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 -15151- Marvin H. Anderson cons-truction '0-01 8901 Lyndale Avenue South xznominnton, MN 55420 '-15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction .0-01 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington: MN 55420 '-15151- Marvin H, Anderson Construction 0-02 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomingtbn, MN 55420 '-15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction m -oz 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 '-15151- Marvin H. Anderson Construction m -oz 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55920 DESCRIPTION co. Bridgeview Shores Co.2nd Addition Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co' Bridgeview Shores • 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co' Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition LOT BLK. sk .m SEWER WATERMAINS m NO. NO. 8. SERVICE SERVICE STORM STREETS TOTAL SEWER o 1 2118'83 2350'28 1553.03 3968'47 »9,990'61 9 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 *9,990'61 10 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 *v,rpo.az 11 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 *9,990.61 12 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 13 1 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 *9,990'61 1 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968'47 *9,990'61 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9.990.61 3 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 PARCEL NO. 27-15151- 040-02 27-15151- 050-02 27-15151- 060-02 27-15151- 070-02 27-15151- 080-02 27-15151- 090-02 27-15151- 100-02 REPUTED OWNER Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, mw 554e0 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Marvin x.'onuerson Construction 8901 Lyouaze Avenue South xzoowinoton, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Marvin H. Anderson Construction 8901 Lyndale Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 DESCRIPTION co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition Co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition co. Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition LOT BLK. SANITARY SEWER wATsxM»zwm & STORM STREETS TOTAL SERVICE SEWER 4 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 5 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 6 z 2118.83 2350.28 1553'03 3968.47 $9,990.61 7 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 8 2 9 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 2350.28 1553.03 3968.47 $9,990.61 10 2 2118.83 2350.28 1553.03 3969.47 $9,990.61 City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING ASSESSMENTS FOR SEWER, WATER, STORM SEWER, AND STREET IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE BRIDGEVIEW SHORES 2ND ADDITION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 90, PROJECT NO. 1) BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights as follows: WHEREAS, the City Clerk, with the assistance of the City Engineer, has calculated the proper amount to be specially assessed_for the costs incurred to date with respect to Improvement No. 907-PrOject No. 1 construction of sewer, water, storm sewer, and street improvements to serve the following described property situated in the City of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, Minnesota, more particularly described as follows: Bridgeview Shores 2nd Addition WHEREAS, the proposed assessment roll has been on file with the Clerk and at all times since its filing has been open for public inspection; and notice thereof has been duly published and mailed as required by law. Said notice stated the date, time and place of such meeting; the general nature of the improvement; the area proposed to be assessed; that the proposed assessment roll has been on file with the Clerk; and that written or oral objections thereto by any property owner would be considered; and WHEREAS, said hearing was held at 8:00 o'clock P.M. on Tuesday, August 15, 1991, at the City Hall in the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Mayor announced that the hearing was open for the consid- eration of objections, if any, to said proposed assessments; and WHEREAS, all persons present were then given an opportunity to present oral objections, and all written objections theretofore filed with the Clerk were presented and considered. NOW THEREFORE, this Council, having heard and considered all objec- tions so presented, and being fully advised in the premises, and having made all necessary adjustments and corrections, finds that each of the lots, pieces and parcels of land enumerated in the proposed assessment roll was and is specially benefited by the construction of said improvements in not less than the amount of the assessment, as corrected, set opposite the description of each such lot, piece and parcel of land, respectively, and that such amount so set out is hereby levied against each of the respective lots, pieces and parcels of land therein described; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the P'roiiosed assessment roll as so cor- rected is hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper special assess- ment for each of said lots, pieces and parcels of land respectively, and the assessment against each parcel, with the interest at the rate of eight percent (8%) per annum accruing on the full amount thereof from time to time unpaid, sM11 be a lien concurrent with general taxes upon such parcel and all thereof. The total amount of each such assessment as to sanitary sewer, stoiiu sewers, and watermains shall be payable in equal amounts extending over a period of nineteen (19) years and each assessment as to street improvements shall be payable in equal amounts extending over a period of ten (10) years; the first of said installments, together with interest on the entire assessment. The first year interest shall commence October 1, 1991 and interest for the first year shall be from October 1, 1991 to December 31, 1991, to be payable with general taxes for the year 1991, collectible in 1992 (now designated as real estate taxes payable in 1992), and one of each of the remaining installments, together with one year's interest on that and all other unpaid installments, to be payable with general taxes for each consecutive year thereafter until the entire assessment is paid. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that prior to September 217"1991; the owner of any lot, piece or parcel of land assessed hereby may at any time pay the whole of such assessment, without interest to the City Treasurer; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk shall prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a certified duplicate of said assessment roll with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended upon the proper tax lists of the County, and the County Auditor shall thereafter collect said assessments in the manner pro- vided by law. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 20th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk CITY OF:MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 12, 1991 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr. Treasurer SUBJECT: City Hall Construction Issues DISCUSSION: In December, the Joseph Construction Company presented a billing approved by the architect for payment of $11,000 of the $16,000 still owed to them for the City Hall construction. The billing was for work done to correct the drainage problem on the front of the building. Due to lack of response to three remaining items of concern, the City Council refused payment of the billing (see attached memo and letter to contractor and architect). When we received hard spring rains, the building continued to leak and staff instructed Joseph to halt repairs on the interior until they found a final solution to the water problem. The contractor and architect met at the building in early July to review the problem. Attached is a letter received from Joseph following that meeting. The letter attempts to assign blame for the corrections and requests that Joseph be paid for the work completed. ACTION REQUIRED: Determine direction staff should take to resolve the remaining problems with the building and whether to pay Joseph all or part of his request. Total balance due Joseph is $16,000 with his request at this time of $11,000. The building continues to leak and no action has been taken or word received from the project architect Lindberg Pierce. LES:mlk C04:3 General Contractors Construction Managers July 15, 1991 Mr. Guy Kullander City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Re: Punch List Items Mendota Heights City Hall & Police Station Dear Mr. Kullander: On Thursday, July 11, 1991, we met with Bob and Paul -at the jobsite to further inspect the water problem at the south entry. It appeared that water may still be coming in at west corner where front entry walk connects to building. Bob Pierce offered to further build this area up with timbers to enhance surface drainage. Our input was that this may work, however a full length gutter at south roof edge would be a better long term solution. We also feel that any future action on this issue should be communicated to the City Council since these options costs money and carry consequences that the Council should be aware of. After the sight inspection we met in the conference room to review the completed punch list items. Below is a summary of actions taken. 1. Repair Chips in Stove Sill complete 2. Repair Lawn by Lindberg Pierce 3. Repair Sprinkler * Joseph responsible for replacement costs on upper level while • Lindberg Pierce is responsilbe for lower level.- Guy is to expedite repair directly and backcharge Joseph and Lindberg Pierce accordingly for reimbursement. 4. Furnish and Install Curbs by Lindberg Pierce 5. Low Point in Sidewalk • by Lindberg Pierce 6. Repair Water Damage to Squad Room and Exercise Room * Joseph to complete as soon as Lindberg Pierce and City agree on final repairs to surface drainage problem at south entry. Mr. Guy Kullander July 15, 1991 Page 2 In summary, The Joseph Company is only responsible for interior wall finishes at lower level. All other punch list items have either been completed or are not our responsibility. Again, we are entitled to the architects approved payment of $11,277.61 immediately. If you are in disagreement or feel the Council still may hold out I ask that you call me. We would be willing to personally address the Councils concerns to expedite this payment if you feel this is necessat ,_ Very truly yours, J•se• A. Wag esident JAW/kr c: Bob Pierce Paul Ragazzino Lawrence Shaughnessy, Jr. %cum TN[ SEPH General Contractors Construction Managers April 9, 1991 City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Re: Guy Kullander Letter dated: April 3, 1991 Relating to Punch List Items Akko[ck Attn: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator Dear Mayor: Below is a list of items regarding the above entitled_ matter. ITEM 1: REPAIR CHIPS IN STONE SILL The Joseph Company will make these repairs on or before May 1, 1991. Estimate of cost to repair $300.00. ITEM 2: REPAIR LAWN - REPLACE DISTURBED AREAS WITH SOD. LEVEL TO MATCH ADJACENT AREAS This was a modification initiated by Lindberg Pierce. The entire area basically has a zero slope and they tried to create a swale so water would flow away from entry sidewalk. The Joseph Company is not liable for this repair. ITEM 3: SEVERAL IRRIGATION SPRINKLER HEADS DAMAGED The Joseph Company will correct and pay for upper level damage. Please have Guy Kullander contact the sprinkler contractor -so they can evaluate the corrective work and cost to repair. ITEM 4: CONSTRUCT TWO - 4" WIDE x 12" DERP x 12' LONG CONCRETE CURBS ADJACENT TO POLICE DEPARTMENT ENTRANCE This will be a modification to the contract. Again this a revision to correct water drainage due to insufficient slope away from the building. This is a design problem and The Joseph Company is not liable for this repair. • , .-.'City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Mn 55118 ITEM 5: THE LOW POINT IN SIDEWALK AT POLICE -ENTRANCE IS UNACCEPTABLE: Again this is a cause of insufficient design contour slope away from the building. We were instructed by Lindberg -Pierce to put in this sidewalk exactly as it is. The Joseph Company is not liable for this repair. ITEM 6: REPAIR DAMAGE IN SQUAD ROOM The Joseph Company will make these repairs on or before May 1, 1991. Estimate cost to repair $590.00. ITEM 7: REPAIR DAMAGE IN EXERCISE ROOM The Joseph Company will make these repairs on or before May 1, 1991. Estimate cost to repair $680.00. Total cost to repair items which are our responsibility is approximately $1,570.00. We certainly are intitled to the architects approved payment of $11,277.61 at this time. Please issue this payment as soon as possible. Sinc_ ely, esident JAW/kr c: Lindberg Pierce April 11, 1991 From: Guy Kullander Re: Comments to Joseph Letter of April 9, 1991. Item #2 Incorrect Statement: One area below maybe Lindberg Pierce responsibility. Two areas above damaged when "envelope" replaced by Joseph. Item #4 Debatable: Joseph Company responsible for backfill around building. This fill ig higher than the elevations shown on architectural plans. Flat slope is Lindberg Pierce problem, but here Joseph did not construct according to plans. Adjacent gravel/grade should not be higher than the sidewalk. Item #5 Interesting statement: Sidewalk not installed as shown on architectural plans. Joseph Company foreman once stated to me that they built sidewalk with low point to correct lack of slope. My impression was that the Joseph Co. made this change but if Lindberg Pierce made this field change then they are responsible for ponding conditions. Items to be deducted from amount owed the Joseph Company: 1. Sweeping of lot last January to prevent excessive mud tracking into building cost $110.00 2. Replacement of dead trees $450.00 as per agreement between myself and Joseph Wagner. 3. Repair damage to sprinkler, heads in rock areas adjacent to south side of building $68.00 4. 'Repair lawn areas on upper level damaged when "envelope" replaced work approved by Joseph Wegner in the amount of $552.50 PAYMENT: Inform Joseph that payment (amount, yet to be determined) could be approved by Council on May 7th -IF all work items have been completed. m - City off Mendota Heights April 3, 1991 Joe Wagner The Joseph Company 806 18th Ave. NW P.O. Box 621 Austin, MN 55912 Paul Ragozzino Lindberg -Pierce Suite 1200 15 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Gentlemen: The City is prepared to release any monies not_needed•to - offset correction of punch list items. .This situation.has dragged on for almost two. years and it is the City's,. • . position that if the following items have not•been"_corrected by July 1,-1991 any undispersed funds.:owed Lindberg Pierce or the Joseph Company will be used to make the. repairs '. �.y.t�l:s.rC•Tiw< ..,i.. /iH•1y1'gj St' t S', necessary totcompletethe-building•y.=•A:...�:.�:.. We request a response from both Lindberg -Pierce and the` " ' �'•. Joseph Company as to: "1. who will make each repair .' . • 2. -when will the work be completed y: 3. .which firm will be financially. -responsible for .::, ' - each repair item • 4. an estimated cost/value of repair so'that the City - can determine what monies can -be released.at.this.- time. Sincerely, - A47/re4.461,,) Guy Kullander Building Manager attachment: Punch list cc: Larry Shaughnessy Tom Lawell 1101 Victoria" Curve -Mendota Heights, MN - 55118'ts':" 4524850 City of Mendota Heights April 2, 1991 The Joseph Company 806 18th Avenue NW P.O. Box 621 Austin, MN 55912 Gentlemen: • • • . At the February 5, 1991 City Council meeting, the City Council considered the billing set by Lindberg -Pierce for partial payment of the funds due on the construction of the City Hall. - • Previous to this meeting, the architects had been isked:o-respond: to the three questions remaining on the contract. :As. of the meeting date and until the present time, no response has been received. As soon as the remaining questions are addressed, the City'Council will reconsider payment of the Payment Certificate. We would appreciate your help in getting- the fin completed. .*Sincerely •r• • • - • . .1 ••• • • • Lawrence E. Shaughness Jr. •. . Treasurer ,. •", • ... LES:Ickb Enclosure • - , . cc: kr. Paul Ragozkinb • . • . , • • ' ; • t*: • • - • at . -r• ar1 I44t‘ • C ICS e.rtk. • January 22, 1991 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: HISTORY: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS NEMO Mayor, City Council and City Administ Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr., Treasurer City Hall Payment Application Since our building has been substantially complete, we have withheld from the contractor approximately $18,000 pending correction of the drainage and water damage problem we have experienced. In fall 1990 we had the contractor attempt to correct the drainage problem at the front of the building by_removing and replacing the backfill material on either side of the sidewalk. Water seepage in this area had previously caused significant damage to the Police Department and adjacent spaces. The architect hassubmitted a request•for payment of $11,277.61 to the general contractor for the work that has been done. After payment we would retain $5,000 to cover future corrective work. At this time, staff has three areas of concern that remain for completion of the -contract. A written statement from the architect was requested as to the resolution of these concerns; however, none has been received. These include: Basement Damage: 1 Rear Damage: Correction of water damage to sheetrock and carpet in exercise, squad -and bathroom. Due to elevation, the regrading work that was done to the back lawn area sePps to have only moved the water and• has not solved the problem. Front Drainage: The work -completed will provide some relief; however, it will not be tested until the spring rains. It should be noted that no soil replacement was attempted under the sidewalk itself which could be the source of our seepage problem. APPLICAT ON AND CERTIFICATE FOR PAYMENT IA IA DOCUMENT C702 PAGE ONE OF PROJECT: (name, address) TO (Owner) ATTN: NEW CITY HALL BUILDING Lexington and State Highway 110 Mendota HOlights, MN. City of M*Idota Heights 750 South Tflaza Drive Mendota Heights, Mn. 55120 , ARCHITECT: ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: CONTRACTOR: CONTRACT FOR: APPLICATION DATE: PERIOD FROM: 7/10/89 Lindberg Pierce, Inc. The Joseph Company, Inc. New City Hall 12/11/90 , APPLICATION NO: Final TO 12/10/90 CHANGE ORDER SUMMARY Change Orders approved in previous months by Owner— ADDITIONS S DEDUCTIONS $ TOTAL Subsequent Change Orders Number Approved (date) G-1 9,169.00 G-2,3,4,5,6 41,464.55 G-7 1,510.88 G-8 5911.46 TOTALS Net change by, Change Orders 4- 30,186.21 State of: Minnesota County of: Mower The undersigned Contractor certifies that the Work covered by this Appli- cation for Payment has been completed In accordance with the Contract Documents, that all amounts have been paid by him for Work for which previous Certificates for Payment were issued and payments received from the Owner, and t t the current payment shown herein Is now due. In accqfdance with the Arch—t: Bv: Application is made for Payment, as shown below, in connection with the Contract. Continuation Sheet, AIA Document G702A, is attached. The present status of the account for this Contract is as follows: 1,054,000.00 V ORIGINAL CONTRACT SUM Net change by Change Orders CONTRACT SUM TO DATE 30,186.21 1,084,186.21 TOTAL COMPLETED & STORED TO DATE (Column C on G702A) RETAINAGE or as noted in Column I on G702A TOTAL EARNED LESS RETAINAGE $, ' LESS PREVIOUS CERTIFICATES FOR PAYMENT 1,084,186.21 74,IZ1 ) 1,067,908.60 1(1277.6,1 CURRENTPAYMENT DUE ....................