The URL can be used to link to this page

1989-11-07CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA AGENDA NOVEMBER 7, 1989 - 7:30 P.M. 1. Administration of Oath of Office to Councilmember Burt Anderson. 2. Roll Call. 3. Agenda Adoption. 4. Approval of Minutes of October 17. 5. Consent Calendar a. Acknowledgment of Treasurer's Report for October. b. Acknowledgment of October 24th Planning Commission Minutes. c. Acknowledgment of October 24th Parks and Recreation Commission Minutes. d. Acknowledgment of Letter from St. Paul Water Regarding Water Service Connection Repair. e. Acknowledgment of October Building Report. f. Acknowledgment of Mendakota Purchase Agreement. g. Approval of RESOLUTION NO. 89-120, "Resolution Accepting Petition and Ordering Preparation of Feasibility Report for Mendota Woods Subdivisio ." h. Approval of the List of Contractors. i. Approval of the List of Claims. End of Consent 6. Public Comments. 7. Unfinished and New Business a. CASE NO. 89-39 - Visitation Convent and School Sign Variance b. CASE NO. 89-41 - Lexington Heights Apartments Sign Variance C. CASE NO. 89-37 - J.A. Development - Lot Split RESOLUTION NO , 89-121 d. CASE No. 89-38 - Bruber - Wetlands Permit e. Friendly Hills Tot Lot. 8. 9. f. Duffy Developer's Agreement. g. Braslau Contract. h. 1990 Tax Levy and Public Hearing RESOLUTION NO. 89-122 i. Furlong Area Street Repairs. j. Sewer Availability Charge Refunds. k. Resignation of Park and Recreation Commissioner. 1. Commission Appointments. m. Review of LMC Legislative Policies and Designation of Voting Delegate. n. Sommerset Water Hook Up. o. Valley View Heights Park. p. CDGB Agreement Modification. q. U.S. West Park Building. r. Barton-Aschman Contract. s. Acquired Properties. t. Neighborhood Parks - New Play Structure. u. Dakota County HRA Representative. v. Cable TV Representative. Council Comments. Adjourn. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS TREASURER'S REPORT, OCTOBER, 1989 4 • : BALANCE COLLATERAL DAKOTA COUNTY STATE BANK Checking Account 5% K$ 23,037.82 Savings Account 5 1/2 = 487.51 C.D. Rep 4/5 7.9% -0- 23,525.33 Collateral - Bonds 315,000.00 Gov't Guar. 100,000.00 200,000.00 $ 615,000.00 CHEROKEE STATE BANK C.D. due 3/11/89 350,000.00 @ 8 1/8% Savings Cert. 8/28/89 13,952.59 @ 8.00% 363,952.59 Collateral - Bonds 700,000.00 Gov't Guar. 100,000.00 $ 800,000.00 Value 10/31/89 (est) U.S. Treasury Money Mkt. 1,500,000.00 (1,715,000.00) Gov't, Securities Fund 1,200,000.00 (1,680,000.00)(10 TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: 3,087,477.92 Funds Available 10/30/88 4,374,000.00 Funds Available 12/31/88 5,273,390.77 Rates, Money Market Oct. 30 Bank 7.10 Fid 8.40 LES:kkb 11/4/89 E. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, OCTOBER 24, 1989 The regular meeting of the Mendota Heights Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, October 24, 1989, in the City Hall Council Chambers, 1101 Victoria Curve. Chairman Mo son called the meeting to order at 7:32 o'clock P.M. The following members were present: Morson, Koll, Dwyer, Anderson, Krebsbach, Duggan and Tilsen. Also present were Acting City Administrator James Danielson and Planning Consultant Howard Dahlgren. APPROVAL OF Commissioner Koll moved approval of the MINUTES minutes from September 26, 1989. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 Chairman Morson acknowledged a letter of resignation submitted by Commissioner Anderson. Chairman Morson stated that Commissioner Anderson was recently appointed to the Mendota Heights City Council. He further stated that Commissioner Anderson should be commended for all of the work he has done with the Planning Commission. In response to a concern regarding the Ince height being too high and that it coulde a Commissioner Krebsbach moved to commend Commissioner Anderson for his work done with the Planning Commission. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 CASE -NO. 89-39 Mr. John Dietrich, Damon, Farber and VISITATION Associates, stated that he is representing CONVENT AND the Convent of Visitation application for a SCHOOL - SIGN variance for a sign at the end of Visitation AND FENCE Drive and Mendota Heights Road. He stat d VARIANCE that at the present time the intention is to construct the entry monument signs. He further stated that the initial need for a sign is for increased readability, aesthetic and location improvement. He stated tha the hope is to have the proposed sign clean the intersection. In response to a concern regarding the Ince height being too high and that it coulde a October 24, 1989 Page 2 hazard for drivers on Mendota Heights Road, Mr. Dietrich stated that they are studying that problem and that at this time he asked the Commission to only consider the sign variance. Commissioner Tilsen stated that the sign does meet the setback requirements but he stated that he would like to see the sign moved back further off of Mendota Heights Road because he is concerned for the drivers coming down Visitation Drive and stopping short of Mendota Heights Road and having the sign impede their, vision. In response to a question from Commissioner Tilsen, Mr. Dietrich stated that the sign is to the west of the natural gas pipe line. He stated that was another reason why fill would be placed so it does not encroach the gas line. Commissioner Duggan stated that his concern is visibility and that he would want to see a new drawing for the fence specifically from the west side. He stated that he thought that the new sign would be a nice addition to the intersection and that it would clean up the area. Mr. Dietrich stated that they plan on filling approximately four feet (41) so that the base of the sign will be at the same elevation as the road. Mr. Dietrich submitted photographs to the Commission showing the location of the proposed sign. Commissioner Anderson stated that he was a little concerned with the four feet (41) of fill. He stated that the size of the sign seemed appropriate and that it would be a great improvement. In response to a question from commissioner Anderson, Mr. Dietrich stated that in the future, the intent is to have the entire grounds fenced. He stated that currently there is a chain link fence. Commissioner Dwyer stated that he is concerned with the sign being larger than it should be. He stated that he would like to see the sign scaled down. Mr Dietrich responded that the sign needs to be large for readability. He Octobr 24, 1989 Page further stated that the columns can be sc led down and that they would look into doing that. Commissioner Koll stated that she had no problems with the sign and the pillars an that the sign would be a nice addition. Commissioner Koll moved to recommend that Council grant a sign size variance from twelve (12) square feet to twenty-two (22 square feet and that relative to the fence on the west side, that a recommendation be deferred until further details are submitted by the applicant. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. In response to a question from Commissioner Krebsbach, Planner Dahlgren stated that a variance is limited to the size of the sign. He stated that normally a support facility for a sign is not computed as part of the sig area, if it is within reason. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1, Dwyer CASE NO. 89-41 Ms. Virgina Faulkner, Property Manager for LEXINGTON HTS. Lexington Heights Apartments, explained their ASSOCIATION - request for a sign variance. She briefly SIGN VARIANCE explained the design of the proposed sign. Commissioner Tilsen stated that he feels the sign is extremely large. Ms. Faulkn stated that the size of the sign was determined because of the need for readability. Ms. Faulkner also responde the pine trees near the site would be mo and will be placed in a different area o property. In response to a question from Commissi Duggan, Ms. Faulkner stated that there not be a "vacancy/no vacancy sign" atta the proposed sign. Commissioner Duggan further expressed his concerns for the maintenance of the sign. Commissioner Krebsbach stated that she i concerned with the size of the sign. Sh further stated that the variance for the largeness of the sign was to help facili rentals. Ms. Faulkner stated that the apartments are not at an occupancy which need to be so they do need to facilitate hat that d the r ld d to to October 24, 1989 Page 4 rentals. Commissioner Anderson stated that the size''of the sign should help people and that the size of the letters may help bewildered people. He stated that he doesn't feel that the size of the sign is a safety factor. Commissioner Duggan moved to recommend to Council that a sign size variance from six (6) feet to sixty-three (63) square feet be granted. Commissioner Koll seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 1, Krebsbach CASE NO. 89-37 Mr. John Mathern, J.A. Development Company, J.A. DEVELOP- explained that they have recently acquired the MENT - LOT Victoria Townhomes Development. He stated SPLIT that they propose to develop this according to the original architecture and footprint parameters of the pre-existing PUD. He stated that they are applying for Lot 1,2 and 3, Block 4 to be changed to allow J.A. Development to put up two townhouses where three would have been built. In response to a question from Chairman Morson, Mr. Mathern stated that he was unsure if this would be the only block that would be split. He stated that they are only asking for the lot splits as requested by their customers. He stated that it could happen again on the property and that he would come back if so requested. Commissioner Duggan moved to recommend to the City Council to waive the public hearing at the Planning Commission level and to grant the requested lot division with commendation. Commissioner Dwyer seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 CASE NO. 89-38 Mr. Bill Devlin, architect representing Mr. BRUBER, and Mrs. Bruber, informed the Commission WETLANDS PER. that he distributed a corrected survey showing the corrected topographic lines. Mr. Devlin stated that they are trying to create a walkout and that they are trying to minimize the dirt work. He stated that they are going to save as many trees as possible and that if Octobe Page 5 need be, they would transplant some of trees along the side of the house. 24, 1989 In response to a question from Commission r Tilsen, Acting City Administrator Daniels n stated that during the mass grading of th addition there were erosion control measu e put in. Commissioner Tilsen stated thatrin this particular case there is a potential for erosion into the Wetlands. Acting Administrator Danielson responded that th erosion material is still at the site and could salvage that and replace it to prot the wetlands from this particular constru site. Acting City Administrator Danielson state that the plans submitted tonight are much improved. He stated that what still rema are the side slopes which were still illustrated as a 1 to 1 slope which is entirely too steep. He stated that typic the steepest slope would be 3 to 1. Mr. Devlin stated that they would be more tha happy to change that. Planner Dahlgren briefly explained the purpose of the Wetlands Ordinance. Plann Dahlgren stated that the plans submitted tonight shows that the slope is 1 to 1 or degree slope. Planner Dahlgren stated th the plans submitted tonight are unrealist with regards to the contour lines. Commissioner Tilsen moved to recommend to Council to grant the Wetlands Permit with stipulations referring to the newly submit October 24 plans: 1. That the grading won't go below elevat 932. 2. A maximum of 3 realizing that walls there is steep. on ly 45 e to 1 slopes be maintain d adjacent to the retaini g a very limited area tha is 3. Erosion control measures be taken and enforced through the building permit process. October 24, 1989 Page 6 4. Erosion control measures be maintained until ground cover is well established. 11 Commissioner Dwyer seconded the motion. AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 HEARING: Mr. Ross Erickson, Eagan Pool and Spa and Ms.. CASE NO. 89-36 Susan Hall, 1755 Lexington Avenue, were EAGAN POOL & present and had some revised plans. They SPA - requested the Commission to review their CAO VARIANCE updated plans. After a brief discussion, the Commission felt that the hearing should again be continued to allow time for staff to review and report on the updated plans. Commissioner Anderson moved to continue the public hearing to November 28, 1989 at 7:45 P.M. Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. AYES: 6 NAYS: 0 ABSTAIN: Morson HEARING: Commissioner Tilsen moved to continue the CASE NO. 89-34 public hearing to November 28, 1989 at 8:00 MINNESOTA P.M. INDOOR SOCCER Commissioner Duggan seconded the motion. ARENA - ZONING AMENDMENT & CUP AYES: 7 NAYS: 0 VERBAL REVIEW Acting City Administrator Jim Danielson outlined the actions Council had taken on last months planning cases. ADJOURN There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:08 o'clock P.M. Respectfully submitted, Kimberlee K. Blaeser Senior Secretary CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MINUTES, OCTOBER 24, 1989 A special meeting of the Mendota Heights Park and Commission was held on Tuesday, October 24, 1989 in tt Conference Room, 1101 Victoria Curve. Commission Huber called the meeting to order at 7:40 P.M. Th members were present: Damberg, Huber, Katz, Lundeen Lachenmayer was excused. Absent: Owens. Staff memk were Parks Project Manager Kullander and Administratii Batchelder. Dave Ayers and John Nowlin were in the i APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Spicer moved apl minutes of October 10, 1989. Chair Huber seconded. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 UPDATE ON CONSULTANT SELECTION Commissioner Lundeen moved app minutes of September 12, 1989. Spicer seconded. Parks Project Manager Guy Kullar brief update on the progress of t being worked out between the City Aschman. Kullander stated that Attorney and Barton-Aschman shou] details worked out soon and that the Council has awarded the contra let commence the design work fc Highlands Neighborhood Park and th design work Hagstrom-King, Ivy Rogers Lake parks. Recreation City Hall Chair John following ind Spicer. yrs present a Assistant idience. ,al of the Commission ,al of the )mmissioner aer gave a ie contract and Barton - the City d have the as soon as --t, he will r Victoria landscape Hill and Kullander stated that the City wa beginning negotiations with Mendakota after receiving its appraisal. He stated the City's appraiser had valued the land a $583,000, which included $100,000 in current assessments. / Administrative Assistant Batchelder stated that the City Council had agreed to appoint a five member committee to negotiate with the School District on the Sibley site, if it was ARCHITECTURE COSTS necessary. Batchelder stated that Acting Administrator Danielson and Councilmemberr Blesener had met with Bruce Anderson and that they are discussing ownership issues after ` development would be completed. He stated that the issue was whether the City would retain ownership of a portion of the Sibley site or whether a long term lease agreement could be worked out. Commissioner Spicer suggested that there were many municipalities in the area that had similar joint use agreements, such as North St. Paul, Eagan and Apple Valley. Commissioner Damberg inquired that if the negotiations work out with Mendakota and the City acquires the land, then does the City still do Sibley. Commissioner Spicer said he felt that the original intention of the Ballfields sub -committee was to acquire three sites and develop two as active parks and one as a practice facility that would only be graded. Kullander stated it was his understanding that the City would acquire three sites and that development money for the third site would come out of Proposition 2. Chairman Huber asked for regular updates on Sibley and Mendakota negotiations. Parks Project Manager Kullander stated that Kodet Architecture had been taken out of Barton-Aschman's proposed contract. He stated that a 10% fee of construction costs for each building in the active parks would be charged by Kodet. He stated that originally the first building would have a ten percent fee, and the additional buildings would be a reduced fee. He stated that because each building would have different uses that they could not be designed from the same scheme, thus each building would have a 10% fee. Commission Chair John Huber stated that during the negotiations with Mendakota that some cutoff point should be elaborated in order that an acquisition cost not eliminate other items in the referendum. He stated there is a certain level we can afford without killing other items in the referendum. He stated that as the dollar costs are coming in during the current design AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 CURLEY TOT LOT phase it is apparent that they a e high and that there is little room to manever within the budget.: Commissioner Spicer made a motion to advise the committee working on the n gotiations with Mendakota that they realize the budget is tight and that any contingency monies are extremely limited. Commissionr Damberg seconded. Parks Project Manager Kullander j the Commission that if City Counc: the contract with Barton-Aschman, City staff release the work lis - contract and discussed earlier. Spicer stated that he believes i priority to begin this work. Chair Huber polled the Commissione were in unanimous agreement that should be released. Parks Project Manager Kullar about what the $4,000 in dedicated to the tot lot in Heights was to be spent on. Dave Ayers, Valley View Heights r, representative, stated that the n wanted landscaping that included black fill dirt, removal rocks/debris, sodding and seedin shrubs or trees towards the back o Kullander and Ayers discu enhancements including signs, picn bike racks, fencing, benches stations, open areas, and cautiona to keep children from sliding in t Mr. Ayers prioritized the enha 1. Split rail fence to define the side. 2. Minimal landscaping. 3. Picnic benches. 4. Bike rack. Kullander stated that fixing 1 problem would come out of maintenance budget, as well as nquired of 1 approves should the ed in the Commission t to be a Commission -s and they this work inquired zancements lley View sident and dghborhood regrading, of large and some the park. ;sed the .c benches, fitness •y measures to winter. as: front and drainage Parks picnic VALLEY VIEW HEIGHTS PARK AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 FRIENDLY HILLS TOT LOT benches, which are purchased on an annual basis. Mr. Ayers requested to be informed prior to construction what improvements were to be built and the final cost. r Mr. Ayers stated that the neighborhood wanted the park named Valley View Heights Park. Commissioner Katz stated that this was in line with the concept of the other• parks being named after the neighborhood they are in. Commissioner Katz made a motion to change the name of Curley's Tot Lot to Valley View Heights Park. Commissioner Spicer seconded the motion. Parks Project Manager Kullander presented an April 19, 1983 memorandum from the City Attorney regarding Friendly Hills Tot Lot. (See attached memo) Kullander stated that the current play equipment is a severe liability hazard and it would be in the City's best interest to remove the equipment. He also stated that the City had, in the past, explored ways of vacating the land. Kullander stated that he felt this was a good time for the City to clear title to the land, sell it and put the money into the Parks Fund. He stated that adjacent neighbors would oppose this action by the City. He stated that option three in the attached memo would be the most feasible. The Commission discussed the options in the memo. Commissioner Katz stated this land was feasible for a garden club but did not hold much interest as a tot lot with all the new equipment that would be going into Friendly Hills Park which is only a block away. Commissioner Spicer made a motion to recommend that City Council: 1. Authorize removal of all the existing play equipment at Friendly Hills Tot Lot; and 2. Bring action to "clear" title to Friendly Hills Tot Lot, sell the land and authorize the funds to the Parks Fund. AYES: 5 NAYS: 0 SUPPLIERS OF PLAY EQUIPMENT Commissioner Lundeen seconded the Parks Project Manager Kullander that he was in contact with five su] play ground equipment and that the stipulated the City should give the and they would design an optimum sE equipment for that price. explained that this was a favorable for the City because it would el competitive bid situation and 1 supplier would give a little exti hopes of getting more parks. explained that this also saves th contingency as we only have to desii specifications and the play companies incur most of the design Kullander asked the Parks Commi direction in the type of base mate would like to have with the play He explained the differences in gravel and rubber matting and how t liability issues. Kullander disc play equipment specifications Commission. Commission Chair Huber that the Commission be given a materials to consider, from wood Members of the Commission expresses new structures should blend in wit: parks and did not desire bright] units. The Commission agreed accent color would be acceptable ] or "brassy" colored units desireable. ion. explained ?pliers of :y had all �m a price �t .of play �Kullander situation iminate a hat each a in the Kullander City on In limited equipment osts. sion for Tial they quipment. ;and, pea ey affect tssed the rith the requested range of :o metal. that the existing ► colored hat some at "loud" ere not The Commission also stated thatthe play equipment should deliver to the w ole range of kids, from toddlers to 12 year o ds. -The Commission reached consensus $17,500 should be specified as a the play structures in each park. stated that originally the Citi; Review Committee had budgeted $20 40$4,000 in contingency for ei structure. He inquired if it that only price for Kullander ens Park ,000 plus Bch play was the NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IMPROVEMENT Commissions directive to only specify $17,500 for each park. The Commission's consensus was yes. Kullander stated that the play structure suppliers who will be visiting each park before they submit a design proposal should give us there opinions on the location of the new structures, as well as, the usefulness of our existing play equipment. he stated that if our existing units are worth saving these would be incorporated in their overall design for each park. He stated that new timber edging and sand or gravel base would be included. Kullander discussed the line item improvements of each park with the Commission. He stated most of this work could begin in the Spring except for improvements to playfields. Rogers Lake Park Halfcourt basketball, volleyball, horseshoe pit, new play structure, regrading, improve existing trail, and additional landscaping. Paving of the driveway and parking lots would not be done at this time. Marie Park Pave parking lot and drive, put in halfcourt basketball, a new play structure. The need for a small section of trail and additional parking were discussed and will be decided on after the location of the new play structure is determined. Fencing in the outfield around the pond was discussed and Kullander was requested to look into the possible use of collapsible fencing. Friendly Hills Park Discussion included the halfcourt basketball, new play structure, landscaping and enlargement of parking area, the need for a storm sewer through the park so fields could be leveled and the need for trails along Decorah and through the park to connect to trail coming from Mendota Heights Road. Since adequate funds were not allocated for the trail or storm sewer i seemed appropriate that money from sale o C Friendly Hills Tot Lot could be used for these two items. Valley Park The need for outfield fence improvements were discussed. The 1 the new play structure is diffict the limited amount of space. R trees along Marie and filling existing ditch were discussed as a additional area. Locating a basketball court will be difficu limited space. It was determined use could be eliminated from this a court will be built at both Victoria Parks which are both le half mile away. Ivy Hills Park Three location possibilities exis new play structure. A trail will Butler on the north and Maple Pa south. Exact alignment will be once the play structure is located. court basketball can be built in portion of the park, as well as, off-street parking. Staff was ins make contact with the Ivy Hills and homeowners association to see if still interested in the City acgi open space adjacent to the park. could be developed as a permane field which would allow fencing improvements be made to existing p additional landscaping improvement: planned. Wentworth Park Paving of the parking lot and drive be done now. once location of th structure was selected the sitii halfcourt basketball pad would Existing bituminous trails will be 8 feet and new trails would conn( Avenue and to Wentworth Trail. landscaping improvements will be later. FRIENDLY MARSH PARK i nd field ►cating of _t due to moving of i of the ray to get halfcourt t due to that this park since 4arie and z than a for the -onnect to rk on the 3etermined The half the south additional :ructed to Ivy Falls they were siring the This area nt soccer and other Lay field. are also would not new play g of the be done. widened to ct to 1st kdditional letermined TRAILS SYSTEM Kullander informed the Commission that a floating boardwalk through Friendly Marsh would be very expensive and could exceed $75,000 when the cost of a 40 foot bridge was included. This path would also adversely impact the Wetland. Because of these high costs it was determined that staff would contact Dodge Nature Center for help and for information before proceeding with any improvement plans or proposals. NEW PARKS The Mendakota neighborhood park will not be addressed until it is determined if the City will acquire more land for an active play park. Hagstrom-King park will need additional landscape improvements as well as extensive grading and top dressing of the playfield. As with the Mendakota site, the neighborhood amenities for the Kensington and Sibley sites will wait until we have control of the land and our consultants are doing preliminary design sketches. Kullander explained that the engineering and design work being done by City staff was in motion and that it appeared the City could complete 7 miles of trails in 1990. The Commission reached consensus that it would be appropriate to have signage indicating "You• are here" throughout the trail system. Commissioner Spicer stated that this would be appropriate for our 11 parks. Kullander suggested we address the entire signage question at a future meeting. ADJOURN There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:50 o'clock p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kevin Batchelder Administrative Assistant FA SHERMAN WINTHROP ROBERT R. WEINSTINE THOMAS J. SEXTON RICHARD A. HOEL ROGER D. GORDON STEVEN C.TOUREK HART KULLER DAVID P. PEARSON THOMAS M. HART 13Z DARRON C. KNUTSON DOUGLAS B. ALTMAN WENDY WILLSON LEGGE MARK J. BRIOL GIRARD P. MILLER MICHELE 0. VAILLANCOURT MARY M. COLLINS JON J. HOGANSON ALAN L. DWORSKY JAY R. NAFTZGER WINTHROP, W E I N S T I N E & SEXTON ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW 1800 CONWED TOWER 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 55101 April 19, 1983 Mr. Orvil Johnson i! Administrator i Mendota Heights Plaza Drive Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55120 Re: The following described property situated in Mendo Heights in Dakota County, Minnesota: Lots 3, 4, 10 and 11 in Block 18, Friendly Hills R( arrangement. Dear Orvil: (612) 292 -8110 PR .1 jai You have inquired as to the right of the City of Mendota eights to dispose of the above property which is commonly referr d to as the Friendly Hills "Tot -Lot." Tlie property in question is in the name of the City of Me dota Heights. According to our information, at the time of th filing of the Friendly Hills Rearrangement Plat, a Declaration setting forth certain covenants and restrictions was also filed which provided that this property was to be used for a "p ay - ground area or for development as a school location or for a public park or for other public uses or purposes, all as ay be permitted under the zoning ordinances of the Village of Mndota Heights, Minnesota." The formal Declaration provides that the covenants and re tric- tions continue for a twenty-year period and then are auto- matically renewed for successive five-year periods unless at least 65 percent of the owners of the lots in Friendly Hills Rearrangement agree to their cancellation or modification Mr. Orvil Page 2 April 19, Johnson 1983 It would appear to us that there are three possible alternative means of "eliminating" the application of these restrictions to this property. These alternative means are as follows: 1. The cancellation or modification of the covenants pursuant to the terms of the formal Declaration. That would require the consent of the owners of 65 percent of the lots in the Friendly Hills Rearrangement Subdivision. 2. A condemnation proceeding by the City of Mendota Heights could be brought for the purpose of "taking" the interest of the Friendly Hills Rearrangement Subdivision property owners in this particular property. We would assume that every owner of a lot in the Friendly Hills Rearrangement Subdivision would have to be joined as a respondent in any such proceeding. 3. The City could bring an action to "clear" title to the property in question. The court in such a proceeding would have to determine what type of notice would have to be given to the owners of the lots in the Friendly Hills Rearrangement subdivision. While there is no guarantee of how a court would +let -ermine that issue, it is possible that in view of the cir- cumstances, a court might simply require published notice or possibly only mailed notice rather than personal notice on all property owners. From a practical point of view, it would appear to us that if the City did determine to dispose of this property, the most practical and feasible means of eliminating the outstanding restriction would be by bringing an action to clear title in the manner set forth in paragraph 3 above. If you have any questions or desire any additional information in this connection, please do not hesitate to ask. Sincerely yours, WINTHROP, WEINSTINE & SEXTON By - Sherman Winthrop SW:srl i 10 CITY OF SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA BOARD OF WATER COMMISSION El ROGEP EN i BiM(6l101V41E1 _ r61 ager"' RIVER;` __ -=a�1KES� Mr. James Danielson Acting City Administrator 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 Dear Mr. Danielson: .HSE IDENN m : 'Vol NyIVEN��r'ti Fit•` �_� '• fit E ,i November 1, 1989 RE: Repair to water service connection 8 Dorset Road, Mendota Heights The Water Utility is now in the process of collecting the charges the repair of the water service connection at 8 Dorset Road by means o the quarterly billing for water service to that account. 4 a 1. BERNIE R. BULLERT Supt. of Water Distribution ROGER A. MOkIROR Water Prpduction Engineer for This action is being taken only after your efforts to resolve the matter through an offer to adjust the charges were rejected by the ownr, Mr. Dan Johnson. It is important to note the circumstances under which the charges occurred and Mr. Johnson's rationale for not paying them, 1. Mr. Johnson is provided water service through a water co nection which was not installed by the Water Utility and therefoe is not guaranteed for required maintenance work. 2. The service connection did develop a leak; which, if lef uncorrected, could cause significant damage to private property, the roadway or the traveling public. 3. In accordance with the conditions under which the Water Jtility provides service to the City of Mendota Heights, all mai tenance work on the water distribution system of the City is per ormed by Utility forces. 4. The owner, Mr. Johnson, was notified of the fact that hi water connection was leaking and Utility forces would ma the necessary repairs and bill him for the work, 4TH FLOOR CITY HALL ANNEX - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55102 Mr. James Danielson November 1, 1989 Page two 5. The cost of the repair did not exceed the cost of a new connection. 6. The Utility completed the repair to the water connection at 8 Dorset Road in April 1988 and the street repair in May 1988. A billing issued to the owner in August 1988 (which the owner denies receiving) has to date been unpaid. It should also be noted the Water Utility performs many repairs to nonguaranteed service connections within its service area and these are all appropriately paid by the property owners served by these connections. That Mr. Johnson should be somehow treated differently is not fair or equitable to other Utility customers who would then be required to share in paying for services which were solely for the benefit of Mr. Johnson, If the City of Mendota Heights wishes to discuss the matter of the Water Utility performing all necessary maintenence work on the City's water distribution system, please let me know. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. TDM/kf r Very tru y yours, Thomas D. Mogren General Manager TO: FROM: SUBJECT: BUILDING MEMO Date: 10-25-89 Mayor, City Council, and City Administrator Paul R. Berg, Code Enforcement Officer Building Activity Report for October 1989 CURRENT MONTH YEAR TO DATE 89 YEAR TO DAT PERMITS: No. Valuation Fee Collected I No. Valuation Fee Collected I No. Valuation SFD 7 1,070,701.00 9,557.64 1 81 12,991,730.00 113,460.05 j 116 17,916,303.81 APT 0 0 0 j 0 0 0 I 0 0 TOWNHOUSE 6 629,065.00 6,494.40 1 17 2,347,486.00 21,599.15 1 0 0 CONDO 20 1,626,524.00 10,588.89 ( 43 4,309,292.00 26,308.46 j 0 0 MISC. 32 225,976.00 4,461.36 ) 197 1,685,189.00 30,039.14 1 195 1,376,912.77 CII 5 129,500.00 1,922.25 j 37 6,792,905.00 40,486.77 j 47 5,432,189.00 ..............................................----...........------.....--........................... Sub Total 70 3,681,766.00 33,024.54 j 375 I 28,126,602.00 231,893.57 ( 358 I 24,725,405.58 TRADE I j I I PERMITS: 1 i Plumbing 21 520.00 I 1 146 3,869.00 I ( 158 Water 20 100.00 j 131 655.00 j 130 Sewer 21 367.50 j 121 2,117.50 1 112 Neat, AC, j I & Gas 28 1,719.50 ( 190 18,856.00 j 184 .............................................-----........-----.................+.................--- Sub Total 90 2,707.00 j 588 .r 25,49750 j 584 I Licensing.• 1 I I ! Contractors j Licenses 17 425.00 j 466 11,650.00 ( 459 Total 177 3,681,766.00 36,156.54 11429 28,126,602.00 269,041.07 11401 24,725,405.51 NOTE: All fee amounts exclude Sac, Wac, and State Surcharge. Amounts shown will reflect only permit, I valuation amounts. 88 Fee Collected 157,098.59 0 0 0 24,407.18 32,753.92 214,259.69 4,165.00 650.00 1,960.00 16,098.00 .............. 22,873.00 11,475.00 ......•....... 