$ Subscribed and sworn to before meday Of December this llt Notary Public: My Commission expires: 90 December 199 and this Application for Payment the Contractor Is entitled to payment in the amount shown above. ,19 90 0 OWNER , 0 lITECT • .• EliL fRACTOR City of Mendota Heights City Hall Punch List Feb. 1991 Prepared by Guy Kullander 1. Repair chips in stone sill damaged when backfill replaced. * 6-8 large chips 1"x 1-1/2 to 2" * 4-6 Medium chips 3/4" x 1" * 4-6 small chips 1/4" to 1/2" 2. Repair lawn - replace disturbed areas with sod. Level to match adjacent areas. Approximately 146 square yards. 12'x3/' 50D /-1W/) 24' Y.1' ' _5CD • Tj 4- 14 3. Several irrigation sprinkler heads damaged. Estimate repair costs at $200 to $400. * 2 broken * 2 look ok * 6 buried - condition unknown Not sure if any heads in lower grass area were damaged. Will know at start-up. pAls4A6)ED tielit)5 X X X 4. Construct 2 - 4" wide x 12" deep x 12'- 0" long concrete curbs adjacent to Police Department entrance under canopy. Planting areas on both sides are higher than sidewalk. Run off goes directly in front of door and ponds. Hazardous condition in winter. • 5. The low point in sidewalk at Police entrance is unacceptable. Solution #i Remove sidewalk from parking lot to edge of canopy. Replace sidewalk, slope to bituminous by dropping curb section to achieve additional fall. Solution #2 Place catchbasin adjacent to low point of sidewalk. Discharge to catch basin on north side of driveway. Attempt to drain water across lawn is a failure - snow banks and ice prevent this from working in winter. c, DFSi6,N= .iC—)11•• ACTe AL f .1(7-1 ConE: - - - • (.O' •�-•� 7$(,cZ%--- 1.510 \\ Z•SG.` Ht -fey L.�C1HlaTON 5 6 6. Repair damage in squad room. A. Replace sheetrock behind squad room desks B. Paint C. Clean carpet - replace if necessary .D. Replace carpet base along wall EQUAL EQJAL x' QUA,- EQUAL tr* ... ..... . .....4-.N.Yeees•teeees•A re-OUNTEAL44416117. DM4046, ED. SQUAD ROOM -SOUTH ELEVATION. • • 14--•=2" Ftiv!Azt 128 SQUAD 441.2 Ir5o TOR. A 7.. Repair damage in exercise room A. Replace sheetrock in shower area B. Patch ceiling C. Reinstall insulation in block wall D. Paint repaired area E. Remove rust on H.M. door moulding F. Repair tile G. Replace sheetrock damaged in exercise room H. Replace damaged/stained carpet STORAGE 4132. ..• MECHANICAL.. .stti3s MECH. EXERCISE 11 EQUIPMENT MECH. .43+ • 8. Replaced trees that died and not replaced by landscaper. Joe Wagner approved $450 for tree replacement. I arranged for four trees to be installed for the mentioned afore amount. 9. Four of the airhandling units did not have phase protection. We experienced a power outage when we first occupied the building that resulted in a motor burning out. We were assured by Lindberg -Pierce that the motors were as specified and were protected. Last summer we experienced another outage which resulted in one motor burning out and only by prompt action by me were the other three saved. I received minimal assistance in resolving this problem from Lindberg -Pierce and have had monitor controls installed on all four units. Cost: $496.88 which I feel should be reimbursed to the City. 10. As reported to Paul Ragozinno last fall, the concrete topping -on the light pole bases is cracked and breaking off. Must be done again. 11. Also Paul, what action will be done regarding the discoloration of the stain used on the exterior suffits? Will it be redone? By whom? When? CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administ SUBJECT: Kensington Phase II Developer's Agreement August 16, 1991 INTRODUCTION: At our August 6th meeting, Council approved numerous actions related to the Centex - Kensington Phase II Development, subject to approval of the project Developer's Agreement. Attached for your consideration is the Developer's Agreement prepared by staff and legal counsel. DISCUSSION: The Developer's Agreement is a contract between the City and the Developers (Centex and Tandem Corporation) setting forth many of the finer details related to the project. Through this agreement, the developer is bound to develop the property in accordance with the plans and submittals reviewed by Council on August 6th. These documents are incorporated into the agreement as Exhibit B, and due to their bulk, have not been redistributed as part of this packet. Other "highlights" of the agreement include a provision that Centex will be allowed to privately undertake the construction of certain public improvements which are designed, City approved, and under written contract in 1991. Other public improvements in the area will be completed by either the City or the Developer, at the City's option. The agreement provides for the dedication of the agreed upon park land as part of the final plat, and stipulates certain grading conditions which must be met as part of the dedication. The agreement further stipulates that the primary access road to the park, Concord Way, be completed not later than July 1, 1993, although it remains the intent of Centex to actually have the road constructed during the 1992 construction season. As an aside related to the park issue, on August 13th the Park and Recreation Commission discussed the Kensington Park issue and agreed with City staff that the necessary park design work could be handled by our Engineering staff without the need to retain an independent park design consultant. It would be our f intention to further discuss park design objectives with the Council in September, complete design work over this winter, and hopefully let construction contracts for the park next spring. Other conditions imposed by Council on the development are included on Exhibit D, Resolution No. 91- . On August 6th, Council approved the Conditional Use Permit for Planned Unit Development via Resolution, and directed staff to prepare this Resolution setting forth the conditions of approval. The last step required of Centex before they_can proceed with project construction is submission of their final plat. Centex had originally hoped to have the final plat ready for consideration at the August 20th meeting, but due to the size of the project and short time frame, it is not yet fully prepared. The delay in preparing the final plat is not overly important to the City, but does have implications for Centex as they will not be issued a City grading permit until the final plat is approved. Centex intends to submit the final plat to Council for approval on September 3rd. RECOMMENDATION: Representatives from the City and Centex intend to meet on Monday to conduct a final review of the Developer's Agreement... It is not envisioned that significant changes will result from that meeting, and any changes which are agreed to will be brought forth as an add-on item on Tuesday. It is my recommendation that the Developer's Agreement be approved. ACTION REQUIRED: Review the terms and conditions of the attached Developer's Agreement making any desired changes and then if Council desires to implement the recommendation, pass a motion authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. MTL:mlk AUG -16-91 FRI 9:14 WINTHROP & WEINSTINE DEVELOPERS' AGREEMENT: KENSINGTON PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, PHASE II P. 03 RE: Kensington P.U.D., Phase I I: Case No. 91-23 THIS DEVELOPERS' AGREEMENT for the Kensington Planned Unit Development, Phase ll, has been entered Into this .� day of August, 1991, by and between CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation ("Centex"), d/b/a CENTEX HOMES, 5929 Baker Road, Suite 470, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345, and TANDEM CORPORATION ("Tandem"), a Minnesota corporation located at 2765 Casco Point Road, Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 (hereinafter jointly called the "Developers") and CiTY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, a municipal corporation, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 (hereinafter called the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developers by Application dated and filed February 8, 1990, have applied to the City for approval of the following: a. Rezoning of the subject property (legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto) from R-1, R -1A, and R -1B (all one -family residential districts) to HR PUD (high density residential planned unit development) and MR PUD (medium density residential planned unit development) as set forth on the diagram attached hereto as Exhibit 8 (the "Plan"). b. Preliminary plat approval for Kensington Planned Unit Development, Phase II. c. Certain wetlands permits; and d. A Conditional Use Permit for a planned unit development; and e. Street vacation of Lockwood Drive. WHEREAS, the Developers propose to develop onthe subject property a planned unit development consisting of three hundred five (305) residential units and approximately thirteen (13) acres of park in accordance with the Plan (hereinafter called the "Kensington Phase II Planned Unit Development"); and WHEREAS, the Plan was reviewed and, approved by the city planning commission on July 23, 1991, subject to certain conditions; and AUG -16-91 FRI 9:15 WINTHROP Oc WEINSTINE P.. 0.4 WHEREAS, the Plan was reviewed and approved by the city council on August 6, 1991, subject to certain conditions set forth on Exhibit D attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Developers have agreed that Phase 11 shall comply with and conform to the conditions specified herein; and WHEREAS, there is currently pending before the Dakota County District court as File No. 19-C9-91-006089 the matter of Centex Real Estate Cor oration a Nevada corporation dib a Centex Homes` an an em or•ora ion a nneso a corporation Plaintiff- etitioners vs. the Ci y o ' en • o a ' eig s, ' a o a County, corporation, a municipal corporation, Defendant-1�espondnt (the ''Kensington Lawsuit"); and WHEREAS, contemporaneously with the execution hereof, Developers shall execute and deliver to the City a Stipulation of Dismissal of the Kensington Lawsuit with prejudice along with a full and final release of all claims arising in connection therewith; and WHEREAS, as between the Developers, Centex and Tandem each owns a portion of the entire property involved in these proceedings, to wit: Centex owns Parcel "A" and Tandem owns Parcel "B", as more particularly depicted;. on Exhibit "E" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, as this DEVELOPERS' AGREEMENT: KENSINGTON PLANNED UNiT DEVELOPMENT, PHASE 11 relates to the City, Centex shall be liable for those undertakings herein as the same apply separately to Parcel "A" and Tandem shall be liable for those undertakings as the same shall apply separately to Parcel "B"; and WHEREAS, as to covenants of the Developers relating to both Parcel "A" and Parcel "B", Developers shall be jointly and severally obligated for the performance thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting its Ordinance No. 277, Ordinance Amending City Ordinance No. 401 with respect to MR -PUD, Ordinance No. 278, Ordinance Amending City Ordinance No. 401 with respect to HR -PUD, Resolution No. 91-44, Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit for Phase 11 of Kensington Planned Unit Development (the "P. U. D. "), and Resolution No. 91 -43,' -Resolution- Approving Vacation of Street Right of Ways and Drainage and Utility Easements, the Developer covenants and agrees to develop and maintain the property, subject. to the following terms and conditions: 1. The Developers shall develop and maintain Phase 11 in conformance with the Plan subject to the conditions to approval imposed by the city council, as set forth on Exhibit D attached hereto, and further subject to the conditions and approval requirements provided herein. The Developers shall not develop, construct upon, or maintain Phase 11 in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developers acknowledge that pursuan(to the City's zoning ordinance, construction of Phase 11 must commence within one (1) year from the date of approval unless the city council, in its discretion, extends the AUG -16-91 FRI 9=16 WINTHROP e, WEINST INE P_ 05 construction period for an additional one (1) year; if construction does not commence within such period, the Conditional Use Permit granted to the Developers by the City on August 6, 1991 in connection with the Kensington Phase II Planned Unit Development shall lapse and be of no further force and effect. 3. The Developers shall submit to the City for approval, final plans for all sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities, drainage facilities, concrete curb and gutters, and streets (hereinafter called "Improvements") to be mIde and constructed on or within the property to be dedicated to the City. Said plans are hereby made a part of this Agreement. Developers further agree that all Improvements shall be designed by a registered professional engineer in compliance with city, state and federal standards. The City reserves the right to approve or request reasonable modifications to the improvements. All such Improvements designed, approved by the City and for which a written contract is entered into in calendar year 1991 (collectively, the "Developer Improvements") shall be completed by the Developers and shall be free and clear of any liens, claims, charges, or encumbrances including any for work, labor, or services rendered in connection therewith, materials or equipment supplied therefor. Developers agree to provide to the City on or before January 15, 1992 with a written statement describing the Developer Improvements, to be accompanied by copies of the written contracts relating thereto. By the execution,:of,this Agreement, Developers hereby petition the City for the completion. and construction of all public improvements other than the Developer Improvements. Developers acknowledge that the City may, at its option, perform or cause to be performed all public improvement construction on the project site, other than public improvements actually constructed and completed by Developer, with the cost thereof to be assessed against the subject property in accordance with applicable law and city policies and procedures. in the event that any such costs may not be so assessed, Developers shall reimburse the City for such costs upon demand. Developers also agree to furnish to the City for approval a list of contractors being considered for retention by the Developers for the performance of the work required hereby. The City reserves the right to reject a contractor for reasonable cause. It is further agreed that the Developers shall provide (i) all staking and surveying and, (ii) if required by the City Engineer, sufficient full-time resident inspection for the Developer Improvements in order to insure that the . completed Developer Improvements conform to the approved plans and specifications. The City and St. Paul Water Utility will provide for general and final inspection and shall be notified of all tests to be performed. The Developers' inspector, city inspector and St. Paul Water Utility will coordinate inspections at various times to check the condition of water stop boxes and other utility extensions. it is agreed that all charges of the City for legal, planning and engineering services relating to design approval and construction of the Public Improvements, including Inspection, supervision and administration costs and services charged by St. Paul Water Utility, shall be included in the total cost of all Improvements. The Developers shall provide an escrow deposit of $10,000 to cover those costs. Should this amount be exceeded, the Developers shall be billed for those costs, with payment due immediately. The Developers agree to provide to the City on request any and all AUG -16-91 FRI 9:16 WINTHROP e, WEINSTINE documents, agreements or information relative to the Developer Improvements. All plans, bids, change orders or other amendments to the Plan must be approved by the City in advance. The Developer shall be financially responsible for the installation of street identification sign and non-mechanical and nonelectrical traffic control signs. Street signs will be in conformance with the names as indicated on the plat of record and be prepared by City staff. The actual number and location of signs to be installed will be et the discretion of the City and actual installation shall be performed by the City staff. Prior to commencement of the Developer Improvements, Developers shall provide to the City a payment and performance bond(s) from a recognized bonding company providing for construction and completion of the Developer improvements on a "fixed cost" or "guaranteed maximum" basis, naming the City as dual obligee. Upon completion and acceptance per Paragraph 7 below, the Developers warrant and guarantee that the Developer Improvements will be free from any defects in materials or workmanship for a period of one (1) year following said completion and acceptance. Defects in materials or. workmanship shall be reasonably determined by the City in accordance with local industry standards. In case any material or labor supplied by the Developers shall be rejected by the City Engineer or his designated representative as defective or unsuitable, then such rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material and the rejected labor shall be done anew to the specifications and approval of the City Engineer and at the sole cost and expense of the Developers. It is specifically understood that final approval and acceptance of the Developer Improvements shall take the form of a Resolution duly passed by the Mendota Heights City Council, on the advice of the City Engineer. Upon completion of all Developer Improvements, the City Engineer or his designated representative, a representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developers will make a final inspection of the work. Before final payment is made to the contractor by the Developers, the City Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with approved plans and specifications, and the Developers shall submit a written statement attesting to same. Upon completion of the work, the Developers shall provide the City with all reproducible mylar plan sheets and one set of prints showing the sewer service stub inverts and at least two (2) ties to all water stop boxes and all ends of sewer stubs. These plans shall include the locations, elevations and ties to all sanitary sewer and watermain services. 