248,607.69 check fee, and t I CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Nove TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Dani Acting City Aso q--V61r SUBJECT: Mendakota, Purchase Agreement DISCUSSION: Last meeting Council directed City Attorney Tom Hart to forw purchase agreement to C.G. Rein for the Mendakota Park site for i appraised value. Attached is a copy of the agreement as it was p As of this date staff has not received a respdnse from Mr. Rein. ACTION REQUIRED: For information only. JED:dfw -1 �, It, CA 3, 1989 a ented. [DRAF- Novembe PURCHASE AGREEMENT NO. 1] 1, 1989 THIS PURCHASE AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1969, by and between C. G. Rein Company, Minnesota corporation, e "SELLER") and the City of Mendota Heights, a municipal corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota ("BUYER"), W I T N E S S E T H First. SELLER is the owner of certain unimproved real prope ty, legally described as Outlot A, Mendakota Estates, Dakota County, Minnesot (said real property together with all improvements thereon and appurtenance thereto, is hereinafter referred to as the "Real Property"). Second. BUYER desires to purchase the Real Property from SELLER, and SELL`£ 2 desires to sell the Real Property to BUYER, on the terms nd subject to the conditions herein contained. NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the foregoing recitals, which are Ian integral part hereof, and in consideration of the terms, conditions, cov pants and agreements herein contained, SELLER and BUYER hereby agree as f (lows; 1. Sale and Purchase. Subject to the terms, conditions, representations and warranties set or herein, SELLER agrees to sell to BUYER nd BUYER agrees to purchase from SELLER, the Real Property. 2. Purchase Price. Subject to the conditions hereinafter set forth, BUYER shall pay to SELLER, as the purchase price for the Real Property, the sum of Five Hundred Eighty Three Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($583,000.00), as hereinafter defined (the "Purchase Price"), which shall be payable s follows: a. Three Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($3,000.00), earnest money, by check payable to SELLER the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, which earnest money shall be deposited by SELLER In an inter est -bearing account, with all interest earned to be payable to BUYER upon the closing or termination of this Agreement; and b. The balance by cash, certified funds, wire transfed or other immediately available funds, on the Closing Date (as hereinafte defined). 3. Title. SELLER shall, at its expense and within twenty (20) date` Fereof, furnish an Abstract of Title or Registered Proper certified to date, which shall include proper searches covering bi state and federal judgments and liens, and pending and levied i (the "Current Abstract") SELLER shall also deliver to BUYER w (20) days of the date hereof a survey, of the Real Property BUYER, incorporating the legal description of the Real Property, s area, showing the location of any improvements, showing all ease Jays of the y Abstract nkruptcies, ssessments, thin twenty certified to lowing total rients (both benefitting and burdening the Real Property) and otherwise meeing ALTA standards (the "Survey"). of its BUYER shall be allowed twenty (20) days after receipt of the Curre t, Abstract and Survey for examination of said title and making of any objections thereto, said objections to be made in writing or deemed to be waived If any objections are so made, BUYER may, at its option, immediately ter inate this Purchase Agreement or, if BUYER elects not to terminate this Purchase Agreement, SELLER shall, if such objections are correctable within sixty (60) days, use diligent efforts to correct such objections within sixty (60) days after receipt thereof and, pending such correction, the closing hereunder shall be postponed. Upon correction of such title objections and within ten (10) days after written notice of such correction given by SELLER o BUYER, SELLER and BUYER shall perform this Purchase Agreement according to its terms. If such title is not marketable and not made so within sixty (60) days from the date of written objection thereto, as above provided, and BUYER does not waive the curing of such defects, then BUYER may, ut is not obligated to cure and remove all defects and objections, and the C osing Date under this Purchase Agreement shall be appropriately extended uring the period that the BUYER is attempting to cure such defects and obje tions. All of the BUYER's costs and expenses, including all attorney's fees, incurred in connection with such attempt to cure the objections and defects shall be paid by SELLER. In the alternative, if such objections are, in BUYER's reasonable judgment, not correctable within sixty (60) days, or if the same are not in fact corrected within sixty (60) days for any reason, then BUYERII ay, at its option, either waive said objections and proceed to Closing or terNnate this Purchase Agreement by written notice to SELLER. I 4. Real Estate Taxes and Special Assessments. Real estate tax due and payable in the year of closing shall a prorateJ between SELLER End BUYER on a calendar basis as of the Closing Date, unless transfer of title to the Real Property pursuant to this Purchase Agreement results in tax-exe pt status with respect to the Real Property, in which case SELLER shall pay all real estate taxes due and payable in the year of closing. BUYER shall pay any and all real estate taxes due and payable in the year following Closing and thereafter. SELLER shall pay all real estate taxes and special assessments due in the year preceding the year of closing and all prior years. SELLER shall pay all special assessments levied or pending with respect to the Rel Property as of the date of closing. 5. Conditions to SELLER's Performance Hereunder. This Purchase Agreement and s obligations hereunder shall e con itioned, for the ole benefit of SELLER, upon the following: a. BUYER's Performance. BUYER shall have performed all of its covenants, auties and o6Tigations under this Purchase Agreement. 6. Conditions to BUYER's Performance. This Purchase Agreement and BUYER's obligations ereun er are conditioned, for the sole benefit of BUYER, upon the following: a. SELLER's Performance. All representations and warranties of SELLER hereunder shall e rue as of the Closing Date (with no mate ial change -2- 7. made to such representations and warranties by SELLER as c)ntemplated by Section 8) and SELLER shall have performed all of its covenants, duties and obligations under this Purchase Agreement. b. Environmental Audit. BUYER shall have received, within thirty (30) days of the date hereof, an environmental assessment oi the Real Property, to be obtained by SELLER, prepared by an environmental engineering firm mutually acceptable to SELLER and BUYER. The cost and expense of said environmental audit shall be shared equa ly between SELLER and BUYER. Said environmental assessment shall include a full Phase I environmental audit of the Real Property, including preliminary research, site inspection, an on-site review, and shall contain (i) a finding that the environmental auditor has no reason to believe that hazardous or toxic substances are located on or under the Real Property and (H) a recommendation that no further testing be undertaken at this point. If, however, said audit reveals the existence of any pollutanl s, toxic or hazardous waste or substances classified as such by Federal la N or law of the State of Minnesota In or on the Real Property in concent'ations that exceed background concentrations, BUYER may, at its optior, object in writing, with reasonable specificity, to the existence of the -'ame within twenty (20) days after receipt of said audit. In the ev?nt BUYER objects, BUYER may, at its option, immediately terminate th s Purchase Agreement, if BUYER elects not to terminate this Purchase Agreement, SELLER shall use reasonable efforts to correct the environmental objections raised by BUYER, provided that such corrections shall be complete within 90 days of BUYER'S receipt of SELLER'S objections. Completion of said corrections shall be evidenced by a new environmental audit reasonably satisfactory to both parties. Pending such correction, the closing hereunder shall be postponed to a date not more than 15 days after the parties' receipt of a reasonably satisfactory environmental audit. If SELLER falls to correct such objections within 90 days, BU ER may, at its option, terminate this Purchase Agreement by notice to SE LER. Any expenses incurred by SELLER in connection with the correcton of such environmental objections, including, but not limited to, all additional environmental inspection and audit costs not contemplat d by this Purchase Agreement shall be the sole cost and expense of SELfER. Waiver of Conditions; Termination. a. The conditions, or any of them, set forth in Sections 5 a�d 6 may be waived by the party expressly benefitted thereby only in writing. b. If any of the conditions set forth in Section 5 or 6 are or waived by the time specified therefor (or if no time is spf by the Closing Date), then BUYER (with respect to Section entitled to terminate this Purchase Agreement in which cas paid by BUYER to SELLER (including all accrued interest th be promptly refunded and neither party shall thereafter have liability, right or obligation thereunder. -3- of satisfied cified, then 6) shall be a all money aneon) shall �any further 8. Representation, Warranties and Covenants of SELLER. SELLER following representations and warranties to BUYER: I a. Ownership of the Real Property. SELLER is the owner Property as of the date ot execution of this Purchase SELLER has full right and authority to sell the Real Property. makes the f,the Real agreement. b. Litigation. There is no litigation, proceeding, claim or investigation, pen d'in-g--o—r-fhreatened, against SELLER or the Real Property that might create or result in a lien on the Real Property. c. Environmental. SELLER has not released or disposed of in or about the Real Property any waste or substance classified as hazardous or toxic under applicable Federal and State environmental laws and, to SELLER's actual knowledge there has been no release or disposal In or about the Real Property of any waste or substance known by it to be classified as hazardous or toxic under applicable Federal and State environ ental law. SELLER has not received any written notice from any governmental authority that the Real Property contains any hazardous or toxic waste classified as such under such environmental laws. d. Enforceability. Neither execution nor delivery of thi3 Purchase Agreement by the SELLER nor its performance by SELERwill: (I) conflict with or result in a violation or breach of any law 0:1, regulation applicable to SELLER or the Real Property, or with any order, writ or injunction of any court or government agency with jurisdiction over the Real Property or SELLER; nor (ii) conflict with or result in a violation or breach of any term or condition of any indenture or other contract or agreement to which SELLER is a party, or which is applicable to the Real Property, nor cause a default thereunder; nor (ill) result in he creation or imposition of any lien, charge or incumbrance of tiny nature whatsoever on the Real Property pursuant to the terms of any agreement referred to in subsection (ii) immediately preceding. Each of the foregoing representations and warranties shall be dee ed remade as of the Closing Date (with such changes thereto as SELLER hall notify I BUYER as of the Closing Date) and, as so remade, shall survive th closing. 9. Commission. Any brokerage commission or finder's fee incrred as a result of the T"ransactions described herein shall be paid by SELLER. 10. Hazardous Waste Indemnification. SELLER agrees to indemnify and hold BUY rR harmle om any and all claims, causes of action, damage3, penalties and costs (including attorneys' fees, consultant fees and relate c expenses) that may be asserted against, or incurred by BUYER resulting from or due to any release of hazardous substance (as defined by any statute, rPgulation or code now existing or hereinafter enacted or amended) on or and the Real Property or arising out of any injury to human health or the env ronment by reason of the condition of any past or present activity upoii the Real Property.. SELLER's duty to indemnify and hold harmless includes, but is not limited to, proceedings or actions commenced by any person (incuding, but not limited to, any federal, state or local government or agency or entity) before any court or administrative agency. SELLER further agrees that -4- E pursuant to its duty to indemnify under this Section 10, SELERshall indemnify BUYER against all expenses incurred by BUYER immediately as they become due, and SELLER shall not be entitled to wait for the ultim to outcome of any such litigation or administrative proceeding prior to inclemnifying BUYER. SELLER's obligation to indemnify and hold BUYER harmless hereunder shall survive the termination of this Purchase Agreemelt and the purchase of the Real Property. 11. Closing. a. General; Possession. Subject to all the terms and conditi Purchase Agreement having been complied with, the closi transactions contemplated hereby shall occur on or before 19 . in the offices of BUYER's attorneys or at such other an7dplace as the parties shall agree in writing. The date oi herein referred to as the "Closing Date." Possession of Property free and clear of any and all leasehold interests exception of a verbal month-to-month lease by and between S Royal Car Service, shall be transferred by SELLER to BUY Closing Date. ns of this g of the 3aie, iime closing is the Real with the LLER and R on the b. Deliveries by SELLER at Closing. At the closing, SE LER shall deliver to BUYER the foTo�wing. (1) A Warranty Deed, in recordable form with appropriate deed tax having been paid, conveying good and marketable title to the Real Property to BUYER free and clear of all encumbrances, and restating the warranty set forth in Paragraph 10.c. hereof. I (2) A written reaffirmation of all of SELLER's represen ations and warranties contained herein as of the Closing Date a d written acknowledgment of the survival thereof pursuant to Section 12 hereof. (3) All other agreements, documents and instruments necessary or incident to consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby. c. Deliveries by BUYER at Closing. At the closing, BUYER shall deliver to SELLER the following: (1) The balance of the Purchase Price required by Sectiob 2b. (2) All other agreements, instruments and documents necessary or incident to consummation of the transactions contemplated ereby. The performance by SELLER and BUYER at the closing shall be c 12. Survival. All representations and warranties of the parties I survive, (i) the closing of the transactions contemplated hereb,. delivery of documents in connection therewith, and (iii) any inves or on behalf of either party. -5- rrent. weto shall P (ii) the igation by 13. Remedies. If BUYER cancels this Purchase Agreement by reasc nonsatis action of one or more conditions to closing or SELLER's money paid by BUYER to SELLER (including all accrued interest the be promptly refunded to BUYER and neither party shall thereafter further liability, right or obligation hereunder. SELLER's sole an remedy for BUYER'S default shall be cancellation of this Purchase and retention of the earnest money as liquidated and final dama Purchase Agreement shall otherwise be non-recourse as to BUYE Purchase Agreement is not cancelled by BUYER, BUYER shall have in addition to other remedies and rights available at law or in equit for and receive from any court of competent jurisdiction, equitabl way of specific performance to enforce performance of the ter Purchase Agreement, plus reimbursement for costs, including attorney's fees, incurred in securing such relief; provided, howev action to enforce such specific performance shall be commenced months after such right of action shall arise and shall be In lieu o for damages. n of either iefault, all neon) shall Piave any I exclusive Agreement les. This If this the right, to apply relief by is of this reasonable r, that an within six any claim 14. Notices. All notices, offers, requests, and other communications from any Mfrs parties hereto to the others shall be in writing and shall be considered to have been duly given or served if sent by first cla s certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, tote party at the address set forth below, or to such other address as such party may hereafter designate by written notice to the other parties: a. If to BUYER, to: City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 Attn: Larry E. Shaughnessy with a copy to: Winthrop & Weinstine 3200 Minnesota World Trade Center 30 East Seventh Street Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101 Attn: Thomas M. Hart b. If to SELLER, to: C. G. Rein Company 949 Sibley Memorial Highway Saint Paul, Minnesota 55118 15. Headings. The headings of the sections and subsections Agreement are for convenience and reference only and do hereof, and in no way interpret or construe such sections anc of this Purchase not frm a part subs ctions. 16. Parties in Interest. This Purchase Agreement shall be bindin upon and inure tote ene tt o the heirs, executors, administrators, succ ssors, and assigns of the BUYER. This Purchase Agreement shall be bindin upon and C inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, s assigns of the SELLER. sors and 17. Entire Agreement. This instrument (including all exhibi e- hereto) contains the entire agreement of the parties. It may not be changed orally. It may be changed only by an agreement in writing signed by the party against whom enforcement of any waiver, change, modification, extension or discharge is sought. 18. Counterparts. This Purchase Agreement may be executed in 4ny number of co un erpar .s, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. 19. Severability. If any provision of this Purchase Agreement is held to be unen eable or void, such provision shall be deemed to be severable and shall in no way affect the validity of the remaining terms of this Purchase Agreement. 20. Governing Law. This Purchase Agreement shall be construed as to both valid'ityand performance and enforced in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, year first above written. the parties hereto have set their hands tlf a day and -7- SELLER: C. G. REIN COMPANY By: Its BUYER: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By: Mayor Attest: y uie CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS October 14� TO: Mayor, City Council and Acting City Admi 12r or FROM: Klayton H. Eckles Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Sewers, Water, Streets Mendota Woods Subdivision (Patrick) Job No. 8922 Improvement No. 89-7 DISCUSSION: Staff has received a petition for improvements and waiver of from Steve .• and Jana Patrick for the Mendota Woods subdivision. 2 1989 The next step is the preparation of a developer's agreement. Staff has already sent a rough draft to the developer for comments. After tha developer's agreement is signed and the feasibility escrow is received, a feasibility report should be prepared. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council accept the petition for improvements nd waiver of hearing and authorize staff to begin preparation of a feasibility report, subject to receiving a feasibility escrow of $1,650. ACTION REQUIRED: If Council concurs with staff recommendation they should pass adopting Resolution No. 89-7._, RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION AND C PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR MENDOTA WOODS SUBDIVISION (IN. NO. 89, PROJECT NO. 7) KHE:dfw motion City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota IRESOLUTION NO. 89 - RESOLUTION ACCEPTING PETITION AND ORDERING PREPARATION OF FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR MENDOTA WOODS SUBDIVISION (IMPROVEMENT NO. 89, PROJECT NO. 7) WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the City Council requesting sanitary sewer, storm sewer, water and street improvements to serve Mendota Woods Subdivision and adjacent areas. I NOW THEREFORE, !�ORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesotap as follows: I 1. That the above described petition be and is hereby accepted by I the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights. That2. the City Engineer be and is hereby authorized and dir- ected to prepare a feasibility study as to whether said proposed im- provements are feasiblep whether said improvements 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 7th day of Novemberp 1989. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson City Clerk n LIST OF CONTRACTORS TO BE APPROVED BY CITY COUN ON NOVEMBER 7, 1989 Concrete Licenses John R. Spaeth Masonry Ostertag Cement Excavating License Young Excavating Gas Piping License Marsh Heating & Air Conditioning Co., Inc. Heating & Air Conditioning License Marsh Heating & Air Conditioning Co., Inc. General Contractors Licenses Albert Kastner & Sons C.E. Kopp Construction Co., Inc. Dakota Fence of Minnesota, Inc. Damont Designers and Builders, Inc. Harvey Homes, Inc. On The Level, Inc. Pete Boyer Construction, Inc. Prestige Pools .71 3 Ace Hardware 08-4335-000-00 misc splys 16.12 SO! Totals Temp Check Number Temp Check Number 4 sc�-Sno 1ao'g2 �71 Temp Check Number 5 �| o American National Bank' o* pvmt am,mmw'mm o American National Bank 06-4e20-000-00 o * pymx 55,s5o'75 �� wa��nnaz-ea�*---------wa-�ees-m�m-wm-------------------mt'ree---N---- IS-ENgr 60 -Utilities ---- 3 Nov 1989 11/7/89 Claims List 20 -Police 70 -Parks Page 1 -- Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights 30 -Fire 80 -Planning 4Q -CEO 85 -Recycling ,T -Tem p -Ch erlc-Numbe Temp. --Cn*c --------- _ Number Vendor Name Account Code Comment Amount ,{ 0.71 o.aS Totals Temp Check Number 1 41 Temp Check Number 2 -mz-��m-wem-�m---------- ------ Oct- ., e AT&T 01 -*210-050-50 Nov s,c 10.53 e AT&T m�-�e�m-m�m-7w Nov �"c lw.5e �------e�n Nov- sv cr- �o� - ----- z' m ao'o4 .-x! � :�,/ Temp o»eox Number � .71 3 Ace Hardware 08-4335-000-00 misc splys 16.12 SO! Totals Temp Check Number Temp Check Number 4 sc�-Sno 1ao'g2 �71 Temp Check Number 5 �| o American National Bank' o* pvmt am,mmw'mm o American National Bank 06-4e20-000-00 o * pymx 55,s5o'75 �� wa��nnaz-ea�*---------wa-�ees-m�m-wm-------------------mt'ree---N---- pv ---- ao,sre's7 -----rutaxs-remp-ch�c:-mumber----------15--�------'----------------------------- -- -------'-----------'-- ^o Temp Check Number � 49 z" � �----- ------------------- .� Totals Temp Check Number 6 ' -�—remp-Check-Nlumb --7---- 7 7---7 r r Auto Sunnz�" *1-4305-050-50 mis= soI�S _ 3 Nov 1989 Claims List Pane 2 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights emp-Check-Numbel- 40 1-1-B3-es-ener-Bu i I ders Temp. rfd-port-iorr-Fear-escrow SOW0.00 411 4211 ------ 500.00 53 Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount 6 7T_7-P--&---J-Auto-Supply, 01-4305-030-30--- misc-splys 7 B & J Auto Supply$ 01-4305-020-20 misc '-ply. 22-8-44 94 7 B & J Auto Supply, 01-4330-490-50 misc splys 94.79 10� 01-4425-310-50 Seot Svc 16.63 49----1" 42 -Board~of -Sept-sv 108.371 Totals Temp Check Number 7 43 -4460-847-00 air vent 87-2 13,S Temp Check Number sal 12 Board of Water Commissioners 40-4460-868-00 .I! 2,145.00 r2 60 8 -Barr' -Engineering- Co- ------Re 89-5 Ruby Drive---4T58-2--.8r_I 2,871.83 6 Barr Engineering Co 32 Re 89-5 Ruby Drive 7,417.18 16 20 Totals Temp Check Number 21 ZZ Temp -Check -Number --9-- 23 1, 241 9 Bills Suns Shop 01-4305-020-20 MiSC SDIYS 8.51 251 26. 9 2,1 Totals Temp Check Number 9 Temp Check Number 10 39 2 ;; ...... Y Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-490-70 2 331 10 Battery & Tire Warehouse 01-4330-490-50 carb-c-lea batteries 112. 44 batteries 173.14 35 30 302.50 361 Totals Temp Check Number 10 ,51 � Temp Check Number 11 39! 40 1-1-B3-es-ener-Bu i I ders 40-22-1-215 rfd-port-iorr-Fear-escrow SOW0.00 411 4211 ------ 500.00 7,7--Tvt-.T-1 . Tempr-Check-Number--l-I 44 4F Temp Check Number 12 47 12 Board of Water Commissioners 01-4425-315-30 Sept svc 294.23 48 12 Board of Water Commissioners 01-4425-310-50 Seot Svc 16.63 49----1" 42 -Board~of -Sept-sv 108.371 12 Board of Water Commissioners 43 -4460-847-00 air vent 87-2 307.60 sal 12 Board of Water Commissioners 40-4460-868-00 Svc Conn 89-3 2,145.00 r2 60 2,871.83 Totals Temp Check Number 12 Temp Cher -6 Number 13 3 Nov 1989 Claims List Page 3 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights Temp"Check'-Number- Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount g et--C-i ght'i ng --I na,--- 08=433�5=000=00 f I ood Yi t es:- r_ 1'2-.4-1 26 273.25 6t-,51ff"-TemP-Ch e5k-N Temp Check Number 14 14 David Braslau Assoc Inc 01-4220-080-80 Re MH/Eagan Corridor 11,154.43 14 David Braslau Assoc Inc 01-4220-080-80 Re MH/Eagan Corridor 3,348.00 28 14,502.43 Totals Temp Check Number 14 Temp Check Number 15 parts' 15 City Motor Supply 01-4305-070-70 mise parts 28.46 15 City Motor Supply 15-4305-060-60 mise parts 28.45 ,---------15-CitY-Motor-Supply 01-4330-490-70 parts -501- 15 City Motor Supply 01-4330-490-70 parts 501 40.72 75 Totals Temp Check Number 15 -mp-Check-t4umbe 16 Commissioner of Trsot 01-4211-420-50 flood lamp 4.23 .5 16 4.23 15' Totals Temp Check Number 16 Temp Check Number 17 A -7-Conti --Oct* Svc"---* -.95- 17 5.95 .-.-Tota-l-s-Temp-Check-Numbe ---17-- Temp Check Number Is 18 Crawford Door 01-4335-315-30 door rprs 83.05 83;-05 Totals Temp Check Number is 19 Creative Colors 01-4330-215-70 paint 39.75 19 39.75 Total mp Check Number 19 o Nov 1989 Claims List pane 4 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights em---------------' ----cn�c -----------------------------� ^. ' � wu*ber Vendor Name Account Code 7,-20--Custom-Tur-f 08-4335-000-00 remp Check Number so Comments City share traffic lites Nov allowance Amount 20 Temp Check Number 21 ��-��---- 's' -------------------- .] el Dakota County Hwy Dept 01-+2/1-420-50 '. '------�r--------'---------�-- - — --'- --''--- - ' --- ' � Totals Temp Check Number 21 ��--Temp-ohe=*-wumber--------'ee-- ----'-'----�-------- ------ - 22 James Danielson �� —�---' 01-4415-110-10 �r� --------------'- 24 Totals Temp Check Number 22 remp Check Number so Comments City share traffic lites Nov allowance Amount 291 :01 120.00 32 33i Temp Check Number 24 35 24 John R Du Bois 01-4330-440-20 Re FCC license 140.00 Totals Temp Check Number 24 39 42� 25 Dytron Corp 01-4305-050-50 shop splys 27.18 . 25 Dytron Corp _- 15-4305-060-60 shoo �-----r�-'----'-----------------'-------------'--- --'--'' ' -- '------------e�� ---__ ---_--_---__--_--__' Totals Temp Check Number 25 � 46 7;-Check-wumbe. -26-- e 26 aa xzayton scxzes 05-4415-105-15 misc mileage 40'0e ua 40'0e .' Totals Temp Check Number 'ea — ' -----`--- -- - - — Temp oher^ Number 27 --- - - ---`-----` ~ -` ----'- - -- --'-------------------- '------�r-� ar��noer--------------' m�-��-a�m-�m--------'--------- na~ts -�� -� --------�---------*r^��--- ---------'-- o wnv 1989 Claims Lis* page 5 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount 61 01 -*335-310-70 part s Temp Check Number oz � ^z' Temp Check Number oe t4� as J a Irrigation 01-4335-315-30 .. Totals Temp Check Number oe � 33 q/ oo Paul Kaiser ��-----on-Pau z-xe-i -- ' 6s ,:----Total s-Terap-Check- Number ' ----mz-+��-w�m-nm-----'--- 1/3 -payroll- 95;_00- spxzr svs --- - --- - ' '--'- - - 33---- - — ----- - -- Oct Svc Oct mileaue- 890.60 Temn Che /umber 34 34 Kat Keys 01 -*305-050-50 dupz keys 19'75 -- Totals Temp Check Number 2 27 2aGoodyear Service Store 01-4330-440-20 tire% 2246 1eo'� . �u /eo.a* Totals Temp Check Number 2* .a��' '------------------------------'--�-'---- -'' -- ---------- Temp Check mumber. og --12/7 wxshop-xoll------- so -.-mm �--- ``� ----- z^/ e9 ,,.�� .�`�^�-,��p-"n��°-=umoer---------��--'---------------------------'------------------ --- Temp Check Number 30 s, � -��---�---� ----�------------------ --- 30 *uwe Hank 15-4305-060-60 misc splvs 2+'46 z^ 30 *dwe Hank 01-4305-070-70 misc spzys *2'e8 6el 66.74 33! Totals Temp Check Number 30 Temp Check Number oz � ^z' Temp Check Number oe t4� as J a Irrigation 01-4335-315-30 .. Totals Temp Check Number oe � 33 q/ oo Paul Kaiser ��-----on-Pau z-xe-i -- ' 6s ,:----Total s-Terap-Check- Number ' ----mz-+��-w�m-nm-----'--- 1/3 -payroll- 95;_00- spxzr svs --- - --- - ' '--'- - - 33---- - — ----- - -- Oct Svc Oct mileaue- 890.60 Temn Che /umber 34 34 Kat Keys 01 -*305-050-50 dupz keys 19'75 -- o Nov 1e89 Claims Lis: page a Fri 10:*9 nm City of Mendota Heights emp-Sheck—Number 34— Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount 34 Totals Temp Check Number 34 Temp Check Number 35 remp Check Number 36 �---��---------'-- -- - 36 xise Const Curp�� -�e� rr / �'---`no escrow— --- �,--w'wm -------'---- z,. "= �� ---------��------------�--------- --- --� '- -----------��mmm'wm--�------------------ Totals Temp Check Number 36 � '^! s, '~~~ ~'~^~ '`~~~~' 37— ' 'I, 'I, 27i 37 Thomas Knuth 56-4*15-859-00 project mileage 36.*8 � s_xpnth project ----------*a ---- 's: or Thomas Knuth 40-4415-868-00 project mileage 18'00 oo/ 37 Thomas Knuth 09-4415-000-00 park ref mileage 28. 08 05-*4-15-1w5-1-----misc- mi leage--------'--- 0,5 3/ Thomas Knuth 05-4415-105-15 Nov allowance 1w'mm —�--- --------'------ ---------------------1-47;-m --- Totals Temp Check Number 37 �'. .~~~ .'.ec. '..~.e' 38 oa wrec»s office machines 01-4300-110-10 comp printer paper 67'00 �e-wa 05 -*330 -*e0-15 --'----pr� wx�----- --------------------�-ea�w� ---- .`' 42 76 --___ yw'm� �-coe��-wum�e,---------36---------------------'---'------------'----+----- '^ - Temp Check Number oe ' ^ ^, oe L s L S w-- 01-e075 Nov dues 175'50 ------ Totals Temp Check Number 39 emp--Chez*-wm -*m---------- wo L m o z T xp 01-e074 �-----40-L-m-o-1~r op--- - '---- '- --''01-*131-0e0-e0 -- -- ' so Number----------- 175;-50— Nov prem 5,07. 95 Nov prem 6*e'63 -------- 1,15w'5e o Nov 1989 Claims List page 7 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights 7— ,Check Number vendor Name ^i Account Code Comments --post- dri Amount 12 41 Temp Check Number 42 ' 16.67 14! 42 W A Lang Co 01-4250-110-10 2 mos 89 boiler ins 281.00 42 W A Lang Co 01-121S 10 mos 90 boiler ins 1,405.00 Temp Check Number *r sv ' °` 18' Totals Temp Check Number 42 `^. ,^ 47 o,wmm'mm Temp o»eox Number 43 --- *�--'--'------------- --- - -----------'---------� ----- 2.22 � - m��m Oct Svc T70------'-- +a Leer Bros 01 -*335-310-70 Oct Svc 9.6- z,: 43 Leer Bros 15-4335-310-60 Oct Svc y'a5 s, -------- -�---------'------'------------- --- zo! 12e 29.00 27 Totals Temp Check Number 43 �29Terap Check Number 44 30, _ /w i f Temp Check Number 45 57 1 3a 45 Lynn Peavey 01-4490-020-20 "J Totals Temp Check Number 45 42 89 -lawn -care -Fire -St �om'mm evidence labels 11.75 = ' 4--1 46 John maczm, 01Intl chief conv � 6e9'45 =. 46 6e9'45 ^v Totals Temp Check Number 46 Temp Check Number *r sv ' °` Moouvs-znvestmert'ovc---------35-*2e6-000-00'-------'-- ---' --8y bond svc fee ,^ 47 o,wmm'mm �=----�,tals-remp-oheck_wumber'---- --- *�--'--'------------- --- - -----------'---------� ----- - Temp oh" lumber 4e 48 Med Centers H P 01-2074 Nov prem 1,116.20 o Nov 19e9 Claims Lis* Page a Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights ---Temp-Check-Numbe 48 Temp. ---Check-- Number Account Code ------- --------- Comments omount Temp Check wmwuer 53 53 Minnesota Glove Inc ----�a----------'----' - - Totalmp Check Number --Temp-o*ewumoer--'------54---'' 53 --- - ------` - - '- `-- work cloves 53'00 ----- 53. 00 er ��*��`-�� mov prem ---- 48 Med Centers H P 05-4131-105-15 Nov prem 704.40 48 Med Centers H P 01-4131-020-20 Nov prem 1, 86-4-.-55'- 48 Med Centers H P 01-4131-050-50 Nov arem 964.25 4e Med Centers w p 15-4131-060-60 Nov prem emo'mm . -med-Cent ers- 01-+u-34-070-70-- Nov prem ------- ee4,-40 ^ . 4a Med Centers * n __- 08-4335-000-00 Nov prem 8e'40 -_-_--__ - �----��u'-----------�---------'--'----''--'----'-----------------'----------'' � ------------------a��aa�s�-----�---'------------ � rotals Temp Check Number *w �-Temp-chec^-wumb49-----'---------------------�------------------ --'--- '------------------'------------�---------------- �-' 4s Mendota Heights Landscape 01-4500-070-70 tree removal 475'00 = 49 475. 00 Totals Temp Check Number 49 a. Temp Check Number 50 12,-----52r-met-ro-'wastpr-cxcrrxrcil:----------'--15-444-8-060-60------------''-----oct Sac - 29. 50 5m metro waste Control 15-3615 Oct Sac coo 19e'65cr ,o' 50 Metro waste Control 15-4**9-060-60 Nov s°c 33,118'04 �------�w-me*rc'~was-te-oorit-r -7-357 wov svc--- -ef-7e6;-08cr ---' ^` emm 49,790'31 :;4. 'Tint -a-1 z-TerTp-Check-Number-50 zs/ Temp Check Number 51 ., ' �� m�� American � o Com�-+e�m-wem-�w � � calls � ' 82 ,s -- ---- Be -__- Totals Temp Check Number 51 � -- ''--- ' �---------- ---' ----------------- . 5e Minn Cellular Tele Co 01 -4e10 -0e0 -e0 Nov s*c 7'e5 ---- 5e'Minn -Cel Iuz-ar-reneoo--- - - ��-+��w-mew-em - - - Nov s"c - -------' -'---'---r'em----'--------�-------- ^� zm^ /4.45 -:-----TotaI-s-remp-o*ec*-Numb --52 Temp Check wmwuer 53 53 Minnesota Glove Inc ----�a----------'----' - - Totalmp Check Number --Temp-o*ewumoer--'------54---'' 53 --- - ------` - - '- `-- work cloves 53'00 ----- 53. 00 o Nov 198e ` Claims List pane g Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights o7Minnesota Teamsters Loc :320 01-2075 Nov dues 200. 00 57 p*-nneffn-m"mber----'---- ------- -- Fr eq- � 3E, Totals Temp Check Number ` 39 58 -------' co"n cou 150'00 �--'che�:----------------------'-------------- Temp. 42 58 Minnesota Conway ^ Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount _ Totals Temp Check Number 5e w' -�-,=remp-ohec:-wnmuer-------- 59 5*,-M1rn,-muta1L-i fz 01^e07 --------w ' 59 Mn oeot Public Safety 01-4200-610-20 ' ic'Sare«y- --'----m�-*�mw-s�m-ew---'- , J 54 Minn Mutual Life Ins 01-4131-070-70 Nov prem 1.70 Ic 162 27.20 21 Totals Temp Check Number 54 Temp Check Number 55 -7 55 Minnesota Benefit Assn 01-4131-110-10 Nov Drew 144.65 is 55 Minnesota Benefit Assn 05-4131-105-15 Nov prem 320.55 55 Minnesota Benefit Assn 01-4131-050-50 Nov prern 112.227 55 Minnesota Benefit Assn 01-4131-070-70 Nov prem 94.49 3:30 Totals Tema Check Number 55 1,693.68 24 Temp Check Number 56 291 45. 25 32 Temp Check Number 57 o7Minnesota Teamsters Loc :320 01-2075 Nov dues 200. 00 57 -. ------- -- Fr eq- � 3E, Totals Temp Check Number 57 39 58 -------' co"n cou 150'00 411 yw,; 00------------------- 42 58 Minnesota Conway 01-4630-030-30 ' _ Totals Temp Check Number 5e w' -�-,=remp-ohec:-wnmuer-------- 59 =' ��5e-mv'oept—nobl ' 59 Mn oeot Public Safety 01-4200-610-20 ' ic'Sare«y- --'----m�-*�mw-s�m-ew---'- , 118 �—Tot aI s -Tem Check Number -- —�y-----'----- remp oh/ 4umber am Fr sq 1,148'e0 ------- -- Fr eq- —050; -50 -- En rprs 55 ----------'-----''�-�o��85 --�'-- -------' co"n cou 150'00 - ' - conn cho ---'------ yw,; 00------------------- e4m.mm 60 murr pzumbina 08-4335-000-00 rprs o * 4e'00 3 Nov 1989 Claims List Pane 10 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights - T -Tersip-CheckNumbe __60 I i, Temp. Number Vendor Name 61 Account Code Comments Amount 732 Totals Temp Check Number 61 Temp Check Number 612 2,007.8-- Totals Temp Check Number 60 --Nov-svc------ 125-.7 10 62 Northern State Power 08-4211-000-00 Nov svc 684.40 Temp Check Number 61 01-4211-320-70 Nov svc 38.37 12 Nov-svc- --307-780 ,3 01-4211-320-70 Nov svc Nov - svc 5-34--;-7-3 14 61 Northern State Power 01-4212-315-30 Nov svc 136.19 75+ 61 Northern State Power 01-4212-310-50 Nov svc 99.73 Totals Temp Check Number 62 *Nov svc -----99;-73 61 Northern State Power 15-4212-310-60 Nov svc 99.73 63 61 Northern State Power 01-4212-320-70 Nov svc 75.47 T,;-6-1--Northerrr-StatL--PowL-r--------- 15-4212-400-60------ - Nov- svc 42 63 Oakcrest Kennels 61 Northern State Power 08-4212-000-00 Nov svc 178.85 -63-OaRcre%t--Kenr)e3 61 Northern State Power 01-4211-315-30 Nov svc 341.37 - --ryl-Northern--St-at-e-Power---.-- Nov- svc— 451 23 61 Northern State Power 01-4211-310-70 Nov svc 142.67 � 24i 61 Northern State Power 15-4211-310-60 Nov svc 142.66 732 Totals Temp Check Number 61 Temp Check Number 612 2,007.8-- Temp Check Number 64 Oxygen Service Co 64 Oxygen Service Co 64 01-4305-050-50 61-4305-030-30 128 Totals Temp Check Number 64 Temp Che-'- Number 65 65_i .