4. The Developers shall submit to the City for approval, final plans for grading, drainage, and landscaping (hereinafter called "Landscaping Improvements"). Said plans are hereby made a part of this Agreement. Developers further agree that all Landscaping improvements shall be designed in compliance with City standards. The City reserves the right to condition its approval upon the agreement of the Developers to complete reasonable specified modifications to the Landscaping Improvements. All such Landscaping Improvements shall be completed by the Developers and shall be free and clear of any liens, claims, charges of encumbrances, including any for work, labor, or services rendered in connection therewith, materials or equipment supplied therefor. AUG -16-91 FRI 9:17 WINTHROP e, WEINST INE P. 07 5. Developers agree to dedicate, transfer and convey to the City by dedication in the final plat without cost to said City free and clear of all encumbrances other than existing utility easements of record, to the areas designated as park on Exhibit B (hereinafter collectively called the "Park"); Developers further agree to transfer to the City immediately upon recording the final plat by instrument acceptable to the City, (i) a fifteen (15) foot trail easement between Lots 6 and 7, Block 1 of the P.U.D. and (II) Outlot A. Developers agree to install post markers at all park boundary corners at no cost to the City. Developers shall hold, at the time of final platting of the P.U.D., good and marketable fee simple title in and to all proOerty to be dedicated to the City hereunder. Concurrent with project grading, Developers also agree to submit a bona fide bid, along with other responsible bidders if competitive bidding is required, to grade the Park at City's expense in accordance with reasonable grading plans approved by the City. Developers agree to design their site grading such that each of the City park areas can be graded to final park design conditions without the need to add or remove soil. Developers also agree to insure that adequate amounts of on-site topsoil (including any on-site black dirt) are available on each park site, at no cost to the City, sufficient to cover all parkland with at least 4 Inches of material, whether or not Developers are awarded the park grading contract. Developers agree to take all reasonable steps to complete Concord Way providing access to the Park not later than July 1, 1993. 6. Developers agree that anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, the city council, its agents, employees, and/or assigns shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the Developers, their contractors or subcontractors, materiaimen, laborers, or to any other person or persons whomsoever, for any claims, demands, damages, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this Agreement or the performance and completion of the work and improvements provided herein. The Developers will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City from and against all claims, demands, damages, actions or causes of actions, costs, disbursements and liability, specifically including without limitation, cost and expenses for City administrative time and labor, costs of consulting engineering services and costs of legal services, paid or incurred by or asserted against the City, arising out of or in connection with any negligence or wrongful acts of Developers, Developer's failure to perform any of its covenants or obligations hereunder, or their respective agents, employees and/or contractors. In addition, the Developer shall also reimburse the City immediately upon demand for any and all City administrative time and labor costs of consulting engineering services, costs of legal services and other out of pocket expenses incurred by the City arising out of or in connection with this Agreement or the public Improvements to be constructed hereunder. 7. Immediately upon final completion of all Developer improvements, Developers shall give written notice thereof to the City's engineer, who shall conduct a final inspection of all Developer Improvements and shall report in writing the results of the inspection to the Developers within one (1) week after receipt of such notice. Until acceptance by the City of the Developer Improvements, the Developers shall be solely responsible AUG -16-91 FRI 9:18 WINTHROP ec WEINST INE P. 08 for all maintenance thereof and repairs thereto. The City shall be responsible for all maintenance and repairs after acceptance of said dedication of said Developer Improvements. Prior to the City's acceptance of the Developer improvements, the Developers shall cause warning signs to be placed on and around such streets and other Improvements whenever any dangerous or hazardous condition exists on such property and shall establish any necessary detour routes. If and when streets become impassable, such streets shall be barricaded and closed. No occupancy permits for any house or _structure in the P.U.D. completed prior to July 1, 1992 shall be issued by the City until a herd, smooth, all weather surface has been constructed for the streets and roadways serving such house or structure and utilities relating thereto are completed. As to houses or structures in the P.U.D. completed after July 1, 1992, no occupancy permits will be Issued until the streets, roadways and utilities serving such house or structure are all completed, with the exception of the final wearing course of asphalt. The Developers shall be responsible for (i) keeping streets within and abutting the property swept clean of dirt and debris that may spill or wash onto said streets from their operation, and (ii) taking all necessary steps to ensure that dust and debris from or related to the construction of public Improvements serving the P.U.D. do not blow onto or enter adjacent or nearby property or become a nuisance to adjacent or nearby landowners. If the public streets are black -topped, the City shall.. keep the streets open during the winter months by plowing snow from said streets prior to final acceptance of said streets. 8. The provision by the City of snowplowing service does not in any way constitute final acceptance of the Developer Improvements. 9. The Developers, shall dedicate to the City all rights-of-way shown on the Plan. The Developers agree to dedicate said rights-of-way free and clear of all encumbrances, liens and mortgages except existing utility easements. The rights-of-way for Concord Way and Lockwood Drive shall be sixty feet (60') wide as shown on the Plan. All other public rights- of-way shall be fifty-five feet (55') wide. 10. Developer shall furnish the City of Mendota Heights proof of insurance covering any contractor's equipment, laborers, and hazard caused by said improvements. Prior to commencement of construction, the Developer shall furnish to the City evidence of Public Liiiability Insurance in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) and Six Hundred Thousand Dollar ($600,000.00) and Property Damage Insurance in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00), all of which shall name the City as an additional insured (as to liability insurance) and Toss payee (as to property or hazard insurance). These insurance policies shall be in full force and effect during the life of this Developers Agreement. 11. The Developers agree that all lots in Phase 11 shall have minimum setbacks and/or spacing equal to the setbacks shown on Exhibit B or, where no dimensions are provided on Exhibit B, in accordance with the following: AUG -16-91 FRI 9:19 WINTHROP & WEINSTINE a. Multi -Family: I. Front yard (building to right-of-way) 30 feet 11. Building to private drive20 feet iii. Side yard N/A iv. Building to building 50 feet (except side to side) 30 feet v. Parking area to building 15 feet b. Single Family: i. Front yard ii. Side yard iii. Rear yard 30 feet 10 feet 30 feet P-09 12. Certain Tots in Phase 11 require Wetlands Permits for construction within the 100 -foot setback requirements and, accordingly, Developers have made application therefor. Based on Developers' application relating thereto as well as other Information gathered by or available to City staff, the City has determined that such applications for Wetlands Permits meet all criteria therefor set forth in City Ordinances. Accordingly, the lots indicated on the attached Exhibit C are approved for construction no closer than the distance listed from the regulated pond elevation. Any encroachment beyond the approved construction boundary will require submission of an application for a Wetlands Permit as required • by City Ordinances. Developers and the City acknowledge and agree that all reasonable steps should be taken to preserve on the subject property existing trees and other flora. Accordingly, Developers agree to engage, at Developers' sole cost, a qualified forester reasonably acceptable to the City to assist and advise Developers in preservation of such trees and other flora. Developers agree to cooperate reasonably with the City in establishing final location of roadways and other improvements in a manner best suited to maximize the preservation. 13. The Developers acknowledge that the rights of the • City to performance of the obligations of the Developers contemplated and specified within this Agreement are special, unique and of extraordinary character and that, in the event that the Developers violate, fail, or refuse to perform any covenants, conditions or provisions made herein, the City may be without an adequate remedy at law. The Developers agree, therefore, that in the event that they violate, fail, or refuse to perform any covenants, conditions or provisions made herein, the City may, at its option end in addition to any other remedy available at law or in equity, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce performance of such covenant. No remedy referred to in this Agreement is intended to be exclusive and shall be cumulative and shall be In addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedies. 14. Developers acknowledge that, as proposed to be platted, Outlot B is without access on public roadways. In the event that Developers elect to sell, transfer or convey all or any part of or interest in Outlot 8 to any third party, Developers shall be sdiely responsible for providing adequate AUG -16-91 FRI 9:19 WINTHROP & WEINSTINE P. 10 access to Outlot B and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against any claims or expenses relating thereto. 15. Any terms of this Agreement that are illegal or unenforceable at law or in equity shall be deemed to be void and of no force and effect to the extent necessary to bring such terms within the provision of any such applicable law or laws, and such terms as so modified in the balance of the terms of this Agreement shall be enforceable. 16. The provisions of,this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Dvelopers, their successors andjor assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals all as of the date and year first above written. CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION By Its TANDEM CORPORATION By Its CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Its Mayor Attest Its City Clerk ��RS SU9<(` 1- 0 SATHRE - BERGQUIST, INC. co 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN 55391 (612) 476-6000 FAX 476-0104 July 2, 1991 KENSINGTON PHASE II CENTEX - MENDOTA HEIGHTS Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 1; Lots 1, 2, 3, & 4, Block 2; Lot 6, Block 3; Outlots E, F and G; Lockwood Drive; and that part of Concord Way lying east of the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 4, Block 2, of said KENSINGTON P.U.D. according to the recorded plat on file in Dakota County, Minnesota. That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28 North, Range 23 West, Dakota County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, bearing assumed, along the east line of said Southeast Quarter, a distance of 721.62 feet to. a point on a line parallel with and 103.40 feet southerly of, as measured perpendicular to the north line of the south 50 rods of the South Half of said Southeast Quarter and the point of beginning of the land to :be described; thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, continuing along said east line of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 451.79 feet; thence South 84 degrees 52 minutes 58 seconds West, a distance of 364.29 feet to a point on a line parallel with and 362.95 feet westerly of, as measured perpendicular to, said east line of the Southeast Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, along said parallel line, a distance of 287.00 feet; thence North 80 degrees 49 minutes 39 seconds Fast, a distance 367.44 feet to said east line of the Soiutheast Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, along said east line of the Southeast Quarter, distance of 327.49 feet to the north line of the South 30 rods, of the North Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 22 minutes 52 seconds West, along said north line of the South 30 rods, a distance of 1611.37 feet; thence South 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds Fast, parallel with said east line of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 988.46 feet to said north line of the South 50 rods of the South Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds Fast, along said north line of the South 50 rods, a distance of 138.51 feet; thence South 20 degrees 16 minutes 08 seconds East, a distance of 109.80 feet to a line parallel with and 103.40 feet southerly of, as measured perpendicular to, said north line of the South 50 rods; thence north 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds Fast, along said parallel line, a distance of 1435.19 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easements, restrictions, and reservations of record, if any. EXCEPT that part embraced within the plat of HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof. Outlot A, HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof. Exhibit A Legal Description That part of the South 1815.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23 which lies westerly and southwesterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 24 minutes 06 -seconds West, assumed basis for bearings, 1097.00 feet along the south line of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 35 minutes 54 seconds West 395.50 feet; thence North 74 degrees 48 minutes 54 seconds, West 252.00 feet; thence North 20 degrees 14 minutes 55 seconds West 383.28 feet to the north line of the South 825.00 feet of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 24 minutes 06 seconds West 130.07 feet along said north line to the east line of the West 1032.56 feet of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 27 minutes 53 seconds West 990.00 feet along said east line to the north line of the South 1815.00 feet of said Southeast Quarter and said line there terminating. EXOJPI' that part of said 1815.00 feet which lies within the right-of-wayof Interstate Highway No. 494 as established by MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 19-57, on file or record in the office of thelCounty Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. Also except that part embraced within the plat of HAMPSHIRE ESTATES according to.the recorded plat thereof. That part of the Fast Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, which lies easterly of the plat of EENSINGTON P.U.D. according to the recorded plat thereof and which lies southerly of the westerly extension of a line drawn 40.00 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the South 1815.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36. EXUrPl' that part of the Fast Half of the Southwest Quarter as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 19-56, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. Exhibit A Page 2 WETLANDS PERMIT: WETLANDS This property includes three wetlands areas that are designated within the City's Wetlands Ordinance. Wetlands setbacks less than 100 feet are designated on the preliminary plat and development plan. These setbacks have been measured utilizing an 80 foot SFD housing pad, normally a 60 foot pad is utilized. This 80 foot setback should be more than ample to include any decks that would be constructed in the -future. The following is a listing of the structures that have been granted a wetlands permit. LOT BLOCK SETBACK IN FEET Building 4 Block 2 80 5 Block 2 10 1 Block 3 45 7 Block 3 45 8 Block 3 40 Front 60 Rear 9 Block 3 45 10 Block 3 40 11 Block 3 50 13 Block 3 80 14 Block 3 60 15 Block 3 60 16 Block 3 60 17 Block 3 80 24 Block 3 80 25 Block 3 60 26 Block 3 50 27 Block 3 55 30 Block 3 50 31 Block 3 20 32 Block 3 40 35 Block 3 55 36 Block 3 30 37 Block 3 30 38 Block 3 40 39 Block 3 40 40 Block 3 70 41 Block 3 70 Front 40 Rear 42 Block 3 35 43 Block 3 35 44 Block 3 55 Exhibit C Wetlands Permit City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR KENSINGTON PHASE II WHEREAS, Centex Homes Inc., together with Tandem Corporation, proposed a revised planned unit development housing project of 305 units in the southeast area of the City of Mendota Heights as a set- tlement plan for their lawuit brought against the City as a result of the City's denial of their rezoning request for Kensington Phase II; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed--said•proposal, and unanimously recommended its adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, said Phase II plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinances of the City of Mendota Heights; and WHEREAS, said Phase II plan is consistent with the criteria established by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights during settlement negotiations. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, that a conditional use permit for a planned unit development be granted to Centex Homes and Tandem Corporation to allow the development of 98 single family homes, 138 back to back•townhomes and 69 townhomes as shown on their plans dated July 13, 1991, subject to the following conditions: 1. The established Kensington Planned Unit Development Criteria that is attached and dated July 2, 1991. 2. Implementation of the accepted Planning Commission recommen- dation from their July 23, 1991 meeting, as shown on the revised preliminary plan dated July 31, 1991 and discussed in the Centex letter dated July 31, 1991 and as specifically listed below: a. Adjustments to setbacks of carriage homes and addition- al landscaping to provide transition to the manor homes along Heritage Way. b. Minor lot adjustments to Lots 3 and 6, Block 1. c. Grading considerations to Lots 4, 17, 18, and 22, Block 1. d. Driveway plan as submitted for Lots 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, Block 3. e. Acknowledged special care for drive installation and house placement for Lot 8, Block 3. f. Minor lot adjustments to Lots 1 and 7, Block 4. Exhibit "D" 3. Engagement of a professional forester and surveyor for identification of and retention of significant trees to allow minor roadway alignment, house placement and lot adjustments to preserve and protect natural flora to the greatest extent possible. 4. Final landscape and grading plans submitted for staff ap- proval. 5. The platting of Dr. Owen's homesite as a lot. 6. The inclusion of all appropriate utility and drainage ease- ments to be included in the final plat. 7. The conveyance of the park dedication, Outlot A, and the trail easement on Lot 7, Block 3, as shown on -said plan. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 6th day of August, 1991. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk July 2, 1991 ATTACHMENT - EXHIBIT D KENSINGTON PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA As City Council proceeded through the Centex settlement negotiations, they established the following criteria for a Planned Unit Development that would be acceptable: 1. Total number of units - Allowable number of units in Kensington was established at 385, including the existing manor homes in Phase I. 2. Multi- family/Single family - Only single family units east of the power line transversing the PUD area. Single family or park along Mendota Heights Road between Huber Drive and Delaware Avenue. 3. Public R.O.W. - Required 60' R.O.W. for major roads in high density areas. Required 55' R.O.W. for the less traveled lower density single family residential areas. B618 curbs required. 4. Parks - Required to provide the minimum park dedication (10% of land area) with usable• park land. Northern park area to include the existing comfort station and to be of sufficient•' size to include tot lot, a dimensioned area for a possible practice soccer field, and amenities. The southern park area needed to be of sufficient size to site one 360' x 240' soccer field and one 360' x 300' soccer field, a parking lot and an area for play equipment and amenities. Required was a trail link to Delaware Avenue from the soccer area and a trail link from the southern park area to the northern park area and Mendota Heights Road. Developer will balance quantity of soils for park area. 5. Lot Sizes and Setbacks - For single family homes 10 percent of the total number of single family lots could be from 13,000 square feet to 13,999 square feet and another 10 percent of the total would be allowed to be 14,000 to 14,999 square feet. All remaining lots had to meet or exceed 15,000 square feet. None of the pond lots shall be allowed to use water in their area calculations. The typical front footage requirement for single family lots is 100'. The criteria for this PUD would be that 20 percent of the total single family lots could be between 80-89 feet of frontage and another 20 percent of the total single family lots could have a lot width between 90 and 99 feet. The remaining lots would have to meet the 100' requirement. All setback requirements in the R-1 Ordinance Section would be met. This is 10 ' side yard setbacks and 30 ' rear yard setbacks. A quality assurance plan would be submitted. Square Foot Area 13,000 - 13,999 14,000 - 14,999 15,000 + LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS Actual Criteria 5 or 50 10 or 10% 7 or 7% 10 or 10% 86 or 88% 78 or 80% Total 98 - 100% 98 - 100% LOT FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS Frontage in Feet 80 - 89 90 - 99 100 + Actual Criteria 13 or 13% 19 or 20% 26 or 27% 20 or 20% 59 or 60% 59 or 60% Total 98 - 100% 98 - 100% NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS Unapproved August 7, 1990 Proposed Settlement Plan * Plan * Manor Homes 160 80 Coach Homes 276 0 Townhomes 71 69 Back.to Back Townhomes 0 138 Single Family 48 98 Total 555 385 * Dwelling unit counts include existing Phase I. UG - 16-91 FR I 8 :24 SATHRE-BERGQU I 0-1- INC EXHIBIT E PARCEL A CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1; Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 2, Lot 6, Block 3; Outlots E4 F, and G; all in EMINGTON P.U.D., according to the reoorded plat thereof, All of Lockwood Drive as dedicated in the plat of KENSINGTON according to the recorded plat thereof. That part of Concord Way as dedicated in the plat of EENSINGTON according to the recorded plat thereof, which lies easterly of the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 4, Block 2 of said EENSINGTONIUM That part of the Rt Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, which lies easterly of the, plat of EENSINGTON P.U.D., according to the recorded plat thereof and which lies southerly of the westerly extension of a line drawn 40.00 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the. South 1815.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36. EXCEPT that part of the Fast Half of the Southwest Quarter as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATICN RIGHTOF-EAY PLAT NO. 19-56, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. That pert of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at the South Quarter corner of said Section 36; thence North 0 degrees 26 minutes 53 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Southeast Quarter of Section 36, a distance of 386.12 feet to a northerly right of way line of MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. 19-56, said point being the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continue North 0 degrees 26 minutes 53 seconds West, 1388.86 feet to the south line of HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof; thPnce North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East, along the south line of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, a distance of 263.05 feet; thence easterly. 128.27 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the south, said curve has a radius of 458.58 feet and a central angle of 16 degrees 01 minutes 34 seconds; thence along a tangential reverse curve, concave to the north a distance of 332.15 feet, said curve has a radius of 660.00 feet, a central angle of 28 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds and a chord length of 328.66 feet which bears South 88 degrees 58 minutes 58 seconds Wigt.; thence South 20 degrees 09 minutes 41 secondS Ehst, not tangent to the last described curve, 262.78 feet; thence Sodth 5 degrees 22 minutes 28 seconds East, 415.35 feet; thence South 30 degrees West, 110.17 feet; thence South 55 degrees Fast, 295.19 feet; thence South 61. degrees. East, 198.93 Exhibit E - 9wAership e, .4 AUG -16-91 F R I 8 23 S A T H R E- B E R G Q U I S T, I N C . feet to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36, said point being 1436.26 feet west of the east line of said Southeast Quarter, as measured along said parallel line; thence South 20 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East, 273.48 feet; thence South 74 degrees 48 minutes 29 seconds East, 252.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 35 minutes 28 seconds East, 97.10 feet to the northerly right of way line of said RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. 19-56; thence westerly -along said right of way line to the west line of said Southeast Quarter; thence north along said west line to the point of beginning. That part of Outlot A, HAMPSHIRE ts5I'ATBS, Dakota County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof and that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, described as follows: Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said Section 36; thence North 0 degrees 26 minutes 53 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Southeast Quarter of Section 36, a distance of 1774.98 feet to the south line of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East, along the south lint. of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, a distance of 263.05 feet; thence easterly 128.27 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the south, said curve has a radius of 458.58 feet and a central angle of 16 degrees 01 minutes 34 seconds; thence along a tangential reverse cu ve concave to the north a distance of 332.15 feet, said curve has a radius of 660.00 feet, a central angle of 28 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds and a chord length of 328.66 feet which bears South 88 degrees 58 minutes 58 seconds East, to the point of beginning; thence South 20 degrees 09 minutes 41 seconds East, not tangent to the last described curve, 262.78 feet; thence South 5 degrees 22 minutes 28 seconds East, 415.35 feet; thence South 30 degrees West, 110.17 feet; thence South 55 degrees East, 295.19 feet; thence South 61 degrees East, 198.93 feet to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East along said parallel line, 295.18 feet to the intersection with a line 1141.05 feet west of and parallel with the east line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, along said parallel line, 1276.30 feet to the north line of said Outlot A; thence westerly along the north line of said Outlot A to the most westerly corner of said Outlot A; thence westerly along the southerly line of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, to the point of beginning. Exhibit E Page 2 A U G— 1 6— 9 1 F R I 87.22 S A T H R E— B E R G Q U 1ST EXHIBIT E PARCEL B R.A. P(JJNAM AND ASSOCIATES, INC. I NC That part of Outlot A, HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, Dakota County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof and that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, dPqnribed as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Southeast Quarter, 721.62 feet to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of said Southeast Quarter, said point being the point of beginning; thence continue North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West along said east line 451.79 feet; thence South 84 degrees 52 minutes 58 seconds West, 364.29 feet to the intersection with a line 362.95 feet west of and parallel with the east line of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West along said parallel line 287.00 feet; thence North 80 degrees 49 minutes 39 seconds East, 367.44 feet to the east line of said. Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West along said east line 326.44 feet to the south line of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES; thence west along the south line of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES to the southeast corner of said Outlot A; thence north along the east line of said Outlot A to the northeast corner of said Outlot A; thence west along the north line of said Outlot A to the intersection with a line 1141.05 feet west of and parallel with the east line of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds East, along said parallel line 1276.30 feet to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East, along said parallel line to the point of beginning. Exhibit E Page 3 SHERMAN WINTHROP ROBERT R. WEINSTINE RICHARD A. HOEL ROGER D. GORDON STEVEN C.TOUREK STEPHEN J. SNYDER HART KULLER DAVID P. PEARSON THOMAS M. HART IV DARRON C. KNUTSON JOHN A. KNAPP MICHELE D. VAILLANCOURT DAVID E. MORAN, JR. DONALD J. BROWN JON J. HOGANSON SANDRA J. MARTIN GARY W. SCHOKMILLER TODD B. URNESS SCOTT J. DONGOSKE PETER J. GLEEKEL ROBERT S. SOSKIN EDWARD J. DRENTTEL JEFFREY W. COOK JEFFREY R.ANSEL LAURIE A. KNOCKE WILLIAM F MOHRMAN WINTHROP 6, WEINSTINE ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 3200 MINNESOTA WORLD TRADE CENTER 30 EAST SEVENTH STREET SAINT PAUL, MINN ESOTA 55101 TELEPHONE (6121 290-8400 FAX (612) 292-9347 DIRECT DIAL 290-8481 August 20, 1991 Mr. M. Thomas Lawell City Administrator City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 LLOYD W. GROOMS JULIE K. WILLIAMSON MARK T. JOHNSON BETSY J. LOUSHIN BROOKS F. POLEY JULIE WIDLEY SCHNELL CHRISTY JO CASPERS THOMAS H. BOYD JOSEPH C. NAUMAN DANIEL C. BECK ERIC J. NYSTROM BRIAN J. KLEIN KRISTIN LPETERSON sl w /CL( v JOANNE L. MATZEN TIMOTHY K. MASTERSON EVAN D. COOKS THOMAS A. WALKER GINA M. GROTHE FOLLEN E. JOSEPH NEWTON PATRICK W. WEBER CHARLES A. DURANT CRAIG A.BRANDT DAVID A. KRISTAL KARL A. WEBER ALOK VIDYARTHI DANIEL W. HARDY OF COUNSEL VIA MESSENGER Re: Final Draft of Kensington Developer's Agreement Dear Tom: I am enclosing herewith two copies of the most recent draft of the Developer's Agreement for the Kensington PUD, one of which is black lined to reflect changes from the previous draft. The changes reflected on this draft were based upon our discussions today and my meeting yesterday with you, John Bannigan, Tom Boyce, Dick Putnum and Kevin Batchelder. Many of the changes are self explanatory. A few of the changes, however, deserve some comment and explanation. First, we have eliminated Tandem Corporation as a party to the Agreement based on Dick Putnam's representation.that Tandem Corporation holds no interest in the subject property. The interest formerly held by Tandam has apparently been transferred to R.A. Putnam"*& Associates, Inc. In•fact, Tandem was apparently listed •as a plaintiff in the Kensington lawsuit by mistake. We have deleted .two •sentences in the middle of Paragraph 3 relating to the public improvements to be completed by•the City. The first deleted sentence, whereby the Developers petitioned the City for completion of all public improvements other than Developer Improvements, was initially inserted for the purpose of insuring that the City could initiate construction of Concord Way at any time in order to provide access to the park. We have dealt with the City's concern in this regard in the last two sentences of Paragraph 5. We also deleted a sentence in Paragraph 3 which previously provided that if any costs incurred Mr. M. Thomas Lawell August 20, 1991 Second Page by the City in connection with construction of public improvements were not assessed, the Developers would immediately reimburse the City for such costs upon demand. Again, this sentence was inserted for the purpose of insuring that, if the City were forced to complete any of the Developer Improvements, it could immediately recover the costs from the Developers. We deleted this sentence in recognition of the City's right to compel completion by submitting a claim under -the performance bond(s) to be supplied by the Developers pursuant to Paragraph 3. In all likelihood, this would be the fastest and least expensive remedy for the City if the Developer breaches its obligation to complete the Developer Improvements. You will note that we also imposed a deadline of July 1, 1993, for completion of all Developer Improvements. We have added stronger warranties in Paragraph 5 as to the Developer's rights to acquire and develop the Property. We have also proposed to bind the Developer to presenting a final plat application for the entire P.U.D. at the first council meeting in September, with the further obligation of recording the plat immediately (assuming it is approved). We have also changed the last two sentences of Paragraph 5 with respect to completion of Concord Way. If Concord Way constitutes a Developer Improvement, completion will be insured under the performance bond. If it is not a Developer Improvement, the Development Agreement constitutes a petition to the City for completion of Concord Way, in which case the timing of completion will be under the City's control. We have deleted the last sentence in Paragraph 6 which related to the Developers' obligation to reimburse the City for administrative time, engineering and legal services. We all agreed that this obligation was adequately covered under a comparable provision in the second half of Paragraph 3 (as amended by adding the words "or otherwise arising hereunder") along with the indemnification provisions set forth in Paragraph 6. By copy of this letter, I am telefaxing the black lined copy of the revised Agreement to John Bannigan. If you have any questions or comments with respect to the Developer's Agreement, please give me a call immediately. I will be available today to deal with any additional fine tuning which needs to be accomplished prior to tonight's City Council meeting. If Mr. Bannigan has any comments I will, of course, pass them along to you immediately. Mr. M. Thomas Lawell August 20, 1991 Third Page You will note that we have also included a list of exhibits. It is my understanding that you will be attaching the actual exhibits for submission to the City Council. Very truly yours, WINTHROP & WEINSTINE TMH/J7 Enclosures cc: John Bannigan (via facsimile 223-8019) BLACK -LINED COPY 8/20/91 DEVELOPERS' AGREEMENT: KENSINGTON PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, PHASE II RE: Kensington P.U.D., Phase II: Case No. 91-23 THIS DEVELOPERS' AGREEMENT for the Kensington Planned Unit Development, Phase II, has been entered into this day of August, 1991, by and between CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation -("Centex"), d/b/a CENTEX HOMES, 5929 Baker Road, Suite 470, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55345, and R.A. PUTNAM & ASSOCIATES INC. "Putnam"), a Minnesota corporation oca e a asco oin oa , ayzata, Minnesota 55391 (hereinafter jointly called the "Developers") and CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA, a municipal corporation, 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 (hereinafter called the "City"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Developers by Application dated and filed February 8, 1990, have applied to the City for approval of the following: a. Rezoning of the subject property (legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto) from R-1, R -1A, and R -1B (all one -family residential districts) to HR PUD (high density residential planned unit development) and MR PUD (medium density residential planned unit development) as set forth on theAroi c s ibmi al containing 7 loges and attached hereto as Exhibit Bcollectively, the "Plan"). b. Preliminary plat approval for Kensington Planned Unit Development, Phase II. c. Certain wetlands permits; and d. A -Conditional Use Permit for a planned unit development; and e. Street vacation of Lockwood Drive. WHEREAS, the Developers propose to develop on the subject property a planned unit development consisting of three hundred five (305) residential units and approximately thirteen (13) acres of park in accordance with the Plan (hereinafter called the "Kensington Phase II Planned Unit Development"); and WHEREAS, the Plan was reviewed and approved by the city planning commission on July 23, 1991, subject to certain conditions; and WHEREAS, the Plan was reviewed and approved by the city council on August 6, 1991, subject to certain conditions set forth on Exhibit D attached hereto; and WHEREAS, the Developers have agreed that Phase II shall comply with and conform to the conditions specified herein; and WHEREAS, there is currently pending before the Dakota County District court as File No. 19-C9-91-006089 the matter of Centex Real Estate Corporation, a Nevada corporation d bla Centex Homes, and Putnam Corporation/a Minnesota corporation, Plaintiffs -Petitioners vs. the Cty of Mendota Heights, Dakota County, innesota a municipal corporation, Defendant -Respondent (the 1'Kensington Lawsuits'); and WHEREAS, contemporaneously with the execution hereof, Developers shall IL deliver to the City a Stipulation of Dismissal of the Kensington Lawsuit with prejudice along with a full and final release of all claims arising in connection therewith duly executed by all named plaintiffs therein: and WHEREAS, as between the Developers, Centex and P"= each owns a portion of the entire property involved in these proceedings, to wit: Centex owns Parcel "A" and Putnam owns Parcel "B", as more particularly depicted on Exhibit E attache ere o; and WHEREAS, as this DEVELOPERS' AGREEMENT: KENSINGTON PLANNED •UNIT DEVELOPMENT, PHASE II relates to the. City, Centex shall be liable .for those undertakings herein as the same apply separately to Parcel "A" and Putnam shall be liable for those undertakings as the same shall apply separately to Parcel "B"; and WHEREAS, as to covenants of the Developers relating to both Parcel "A" and Parcel "B", Developers shall be jointly and severally obligated for the performance thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting its Ordinance No. 277, Ordinance Amending City =Ordinance No. 401 with. respect to MR -PUD, Ordinance No. 278, Ordinance Amending -City Ordinance ,-No. 401 with :respect to HR -PUD; Resolution No. 91-44,- Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit for Phase II of Kensington ' Planned Unit Development (the "P. U. D. "), and Resolution -:,No. 91-43, Resolution -Approving Vacation of Street Right of Ways and Drainage "and Utility • Easements, the Developer covenants and - agrees to develop and -maintain 'the property, ,_subject'- to the; following terms and conditions: _ w . 1.• The Developers shall develop -.and°maintain Phase II in conformance with the Plan subject to the conditions to approval imposed by the city council, as set forth on Exhibit D attached hereto, and :further subject to the .conditions and - approval—requirements provided herein. - The Developers shall not develop,• construct upon or maintain Phase II in any other respect or manner than provided herein. 