-Bend-Pavi ng— 01=4422-050-50- cyl act thru 10/15 cyl act thru 10.15 fine T11i X 12.60 8.40 21.00 0? bheryr-Stat-s-Power __01-4211-420-50 --Nov-svc------ 125-.7 32 62 Northern State Power 08-4211-000-00 Nov svc 684.40 62 Northern State Power 01-4211-320-70 Nov svc 38.37 _NCrthern-State-Power ---1-5-4211-400-60— Nov-svc- --307-780 62 Northern State Power 01-4211-320-70 Nov svc 9.04 35 Totals Temp Check Number 62 39 .40 '41 63 42 63 Oakcrest Kennels 01-4221-800-90 Oct Svc 105.00 ':3 -63-OaRcre%t--Kenr)e3 -4: - 451 126 145.00 -- --Totals- Temo, -Check, Number Temp Check Number 64 Oxygen Service Co 64 Oxygen Service Co 64 01-4305-050-50 61-4305-030-30 128 Totals Temp Check Number 64 Temp Che-'- Number 65 65_i .-Bend-Pavi ng— 01=4422-050-50- cyl act thru 10/15 cyl act thru 10.15 fine T11i X 12.60 8.40 21.00 3 Nov 1989 Claims List Page 11 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights _E4 hek- 17N,,,.ber Vendor Name Account Code Comment s Amount 65 Pine Send Paving 01-4422-050-50 wear m2x 9 432. 5,316.32 :12! Totals Temp Check Number 65 Temp Check Number 66 1611 66 540. 00 20 '2,: Temp Check Number 67 forms Totals Temp Check Number 67 se Recreational Surface 01-4330-e15-70 ' 1 ea 33! Totals Temp Check Number 68 Temp Check Number 69 Re tennis courts 71'51 1-751 2, 80Q71. 00 2,800.00 ------rolzer trailer- ae u,maw'mm ec*rwomue ---------------------'--------�----_------ ------____- "n Temp Check Number 7m 43* ' 70 Brad Ragan Inc 01 'tires ow/ "s-- �Totals Temp Check Number 70 � ��-renp-oheck-wnmuer--------71---' ---'- -- ,v. ' |,,' 71 s u r Office products 01 -4300 -0e0 -e0 misc sozrs ----71-S m -r Office Products - --- m�-*�mw-�mn-x� ----'- misv splvs 14e �----Tot azs-remp-Check- wvmuer Number - ----- ��------------ ------ - - Temp oh' qvm"er re �� 72 Sanitery Products Co 08-4335-000-00 misc spz"s 412.76 46.09 o Nov 1989 Claims List Pane 12 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights --Temp-Ch ,i � Temp' ---o* -' --'- - ' -- . Number venum^ Name Account code Comment mnount u. 71 72 Totals Temp Check Number 7.0 10 Temp Check Number 73 13; -rprs aw �ory---- 73 65.40 '^ Check- Number --------73----�-----'--------------- �-- ' ------- - - -'--------------------- `p Temp Check Number 74 "o' 7* L E Shaughnessy Jr � m�-��m-��-�m Oct svc x +ae 1m ,' ��- 7� � s ��u��n��s� z, ��-�aew-13e-15 Oct svc 1e3'e0 ,z� --- oaus��essr-ar---'-------eu-�eem-mse-mm-------'------�----'---------- Oct-vc -----'-------ema�w------'-- ' ' Zz 74 L E Shaughnessy Jr 1s-421ew-132-wm Oct s°c 306.40 a' ,+ L E Shaughnessy Jr 03-+220-132-00 Oct s,c 96'40 74-L---E-Strzrughnessy-Jr- -1-4-4220--1-32-00 0e5.'60------ | '+ L E Shaughnessy Jr __- 15-+ee0-132-60 Oct svc e54'80 � z, ___--_-_ 442. 50 29l Totals Temp ooeou Number 74 50 e ber 75- -----'--------- --------------------'- 321 3o' ro The Shaughnessy Co 35-4ee6-000-00 Re 89 impr uds 9,553'75 ,34: 75 9,553'75 361 Totals Temp Check Number 75 Temp Check Number ns ` e-1 remp Check Number _ rr David Soy -by w 77 �Totals Temp Check Number 77 �L-rem�'o�e�x-w"m�er------�'--�e-- '---------------- �c ---- crm-xey------'-- - - ------------------ 54'48 7e a+ Paul Book u Stationery 01-4305-030-30 sozvS 14'4e 78 14'4e . Tot aI _?mp Check Number 78 3 Nov 1989 Fri 10:49 AM emp-'Chock-Number- Temp. Check - Number Vendor Name cl 7 9-St---Pa-UlSt a Claims List Page 13 City of Mendota Heights Account Code Comments Amount orkt. 01=4490=800=90 -- 41-700 243 Totals Temp Check Number 81 Temp Check Number &II, 111.90 79 0-1-10-1 Oct -Svc 4i. 00 -Total s` -Temp C Kec k- -NTLij i WY 01-4210-020-20 Oct Svc 464.81 Temp Check Number 80 05-4210-105-15 Oct Svc 148.45 2- -V-S-West---CorsimuYAcat-i Oct -Svc— 5 j4' a5i 80 Sun Newspapers 01 -4490-050-50 ad for bid plow wing 15.04 80 Sun Newspapers 32 -4240-840-00 ad for bids 89 -5 35.22 '7! 160 -01 -4210-050-50 —Oct -Svc 50.26 !F, Totals Temp Check Number 80 Oct Svc 35.47 82 U S West communications 01-4210-070-70 Oct Svc 35.46 40 Temp Check Number 81 act 738 1, 211.05 81 Turf Products 01 -4200-610-70 rental 50.00 24i 81 Turf Products 01-4330-490-70 rprs 10.00 243 Totals Temp Check Number 81 Temp Check Number &II, 111.90 82-U-S--West--Communi-cat i ons --01-421 0-1-10-1 Oct -Svc 280.1"? 82 U S West Communications 01-4210-020-20 Oct Svc 464.81 82 U S West Communications 05-4210-105-15 Oct Svc 148.45 2- -V-S-West---CorsimuYAcat-i Oct -Svc— 5 j4' a5i 82 U S West Communications 15-4210-060-60 Oct Svc 50.56 82 U S West Communications 01-4210-030-30 Oct Svc 110.90 301 ;:--I -S-West-Communi cat! ons -01 -4210-050-50 —Oct -Svc 35:-47— !F, 82 U S West Communications 15-4210-060-60 Oct Svc 35.47 82 U S West communications 01-4210-070-70 Oct Svc 35.46 40 ati 738 1, 211.05 Totals Temp Check Number 82 43 .4 Temp Check Number 83 4A_ Nov Drerti 170.--88- 83 United Central Trustee 01-4132-020-20 Nov prem 43.93 .4- 83 United Central Trustee 01-4132-050-50 Nov prem 18.35 - -83-'Urr!7ted--Cent-ral-Trustee --OT-413C--070-70 Nov -prem— V9741 49 50 :332 252.57 ai Tot-als -Temp -Check- -Number ---- Temp Check Number 84 84 U-4ted Way St Paul 01-2070 Nov contr 102.70 i 0 - Totals TemD Check Number 84 3 Nov 1989 Claims List Page 14 Fri 10:49 AM City of Mendota Heights erap-Check-Numbey--- -85 ----- _- _� _ __-__- 2i 85--- 2i Temp. 41 Check— I Number Vendor Name Account Code Comments Amount as ournal -01-440'2-110-•10 - renewal-- 99-700 99. 00 10i Totm-ks7--Temp-Check --Numb _S5__ —.Sept -Re Fire --relief s0_._00 ' '1 1 16-4220-120-00 Sept Re Furlong addn 652.41 ,,I Temp Check Number 86 16-4220-120-00 Sept Re Duffy DevIp 2,897.40 -89--Wtrfttrrcrp-&-We-inst--kne- -4490-020-20 -Sept--Re- Ternpco-FA-Fees 65.-0 :31 4 86 Western Life Ins 01-4132-031-30 Nov prem 86.00 25 !35 -------- 6-598-G4 27; Totals Temp Check Number 86 Pd ---------- 3 "1 93.34 12388 161.00 Larry Bridger Tdition reimb 227,416.74 7 rand Tab- 1 389 —12r.92 --Knuth_--itileage TDff 20I :39 12390 _ , 87 Winthrop & Weinstine 01-4220-120-80 Sept Re Kensington 114.40 12391 15.00 North Star Chap ICBO Re McCullough -Prop' -684-w-50 87 Winthrop & Weinstine 01-4221-1.20-10 Sept retainer 541.40 87 Winthrop & Weinstine 01-4222-120-20 Sept prosecutions 1,104.00 -87-Wi-rrthrop-&-We-i-nst *-ne--01-42120-1-20-30 —.Sept -Re Fire --relief s0_._00 87 Winthrop & Weinstine 16-4220-120-00 Sept Re Furlong addn 652.41 87 Winthrop & Weinstine 16-4220-120-00 Sept Re Duffy DevIp 2,897.40 -89--Wtrfttrrcrp-&-We-inst--kne- -4490-020-20 -Sept--Re- Ternpco-FA-Fees 65.-0 87 Winthrop & Weinstine 16-4220-120-00 Sept Re SOS cony 509.30 --- 783 !35 -------- 6-598-G4 :31 . 32 Totals Temp Check Number i3 i MANUAL CHECKS 34! 12386-- 75-.00--Bill-Hiiaalia-----pfti7-je-la-a r !35 12387 150.00 Dakota Cty Warrants Pd ---------- 3 "1 93.34 12388 161.00 Larry Bridger Tdition reimb 227,416.74 7 rand Tab- 1 389 —12r.92 --Knuth_--itileage TDff :39 12390 231.41 Guy Kulland -mileage & exp reimb 39, 12391 15.00 North Star Chap ICBO P Kaiser .1.01 12392--------14S-.O0j&Esay ct5i-wjFr-j.-Tj fs-t;-d--- 411 12393 35.00 St Louis Cty 11 11 42E 12394 56.97 Dennis Delmont Clothing reimb 42 12395---3;222-.-32—StatCCapitol-Ci-6ditUii---10/20- payrolls deductions 441 12396 5.54 Dan Dahlglish U. D. ded reimb 12397 6,946.25 PERA. - ' -) 10/6 Payroll - _t.r 4C 12398---- 5,297-87 --C,,iiiii-s-i8r�er-of-Revenue-- 10/6**& 10/20 (v1h,:/: 477, 12399 2,771.29 It balance 3rd qtr w/h .1240 , o 425.00 Dakota CtyState Bank 10/20 Payroll deductions 4912401 - 16-i26 pa-yr-oll, w/h co 12402 34,256.63 City H.H. Payroll a/c 010/20 net payroll 12403 70.00Instrumentative Svcs REgr. Olund, Neska -fo-fil, 60.00 Ramsey Counta warmants Pd manual checks 67,980.11 12405 2,500.00 U. S.Post Office refill postage meter 12406 19.00 Deputy Rear Repj! j p d GRAND TOTAL 295,396.85 76-.8-0-7 TAystee Bakery Bonfire 12408 142.80 HusKiks 12409— 63.60— Pep,j- Cols ------- 12410 18.86 Russ' Wahl CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Novemberl TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Dani and Kevin Batchelder Acting City A= trator Administrative Assis SUBJECT: Visitation Convent and School - Sign Variance Case No. 89-39 DISCUSSION: 19 1989 Visitation Convent, upon reading the staff reports, and seeing the problems associated with the fence along the west side of the driveway, decided that it was appropriate to remove the portion of the application requesting a variance for the fence height. They proceeded only wil ;h their sign area variance request, which was presented as originally propoped. There was discussion during the Planning Commission review con erning the massiveness of the sign. t RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission voted 6-1 (Dwyer:opposed size) to recommen approval for the requested sign variance from twelve (12) square fe t to twenty-two (22) square feet. ACTION REQUIRED: If City Council desires to implement the Planning Commission recommendation, they should pass a motion granting a sign size vari twelve (12) square feet to twenty-two (22) square feet as proposed. JED/KLB:dfw e from TO: FROM: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS EMO Planning Commission October 19, 1989 James E. Danielson, Acting City Administrator Kevin L. Batchelder, Administrative Assistant CASE NO. 89-39: Visitation Convent Variance to Sign Area and Fence Heights r 1) SCUSSION i Visitation Convent has made application to construct attractive sign and fence at their main entryway on Mendo Heights Road. This fence and sign are proposed to be constructe& of brick pillars and wrought iron fencing. There are not setback variances required, however variances need to be considered for sign area and for fen height. The sign variance requested is from twelve (12) square feet to twenty-two (22) square feet (401 18.6(3)]. The fence height of seven (7) feet six (6) inches as prop would need a CUP which states fences in front yards of residential' zoned areas should not exceed thirty (30) inc i Normally a front yard fence height requires a CUP. However, in the soon to be revised Zoning Ordinance, this would be processed as a Variance. Because this is not a typical residential front yard, and contains only a small amount of fence associated with the sign design, staff suggests that the Planning Commission waive the requireme: for a CUP and grant the request in conjunction with the s. as a variance. *00=0 901042-OLL11 Review the proposed variance requests with the `t'nvd make a recommendation to the City Council � .�.� ir-ment for a CUP for fence height and on �+z twelve (12) square feet to twenty. variance for fence height from two �;ix t6) inches to seven (7) foot six (6) inches. JED/KLB:kkb t f ed :s. PLANNING REPORT DATE: , ' CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: ACTION REQUESTED: PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 24 October 1989 Sister Peronne Thibert/Visitation Co School Marie and North of Mendota Ifeights f DI Road, West o odd Road (see sketch) Approval of Variance t Sigh Area and Fence Height 1. Attached is a statement prepared by Sister Peronne Marie Thi 'ertOf the Visitation Convent and School. She notes the desire to enha ce the entrance to the campus off of Mendota Heights Road throw the development of some ornamental walls and a new nameplace sign in the northeast quadrant of Mendota Heights Road and Visitation Drive.1 2. The Zoning Ordinance allows for a sign of up to 12 square, feet Isetback at least 10 feet from the property line for an institutional use uch as the convent and school located in the R-1 Zone. 3. The landscape architects have prepared a development plan in icating the location of a series of brick piers connected by a rod -iron fence in the northwestern quadrant of the intersection. There also is a sign with a single panel of rod -iron suspended by three brick piers, 21 " on a side. 4. First, with respect to the fence. The R-1 single-family zone a] a fence height of up to 216". The proposed height here is 716", on the scale of the campus and the considerable open space vicinity, we suggest that 7'6" is not a significant concern. I the location on the property line is close enough to both roadw we are concerned ab*6ut the safety condition as a result significantly reduced line of sight visibility. You will note that due to the configuration on the property lin site, this problem (with the sign setback 10 feet) is not appare corner of the northeast quadrant. However, in the northwest where the fence alone is to be constructed, we are concerned safety of persons in vehicles because of the visual impedimen by the relatively massive piers at the immediate corner of the suggestion for improvement might be to move the fence back feet to the north. This would tend to put the fence more in the signage construction on the opposite corner and would sul improve traffic visibility at this intersection. We realize that some existing trees in the area, therefore, this movement i carefully planned. However, we suggest that this can be acc in the vicinity of a 30 -foot setback if carefully considered. 3ws for Based in the owever, ys that of the s of the t in the quadrant :)Out thl creale'l. site. A 0 to 30 ine with ;tantially sere are could be mplished Sister Peronne Thibert/Visitation Convent and School Page 2 S. The size as proposed in Sister Peronne Marie Thibert's statement 1 22 square feet, whereas the Ordinance allows for 12 feet. This increas in I square footage is in scale with the size of the campus and spa ious nature of the entrance area. Such a sign (12 square feet in �ea) according to the Ordinance can be up to 10 feet high and 10 feet ack from the right-of-way. We suggest here that both of ' these condi ons are appropriate and that the 7'6" high sign (to the top of the rick columns) is not a significant problem. 6. You will note that the sign details include a section of rod�ironsuf nce constructed at right angles with the surface of the sign. e gest that traffic proceeding from Dodd Road westerly on Mendota He ghfs Road will find this section of the fence impeding upon the visibilit of the sign. Either the three posts should be moved further north or the fence section should be constructed parallel to Mendota Heights Roa so as to remove this visual impediment. N In summary, the application Is for a variance of the sign area frol feet to 22 feet, which appears to be reasonably in scale with grounds and institution. Though not requested, it would appear that fence to which the sign is attached and the freestanding fence it northwest corner of the intersection is 5 feet higher than that all in the R-1 Zone. Thus, a variance should be considered for the h of this fence, subject to possible relocation of the fence in northwest quadrant. 12 the the the wed fight the 1 T6 - fit! a • • • • • • • • i • f;.' �'' cr • _ — U i L t_ D R • • i A'K f fl / ......... . ...... . . .. J i .. . ........ . .. .... . ........ :•:• . . .. ............ .... .i ;`Ix J1 •• .•ate • �;:: �: t i • X., .::::. :►� 0. HAZEL CT o • • •�— 1 ...,.; . I LO \ �, i cc 4. • �. z 1 t, HEIGHTS ROAD SUBJECT PROPERTY d .........NORTH fi CL SCALE 1 =400' 0 a` I V i Vii .. }'''}} J I C y of Mendota Heights APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Case No. Date of Application Fee Paid 55 Applicant Name: i �O � r">— r tro n m t " - PH:_ Address: _- Owner Name: Address: (Last) (First) (MI) *S-S'Ui�5r`�i7nr'v� 4uclafA tom'li} S.S'j2 (Number & Street) (City) (State) (Zip) V t T`t�-�t'o n Co r1 VeH f cuj -Sao a 1 (Last)' I (First) (Ml) (Number & Street) Street Location of Property in Question: Legal Description of Property: ",to fay �ei 4 /14 S J !_� (City) (State) (Zip) ✓lY>r�lA _ Type of Request: Rezoning 1% Variance Conditional Use Permit Subdivision Approv Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D. Wetlands Permit Plan Approval Other (attach explan Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applicable City Ordinance Number Section Present Zoning of Property Present Use Proposed Zoning of Property Proposed Use I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional material are true. ton (Signature of Applicant) (Date) (Received by - Title) . %,-L'7 1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 1452.1850 October 16, 1989 Members of the Planing Commission City of Mendota Heights Dear Commissions Members: The Visitation Monastery and School over the past year has been involved in a master plan study of its campus. In association with Damon Farber Associates, Landscape Architects, the master plan has focused upon the components of new plantings, arrangements of exterior athletic fields, circulation, improved visibility and signage. The first phase of our master plan implementation is an entry sign at the corner of Visitation Drive and Mendota Heights Road as illustrated in detail 1/L2. The sign will be internally lit and set between brick piers. The entry sign being proposed is in need of a variance due to the square footage of the sign face. The square footage of the sign is 22 square feet per face, whereas the ordinance calls for a maximum of 12 square feet per face. Due to Visitation's institutional use within a residentially zoned district, the large site, and need for visibility, the ordinance as it applies to our site is less than sufficient. The proposed sign we feel is of the proper proportions and accurately introduces the Visitation Monastery and School to visitors of our site. Please accept our application for a variance in order to construct the entry monument sign as illustrated in the attached plan sheets. Thank you for your consideration of our application for a variance to increase the square footage of our proposed entry sign. Sincerely, S. Rvotiv, N" 7�,-L Mother Peronne Marie HEIGHTS APARTMENTS • MENDOTA HEIGHTS. MN 55120 452-8826 .x 21122�� i J 20 23 19 24 25 01 02 03 04 OS n 17 S 14 13 12 t)8 07 11 10 09 w � � }—wry j O----•�� 2300 �I LEXINGTON AVE. S`-' w� C.e n- 2370 BLDG C a 1b DODD ROAD / Ar .ilRumlrMuxt 1 � 1QN CARR PR AQS(XTATRI IJ�MyIAN14uw IMOitlT CONVENT OF THE VISITATION iKfT lTR! ENTRY MONUMENT/PIERS /^~ayLl +IYRY c�VY Y1A RY oW°�MA: RTI NI°ni M0. _ 2 FENCE IMMMNUM AR.mn. j— IAU)IIJAI r S II _i_— __-_--tlag 1M/ lp � E � z I i I NIONUMENTIMERSWENCE ppArw h NR p um my RtOCiOnAtIMMEARAFRATIMAr" .4w wwtl..leyM«.R S'i a I � i •_—�•�� lumclW Vqv Mw Ywx t RiR RYH G Wrow,a z ---._ -- '--•�� '•�� NAiFE ORTE tYKfs 1l nrl, fwmlwM - ••`-�'-` �� 1 ' y 3a )y11 I I I i PR r S II 1 _i_— __-_--tlag 1M/ lp � E xwrw ! 