2. Developers acknowledge that pursuant to the City's zoning ordinance, construction of Phase II must commence within one (1) year from the date of approval unless the city council, in its discretion, extends the -2- construction period for an additional one (1) year; if construction does not commence within such period, the Conditional Use Permit granted to the Developers by the City on August 6, 1991 in connection with the Kensington Phase II Planned Unit Development shall lapse and be of no further force and effect. 3. The Developers shall submit to the City for approval, final plans for all sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer facilities, drainage facilities, concrete curb and gutters, and streets (hereinafter called "Improvements") to be made and constructed on or within the property to be dedicated to the City. Said plans are hereby made a part of this Agreement. Developers further agree that all Improvements shall be designed by a registered professional engineer in compliance with city, state and federal standards. The City reserves the right to approve or request reasonable modifications to the Improvements. All such Improvements designed, approved by the City and for which a written contract is entered into in calendar year 1991 (collectively, the "Developer Improvements") shall be completed by the Developers and shall be free and clear of any liens, claims, charges, or encumbrances including any for work, labor, or services rendered in connection therewith, materials or equipment supplied therefor. Developers agree to provide to the City on or before January 15, 1992 with a written statement describing the Developer Improvements, to be accompanied by copies of the written contracts relating thereto. Developers shall Developers ac now ecge t at the City may, at its option, perform or cause to be performed all public improvement construction on the project site, other than public improvements actually constructed and completed by Developer, with the cost thereof to be assessed against the subject property in accordance with applicable law and city policies and procedures./` Developers also agree to furnish to the City for approval a list of contractors being considered for retention by the Developers for the performance of the work required hereby. The City reserves the right to reject a contractor for reasonable cause. Cit and Deve o•e shall reasonabi cc000••erate 't, •. - . • i - . ' • - • - ;nu• - tt • • • .11 • I3 . It is further agreed that the Developers shall provide (i) all staking and surveying and, (ii) if required by the City Engineer, sufficient full-time resident inspection for the Developer Improvements in order to insure that the completed Developer Improvements conform to the approved plans a$ specifications. The City and St. Paul Water Utility will provide for general and final inspection and shall be notified of all tests to be performed. The Developers' inspector, city inspector and St. Paul Water Utility will coordinate inspections at various times to check the condition of water stop boxes and other utility extensions. It is agreed that all charges of the City for legal, planning and engineering services relating to design" approval and construction of the Public Improvements or otherwigg arising hereunder including inspection, supervision and administration costs and services c arged by St. Paul Water Utility, shall be included in the total cost of all Improvements. The Developers shall provide an escrow deposit of $10,000 to cover those costs. Should this amount be exceeded, the Developers shall be billed for those costs, with payment due immediately. The Developers agree to provide to the City on request any and all -3- documents, agreements or information relative to the Developer Improvements. All plans, bids, change orders or other amendments to the Plan must be approved by the City in advance. The Developer shall be financially responsible for the installation of street identification sign and non-mechanical and nonelectrical traffic control signs. Street signs will be in conformance with the names as indicated on the plat of record and be prepared by City staff. The actual number and location of signs to be installed will be at the discretion of the City and actual installation shall be performed by the City staff. Prior to commencement of the Developer Improvements,_ Developers shall provide to the City a payment and performance bond(sy from a recognized bonding company providing for construction and completion of the Developer ImprovementsAnaming the City as dual obligee. Upon completion and acceptance per Paragraph 7 below, the Developers warrant and guarantee that the Developer Improvements will be free from any defects in materials or workmanship for a period of one (1) year following said completion and acceptance. Defects in materials or workmanship shall be reasonably determined by the City in accordance with local industry standards. In case any material or labor supplied by the Developers shall be rejected by the City Engineer or his designated representative as defective or unsuitable, then such rejected material shall be removed and replaced with approved material and the rejected labor shall be done anew to the specifications and approval of the City Engineer and at the sole cost and expense of the Developers. " It is specifically understood that final approval and acceptance of the Developer Improvements shall take the form of a Resolution duly passed by the Mendota Heights City Council, on the advice of the City Engineer. Upon completion of all Developer Improvements, the City Engineer or his designated representative, a representative of the contractor, and a representative of the Developers will make a final inspection of the work. Before final payment is made to the contractor by the Developers, the City Engineer shall be satisfied that all work is satisfactorily completed in accordance with approved plans and specifications, and the Developers shall submit a written statement attesting to same. .Upon completion of the work, the Developers shall provide the City with all reproducible mylar plan sheets and one set of prints showing the sewer service stub inverts and at least two (2) ties to all water stop boxes and all ends of sewer stubs. These plans shall include the locations, elevations and ties to all 'sanitary sewer and watermain services. 4. The Developers shall submit to the City for approval, final plans for grading, drainage, and landscaping (hereinafter called "Landscaping Improvements"). Said plans are hereby made a part of this Agreement. Developers further agree that all Landscaping Improvements shall be designed in compliance with City standards. The City reserves the right to condition its approval upon the agreement of the Developers to complete reasonable specified modifications to the Landscaping Improvements. All such Landscaping Improvements shall be completed by the Developers and shall be free and clear of any liens, claims, charges of encumbrances, including any for work, labor, or services rendered in connection therewith, materials or equipment supplied therefor. -4- 5. Developers agree to dedicate, transfer and convey to the City by dedication in the final plat without cost to said City free and clear of all encumbrances other than existing utility easements of record, to the areas designated as park on Exhibit B (hereinafter collectively called the "Park"); Developers further agree to transfer to the City immediately upon recording the final plat by instrument acceptable to the City, (i) a fifteen (15) foot trail easement between Lots 6 and 7, Block 1 of the P.U.D. and (ii) Outlot A. Developers agree to install post markers at all Park boundary corners at no cost to the City. Developers,epresent and warrant to the City that Developers have the right to acquire, pursuant to currently enforceable written contracts fee simple title in and to all real property included within the P.U.D., including without limitation the property to be dedicated to the City hereunder. Developers further represent and warrant that they intend and have the rihit to...pursue development of the P. U. -D. in accordance with the Plan. Develo er use all best efforts to present to the Vitt'y, for consideration byte City council at its regular meeting schecfuTed for e. -u•- •• •1 as. ica ion or ina • at ..• . .- -. - • • .• 'cation is a• •rove. Deve o•ers •e recor•e• wit t e 1�•1 111 e •tfi?�DiLi i *i - '_ 1. 1 . o 0 it es a . of ree to cause the final plat of the C •1 ; - . • - . 1 . • : - . Concurrent with project grading, Deve opers a so agree to submit a bona fide bid, along with other responsible bidders if competitive bidding is required, to grade the Park at City's expense in accordance with reasonable grading plans approved by the City. Developers agree to design their site grading such that each of the City Park areas can be graded to final Park design conditions without the need to add or remove soil. Developers also agree to insure that adequate amounts of on-site topsoil (including any on-site black dirt) are available on each Park site, at no cost to the City, sufficient to cover all parkland with at least 4 inches of material, whether or not Developers are awarded the park grading contract./, Developers acknowledge that the City desires completion of Concord Way not later than July 1. 1993 in order to providepublic access to the Park. If completion of Concord Wax is a Develo•er Im•rovement Develo•er shall com.Iete c..s oncor a wit t o exce•tion o t e la ea II• .. .. or •e ore Ju .• . I com etion of Concord Wa Is not a Devel .. er m rovemen execu ion o t is reement s a constitute a e 1 eve opers or e cons ruc ion ancomp a ion o oncor • • ft etition by ay y e V 6. Developers agree that anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, the city council, its agents, employees, and/or assigns shall not be personally liable or responsible in any manner to the Developers, their contractors or subcontractors, materialmen, laborers, or to any other person or persons whomsoever, for any claims, demands, damages, actions, or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this Agreement or the performance and completion of the work and improvements provided herein. The Developers will indemnify, hold harmless and defend the City from and against all claims, demands, damages, actions or causes of actions, costs, disbursements and liability, specifically including without limitation, cost and expenses for 'City administrative time and labor, costs of consulting engineering, services and costs of legal services, paid or incurred by or asserted against the City, arising out of or in connection with any -5- negligence or wrongful acts of Developers, or the failure bytiDevelopers or their respective agents and/or contractors oto perform any of its or t ei`� i—' ovenants or obligations hereunder 7. Immediately upon final completion of all Developer Improvements, Developers shall give written notice thereof to the City's engineer, who shall conduct a final inspection of all Developer Improvements and shall report in writing the results of the inspection to the Developers within one (1) week after receipt of such notice. Until acceptance by the City of the Developer Improvements, the Developers shall be solely responsible for all maintenance thereof and repairs thereto. The City shall be responsible for all maintenance and repairs after acceptance of said dedication of said Developer Improvements. Prior to the City's acceptance of the Developer Improvements, the Developers shall cause warning signs to be placed on and around such streets and other Improvements whenever any dangerous or hazardous condition exists on such property and shall establish any necessary detour routes. If and when streets become impassable, such streets shall be barricaded and closed. No occupancy permits for any house or structure in the P.U.D. completed prior to July 1, 1992 shall be issued by the City until a hard, smooth, all weather surface has been constructed for the streets and roadways serving such house or structure and utilities relating thereto are completed. As to houses or structures in the P.U.D. completed after July 1, 1992, no occupancy permits will be issued until the streets, roadways and utilities serving such house or structure are all completed, with the exception of the final wearing course of asphalt. The Developers shall be responsible for (1) keeping streets within and abutting the property swept clean of dirt and debris that may spill or wash onto said streets from their operation, and (ii) taking all necessary steps to ensure that dust and debris from or related to the construction of public Improvements serving the P.U.D. do not blow onto or enter adjacent or nearby property or become a nuisance to adjacent or nearby landowners. If the public streets are black-topped, the City shall keep the streets open during the winter months by plowing snow from said streets prior to final acceptance of said streets. 8. The provision by the City of snowplowing service does not in any way constitute final acceptance of the Developer Improvements. 9. The Developers shall dedicate to the City all rights-of-way shown on the Plan. The Developers agree to dedicate said rights-of-way free and clear of all encumbrances, liens and mortgages except existing utility easements. The rights-of-way for Concord Way and Lockwood Drive shall be sixty feet (60') wide as shown on the Plan. All other public rights- of-way shall be fifty-five feet (55') wide. 10. Developer shall furnish the City of Mendota Heights proof of insurance covering any contractor's equipment, laborers, and hazard caused by said improvements. Prior to commencement of construction, the Developer shall furnish to the City evidence of Public Liability Insurance in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00) and Six Hundred Thousand Dollar ($600,000.00) and Property Damage Insurance in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000.00), all of which -6- shall name the City as an additional insured (as to liability insurance) and loss payee (as to property or hazard insurance). These insurance policies shall be in full force and effect during the life of this Developers Agreement. 11. The Developers agree that all Tots in Phase II shalt have minimum setbacks and/or spacing equal to the setbacks shown on Exhibit B or, where no dimensions are provided on Exhibit B, in accordance with the following: a. Multi -Family: i. Front yard (building to right-of-way) 30 feet ii. Building to private drive 20 feet iii. Side yard N/A iv. Building to building 50 feet (except side to side) 30 feet v. Parking area to building 15 feet . b. Single Family: i. Front yard 30 feet ii. Side yard 10 feet iii. Rear yard 30 feet 12. Certain lots in Phase II require Wetlands Permits for construction within the 100 -foot setback requirements and, accordingly, Developers have made application therefor. Based on Developers' application relating thereto as well as other information gathered by or available to City staff, the City has determined that such applications for Wetlands Permits meet all criteria therefor set forth in City Ordinances. Accordingly, the' lots indicated on the attached Exhibit C are approved for construction no closer than the distance listed from the regulated pond elevation. Any encroachment beyond the approved construction boundary will require submission of an application for a Wetlands Permit as required by City Ordinances. Developers and the City acknowledge and agree that all reasonable steps should be taken to preserve on the subject property existing trees and other flora. Accordingly, Developers agree to engage, at Developers' sole cost, a qualified forester reasonably acceptable to the City to assist and advise Developers in preservation of such trees and other -flora. Developers agree to cooperate reasonably with the City in establishing final location of roadways and other improvements in a manner best suited to maximize the preservation of such trees and other flora. 13. The Developers acknowledge that the rights of the City to performance of the obligations of the Developers contemplated and specified within this Agreement are special, unique and of extraordinary character and that, in the event that the Developers violate, fail, or refuse to perform any covenants, conditions or provisions made herein, the City may be without an adequate remedy at law. The Developers agree, therefore, that in the event that they violate, fail, or refuse to perform any covenants, conditions or provisions made herein, the City may, at its option and in addition to any other remedy available at law or -7- in equity, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce performance of such covenant. No remedy referred to in this Agreement is intended to be exclusive and shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of any one or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedies. 14. Developers acknowledge that, as proposed to be platted, Outlot B is without access on public roadways. In the event that Developers elect to sell, transfer or convey all or any part of or interest in Outlot B to any third party, Developers shall be solely responsible for providing adequate access to Outlot B and shall indemnify and hold the City harmless from and against any claims or expenses relating thereto. - 15. Any terms of this Agreement that are illegal or unenforceable at law or in equity shall be deemed to be void and of no force and effect to the extent necessary to bring such terms within the provision of any such applicable law or laws, and such terms as so modified in the balance of the terms of this Agreement shall be enforceable. 16. The provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Developers, their successors and/or assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have set their hands and seals all as of the date and year first above written. CENTEX REAL ESTATE CORPORATION By Its R.A. PUTNAM & ASSOCIATES, INC. By Its CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Its Mayor Attest Its City Clerk -8- (ct0) (612) 476-6000 FAX 476-0104 SATHRE - 'BERGQUIST, INC. 150 SOUTH BROADWAY WAYZATA, MN 55391 July 2, 1991 KENSING'T'ON PHASE II CENTEX MENDOTA HEIGHTS • Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 1; Lots 1, 2, 3, & 4, Block 2; Lot 6, Block 3; Outlots E, F and G; Lockwood Drive; and that part of Concord Way lying east of the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 4, Block 2, of said KENSINGTON P.U.D. according to the recorded plat on file in -Dakota County, Minnesota. That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28 North, Range 23 West, Dakota County, Minnesota,' described as .follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said -Southeast Quarter;,thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, bearing assumed, along the east line of said. Southeast Quarter,: a. distance of - 721.62 feet to.. -.EL, point on a line parallel with and 103-.40 feet southerly of, as measured perpendicular to the north line of the south 50 rods of the South Half of said -Southeast Quarter and the point of beginning of the land to -be described; thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, continuing along said east line of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 451.79 feet; thence South 84 degrees 52 minutes 58 seconds West, a distance of 364.29 feet to a point on a line parallel with and 362.95 feet westerly of, as measured perpendicular to, said east line of the Southeast Quarter; thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, along said parallel line, a distance of 287.00 feet; thence North 80 degrees 49 minutes 39 seconds East, a distance 367.44 feet to said east line of the Southeast Quarter;. thence North 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West,.along-said~east line'of"the Southeast Quarter, distance of 327.49 feet to the north line of the South 30 rods, of the North Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence South -89 degrees 22 minutes 52 seconds West, along said north"line of the South 30 rods, a distance of 1611.37 feet; thence South 00 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds Fast, parallel with said east line of the Southeast Quarter, a distance of 988.46 feet to said north line of the South;50 rods:of the South Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds Fast, along said north line of the South 50 rods, a distance of 138.51 feet; thence South 20 degrees 16 minutes 08 seconds Rapt, a distance of 109.80 feet to a line parallel with and 103.40 feet southerly of, as measured perpendicular to, said north line of the South 50 rods; thence north 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East, along said parallel line, a distance of 1435.19 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to easements, restrictions, and reservations of record, if any. EXCEPT that part embraced within the plat of HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof. Outlot A, HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, according to the recorded plat thereof. Exhibit A Legal Description That part of the South 1815.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23 which lies westerly and southwesterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 24 minutes 06 -seconds West, assumed basis for bearings, 1097.00 feet along the south line of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 35 minutes 54 seconds West 395.50 feet; thence North 74 degrees 48 minutes 54 seconds, West 252.00 feet; thence North 20 degrees 14 minutes 55 seconds West 383.28 feet to the north line of the South 825.00 feet of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 89 degrees 24 minutes 06 seconds West 130.07 feet along said north line to the east line of the West 1032.56 feet of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 27 minutes 53 seconds West 990.00 feet along said east line to the north line of the•South 1815.00 feet of said Southeast Quarter and said line there terminating. EXCEPT that part of said 1815.00 feet which lies within the right-of-way of Interstate Highway No. 494 as established by MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 19-57, on file or record in the office of the County Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. Also except that part embraced within the plat of HAMPSHIRE ESTATES according to the recorded plat thereof. That part of the Fast Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, which lies easterly of the plat of EENSINGTON P.U.D. according to the recorded plat thereof and which lies southerly of the westerly extension of a line drawn 40.00 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the South 1815.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36. EXCEPT that part of the Fast Half of the Southwest Quarter as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 19-56, on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. Exhibit A Page 2 Exhibit B Includes all plans and submittals provided by Centex and considered by the City Council on August 6, 1991. These documents will be attached to the executed copies of the final Developer's Agreement. WETLANDS PERMIT: WETLANDS This property includes three wetlands areas that are designated within the City's Wetlands Ordinance. Wetlands setbacks less than 100 feet are designated on the preliminary plat and development plan. These setbacks have been measured utilizing an 80 foot SFD housing pad, normally a 60 foot pad is utilized. This 80 foot setback should be more than ample to include any decks that would be constructed in the -future. The following is a listing of the structures that have been granted a wetlands permit. Building LOT BLOCK SETBACK IN FEET 4 Block 2 80 5 Block 2 10 1 Block 3 45 7 Block 3 45 8 Block 3 40 Front 60 Rear 9 Block 3 45 10 Block 3 40 11 Block 3 50 13 Block 3 80 14 Biock 3 60 15 Block 3 60 16 Block 3 60 17 Block 3 80 24 Block 3 80 25 Block 3 60 26 Block 3 50 27 Biock 3 55 30 Block 3 50 31 Block 3 20 32 Block 3 40 35 Block 3 55 36 Block 3 30 37 Block 3 30 38 Block 3 40 39 Biock 3 40 40 Block 3 70 41 Block 3 70 Front 40 Rear 42 Block 3 35 43 Block 3 35 44 Block 3 55 Exhibit C Wetlands Permit City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 91 - RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR KENSINGTON PHASE II WHEREAS, Centex Homes Inc., together with Tandem Corporation, proposed a revised planned unit development housing project of 305 units in the southeast area of the City of Mendota Heights as a set- tlement plan for their lawuit brought against the City as a result of the City's denial of their rezoning request for Kensington Phase II; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed -said -proposal, and unanimously recommended its adoption by the City Council; and WHEREAS, said Phase II plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinances of the City of Mendota Heights; and WHEREAS, said Phase II plan is consistent with the criteria established by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights during settlement negotiations. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, that a conditional use permit for a planned unit development be granted to Centex Homes and Tandem Corporation to allow the development of 98 single family homes, 138 back to back townhomes and 69 townhomes as shown on their plans dated July 13, 1991, subject to the following conditions: 1. The established Kensington Planned Unit Development Criteria that is attached and dated July 2, 1991. 2. Implementation of the accepted Planning Commission recommen- dation from their July 23, 1991 meeting, as shown on the revised preliminary plan dated July 31, 1991 and discussed in the Centex letter dated July 31, 1991 and as specifically listed below: a. Adjustments to setbacks of carriage homes and addition- al landscaping to provide transition to the manor homes along Heritage Way. b. Minor lot adjustments to Lots 3 and 6, Block 1. c. Grading considerations to Lots 4, 17, 18, and 22, Block 1. d. Driveway plan as submitted for Lots 24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 32, Block 3. e. Acknowledged special care for drive installation and house placement for Lot 8, Block 3. f. Minor lot adjustments to Lots 1 and 7, Block 4. Exhibit "D" 3. Engagement of a professional forester and surveyor for identification of and retention of significant trees to allow minor roadway alignment,.house placement and lot adjustments to preserve and protect natural flora to the greatest extent possible. 4. Final landscape and grading plans submitted for staff ap- proval. 5. The platting of Dr. Owen's homesite as a lot. 6. The inclusion of all appropriate utility and drainage ease- ments to be included in the final plat. 7. The conveyance of the park dedication, Outlot A, and the trail easement on Lot 7, Block 3, as showh on -said plan. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 6th day of August, 1991. ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk • CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor a July 2, 1991 ATTACHMENT - EXHIBIT D KENSINGTON PLANNED UNIT DEvELOPMENT CRITERIA As City Council proceeded through the Centex settlement negotiations, they established the following criteria for a Planned Unit Development that would be acceptable: 1. Total numberof units - Allowable number of units in Kensington was established at 385, including the existing manor homes in Phase I. 2. Multi- family/Single family - Only single family units east of the power line transversing the PUD area. Single family or park along Mendota Heights Road between Huber Drive and Delaware Avenue. 3. public R.O.W. - Required 60' R.O.W. for major roads, in high density areas. Required 55' R.O.W. for the less traveled lower density single family residential areas. B618 curbs required. 4. Parks - Required• to provide the minimum park dedication (10% of land area) with usable -park land. Northern park area to include the existing comfort station and to be of sufficient size to include tot lot, a dimensioned area for a possible practice soccer field, and amenities. The southern park area needed to be of sufficientsize to site one 360' x 240' soccer field and one 360' x 300' soccer. field, a parking lot and an area for play equipment and amenities. Required was a trail link to Delaware Avenue from the soccer area and a trail link from the southern park area to the northern park area and Mendota Heights Road. Developer will balance quantity of soils for park area. 5. Lot Sizes and Setbacks - For single family homes 10 percent of the total number of single family lots could be from 13,000 square feet to 13,999 square feet and another 10 percent of the total would be allowed to be 14,000 to 14,999 square feet. All remaining lots had to meet or exceed 15,000 square feet. None of the pond lots shall be allowed to use water in their area calculations. The typical front footage requirement for single family lots is 100'. The criteria for this PUD would be that 20 percent of the total single family lots could be between 80-89 feet of frontage and another 20 percent of the total single family lots could have a lot width between 90 and 99 feet. The remaining lots would have to meet the 100' requirement. All setback requirements in the R-1 Ordinance Section would be met. This is 10 ' side yard setbacks and 30 ' rear yard setbacks. A quality assurance plan would be submitted. Square Foot Area 13,000 - 13,999 14,000 - 14,999 15,000 + LOT SIZE REQUIREMENTS Actual Criteria 5 or 5% 10 or 100 7 or 7% • 10 or 100 86 or 88% 78 or 80% Total 98 - 100% 98 - 100% LOT FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS Frontage in Feet 80 - 89 90 -99 100 +• Actual Criteria 13 or 13% 26 or 27% 59 or 60% 19 or 20% 20 or 20% 59 or 60% Total 98 - 100% 98 - 100% NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS Unapproved August 7, 1990 Proposed Settlement Plan * Plan * Manor Homes 160 80 Coach Homes 276 0 Townhomes 71 69 Back.to Back _ Townhomes 0 138 Single Family=- 48 =. 98 Total 555'' 385 r * Dwelling unit counts include. existing Phase I. UG- 1 ES. -- 1 FR I 824- SA HRE-BERGQIJ I ST EXHIBIT E PARCEL A CEN'TEK REAL ESTATE CORPOIMIGN I NC - _ 04 • Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1; Lots 1, 2, 3 and. 4, Block 2, Lot 6, Block 3; Outlots E, F, and G; all in KENSINGTON P.U.D., according to the recorded plat thereof, All of Lockwood Drive as dedicated in the plat of KENSINGTON P.U.D., according to the recorded plat thereof. That part of Concord Way as dedicated in the plat of ICENSINGIDN P.U.D., according to the - recorded plat thereof, which lies easterly of the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 4, Block 2 of said KENSINGTON P.U.D. That part of the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, which lies easterly of the plat of KENSINGTON P.U.D., according to the recorded plat thereof and which lies southerly of the westerly extension of a line drawn 40.00 feet south of and parallawith the north linP of thetSouth 1815.00 feet of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36. ExcEpr that rt' of the Fact Half of the Southwest Quarter as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. 19-56, on file and of record in the office of the , County Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. That part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, -, described as follows: Beginning at the South Quarter corner of said Section 36; thence.._, North 0 degrees 26 minutes 53 seconds West, asmamedbearing, along 1,; the west line of said Southeast Quarter of Section 36, a distanoe, of 386.12 feet to a northerly right of way line of MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. -19-56, said point being the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continue North 0 degrees 26 minutes 53 seconds West, 1388.86 feet to the south line of HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, according to the recorded plat%thereof; thence North 89 degrees i24 minutes- 31v. seconds East, along the south line of said BANESEIRE ESTATES, a distance of 263.05 feet; thence easterly 128.27 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the south, said curve has a radius of 458.58 feet and a central angle of 16 degrees 01 minutes 34 seconds; thence along a tangential reverse curve, concave to the north a distance of 332.15 feet, said curve has a radius of 660.00 feet, a central Angle of 28 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds and a chord length of 328.66 feet which bears South 88 degrees 58 minutes 58 seconds East; thence South 20 degrees 09 minutes 41 seconds East, not tangent to the last described curve, 262.78 feet; thence South 5 degrees 22 minutes 28 seconds East, 415.35 feet; thence South 30 degrees West, 110.17 feet; thence South 55 degrees Ft, 295.19 feet; thence South 61. degrees Pt, 198.93 Exhibit E - Cwnership • 1 • AUG -16—.91 FR I S:2a: S A T H R E— B E R G Q U I ST , I N C feet to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36, said point being 1436.26 feet west of the east line of said Southeast Quarter, as measured along said parallel line; thence South 20 degrees 14 minutes 30 seconds East, 273.48 feet; thence South 74 degrees 48 minutes 29 seconds East, 252.00 feet; thence South 0 degrees 35 minutes 28 seconds East, 97.10 feet to the northerly right of way line of said RIGHT-OF-WAY PLAT NO. 19-56; thence westerly along said right of way line to the west line of said Southeast Quarter; thence north along said west line to the point of beginning. That pert of Outlot A, HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, Dakota County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof and that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, described as follows: Commencing at the South Quarter corner of said Section 36; thence North 0 degrees 26 minutes 53 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the west line of said Southeast Quarter of Section 36, a distance of 1774.98 feet to the south line of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East, along the south l i nP of said HAMPSHIRE ESTATES, a distance of 263.05 feet; thence easterly 128.27 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the south, said curve has a radius of 458.58 feet and a central angle of 16 degrees 01 minutes 34 seconds; thence along a tangential reverse curve concave to the north a distance of 332.15 feet, said curve has a radius of 660.00 feet, a central angle of 28 degrees 50 minutes 05 seconds and a chord length of 328.66 feet which bears South 88 degrees 58 minutes 58 seconds Mast, to the point of beginning; thence South 20 degrees 09 minutes 41 seconds East, not tangent to the last described curve, 262.78 feet; thence South 5 degrees 22 minutes 28 seconds Esst, 415.35 feet; thence South 30 degrees West, 110.17 feet; thence South 55 degrees East, 295.19 feet; thence South 61 degrees East, 198.93 feet to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East along said parallel line, 295.18 feet to the intersection with a line 1141.05 feet west of and parallel with the east line of the Southeast Quarter of said Section 36; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, along said parallel line, 1276.30 feet to the north line of said Outlot A; thence westerly along the north line of said Outlot A to the most westerly corner of said Outlot A; thence westerly along the southerly line of said HAMPSHIRE NATES, to the point of beginning. Exhibit E Page 2 P E+ AUG -16-91 F R I S:22 S A T H R E- B E R G Q U I S T, EXHIBIT E PARCEL B R.A. PIi1NAM AND ASSOCIATES, INC. INC. That part of Outlot A, HAMPSUIRE ESTATES, Dakota County, Minnesota, according.to the recorded plat thereof and that part of the Southeast Quarter of Section 36, Township 28, Range 23, dPribed.as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Southeast Quarter, 721.62 feet,to the intersection with a line 103.40 feet south of and parallel with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South' Half of said Southeast Quarter, said point being the point of beginning; thence continue North 0, degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West along said east line 451.79 feet; thence South 84 degrees 52 minutes 58 seconds West, 364.29 feet to the intersection with- a line 362.95 feet west of and parallel with the east.line of said Southeast Quarter; thence' North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West along said parallel line 287.00 feet; thence North 80 degrees 49 minutes 39 seconds East,'367.44 feet to the east line of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 seconds West along said east line 326.44 feet to the south line of said HAMPSEIRE ESTATES; thence west along the south line of said HAMPSHIRE BSTATF$ to the southeast corner of said Outlot A; thence north along the east line of said Outlot A to the northeast corner of said Outlot A; thence west along the north line of said Outlot A to the intersection with a line -1141.05 feet west of and parallel with the east line of said Southeast Quarter; thence South 0 degrees 12 minutes 37 ` seconds East, along said parallel line 1276.30 feet to the intersection with aline .103.40 feet south of and parallel el with the north line of the south 50 Rods of the South Half of said Southeast Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 24 minutes 31 seconds East, along said parallel line to the point of beginning. Exhibit E. Page 3 KENSINGTON DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA Revisions Related to Claremont Avenue In reviewing the Developer's Agreement, a number items have been identified with respect to the private drive (Claremont Avenue) on the development plan which require additional clarification. These items include the following: 1) The Developer's Agreement specifically provides that the minimum building setback from Claremont is 20 feet. However, the preliminary plat which was approved on August 6th, indicates that this minimum distance is actually closer to 30 feet. Centex has agreed to the 30 foot minimum with respect to these units, and will add to their plat specific dimensions related to this setback. 2) Exhibit D to the Developer's Agreement specifically discusses minimum street width for public streets, but does not indicate a minimum street width for Claremont Avenue. Centex has agreed to indicate on the plat that this street will be 28 feet wide. 3) A concern has also been raised with respect to parking on Claremont Avenue. Due to emergency vehicle access considerations, it is suggested that vehicle parking only be permitted on one side of Claremont, with the stipulation that no vehicle be permitted to park in such location for more than 24 hours at a time. This condition has not yet been• discussed with Centex. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS FROM: James E. Danie Public Works D MEMO LtAugust 13, 1991 :7,...TO: Mayor, City Council and City Admin'1 SUBJECT: Downtown Mendo'. Heights - MSA Ring Road DISCUSSION: At your August 7, 1991 workshop meeting Council dis- cussed the future plan to construct a ring road around the shopping center and central business area. In order to be able to fund this road with a bridge over Trunk Highway 110, Council directed staff to take the steps necessary to desig- nate the route as Municipal State Aid (M.S.A.). The process for designating a route as M.S.A. is two fold, first we need to obtain preliminary approval from the District State Aid Engineer and then pass a resolution designating the route M.S.A. Attached is a map showing the layout proposed by staff. This layout could be modified if desired once we get into final design. ACTION REQUIRED: Approve a preliminary layout for submission to the State of Minnesota for designation as an M.S.A. route. City of Mendota Heights August 14, 1991 Mr. Elmer Morris, Jr. Minnesota Department of Transportation Oakdale Office 3845 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, MN 55128 Dear Mr. Morris: Please find attached a proposed layout for a new route to be added to the City of Mendota Heights' Municipal State Aid System. The route •is 3,400 linear feet long and includes a bridge over Trunk Highway, 110 to provide a separated/safe corridor and increased access to the City's central business area. The route begins at South Plaza Drive's intersection with Dodd Road (Trunk Highway 149), circles around an area zoned as shopping center, over Trunk Highway 110, through a business zoned area and there connecting back up to Trunk Highway 149 at Hilltop Road. Mendota Heights feel that construction of this route is critical to providing an integrated, safe street system serving the central business district for Mendota Heights and we respectfully request your favorable action upon our request. Sincerely, James E. Danielson, P.E. Public Works Director JED:dfw Enclosure: Layout Map 1101 Victoria, Curve -Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 452.1850 I Il ftp •4L'"`vw`� r,..�.,,;,,i�•;'.•, .'.. _ , { :i'K."' • .ice ,,; :3Ri04. 3'rfj hx'N j`a �4:x�� 1'..i1.'•rF•i',"'• ... moi: W�i7•i +� • r. S; 4t I Y'a i x7ntrc e':a laY i'L' -a. AurrrEF?.,dt 1 r • 2 3 U In V (t South Plaza Drive realignment and extention. MSA Proposal August 20, 1991 Points of great concern and descent by Brian Birch Lot 2 of Birch Addition, and Highway 149 Lis Pendens fee owner. See map. 1. Increased traffic to valley Park via shortcut down Hilltop Rd., Valley Curve, and Wachter. 2. Car headlights into the front window of home at Hilltop and Dodd Rd. intersection. 3. Dangerous curve due to extreme limited vision of intersection. 4. Proposed through traffic must make a 90 degree turn. 5. Signage with stopping required. 6. Bad location of intersection due to Sibley High School traffic. 7. Easterly housing district impaired for shopping at the northern shopping center due to ackward traffic flow, thus negatively affecting the business in this area. 8. Residential property must be rezoned to B-2 and moved northerly spearheading into an R-1 zone. 9. Low elevation property must be prepared, filled, and graded. Drain culverts must be provided. This grading causes the new B-2 property to be brought up to grade at added expense to owner. 10. New Freeway Rd. alignment duplicates already existing road. It also cuts across the Hoeinstein property thus isolating some of that property from its owners original land mass. 1 1. •A 12 inch water main exists here which is also encased in a 24 inch housing which is 200 feet long and at 870 foot elevation, Dodd Rd. at Freeway Rd. is 869 feet, thus causing major changes to this 900 foot pipeway. 12. Culdesac built here will need to condemn property inorder to be constructed. 13. Culdesac does not allow access to the Birch property. 14. This entire proposed roadway serves nobody well. 15. This overpass may block vision to the north and south shopping centers of westerly bound Hwy. 110 traffic, thus decreasing business. 16. Property aquired will have to go through condemnation process inorder to obtain right-of-way from the underlying fee owners who are Friendly Hills Association to the south of Hwy. 110, Mrs. Hoeinstein, and Mr. Birch to the north of Hwy. 110. • 17. Bridge needs to be extra wide for pedways on both sides and fenced for safety to cars and pedestrians. This bridge area alone will cost about $65.00 per sq. ft, thus costing $950,000.00. 18. Severe enviromental impact and road fill is required here. 19. Bridge over creek is not shown on the plan drawing. That is additional cost. 20. Total length of roadways in yellow is not 3400 feet, as represented by council and staff, but is 3850 feet which is .84 mile long. 21. Reroute creek area displace wildlife for shorter bridge. 22. Existing trailway must be cut across, bridged, and aprons properly sloped, for safe and continous biking and walking. This is not shown on plans either. 23. Two pedways are not necessary; one must be for biking and the other for walking. 24. Curve is tangent with the bank entry, thus extremely dangerous. This entry should be closed off permanently. 25. The two sides of the shopping center serviced by this road are the loading docks and doors. Only one entry door exists here: 26. Proposed through traffic must make a 90 degree turn. 27. A dangerous entrance which is close to a busy intersection and is on a winter slope problem area and high volume traffic where children are left off and picked up. 28. A dangerous intersection due to the Fire Station exit 300 feet away. Firemen- voted against this plan the first time. 29. Signage with stopping required. 30. Shopping at the southerly shopping center due to ackward traffic flow will negatively affect the business in this area. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 12, 1991 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr.,/ Treasurer SUBJECT: Disposition of City Owned Property HISTORY: At this time, the City owns the following homes: 2455 TH55 1305 Kendon Lane 1306 Kendon Lane (Gerry Schouviller) (Hollis Huebner) (Mrs. Luchsinger) In the past, we have moved the home which we owned in the Rogers Road area, and we should consider taking bids for the sale and removal of the Schouviller home. It will be vacant by September 1st and could possibly be moved this fall. The other two properties are in the Furlong area and now have water and sewer service available. We should take some action either to occupy or remove the homes before winter due to the deterioration which would take place over the winter and potential vandalism. A thought on these might be to first offer the homes to two of the current owners on Rogers Road as they both have indicated a preference to remain in the area. If there was no interest, we could either open them for sealed bids, contact a real estate agent or put them up for removal. ACTION REQUIRED: Advise staff as to the preferred disposal of these properties. LES:mlk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tom Lawell, City Administ SUBJECT: MSP Airport Issues Update INTRODUCTION/DISCUSSION: August 16, 1991 This summer has been a particularly busy time for developments related to the airport. It seems that Council and staff members are continuously dealing with some new airport issue, hence this memo which seeks to summarize the statusriof five major airport topics. MENDOTA HEIGHTS/EAGAN CORRIDOR TEST The long awaited Mendota Heights/Eagan corridor test procedure is finally underway. The 60 day test began Monday, August 12, and is set to expire Friday, October 11. Two separate departure procedures are being tested - one during busy departure periods (simultaneous departures) and another during slow departure periods (non -simultaneous departures). The two procedures are graphically depicted on the attached maps. Even though the test is not yet a week old, staff has on several occasions monitored departures during the simultaneous departure mode. Thus far, aircraft seem to be adhering to the 100 degree bearing which, in essence, causes aircraft to cross Lexington Avenue north of the City's water tower, but south of Wagon Wheel Trail. In addition, the departing aircraft seem to travel a much more consistent flight path given the "middle marker" turn procedure which brings all jet aircraft over a common point in the Minnesota River bottom before executing any turns. Staff has not yet been able to monitor the test procedures during periods of non -simultaneous departures. Under this procedure, aircraft using the north parallel runway should maintain runway heading on departure, avoiding nearly all residential neighborhoods and exiting our community in the vicinity of the 494/35E interchange. Staff will continue to monitor the test procedures and report back periodically with observations. MSP AIRPORT EXPANSION PLANS As Council is aware, the City was an active participant in the MSP Interactive Planning Group (IPG) charged with analyzing the various impacts of the six consolidated future expansion concepts for MSP. The IPG report was completed in late July, and was forwarded to the MSP Airport Planning Task Force and the MAC Planning and Environment Committee. On August 27, 1991 the Metropolitan Airports Commission will choose one of the six concepts as the preliminary preferred expansion concept for public hearings in September and October. The MAC_will select the final expansion concept by the end of 1991 for inclusion in the MAC Long Range Capital Improvements Plan due for submission to the Minnesota Legislature in January 1992. Good news was received late last week when it was reported that the MSP Airport Planning Task Force has recommended to the MAC that Concept 6 - new north/south runway along Cedar Avenue and new west terminal building - be selected as the preferred expansion concept. With respect to Mendota Heights, the north/south runway is much more desirable in comparison with the other viable runway alternative - a new north parallel runway. It is hoped and anticipated that the MAC will endorse the recommendation at its August 27th meeting. Representatives from the MAC will be present at our September 17th Council meeting to further discuss the selected expansion concept. AIRPORT RELOCATION SITE SELECTION On Friday, August 16th the Metropolitan Council's new Major Airport Search Area Advisory Task Force selected southern Dakota County as the home of a new airport should one ever be built. The search area is located south of Rosemount and includes all or significant portions of three separate townships. The Metropolitan Council will consider the search area designation in December 1991, and then the MAC will spend the next three years deciding on a final airport site within the search area, and the design of a new airport facility. Dakota County officials have indicated great concern over the search area selection and will likely be approaching cities within the County to join them in conducting an in depth analysis of the effects of airport relocation. Of particular concern is roadway access to the selected area of Dakota County. Should the airport be relocated, the roadway impact most notable to Mendota Heights would likely be the upgrading of State Highway 55. PART 150 NOISE ATTENUATION PROGRAM The MAC Part 150 Noise Abatement Program is generating a great deal of publicity this summer. The MAC recently opened a noise attenuated single family residential home in Richfield to demonstrate the benefits of added sound insulation. On Wednesday, August 21st, the MAC will be hosting a Part 150 workshop at Sibley High School from 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. The workshop will allow residents impacted by air noise a chance to learn more about the Part 150 Noise Attenuation Program, and determine whether or not they will likely be eligible for financial assistance under this program. Actual expenditures from the program are not expected until 1993. NWA FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PACKAGE At our June 4, 1991 meeting, the Council adopted Resolution 91-29 - A Resolution Calling for the Inclusion of -Aircraft Noise Abatement Measures as Part of the State Financial Assistance Package to Northwest Airlines. Since that time, the cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, Richfield, and St. Louis Park have either adopted or are currently considering similar resolutions. In addition, we have received written responses from the following individuals regarding our request: 1. U.S. Representative Bruce Vento 2. State Senator Bill Belanger 3. State Senator Jim Metzen 4. State Senator Chuck Halberg 5 State Representative Art Seaberg 6. State Representative Jean Wagenius 7. Lieutenant Governor Joanell Drystad 8. Attorney General Hubert H. Humphrey, III 9. Secretary of State Joan Growe 10. State Treasurer Michael McGrath 11. State Auditor Mark Dayton 12. MAC Executive Director Jeff Hamiel 13. Metropolitan Council Chair Mary Anderson Copies of their replies are attached for your information. Due to the NWA imposed September 30th deadline for finalizing the details of the financial package, it is important that we maintain pressure on the two bodies negotiating the financial arrangements. We have invited representatives from other concerned cities to City Hall on August 22nd to discuss our specific noise reduction objectives and to coordinate our approach to the issue. ACTION REQUIRED: This agenda item is intended for informational purposes. No specific Council action is necessary at this time. Council should provide staff with additional direction deemed necessary on any of the airport topics. MTL:mlk "ft 1'44 , Star Tribune/Thursday/August 15/1991 713e- . Group backs north -south runway and• new terminal A community advisory group said. - Wednesday that a new north -south: runway and a new terminal are the' best ways to expand Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. • The group's recommendation is the. first to be received by the Metropolis tan Airports Commission; which is, to vote Aug. 27 on a design for the airport if it remains in the Twin': • Cities. The possibility of building ' a neW' airport. in 'an outlying countyalso being studied. State -legislators-WE eirpected.to decide whethei to build • or expand in 1996 when both studies, are finished. - • *. • •• • A •north -south runway as -rdCbm, mended•by the advisory group would send traffic primarily over Bloomingly ton and Eagan, but Would...cause the; most community disruption -in Richt!' field. • - • ' • 1-••• Evan Futterman, a Consultant 'Wilt Howard Needles Tammen &Bergen - doff engineers, in Alexandria;,-ya.; said the north -south norwaY4airev-' ommended instead Oa •nortkparal7, lel runway or a south parallelrunwa because of operational advantagea. • • • A north -south runway would allOW' three planes to land siniiiltitifeciuSIy. during bad Weather:Ond'diriS 41�r -ease the capacity of the airport more -than' the ',other two options, Futterman - said. ' -- h.• .. • The firinWailiiielliiithi)4etriiPoli- - • tan Airports Commission to•leviei the options. 1.• . . • . •':Att:t P;.1 .The advisory cominitted-alio mended that a new terminal betbuilt on the west side of the airport. J1. • --•ra. It would eventually replace the -exisi— ing terminal on the east side. ,• The advisory group inCludes -rept— sentatives frombusiness,. goverd- ment and the community.. . : ".• • West Saint Paul I F'!E11Ii�`°I. MI !11511 fLIGE111 : 1111 vat 1 11 Mendota Heights .e Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport Sunfish Lake Inner Grove Heights Inver More Heifihit M.A.C. Proposal Non -Simultaneous Departures 11L Departure 118° (M) Track 11R Departure 105° (M) Track • A *11 i ' JCElCir 1. 111EA t _ 'LIEU/ 1-11 Eung tor 14.A.C. Proposal al ` Simultaneous Departures • • ,11.L Deilarture MM turn 100° (M) Track .11R Departure 118° (M) Track • `' • wA JOANELLMAIYRSTAD P It/TENANT GOVERNOR August 8, 1991 STATE OF MINNESOTA. OFFICE OF THE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR SAINT PA.131. 55153 612 - 296 - 23Z4 Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor of the City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: Thank you for your letter and the copy of the city -council resolution concerning airport noise. I have heard from other mayors regarding this issue and the Northwest negotiations. ' I have forwarded your letter along with the others.to the Department of Trade and Economic Development for their information and review. As you are well aware, the negotiations are complex with a multitude of issues. Be assured, however, that we are aware of your concerns and are sensitive to the noise issue. Thank you again for your letter. I always appreciate hearing from local officials since I have a special understanding of the challenges you face. Please feel free to contact may office if you have any further questions or concerns. Very truly yours, O2½NELL M. DYRST Lieutenant Governor An Equal Opportunity Emplciyer 0634' • lhur W. Seaberg .e Representative District 38B Dakota County Minnesota. House of Representatives RobertVanasek,Speaker COMMITTEES: APPROPRIATIONS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND REGULATION DIVISION; JUDICIARY, CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION; TRANSPORTATION; WAYS AND MEANS July 2, 1991 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: Thank you for your recent letter and resolution expressing the council's will that proper noise abatement and fleet conversion requirements be included into financial assistance package currently being negotiated for the Northwest Airlines plant maintenance and engine overhaul facilities. Your letter prompted me to have staff contact Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) Commissioner Peter Gillette's office to inform them of your concerns. In doing so, staff was told that his office had received notice of your resolution and that the concerns raised by the council were a part of the dozens of private and public discussions concerning this legislation. In reading the bill signed into law by Governor Carlson, I was able to find two solutions with language relating to airport traffic and airport noise. Page five of the bill mentions traffic as a condition which must be submitted in a report to the Governor before any financial assistance can be granted. Secondly, and most importantly,•the bill requires the Metropolitan Airports • Commission to: incl.• de in any agreement. signed • to. build the maintenance base•and engine overhaul facility at the Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport a covenant providing for aircraft. noise abatement (p.36). While the inclusion of the above language in the bill does not guarantee resolution of this long-standing issue, I believe it shows concern on the part of DTED to continue the discussion as part of the bonding package, and perhaps most importantly, move noise abatement concerns to the forefront during the period the facilities are being constructed. 17 Vienna Lane, Eagan, Minnesota 55122 me Office Building, St Paul, Minnesota 55155 IR FAX (6121296-3949 (612) 681-1381 (612) 296-3533 Again, thank you for your input on this issue. Enclosed for your analysis is a copy of the relevant sections of the bill. Please do not hesitate to contact my office if you desire a copy of the full act, or if you have additional concerns or input relating to this or any other state gov- nment matter. Sincere Arth r W, Seaberg State epresentative SENATOR CHUCK HALBERG District 38 133 State Office Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296-4120 Home: 2707 Woods Tr. N. Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 (612) 435-2000 July 19, 1991 The Honorable *Arne Carlson Governor, State of Minnesota Room 130 State Capitol St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 Dear Governor Carlson: Senate State of Minnesota Enclosed, please find copy of a letter I received from the City of Mendota Heights and.a copy of their Resolution No. 91-29. It would seem that their suggestion that noise abatement be introduced as an item for discussion and negotiation with regard to the Financial Assistance Package to be given to Northwest is a good one. If Northwest is indeed concerned about a long term relationship with the people of Minnesota, it would seem that now is the appropriate time to be looking at noise abatement. Airport noise is a subject -that has been discussed over and over again and now is the chance for something concrete to be done. I would appreciate your introducing this issue into the talks with Northwest. 'Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, CHUCK HALBERG State Senator CH:ve cc: Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor, City of Mendota Heights Enclosures COMMITTEES: Elections and Ethics • Employment • Health and Human Services • Taxes and Tax Laws SERVING: Burnsville • Eagan • Lilydale • Mendota • Mendota Heights • r HUBERTH.HUMTHREYJU ATIORNEY GENERAL Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 STATE OF MINNESOTA Olt iCE OF TIM ATTORNEY GENERAL July 25, 1991 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: 102 STATE CAPITOL ST. PAUL, MN 55155 TELEPHONE: (612) 296-6196 FACSIMILE: (612) 297-4193 Thank you for informing me of the resolution passed by the City of Mendota Heights calling for the inclusion of aircraft noise abatement measures as part of the State financial assistance package to Northwest Airlines in connection with a proposed aircraft maintenance facility to be located in Duluth and the aircraft engine repair facility to be located at the Chisholm -Hibbing Municipal Airport. As you are aware, the legislation with respect to the authorization for. State bonding specifically provides as follows: Before issuing the bonds for the facilities, approving financial assistance, or entering into loan, lease, or other revenue agreements for the projects described in subdivisions 5 and 6, the commissioner shall determine that the lessee and, if necessary, other corporations affiliated with by common ownership with the lessee have agreed to requirements satisfactory to the commissioner respecting aircraft noise abatement. Minn. Laws 1991, ch. 350, art. 1, § 2, subd. 7(a). In addition, the provisions of the statute relating to refinancing of certain Northwest facilities by the Metropolitan Airports Commission contain a similar provision. That provision provides in pertinent part as follows: The lease must contain covenants and agreements by the airline corporation and any successor in interest providing for . . . aircraft noise abatement. Minn. Laws 1991, ch. 350, art. 2, § 5, subd. 12(d). I understand that you have provided copies of the resolution of the City of Mendota Heights to the officials most directly involved with approval of the transaction. Thank you for sharing your concerns with me. Equal ChWiliTnifEmployer Best regards HUBERT H. Attorney Genera Printed o Recycled Paper Jean Wagenius State Representative District 626 Hennepin County Minnesota House of Representatives VICE CHAIR, JUDICIARY COMMITTEE COMMITTEES: JUDICIARY, CRIMINAL JUSTICE DIVISION; TAXES; TRANSPORTATION; ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES; LEGISLATIVE COMMISSION ON WASTE MANAGEMENT; CHILD PROTECTION COMMISSION July 16, 1991 Mayor Charles E. Mertensotto City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: I was pleased to get a copy of your resolution regarding aircraft noise abatement at Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport. Under the statute, the Governor and the Metropolitan Airports Commission have an unprecedented opportunity to negotiate to reduce the intolerable noise in our neighborhoods. I have urged both to maximize the opportunity. Again, thank you for sending me your resolution. Warm egards, Z11/7t Jean Wagenius State Representative 4804 11th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55417 State Office Building, St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 822-3347 (612) 296-4200 BRUCE F. VENTO 4TH DISTRICT. MINNESOTA 2304 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, OC 20515 (202) 225-8631 DISTRICT OFFICE GALTIER PLAZA 176 FIFTH ST., E RM. 727, BOX 100 ST. PAUL. MN 55101 (612) 221-4503 !onfirt z of the Unite. 5tatez ti.oane of littpresEstatioes UUUaohinnton, 3 20515 July 5, 1991 Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 Dear Mr. Mayor: HOUSE COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS CHAIRMAN: SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL PARKS • AND PUBUC LANDS HOUSE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, FINANCE AND URBAN AFFAIRS HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON AGING Thank you for your letter and the resolution expressing the concerns of the Mendota Heights City Council regarding aircraft noise and supporting a requirement that Northwest. Airlines meet an accelerated Stage III aircraft acquisition program in conjunction with receiving financial assistance from the State of Minnesota. I share your concern that the nation's airlines, including Northwest, should proceed promptly to acquire quieter Stage III aircraft. In recent conversations with members of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), I was advised that MAC intends to raise this issue in its discussions with Northwest concerning its financial package. As you may. be aware, Northwest has a releatively large number of older Stage II aircraft in its fleet compared to certain other large U.S. airlines. Northwest has also expressed its concern about a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) directive which could lead to the elimination of Stage II aircraft by 2000. For your information, I have enclosed a copy of a General Accounting Office (GAO) report on airport noise which my colleague, Jim Oberstar, and I requested. This study clearly indicates that in the absence of a uniform national airport noise policy, such as the kind now being developed by the FAA, airlines would be forced to comply with a "patchwork quilt" of different noise regulations at different airports nationwide. I hope that the state and the MAC will be able to secure some commitments from Northwest regarding steps to mitigate the effects of aircraft noise for those who live near the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport. Please be assured that I will continue to monitor this issue closely. Again, thank you for sharing your views on this matter with me. BFV:sf Si/rel471g y, uce F. Vento ember of Congress PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER MARK B. DAYTON STATE AUDITOR STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE STATE AUDITOR SUITE 400 525 PARK STREET SAINT PAUL 55103 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria. Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: July 8, 1991 296-2551 Thank you for your letter regarding the concern of the citizens of Mendota Heights about the noise being generated by Northwest airplanes. I respect the serious problem which aircraft noise inflicts upon the quality of life of many of your citizens, since I formerly lived in south Minneapolis on a direct line with one of the airport's major approaches. If the State Board of Investment does decide to make an investment in Northwest Airlines; I will do my best to incorporate this issue into our discussions with the company. In all honesty, I must tell you that, by law, our first and overwhelming consideration must be the security and financial return of such an investment for the present and future retirees who depend upon this pension fund. Applying this first consideration, it is very possible that the Board will decide that such a major investment in the company, or any company, simply cannot be justified. In such an instance, there would be no opportunity to raise the issue of concern to you with the company. Thus, I suggest that you also direct your request to the Metropolitan Airport Commission members. It appears far more likely that MAC will be undertaking a financing package with the company necessary to secure the airbase and other maintenance facilities for northeastern Minnesota. Thus, your most certain chance to insist upon an agreement which incoiporates your concerns rests with the MAC negotiations with the company. I hope that my suggestion is helpful to you. I look forward to continuing our discussion on • this important issue, should the State Board of Investment begin to look at an investment in Northwest Airlines. Please 'do not hesitate to communicate your citizens' views on this or any other subject to me. . With best regards. MBD:tms Mark B. Dayton State Auditor AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER MICHAEL A. McGRATH Treasurer July 5, 1991 STATE OF MINNESOTA OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER 303 State Administration Building 50 Sherburne Avenue Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 (612) 296-7091 Fax (612) 296-8615 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor, City•of-Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: Thank you for sharing with me the Resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights regarding the airport noise issue. While I do not officially have authority in regards to the bonding program of financial assistance for NWA Company passed by the legislature, I support personally the efforts of your Council and others to reduce to the greatest extent possible the intrusion of aircraft noise on the personal lives of our citizens. Discussion of an investment of public employees' pension funds in NWA Company could lead to a role for me to fulfill our common interests in this area of public policy. Among many other questions I have regarding this possible investment, if it is proposed to the State Board of -Investment, will be the use by NWA Company of the proceeds. I will make it very clear that my approval of such an investment will depend, in addition to financial viability, on•a commitment to use the funds to address the quality of life issues you -address. You see, I live in Bloomington and, for some time, was a resident of East Bloomington or Southwest Minneapolis. Therefore, I have. personal knowledge of the problem of conducting daily life in an atmosphere of,noise pollution. While we all appreciate the 'benefits of the current airport location, and we all recognize those benefits bring difficulties, we can also expect the highest priority given by our corporate neighbors to the effects on those who share this area of our state. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Honorable Mertensotto July 5, 1991 Page 2 I hope you will remain steadfast in your commitment to serving the citizens of 'Mendota Heights on this important issue. Sincerely, chael A. McGrath Treasurer State of Minnesota MAMibhs JOAN ANDERSON GROWE Secretary of State ELAINE VOSS Deputy Secretary of State tafP of ilinntinta OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE 'ani# M' 55155 July 3, 1991 Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Hts., MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: 180 STATE OFFICE BUILDING Corporation Division: 612/296-2803 UCC Division: 612/296-2434 Election Division: 612/296-2805 Office of the Secretary: 612/296-3266 Office of Deputy Secy: 612/296-2309 This is in response to your letter stating your concerns about the burden of aircraft noise in your city, and for sharing a copy of your Resolution 91-29 with me. I want to point out at this point that the "financial assistance package" that your refer to in your letter is the one that the state legislature passed. As a constitutional officer I do not vote with the legislative body. I suggest you contact your local legislators and work with them inregardto the noise issue. I am however, a member of the State Board of Investment, and to my understanding there has not been a written proposal from Northwest Airlines presented to that body regarding financial investment at this time. If and when there is one presented, I assure you that it will be looked at carefully, and that necessary due dilligence will be performed. Our procedure will include not only internal analysis, but the board will also seek external financial and legal opinions, and the process will be done in the open and will withstand public scrutiny. Thank you for sharing your concerns with me. I wish you a satisfactory solution to this annoying problem in your area. JAG:jm Si - cerely, Joa nderson Growe Sec - ary of State "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" • t 0 METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION yoL,s 5, Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport rta t .. .o t ° 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450 Phone (612) 726-8100 • Fax (612) 726-5296 0 t 0 4‘Rpo l Office of Executive Director Y July 10, 1991 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor of the City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: Thank you for your letter of June 21 to Metropolitan Airports Commission Chairman Hugh Schilling expressing your concern regarding State financial assistance to Northwest Airlines and consideration for noise abatement issues to be discussed during the negotiation process. I can assure the Metropolitan Airports Commission has a lengthy list of noise abatement measures that it is currently considering as part of the negotiation process with Northwest Airlines. First and foremost, it is absolutely critical that Northwest Airlines acquire the quietest, highest technology equipment available to be competitive with other major carriers and be a good neighbor in the Twin Cities. In addition to the acquistion of new, quieter aircraft, we are considering other measures that will lead toward noise redution for residents who live near the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. I appreciate your forwarding to the Commission your June 4,1991 Resolution. It has been brought to the attention of all Commissioners and will be used as back-up and support of our negotiation process with Northwest Airlines. If the Commission should need further assistance, I consider your letter to be an offer of availability. Thank youfor forwarding the Resolution of the City of Mendota Heights and expressing your concerns regarding this issue. cerely, Jeffrey W. Hamiel Executive Director The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. � M` METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Pau!, MN 55101-1634 612 291-6359 FAX 612 291-6550 TTY 6/2 291-0904 July 2, 1991 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor, City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: The proposed Financial Assistance Package authorized by the State of Minnesota for Northwest Air- lines does indeed provide an opportunity to further address the aircraft noise issue at Minneapolis - St. Paul International Airport (MSP). Under the recently enacted legislation, the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) is authorized to issue general obligation revenue bonds (generally for purposes of acquiring and/or financing or refinancing airline and airport properties). The revenue to repay these bonds shall be covered by lease agreements. The lease agreements must contain covenants, satisfactory to the MAC, providing for. -aircraft noise abatement. The precedent has already been established between the commission and Northwest Airlines for such a type of lease at MSP. The legislation also established an Interagency Task Force to coordinate the financial transactions authorized by this act. Although the Metropolitan Council is not a direct party in these negotiations, we intend to be actively engaged in the implementation of those parts of the agreements affecting the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area. This includes our review of airport development plans for MSP, continued participation in the Stage III Working Group, and continued support of land use compati- bility planning efforts. The Council recognizes the concerns of the MSP area communities regarding continued aircraft noise impacts. We welcome your input and participation in the major airport planning process, as the region strives to balance its economic needs and environmental resources. Spy, Mary E. derson, Chair cc: Hugh Schilling, MAC Chair Margaret Schreiner, Metropolitan Council District 15 red on JAMES METZEN Senate District 39 Room 303 Capitol St. Paul, MN 55155 (612) 296-4370 and 312 Deerwood Court South St. Paul, MN•55075 (612) 451-0174 July 1, 1991 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensotto: Senate State of Minnesota Thank you for your recent letter and resolution regarding Northwest Airlines and noise abatement. I have forwarded the resolution to the group overseeing negotiations with the airline, the State Interagency Task Force. Please find an enclosed copy of the Northwest Airbus legislation, with the sections highlighted which deal directly with noise limitation measures at both the Minneapolis/St. Paul airport and the Duluth Airbus and Hibbing facility. As you can see, this aspect of the legislation with regard to noise abatement will be negotiated by the State Interagency Task Force, whose members include: The Commissioner of Finance, Commissioner of Trade and Economic Development, Commissioner of Revenue, the Chair of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, the Mayors of Duluth and Hibbing, Chair of the St. Louis County Board and the Commissioner of the Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board. It is my hope that this task force will consider the issue of noise abatement during negotiations. in order to make positive strides to address the problem of airport noise. I have sent a request to the Chair of the task force encouraging such action on your behalf. If you have any further questions regarding the issue or the progress of the negotiations, please contact my office. Sincerely, S METZEN State Senator COMMITTEES • Chairman, Economic Development and Housing Committee • Chairman, Banking Subcommittee • Member, Rules and Administration Committee • Commerce Committee • Finance Cnmmittap • (:nminn 12Pd..Iintirm cnmmittpA WILLIAM V. BELANGER, JR. Senator 41st District 10716 Beard Avenue South Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 Phone: (612) 881-4119 Office: 107 State Office Building St. Paul, Minnegota 55155 Phone.. (612) 296-5975 June 27, 1991 The Honorable Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor, City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Chuck: Q14(- -711 k Senate State of Minnesota Thank you for your letter and the resolution by your Council. I am a member of the Advisory Council on Metropolitan Airport Plan- ning, but in that capacity our only function is the dual track approach to an airport site - current or new. However, I believe I can be an advocate for your position through my position as a legislator, and as a legislator who supported the NWA bill. As a resident of Bloomington, I appreciate and understand the concerns of your community relative to airport noise. 'shes, qreedtaP_, BE GER State Senator BB:nl COMMITTEES • Rules & Administration .Taxes & Tax Laws • Commerce • Judiciary . Legislative Commission to Review Administrative Rules • Senate Special Committee on Ethical Conduct CHAIRMAN • Bloomington Legislative Delegation CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO August 20, 1991 TO: Mayor, City Council and City Administrator FROM: Lawrence E. Shaughnessy, Jr., Treasurer "(SUBJECT: Truth In Taxation Hearing HISTORY: It is necessary for the City to hold a hearing regarding the proposed tax levy and 1992 Budget. We have now been advised that the first available Tuesday of a regular Council meeting will be December 3rd with an alternate date of December 17th. The tentative levy and budget approval are on this evening's Council agenda. ACTION REQUIRED: Establish December 3rd as the Budget and Tax Levy Hearing date with the alternative date of December 17th. LES:mlk r<,