1 E OJECT BKET �ITEE 1M/ lp REvmoRB TE my NO. xwrw ! CONVENE FTHE ISITATION NIONUMENTIMERSWENCE ppArw h NR p um my RtOCiOnAtIMMEARAFRATIMAr" .4w wwtl..leyM«.R S'i L2 V.Ip pN,. •_—�•�� lumclW Vqv Mw Ywx t RiR RYH G Wrow,a _ DAAWN/CHECREq z: ---._ -- '--•�� '•�� NAiFE ORTE tYKfs 1l nrl, fwmlwM - ••`-�'-` �� pEGKiMTgN Nq, 6CxLE 1lIUJJI•!UI !AA A nli A JA I cit3�of Aiendota Heig-4ts October 25, 189 Dear Mother Peronne Marie Thibert, Your application for a _(C4Vt , will be considered by _the City Council at their next regularly scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday, The Council meeting starts at 7:30 o'clock P.M., here at City Hall in the Council Chambers. You, or a representative, should plan on attending the meeting, in order that your application will receive Council consideration. .If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Kevin Batchelder Administrative Assis V t 1101 Victoria Curve • Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 4$2.1850 1. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Novem TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Danietwq__.- and Kevin Batchelder Acting City Ad trator Administrative Assis SUBJECT: Lexington Heights Association - Sign Variance Case No. 89-41 DISCUSSION: 19 1989 The building manager for -Lexington Heights Apartments attended the Planning Commission meeting and presented their request for a sign size variance. The Planning Commission expressed some concern about the size of the sign. The general concensus from those who had viewed the staked size and location of the sign was that the size was appropriate for the'comrlex. As presented, this sign is of similar design and lighting as the City Hall's monument sign. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission voted 6-1 (Krebsbach:sign size) to recommend approval of the requested sign size variance from six (6) square feet to sixty-three (63) square feet. ACTION REQUIRED: If the City Council desires to implement the Planning Commiss n recommendation, they should pass a motion granting a sign size var nce from six (6) square feet to sixty-three (63) square feet as proposed. JED/KLB:dfw 0 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO October 19, 1989 TO: Planning Commission FROM: James E. Danielson, Acting City Administ Kevin L. Batchelder, Administrative Assis a SUBJECT: CASE NO. 89-41 - Lexington Heights Apartments Sign Variance (size) DISCUSSION Lexington Heights Apartments currently is utilizing temporary wood sign at their complex. This sign has been up approximately four years and its message is geared toward advertising rental apartments. These buildings are currently fully occupied except for turnover. The owners feel it is time to replace this temporary sign with a permanent sign that only identifie the complex. The sign as proposed conforms to the Zoning Ordinanc requirements with the exception of its size [18.6(2)]. location of the proposed sign is staked for your viewing convenience. ACTION REQUIRED Review the proposed variance request with the appl and make a recommendation to the City Council on a sign variance from six (6) square feet to sixty-three (63) s feet. JED/KLB:kkb e ant ize are � � � x' ^ � PLANNING REPORT DATE: _ 24 October 1989 CASE NUMBER: 89-41 APPLICANT: Lexington Heights Apartments LOCATION: Northerly of Mendota"eights Road (see sketch) r ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of Variance Sign Size I PLANNING l. Initial construction of the Lexington Heights Apartments be an in February, 1984 and consisted ultimately of three 75 -unit strUctur s at a density of approximately 12 units per acre. The land was planr ed and zoned for apartment development as a part of the initial ComprE hensive Plan in the early 601s. The initial site was larger, but substantially reduced in east -west dimensions due to additional acquisition 'or the construction of 35E several years prior to the development of the 2. The site has four entrances off of Lexington Avenue. As you will note on the attached site plan submitted by the applicant, the total length of right-of-way frontage on Lexington Avenue for the development is 1,650 feet. The project has been identified by a temporary sign that is now over four years old. The site is fully leased (except for turn -over), therefore, it is time to consider a permanent sign proiram. 3. Several months ago Staff met with Virginia Falkner who is the manager for the project. We discussed sign regulations and options for the construction of a permanent identification sign for the site * e encouraged Ms. Falkner to consider a single sign rather than a s3ries of signs at each of the four entrances. Because the four entrances are well dispersed along the frontage of Lexington Avenue, it seems practical and reasonable to construct a sign that would be of 4dequate size and visible from a sufficient distance serving as identifica ion for all four entrances. 4. The Ordinance a1lqvvo for a sign of up to 8 square feet for group of residences of six or more. �uch a oign in any R��onm co be 10 feet from the right-of-way and in not to exceed lO feet in hoigiL 5. The proposed sign has 83 square feet of area and appears approximately G feet to the Lop of the apex of the oigr . Attached is a copy of o design illustrating the sign panel, ` n?punted on a brick bane that appears to be approximately 2 height (or slightly less). � - Lexington Heights Apartments, Case No. 89-41 6. The sign is proposed to be lighted from the interior as noted attached statement from k4u. Fmlkner. She notes that th illumination will be similar to that which is employed at kf Mendota Heights City Hall. 7. When the sign ordinance was written back in I960-62, there w emphasis on multi -family housing development in the City. Th/ in fact, only one significant parcel of land zoned for nmol housing and that was the site in question. Other multi -family projects were accomplished at R-1 density utilizing the planr development concept. Thega early developments included the I Townhouses and the Sommrneraot Nineteen project. Except for d site, it was contemplated that most other multi -family housing would be on a relatively orna1l scale and, therefore, the regulation reflected this approach. B. Obviously, if 8 square feet is appropriate for a[n units, sorneLhi/ might be appropriate for 225 units developed on a site with l, of frontage on a major thoroughfare. It is also significant in that the development across the street oonaluto of Rem Cemetery, a long time historical land use in this area of t Residents here normally do not complain. a �e o DLt1a -e was, -family housing 'd unit y FoUo » Riley )rolectu signage City. Thus, it would seem that the sign proposal placed perpendicular to the right-of-way at a distance of 10 feet as prescribed by the Ordinance merits serious consideration. A positive action on this proposal could include a condition that there should be no further identification signage on the site, exclusive of a small directional sign that m ght be appropriate in the interior of the site. ^ \U� i��1.h1/ �� WA ER TOWER 2MG x I 1w] 'r: -p- -WAGON WHE RO ERS L KE ' �, P SUBJECT PROPERTY NORTH SCALE 1 "=400' ST. THOMAS ACADEM IPA. BOYb SCHOOL! lml� rA.,L.� 1 Applicant Name: C ty of Mendota He ghts APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Case No. Date of Application Oct b r 1 Fee Paid $35.00 Lexington Heights Apartments PH: 452—M6 (Last) (First) (Mn Address: 2320 Lexington Ave. So. Mendo (Number & Street) (City) OwncrNamc: Lexington Heights Associates (Last) (First) Address: 2320 Lexington Ave. So. Men (Number & Street) Street Location of Property in Question: (City) 2320Lexin (State) (Zip) r%5 (Ml) a Heights, Minn. 55120 (State) (Zip) Ave. So. Men ota Heights Legal Description of Property: lot #1 BI k. #1 Lot #2 Blk. #1 Lot #3 Blk. #1 Type of Request: Rezoning X Variance Conditional Use Permit Subdivision Appro, Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D. Wetlands Permit Plan Approval Other (attach expla Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applicable City Ordinance Number 401 Section 18.6 (2 ) Present Zoning of Property R3 Present Use Multiple Family Hous Proposed Zoning of Property Proposed Use I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and oP the additional material are true. a (Signature Applicant) (Date) (Received by - Title) 1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 52.1850 LEXINGTON HEIGHTS APARTMENTS October 16, 1989 City of Mendota Heights Planning Commission 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minn. 55120 Members of the Planning Commission: The Lexington Heights Apartments, located 2320 Lexington Ave. So. were built during the period from 1983 to 1985. Our apartment complex consists of 3 delux rental buildings and one administrative building located on approximately 15 acres of land. Since the construction of this property began back in 1983 the only sign on the property identifying our name and phone nunber has been a rather unsightly 8'x 8' plywood, temporary construction sign located 60' from the center of Lexington Ave., beside one of our three driveways. It has since faded, the nails are rusted, the sections are seperating and we feel it is an eye -sore to our complex and it is due time to erect our perm,inent. sign. When surveying the length of our boulevard we came to the conclussion that best location for the new sign would be on top of a small berm just south of our reflection pond and fountain. This site has a clear view by traffic on Lexington Ave. coming from either north or south and is exactly at the 601 right-of-way distance required for such a sign. The sign will be professionally built having a brick base, metal & fiber surface and electrically illuminated from the inside at night, similar to the sign on the lawn at the Mendota Heights City Hall. • Attached please find a plot plan, photos and a detailed drawing of the pro- posed sign we wish to install. Sin rely yo s, Vgirgi;a Faulkner -Property Manager Lexington Heights Apartments 2320 MUNG"FON AVENUE SOUTH AiENDO'Fi\l-IEIGI'ITS,MINN]�so'rA55120 (612)45-i7-8826 1� IL H EIGHTS APARTMENTS 2330 LEXINGTON AVE. SO. MENDOTA HEIGHTS. MN 55120 452-8826 C00' I LEXINGTON AVE. SO. -jpr v- l GevN { cY- FAGF f ..�,� yyY t. •Y'�Y ' I• ',�> ., .c; `:y.., .. a .. '�. +f�%�,w"w,• '• � s. - •,t ,�..-,,.,y, .t .['v}Jc� '-,. � �� ;.� fr"4 �p;w i..;, %., . G'{•, xY i 'i,,;n. •,. � 5�; ' $'j,,+.'X+TT> k s ; �t'.�y . � y ' j','3 a .....4.� - rc Your app licat� on for C Sn VC�,ti('tAV1CQ it x� ;.:p i' `�: at _ •�, -� - - � 4r: ...'•. . K'i ,ilt�v�Mleiidota.R� i `i »'iyt<Y. ...»r `• 'y4��'[S,,s h:" L,y..,..' Pe ' AA�li�l next r :t� .p 4ife.`,�..f .... CH'"yh'S ,1 � ;` - t' ,, `•,a .the :' ..� „,k.�«r;�i' - '. r ��, i. ,. t• ,. ... i .. i+.", r. ["'}: '� -,. - , ��`r K, `>"'. i•.�>� '�` , .,I,.K scheduled meeting" which will; be- held on Tuesday, j{i/�{� .Vi t,l, ,•L9 .kfi (.°>: a f'�•.: t,''•,1,i •'. C. A',' [l. 1,N ,',,,ti ' $ r C_ '; :W, �, iL?•f i,vy 1;+.3. ,� `k 'q. li 't•.n'iw.j;� .. i :xn� . ; .. "e i *,t a ".+: t'�... .. , - ^1: a� n.�:y f,['.w+• �.'+ y, `Y � 1 'wY :.n+ i+x. ..• •4' .Y: ie�i..�..,.�4•Fr MLF.,.i :r.ip. ` < sy S- j•. i i. .L. - •^ .µF <i1} T� t • S.+`4 ~ � • ±t `�.<' •.,h T • 4• 447,,'h ''S rMf';+•.`.!'i• r d,,. cv< ^ ` •. `"� •4�� ., 'v A..� :3:I't��y.�ii'•j Tp :, j, ?t>y F �., a.r+`,"'.K+� A� ..} „"' r '_� 'a • rA: S :. t t=''. ;: y % .. ., ,{ t �i.,. y t .6. .,i 'in' v.. `t aj '< ,`.a. i [ :. ,P,r. [r. ya,,c,a [.. w.; 7 "Y,'i:''<.x ;:Ky%',M xYR 4,�z'w w. •+• '. October 251 1 89-,:.: '� s'4°Y.� `Y��.t� .: :+,i ":,-. . x., tr w.Yy .+ , _ ...' �.• '{^. � a..,j ... 'ashy.' `.;,r *.i :.< •,-,. '•kp,., .M v+ xf ,Y%x•YX.i•, y,.,:. �(�n: Axa' shk �.r._ .xi ,C ti+..,x.`�.'•�++:a�a`xti .'1� '• � - t'• .ii S+8 - rya i^ na ` s . > ,r, 5r - :. ..Y+,, °{ y�,i.:.�},n,'�:+' � �,.'+',.'% r - ,, - i.+v"`• 'b. . } � f.. �: , j �i'S%-•1•-i•f ��'i'' . `. n*i s. 'it'�iti:? t '! •t•t.. .`-..,. t4^''� N. [,1rf:, •!` i+" t,_ w x w.., ,'•i'..�f". ivHa"� �°,�,+.•.Y-t�:,R= ,..4. � *.,,fu.tt,'',+ ?rl:Y•« 1ti �r n•S ,, F.jla••.»+ •i•'r'[- '10 * .. •. i= 4-'•�i,sj• {t. .�n, .. r , r"v � tJ�;.+y`,q:,Y,µ,X{•! rr-4, [.t;'. .d � a' `z a ..�,� yyY t. •Y'�Y ' I• ',�> ., .c; `:y.., .. a .. '�. +f�%�,w"w,• '• � s. - •,t ,�..-,,.,y, .t .['v}Jc� '-,. � �� ;.� fr"4 �p;w i..;, Dear r Ms. Faulkner, i Your app licat� on for C Sn VC�,ti('tAV1CQ •!�` °4th „a . .i:' 'w., ^ ...»r `• 'y4��'[S,,s h:" L,y..,..' Pe ' City Council at ttheirwill be considered"bY next r �e K gularly Wit; , .. ,1 � ;` - t' ,, `•,a .the :' ..� „,k.�«r;�i' - '. r ��, i. ,. t• ,. ... i .. i+.", r. ["'}: '� -,. - , ��`r K, `>"'. i•.�>� '�` , .,I,.K scheduled meeting" which will; be- held on Tuesday, j{i/�{� .Vi The Council meeting starts ` at 70#30 o' clock P.M. , here t .City.:: '.:g..:,• ` `' Hall in the Council Chambers. You, plan on attending',the meeting, in f will receive Council consideration. or a representative, should order that your app ication '_ y If you have any questions, please feel free to con Sincerely, Kevin Batchelder Administrative Assista t 1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights,MN 55118. 4 2-1850' •1Vlendot ''' me. 0.S4 '< "Y,'i:''<.x ;:Ky%',M xYR 4,�z'w w. •+• '. r - y,R•''• +j3!�y _t• < �;-x :w^s' , r.=`•"•w�'�S`<�;1«+np'•t`�.S�.i+,'t:` 'r+, ... ;Ixr',.• , r ,.j';:.rf?-sx<.sar'=-i.Pe-�t,',e tk:,iri:".-`.,•aj.{.. ;'j'-.Se'f •4• r .:.': , {.f : 1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights,MN 55118. 4 2-1850' •1Vlendot ''' me. 1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights,MN 55118. 4 2-1850' •1Vlendot ''' CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Nove TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Dani*�rator and Kevin Batchelder Acting City A Administrative Assist SUBJECT: J.A. Development - Victoria Townhomes - Lot Split Case No. 89-37 At their October meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed a from John Mathern, J.A. Development, to subdivide three townhouse two townhouse lots (see attached staff memos). 1, 1989 roposal ots into This proposal met with favor with the Planning Commission mainly on the basis of its reduction of density. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to waive the requirement forla public hearing and to grant the requested lot division. ACTION REQUIRED: If Council desires to implement the Planning Commission recomm they should pass a motion approving Resolution No. 89 =, RESOLUTI APPROVING THE LOT DIVISION OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 3, BLOCK 4, VICTORIA TO JED/KLB:dfw tion, City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 89 - RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LOT DIVISION OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 31 BLOCK 4, VICTORIA TOWNHOMES WHEREAS, owner of Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 4, Victoria Town Homes, Dakota County, Minnesota has requested from the City to divide said lots into two new lots designated as Lot 1, together with the southeast half of Lot 2 and Lot 3 together with the northeast half of Lot 2; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said lot division and finds the same to be in order. NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota, that the lot division submitted at this meeting be and the same is hereby approved. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th day of November, 1989. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk R CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS REM TO: Planning Commission October 19, 1989 FROM: James E. Danielson, Acting City Administrator Kevin L. Batchelder, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: CASE NO. 89-37: J.A. Development Victoria Townhomes - Lot Split DISCUSSION Mr. John Mathern, J.A. Development Company, has recently acquired the Victoria Townhomes Development. He proposes t develop this according to the original architectures and footprint parameters of the pre-existing PUD. He currently is about to begin construction of one three unit structure under the existing PUD guidelines. Mr. Mathern has received great interest from buyers larger, single level townhomes. These are units that con architecturally to the original PUD, but require larger areas. Essentially, he proposes to build a two unit structure in the footprint that originally accommodated a three unit structure. Mr. Mathern has obtained the requested signatures consent from the existing townhouse owners. Staff is processing this request through Subdivision Ordinance and the Zoning Ordinance 19.10(1) which allows waiving public hearing. ACTION REQUIRED Review the request with the applicant, and make a recommendation to the City Council to waive the public hearing at the Planning Commission level and grant the requested lot division. JED/KLB:kkb Nfi 11.3( of t - PLANNING REPORT .� � DATE: � � .�� CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: ` ACTION REQUESTED: PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: 24 October 1989 J.A. Development Inc � Southwesterly of North of Victoria (see sketch) Approval of Lot Bzb l. This property was originally approved as a planned unit develo ment and plat for the construction of eighteen townhouses. The land was only partially developed and has now been sold to the applicant whc proposes to complete the project. 2. The immediate proposal is to change three existing lots that were platted near the southwesterly corner of the site (nearest Vic ria) into two lots. I Attached is a copy of a statement from the applicant noting intent to develop two townhouses on the two new lots. Techni �ally the application is to convert Lots 1, 2, and 3 of Block 4 into two buildable sites by splitting Lot 2 and adding half of each to Lots' 1 and 3. Thus, this constitutes a lot split and, therefore, requires acticin on the part of the Planning Commission and City Council. The proposal recognizes a demand for larger townhouses and emphasizes a one -level living condition for which there seems to be a considerable market in this part of the Metropolitan Area. The end rest It is one less living unit on the site, but with a lower density anc a more spacious townhouse arrangement. It would seem that the development proposal would not constitute a deleterious affect on ontiguous properties as a whole. V9 of or. Ea Li 510 ON# 5 )N 26 • Soo 7*1.o j)') - .AT cr 7.1 v �D 4- ;� 15 8 11 lb ZI t, 2 ly 1 $3 4 464 10:41 41 RID -p %-%, 9 012-25 io t4o. CODO SUBJECT PROPERTY 0 0 01vt 04 tNORTH ix SCALE 11111=200' 91 64419,17,71.1 "1 -12 90 4 ............. •..... T: LOTS IN QUESTION• ...... - UR 4 -14 6i 4C sy BROAD 7), 9. .. 14 ..... ... p .... .... ..... ............ . .......... t. TL0- % nUTLOT E (fo -CT D 17 0 P :f 234 99 4� el 7d 0� 380-03 r 10 \)Vk 3. r, Ito 0.1 4... 070.0 13 9 17,0L g NIS T r c 6 060�3 4 A V-;� 1/0 sil- 1. 040-03 ell o 0-0"c7h:7' V 0 (j (; 2 0 W f � N i V 0 -A 14 5 T^ ir E Or Z6064- D I!-* A C. SoLi-rH 5-r. PAUL MENDOT-A ©.AO r_mur_ City of Mendota Heidhts APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Case No. Date of Application. A n Fee Paid Applicant Name: V/,% �,`\,Z_1�-!/L- 1 (Las Address: L (Num cr & Street Owner Name: _ `¢,(Last) Address: ✓'1r !� (Number & Street) Street Location of Property in Question: Legal Desc iptio of Property: (MI) ��--++ (State) (Zip) Vt (MI) (City) (State) (Zip) Type of Request: Rezoning Conditional Use Permit Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D. Plan Approval Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applicable City Ordinance Number Present Zoning of Property Present Use _ Proposed Zoning of Property Proposed Use _ I hereby declare that all statements made in this request material are true. , Variance Subdivision Approval Wetlands Permit Other (attach explanatio ) Section of (Date) jznl fg o:�e c 1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN - 55118 402.1850 October 9, 1989 City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Attn: Planning Commission and City Council To Whom it May Concern: 445 Broadway Avenue I St Paul Park, MN 55071 J.A. Development, Inc. has purchased the site on Victoria known as the Victoria Townhomes. The site was originally developed as townhomes ii 1980-81 and has set dormant for some years. In working with our clients, we have had requests for townhomes that a larger site. Our proposal to accomodate these clients is to use a that is platted for three (3) townhomes to accomodate two (2) townho I have attached a site plan with our request to utilize lots 1, 2 and block 4 for a townhome composed of two (2) units. JM/sw (612) 459-4089 ,612) 459-2442 to WON '2600': - 9500 tl 4 45.39 w $361 �. 337.27 5y6 �r LOT I ?lia} oLOCK 8 ppm •j O° lat w t+ t �6 Ja 1 .f„ ��'rb ycJ /'� p •.f •t �.. °ay ° ,1, LOT I 3 y /i ir• BLOCK / ^ }1 e ` a � � ,•/ ` ,� _ _r1C h L� 'p -t _ .� ♦° � . OJ• ]i7Oii y Or �,► �b �• � �'' j a• ao •' ,,tp A.tt to.tt ••• t�� eoj poi` 6i�5� t'.. , �y o% 4y�+4.' n }r6'17 W f%r cppp,,6•�{, ;�6 .F S{.,•4 .,�.. Gir �t°O 9ti *•Iii �,� ~� 'y I �/;%!' ♦`4�`Ab�'a>ai. e�t.S r S,�.N r i�is�.__: �•y7p (, *`tp .315 N.i X34-32• t'•.�';''i.,��;. •7.• p _ �rrT° rI` - eE. •• +4. _ �:+ .>a.•:. .,M : .ice o .r,!'�1.. •y.�F 4d'.». #t� fel �a.�-'. .r• •�r�l�'� '' / .e�.a:'-�J,w_ '� ° �� - 4 .w •`..�•.��,... r:t>....;- dp0°Js ♦. '�dt' �. p>>- . o .• *SO Y r ° �• ,c -rb �!•- t^y .ate ti afl.•: � �` - .. ,y-.• •+t�"r ]+.' '.,, •L•.. „ ok at•, p rtit r - is Z FOUNO 16.00 , i P� y }o •• y'V ♦'� . i , j ..: ;, ,.. •'t• .. •� r .�„ . r• : t:' tr¢S.Y WON I" ^ a� O TJo , r+d,' Ny e`w ` • .. iLp • ,,. M. 0.0. t. MON... OILA rk G _ MENT ° y :. „y;,..'�e}O't' ��• r. z uM •,i I.1�. . room_ - EQe2g57�E U 1GtT, i �SE %,� {,`�. v. _ ? �p'y r°N 1` >. •.': r. 1� N 69'/a S7 -E i 7RR AGE G'twi� sm a it CiC T,Tr }•k �f t�� 4 �•� . t. > i. ,: t ... r- �+ v 10649 - ' > .•'�'j'$• L. _ �� ti• y,4<'• t :. .'•••1s• ..,.''' '' �•t •L'`•• Z ` ^ ' 111.71 _ . •``'�_.C'_.-,ti...., R� . .. J .: ♦ Y : r,;� , .. -.'"� o '.Tt';r�'."j°"'r'^^ry+� yrs.--.. •^'rr.'+M*•.. cj." .t O �' p 1 N. S9'146E. .. (,. I i.,-� t 1. •;.fL.••�c7yy t!' .. }� d�J ;.,!�. t .�� ;r .if;'2'�t':_`•'i_ _...t, w �,�'. .1r. _w 4 i �••f ' `40 'h Vxp el ,.. J...ya•+TyY !.r. ';,,,' :��` r ;"��''tia: t' �•J''" .1' .!' h y V O JJf ' • . • .lem�i� •Mi •y ' j f�aat n� • �' • i e' °•.t':i?'i 'V 6i +1., 'l.•Y '� . x. ,r.• �•{d' >. O C J 4 ! ti .� '•�.I•ic� v'_ � -•.y� 'i. `s .:•i .;. P+• :t Mp. '; ,•.>y. / •• �. ti .♦ � Op�y lb T 4�.*.. �'!: 'rIY1r �� Nam.. , •. i a j ' ,..�. i: ��t'c� `Y'• � '• , ii •• "+ i '+ .N:��; •t.'i.� r tt 1.. !d 00 _ • i 1 `ar a '�.!roe* ,:" ..•j •*t�. .. .: .t •.'=a''y,..\.' ii ; �... .., .. r .. 't .. �., 1009 ♦ Q. '} ='q'°1�'R:•'C 4} tt •• .r:x `.., `'•.it. �ta,.,t ;�.j\:7 'J:. +,/i.;,r. :�•<=%•+i ...l +•.L+ 1�•� 7`°`'' y�C 4y �rT•, :r ..+• �' St"r.. ..m' .. I ,t _:_'�.. `".s: +..., �.../.^ ^ t.:<:-� 'i' : •.. y+'r �• < . r '' y f Je , p 4i° S �.. ... t� �;.''t;s..,,:'*� i r .. � • '� .. •. • j..y'-•..•" � '' i'� .. .. '�'..• •: � •R •' i;:'x• .�4� L,r'4�,i:•- u ? 3 • d� •} 1� 7.� ,,.-,- }..�{}.y ,�r`.r>r^• i •a.. .-I.•t .,_ •�t;,i,•. ,; 'd ✓•+•;' t <'.✓=�... .,. s.4.... ,.c, ., _t ` < 4i y Gp Jt Ci'y s'i't• ssgr.tg��+:'X-i'>r".•t�-)'t.�.` .i ,, .,��...K,•>.r aa.... ` n }��r �J r�i W •' •!•°�+ ?j1i'Z.r \ Y't`a'�N�::.�l.j''.�f•:X.".:13•.:i� it •-. •t+r•:,� -.l. .�' 1, .. t.. i ^+ � eJ lj - '+iµ M` ...i'�i *�'`'\��f:?'�_;�•L �* .:r. �-�. .-� .• „�•-.•/ M1fr. .. s;: 46 Nlb 10 1 � � �a• +� °J. �tJ °O �� + ��ti„�:. '+y�, ,•ii.aJ"•:t ^ _X- 'r '-:'r"�,`,�.�.•: �;, .•' •�`: ^�: •. :.t:t�:hr'��`�tr ;� �. ... ..' . � y 1 .�° `' a'3 , t^ `�� .• •;:: � rte" / Seo _ • 'J �� ¢SET � ' SyE � -R •.3'•�+� �� • u ,ep' `�,. • os: tV�/�t'•6' . . a �a»—a- ._a-_.._. OENC ?6.00 � µ>'a a'Lg' >i • btS } ..( ,, ; ep•1 �� .. - le l.t Ile ° +��/ ",�� •• _ THE WEST GINE OF THE SW V4 HE s0.00 °` c site s o bld 1 Victoria bld 3 Victoria site plan ■ VICTORIA TOWNHOMES site plan s twin home upper 716 lower 1661 total 2377 front elevation *a ■ VICTORIA TOWNHOMES unit h M bed lb x 14 living 23 x 17 m bth WtJWM INII� O dining Ilp 15 x 15 bth krcch 15 x 12 study 13 x 11 garage 34 x 22 main floor second floor basement. ■ unit h twin home upper 465 lower 1906 total 2371 , front elevation ■ VICTORIA TOWNHOMES unit g main floor second floor basement unit g WAI ��N ilk , wilt -01 To: City of Mendota Heights 445 Broadway Avenue 1 (012) 459-4089 St Paul Park,MN 55071 1 (q12) 459-2442 We the members of Owners Association of the Victoria Town Homes concent to *Y.A. developments plans to build a twin home(2 units of housing) on lots 1,2,3 block 4 Victoria Town Homes. ZI�3 .-/ '. r- ► SP } Cit Of � ` Ak A MotaC' Ilt� HC? 1 0 tS October 25, 1!89 Dear Mr. Mathern, Your application for a to� { , will be considered by the City Council at their next re ularly scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday, & U The Council meeting starts at 7:30 o'clock P.M., here it City Hall in the Council Chambers. You, or a representative, should plan on attending the meeting, in order that your appication will receive Council consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Kevin Batchelder Administrative Ass 1101 Victoria Curve • Mendota Heights, MN • 55118 442.1850 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS W=8 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Dani and Kevin Batchelder Acting City Aqestrator Administrative kssis SUBJECT: Bruber Wetlands Permit Case No. 89-38 DISCUSSION: t Novem 1, 1989 Mr. Jay Bruber attended the October meeting of the Planning Commission and distributed a corrected site plan showing the grading involved 'Go con- vert Lot 12, Block 1, The Ponds of Mendota Heights to a walkout lot (see attached corrected site plan dated October 24, 1989). The Planning Commission was concerned about what impact this dtvelop- ment would have on the wetlands and the steepness of the new slopescreated by the grading. They were shown to be one to one slope5,on the new �lan. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend appr wetlands permit subject to the following four conditions: 1. That the grading not occur below the 932 elevation. 2. That the maximum slope allowed on the site be 3:1. 3. That erosion control measures be installed before grading 4. That the erosion control measures be maintained in place i turf is established. ACTION REQUIRED: .If Council desires to implement the Planning Commission recomme they should pass a motion granting a wetlands permit contingent upon four Planning Commission conditions and staff review of the final pl insure the four conditions have been incorporated. JED/KLB:dfw of a occurs. ndation the ans to CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS EMO TO: Planning Commission October 19, 1989 FROM: James E. Danielson, Acting City Administrator Kevin L. Batchelder, Administrative Assistant SUBJECT: CASE NO. 89-38: Bruber - Wetlands DISCUSSION Jay and Laurie Bruber, who are constructing a home at Lot 12, Block 1, The Ponds of Mendota Heights, desire a Wetlands Permit to allow excavation of dirt fill within one hundred (100) feet of Warrior Pond. The proposed new dwelling they are constructing meets all required setbacks and sits one hundred forty (140) feet from the Wetlands. A Wetlands Permit is needed to excavate more than one hundred (100) cubic yards of earth within one hundred (100) linear feet from the Wetlands. Therefore, in order to excavate for a walkout at the rear of the home the Bruber's need the Wetlands Permit. The site plan submitted is not technically correct in its portrayal of topographic lines. Staff visited the site a although it is possible, it appears that it will be a difficult lot to transform into a walkout lot. Review the Wetlands Permit request with the applicant and make a recommendation to the City Council. Staff recommends that the applicant resubmit a revised site plan with correct contour lines before a submittal to the City council. JED/KLB: kkb r' � � " � , PLANNING REPORT D/\lFEz 24 October 1989 ' CASE NUMBER: 89-38 APPLICANT: Jay Bruber LOCATION: North of South Lane, on Warrior Pond (see sketci) ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of Wetlands P t rmit PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: l. The property is Lot 12 of Block l of the Ponds of Mendota Heights, single-family subdivision contiguous to and around the Old Warrior Pond, which at one time belonged to the School District. The lot in eation is vary large and has annp10 area to accommodate the proposed house exceeding the setback requirements for front, side, and rear yards. 2. The setback from the building to the shoreline of the pond is abo t 140 feet, whereas 100 feet is required. They propose, however, to e ava e an area behind the house to lower a portion of the backyard to create a 'twalkout" lot. The house is sited high enough so that thE)re is adequate drainage to the pond. 3. The elevationf the ground around the front d sides of the ho se are 945. The high water line of the pond is at 926. The excavatior stops at elevation 932+. -` The ~~-~`~~~d area becomes—'~~y ''~-'-- at its '---' ---, r' cducing what may appear to be an artificial area of terrain. We have suggested to the applicant that the excavation be expanded to Lh west so as to create a more natural slope environment at the rear f the house. | 5. As the site plan exists ip l , the sides of the excavated areas are, in fact, quite steep beyond the area where retaining waHs are proposed. You will note from the drawing that 4 -foot retaining walls are proposed at two levels on either side of the excavation. Ho Never, if the excavationby gouL" ' - p lines proposed,hical there will continue �o be a very steep slope beyond these retaining walls toward the water's edge. { 6. We suggest that more extensive excavation on the west side c f the newly 'excavated area can be sloped back at a lower angle, eliminating the need for extended retaining vnai1o. As noted, this should reaw1L in o more natural appearance rather than the artificially od gouL" walkout basement level. � 7. The applicant has submitted a statement dated October 16, 1989, which aoenma to suggest that he proposes " . . . to create a natural Woking slope for drainage from the walkout portion of the proposed new dwelling". From this statement we are not uuca if in faoL the � .� Jay Bruber, Case No. 69-38 Page 2 ` . applicant proposes to make the excavation wider so as to create this more natural effect or vvhoLhor they propose to build it as submitted in the site plan. B. In any case, it would appear as though the excavation as proposed can be accommodated on the site without deleterious impact. The impact, we feel, will be laao if the throat in widened to create a more natural slope condltion.- 9. Accompanying the application are plans for the residence, which are delineated in o well thought mut detail. However, it vvoub] be helpful if there were more detail presented for the site plan indicating a more exact design and more detail for the retaining walls and contiguous slope areas. Additional plans for handling of landscaping with respect to these proposed new grades and terraces would also be helpful. In general; it would appear that the excavation within the wetlands area can be accommodated to be functionally and aesthetically pleasing. - - MAle1E - - - AVG- -- (O iOt 2.O1 ZOZ ZoZ 201. 'Lo I— ZS0 210 4L 6 4• 3 2 1 / (A 3 I' w Z zO 19 17 %-2-h / `I I'1 N N N I N h 33 N v h bl 1 % n 3L p 29 h 30 b 31 hl N 4-5i 1 O 20 L L a T. so Z 20 L m0 2- 79 7 GA I -LA HA N PL A C E e� X35 13 .11 151 131 150 164 OS V `hy V - r 04 I� M� SUBJECT ROPERTY N '6 ,r, ' 030-26 040-26 050-26 �, 050-07 040-07 030-07 i y-20-06 2 0-06 _ X31 150 163. 3 " NORTH 8690 320.48 233.02 ; •l�:6� SCALE 1 u 200' Ci9 i9 �`\ `�6.! 67 l7 :• �cA+s••:••• Tom' l �— --• 16 14 40 COURT"_.._._n!9 ` `l .99 ;s 0 19 '� sa '� a/ / 0°10 / �� •= �� H I_ m' 00 I 17 16 15 v , a99 y+ !O B7 46 7249 57 92 ;10 s HTS 0 n 87 37 _94 69 __ 99 57 _93 72 tD OWESLEl7 LANE o• _ 8768 , 8292 16.33 - L•__• „_• _ 336 -,7 1, . '' 2.33 � 296! i 5 3 I30 O N 3 -I 3 2 I w fo l ni 22 512 ��- 14-•4Z i - _• U n N N 100 100 144 12 i 397 32 670 d /s9 2 L mi 34Z 8s W13' 7 yS.9S M '2 5, OD n e1 N N N fV I /So /00 /.3 G Zoo 30 341 8S e0A D h h / SO f oo /go zac foo 6 4• 3 2 1 / (A 3 I It V) 14 0 7 111 O " 3C"(1 - Z, � 8 0 3 Ac. J O h Z y iu % ' N N --• o ° 1 0 1 0 3 e 497.4 Aad oa = 13 r 4 1n e O A ID {- Cy of Alendota Heilhts APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF PLANNING REQUEST Case No. Date of Application Fee Paid Applicant Name: BRUBER JAY H. PH: 455-2432 (Last) (First) (Mn Address: 2050 DELAWARE AVE., #205, MENDOTA HGTS, MN %5118 (Nwnber & Street) (City) (State) (Zip) SAME AS ABOVE Owner Name: (Last) Address: (First) (Mn (Number & Street) (City) (State) (Zip) Street Location of Property in Question: 1852 SOUTH LANE, MENDOTA HGTS . MN Legal Description of Property: LOT 12, BLOCK 1, THE PONDS OF N Type of Request: Rezoning Variance Conditional Use Permit Subdivision Approval Conditional Use Permit for P.U.D. X Wetlands Permit Plan Approval Other (attach explanal Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applicable City Ordinance Number Section Present Zoning of Property Present Use RESIDENTIAL Proposed Zoning of Property Proposed Use RESIDENTIAL I hereby declare that all statements made in this request and on the additional material are true. n_ J /„ . _ (Sidnbtur4of Applicant) v (Date) (Received by - Title) %5118 TIGHTS 1101 Victoria Curve -Mendota Heights, MN - 55118 952.1850 October 16, 1989 To The Planning Commission and City Council, City of Mendota Heights Re: Jay and Laurie Bruber 20 Langer Circle West St. Paul, Minnesota 55118 Zoning: R--1, Lot 12, Block 1, The Ponds of Mendota Heights Request: A Wetlands permit to allow the removal and deposit of more than 100 cubic yards of soil within the 100 ft. setback, to create a natural looking slope for drainage, from the walkout portion of the proposed new dwelling. See attached drainage and site plan. (Exhibit A). The subject property currently has a steep sloping topography towards the pond which would serve as excellent drainage. The proposed new dwelling will be approximately 40 feet away from the 100 ft. rear yard setback line and well away from the current front and side yard setbacks. Drainage could be achieved without removing more than 100 cubic yards of soil, however it is our intent to create a more natural looking grade for drainage by widening the slope, utilizing 4 ft. retaining walls, placing new trees and depositing as much of the soil back onto the site as possible. WE HEREBY STATE NO OBJECTIONS TO THE REMOVAL OF SOIL IN EXCESS OF 100 CUBIC , BEYOND THE 1001 MARKER ON THE PROPERT� OF JAY & LAURIE BRUBER, 1852 SOUTH LANE, MENDOTA HEIGHTS, �i?IOYCE BILL BURG "~ .. ZONI THE ABOVE SIGNATURES ARE NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST, WEST ANO NORTH OF THE PROPERTY. . ' njj1J Dear Mr. and Mrs. Bruber, Your application for a Citof Mendota Heig is October 25, 19;89 1Ct vvDs �erT%A'c will be considered by the City Council at their next regularly scheduled meeting, which will be held on Tuesday, Inov, 7f—_ The Council meeting starts at 7:30 o'clock P.M., here at City Hall in the Council Chambers. You, or a representative, should plan on attending the meeting, in order that your appl cation will receive Council consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free to contac me. Sincerely, Kevin Batchelder Administrative Assis 1101 Victoria Curve • 1Viendota Heights, MN • 55118 45P.1850 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November 2, 1989 To: Mayor, City Council and Acting City(Ad From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assis Subject: Friendly Hills Tot Lot DISCUSSION Both the Citizens Park Review Committee and the arks and Recreation Commission have discussed Friendly Hills Tot Lot and its old play equipment on numerous occasions. There is a general concern with liability issues regarding the old play equipment. (See attachment on liability hazards) When the parks bond referendum was designed there were no funds provided for improvements at Friendly Hills Tot Lot because it was duplicative of the improvements proposed for Friendly Hills Park. With the removal of the play equipment becaus of its liability potential and with no funds being provided for improvement of the tot lot, the Parks and Recreation Commission feels the best use of this land is to divest it and use the proceeds for further park development at Friendly Hills Park. In both 1980 and 1983 the City had considered itself of Friendly Hills Tot Lot. At the time, neighborhood opposition to the City taking this acti( feels that this is an appropriate time to reconsider Friendly Hills Tot Lot and brought this before the Recreation Commission. (see October parks and Rec m attached City Attorney memo) RECOMMENDATION The Parks and Recreation Commission voted unan recommend that City Council: 1. Authorize staff to remove all the existing play e Friendly Hills Tot Lot; and 2. Bring action to clear title to Friendly Hills Tot the land and authorize the funds to the Parks Fund. iivesting here was Staff livesting arks and utes and sly to at , sell ACTION REQUIRED If the City Council desires to implement the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendation they should pass motions approving the following actions: 1. Direct staff to remove all the existing play equipment at Friendly Hills Tot Lot. 2. Council may wish to consider holding a public hearing before directing staff to begin legal proceedings. If so, they should direct staff to hold a public hearing with Friendly Hills Rearrangement homeowners regarding the divestment of the tot lot. L CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS ATTACHMENT November 2, 1989 To: Mayor, City Council and Acting City Administra From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistan4L) Subject: Site Visit to Friendly Hills Tot Lot to Liability Hazards of Play Equipment DISCUSSION r Examine On November 2, 1989 Parks Project Manager Guy Kull nder and I visited Friendly Hills Tot Lot to examine the possible liability hazards associated with the play equipment existing on the site. The potential liability of this play equi ment has been a concern of the Parks and Recreation Commission for some time. Many hazards were found and will be listed below. In general, the equipment was rusty and in a bad state f repair. There was no surface or base material beneath the quipment, which exceeds todays height standards, only hard earth nd grass. I have attached some information from the U.S. Consum r Product Safety Commission that explains why the following conditions are liability hazards. MONKEY BARS 1. Numerous protruding rusty bolts 2. Height MERRY GO ROUND 1. Entrapment underneath a possibility 2. Rotting boards, splinters 3. No base material, only hard earth 4. Protruding rusty bolts SWINGS. SLIDE AND CHIN-UP BARS 1. Power lines directly overhead of swings (approx. 4 ft.) 2. Exposed concrete footings underneath play equipme t 3. No base material, only hard earth surface 4. Approximately eight feet high CONCLUSION Staff's conclusion is that this equipment is a accident waiting to happen, and that for the safety of the p blic this equipment should be removed. 3. Playground Injuries The Commission became concerned about the safety of public playground equip- ment after examining the number and kinds of Injuries associated with use of the equipment. A December 1978 CPSC Hazard Analysts, for example, estimates that In 1977 about 93,000 people were treated in hospital emergency rooms for injuries associated with public play- ground equipment. Children 10 years of age or younger suffered 4 out of 5 of the injuries. Some of these injuries were caused when chil- dren were struck by moving pieces of equip- ment such as swings and gliders. Other chil- dren were Injured when they caught an ex- tremity such as a finger at a pivot or pinch point, or ran or fell against protruding bolts, screws or other hardware on the equipment. Seven out of every ten injuries, however, were caused by falls—the most common play- ground accident. The type of surface on the playground was a major factor affecting the number and sever- ity of injuries associated with falls. Falls onto paved surfaces resulted In a disproportionate- ly high number of severe Injuries. While pro- tective surfaces such as wood chips, shredded tires, sand, etc. may not have reduced the num- ber of injuries from falls, these materials may have reduced the severity of the injuries. The following tables presents the estimated percentage of public playground equipment related Injuries according to the manner in which the Injuries occurred: Falls to surface Falls - struck same piece of equipment Fells - from one piece of equipment and struck another piece of equipment Falls -subtotal 59% 11% 72`f6 Impact with moving equipment 7% Contact with protrusions, pinch points, Swings sharp edges and sharp points 5% Fell against, onto or Into stationary 16% equipment 8% Unknown 8% Total 100% (1) Source: NEISS emergency room based special study April 10, 1978. May 1, 1978, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Directorate for Hazard Identification and Analysis. 3 Hazards Relating to the Most Common Types of Public Playground Equipment Traditional categories of playground equipment— swings, slides, seesaws, climb- ers, and merry-go-rounds— are used in many playgrounds throughout the country. The following table.2 compares the estimated Oer- centage of Injuries related to a particular type of equipment with the percentage of that equipment in use: Typical accident patterns associated with these conventional types of public playground equipment are described below. Climbing Apparatus. Falls accounted for 72 percent of the injuries from climbing apparatus such as monkey bars, chinning bars, etc. Vic- tims fell when they slipped, lost their grip or lost their balance. Falls occurred when chil- dren were swinging from rung to rung, per- forming stunts and jumping on, or from, bars. Swings. Sixty-nine percent of the injuries re- lated to swings occurred when children fell or jumped from the swings. Twenty-six percent of the Injuries resulted when the children were struck by a moving swing. Slides. Seventy-eight percent of the injuries on slides were the result of falls over the side, from the platform, and from the ladder. Falls were caused by roughhousing, walking up and down the slide, losing one's grip, slipping, and (2) Source: NEISS emergency room based special study, April 10, 1978 - May 1, 1978 and Consumer Deputy Study of Playground Surfaces, Sep- tember 13, 1978 - October 16,1976, U.S. Con- sumer Product Safety Commission, Director- ate for Hazard Identiflcatlon and Anelyals INJURIES EQUIPMENT. IN USE Climbers 42% 51% Swings 23% 20% Slides 16% 12% Merry-go-rounds 8% 5% Seesaws 5% 6% All other 6% 6% 100% 100°h Typical accident patterns associated with these conventional types of public playground equipment are described below. Climbing Apparatus. Falls accounted for 72 percent of the injuries from climbing apparatus such as monkey bars, chinning bars, etc. Vic- tims fell when they slipped, lost their grip or lost their balance. Falls occurred when chil- dren were swinging from rung to rung, per- forming stunts and jumping on, or from, bars. Swings. Sixty-nine percent of the injuries re- lated to swings occurred when children fell or jumped from the swings. Twenty-six percent of the Injuries resulted when the children were struck by a moving swing. Slides. Seventy-eight percent of the injuries on slides were the result of falls over the side, from the platform, and from the ladder. Falls were caused by roughhousing, walking up and down the slide, losing one's grip, slipping, and (2) Source: NEISS emergency room based special study, April 10, 1978 - May 1, 1978 and Consumer Deputy Study of Playground Surfaces, Sep- tember 13, 1978 - October 16,1976, U.S. Con- sumer Product Safety Commission, Director- ate for Hazard Identiflcatlon and Anelyals losing balance. Other victims hit protruding bolts, struck the slide rim and edge, or slipped on the ladder and struck the steps. Merry-go-rounds. Most of the injuries associ- ated with merry-go-rounds resulted from falls when children either lost their grip and were thrown from the merry-go-round, fell down while pushing It, or fell while riding it. in some instances those who were pushing were struck by the device. Those who fell while on the merry-go-round either struck or were struck by other gripping bars, or struck the base it- self. Seesaws. Although about one out of every six injuries occurred when the victim was hit by a moving seesaw, most injuries resulted from falls. in some cases, the victims were punc- tured by long splinters from worn, poorly maintained or damaged wooden seesaws. Other. Other types of equipment involved in Injuries were spring action riding equipment, rope or tire swings, etc. Typically, falls contri- buted to over half of the injuries associated with this equipment. .y s 4 4, Planning a New Playgr and Surfacing As indicated in the preceding ch apter on playground injuries, falls are the most com- mon type of playground accident.Commis- sion studies show that the majority (fr m 60 to 70 percent) of playground -related inj iries are caused when children fall from the equipment and strike the underlying surface. Nearly half the injuries that result from falls arg to the head, and range in severity from mino bruises to skull fractures, concussions, brain Jamage, and even death. Until recently, little information was avail- able on the relative ability of surfacing materi- als to protect children from head Injuries re- sulting from falls. Therefore, the Corr mission sponsored research by the National B ireau of Standards to develop a method for assessing the energy absorbing characteristics of play- ground surfaces and to test several co monly used surfaces. Analyses of the test results indicE to that, while they may require little maintenance or re- pair, hard surfacing materials such as asphalt and concrete do not provide Injury protection from accidental fail Impacts and are tt erefore unsuitable for use under public playground equipment. More resilient surfacing materials such as bark, wood chips, orshredded t res, for example, appear to provide greater prc tection to a child in the event of a fall. Howeve , these materials require continuous maintennce to retain their optimum cushioning effecti eness. The choice of surfacing material will, of course, be based in part upon local cor ditions and financial considerations. The fo lowing descriptions of some surfacing mated 31s and the environmental conditions which affect them are offered to help planners in wighing the advantages and disadvantages of tarious surfaces. Organic Loose Materials (Pine Bark N i ggets, Pine Bark Mulch, Shredded Hardwooi Bark, Cocoa Shell Mulch). The cushioning p tential of these materials depends upon I he air trapped within and between the individ al par- ticles. Therefore, if materials decompo a and become pulverized over a period of ti e, or mix with dirt, they will tend to lose thei cush- ioning properties. Cushioning protec ion Is also decreased in rainy or humid weathe when the materials absorb moisture and tend t pack down, or if the temperature drops and t e wet The following guidelines for equipment safety were suggested by studies conducted by the National Bureau of Standards for the CPSC. These guidelines are not mandatory re- quirements for the design and construction of public playground equipment, and the Com- mission is not endorsing particular specifica- tions in the guidelines. However, the Commis- sion believes that publishing guidelines in this fashion will promote safer equipment. General Hazards Entrapment. No component or group of com- ponents should form angles or openings that could trap any part of a child's body or a child's head. If part of an accessible opening is too small to allow children to withdraw their heads easily and the children are unable to support their weight by means other than their heads or necks, strangulation may result. Swinging ex- ercise rings (See Figure 1) with diameters of 5 to 10 inches, for example, could present such an entrapment hazard and should be removed. FIGURE 1 Similarly, children might become caught while trying to climb between narrowly spaced hori- zontal bars. If the distance between the bars Is less than the height of a child's head, children will have difficulty rotating their heads back- ward to free them. Clothirfg Entanglement. In general, accessi- ble parts of moving apparatus and compo- nents next to sliding surfaces --ladders and uprights, protective barriers, handrails, etc. -- should be designed so they cannot catch a child's clothing. If clothing is entangled, the 7 equipment's or child's momentum is often great enough to cause loss of balance or an In- jury. Sharp points, corners, and edges; pinch and crush points; protrusions and projections. Playground equipment should present no ac- cessible sharp edges or protruding points or ends that could cut or puncture children's skin or catch their clothing (See Figures 2 and 3). FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 Manufacturers usually provide self-locking nuts or other devices to prevent nut and bolt assemblies from coming apart; these fasteners and exposed ends of bolts should be covered with smoothly finished protective caps which, tl CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Novemberl TO: Mayor and City Council. FROM: James E. Daniels Acting City Admii or q - SUBJECT: Duffy Developer's Agreement nT_QnTTqqTnW - 39 1989 Staff along with the City Attorney have -been working diligently over the past weeks to prepare a Developer's Agreement with the Lexington Square Partnership, John Duffy and Tom Curley. Attached is a copy of a draft Of that agreement along with a cover letter from Tom Hart explaining the several difficult areas of negotiations. f One of the areas of concern during negotiations and a probable first step after approval of the Developer's Agreement is locating the alignment of the frontage road so that the various land swaps between the City and the Developer can be finalized. Staff has agreed to hire a surveyor to locate the frontage road with,the cost to be paid for out of T.I.F. and be deducted from the $450,000 cap.. ACTION REQUIRED: Review the attached proposed Developer's Agreement, Developer uffy will be present for discussion. If Council desires to approve the agreement they should pass a motion authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. If Council approves the agreement staff also requests that they be authorized to hire a surveyor to locate the frontage road. JED:dfw 1� SHERMAN WINTHROP ROBERT R. WEINSTINE RICHARD A. MOEL ROGER D. GORDON STEVEN C. TOUREK STEPHEN J. SNYDER HART KULLER DAVID P. PEARSON THOMAS M. HART IV DARRON C. KNUTSON JOHN A. KNAPP STEPHEN B. YOUNG MICHELE D.VAILLANCOURT DAVID E. MORAN, JR. DONALD J. DROWN JON J. HOGANSON SANDRA J. MARTIN GARY W. SCHOKMILLER TODD B. URNESS SCOTT A DONGOSKE PETER J. GLEEKEL ROBERT S. SOSKIN JEFFREY W. COOK WINTHROP & WEINSTINE ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW 3200 MINNESOTA WORLD TRADE CENTER 30 EAST SEVENTH STREET SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA SSIOI TELEPHONE 16121290-8400 Mr. James E. Danielson, P.E. Public Works Director City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 November 3, 1989 Re: Lexington Square Partnership/Duffy Development Agreement Dear Jim: Enclosed herewith please find a copy of the most recent draft of a Contract Development between the City of Mendota Heights and Lexington Square Part you will note, we have made the revisions to the Agreement which were discl meeting yesterday with Mr. Duffy, his lawyer, Larry Shaughnessy and yourself. As you know, there have been several significant issues which we have attempte( with regarding the structure of the tax increment financing to be supplied to L Square Partnership (the "Developer") by the City. The first major issue is estab of a minimum assessed value. The Agreement contemplates that we will be ente an assessment agreement with the Dakota County Assessor pursuant to which th, will agree that the minimum assessed value, during the balance of the term of increment district, will at all times be $1,250,000. On this basis, it is my under that Larry is comfortable that sufficient taxes will be generated to pay off the which we will be advancing to or for the benefit of the developer over the balan( term of the tax increment district. This should minimize the risk to the City project will not generate sufficient tax revenues to pay back the tax increment I simply because the project is not a success and does not have sufficient tenan mortgagee providing financing in connection with the project will take subjec assessment agreement and will therefore be bound by its terms. In all likelihoo mortgagee should foreclose because Developer fails to make the required r payments, the mortgagee would still be bound to pay the taxes. It is my under that Larry is comfortable, based upon his experience, that if the property for an goes tax forfeit, the City will be reimbursed for the balance of the public impr costs out of the sale price of the property at auction. The second risk which we have attempted to minimize in this Agreement is the any significant damage or destruction, by fire or otherwise, of the development EDWARD J. DRENTTEL DANIEL C. ADAMS JEFFREY R. ANSEL JEFFREY N. SAUNDERS LAURIE A. KNOCKE WILLIAM F. MOHRMAN LLOYD W. GROOMS KENNETH O. ZIGRINO JULIE K. WILLIAMSON MARK T. JOHNSON BETSY J. LOUSHIN BROOKS F. POLEY PATRICIA 1. REDING JULIE W. SCHNELL TIMOTHY R. DUNCAN JOSEPH C. NAUMAN DANIEL C. BECK ERIC J. NYSTROM BRIAN J. KLEIN KRISTIN L- PETERSON JOANNE L. MATZEN DANIEL P. OFSTEDAL JOHN F. APITZ FAX 16121 Z92-9347 Private hip. As I at our to deal ishment ing into parties the tax standing amounts e of the ,hat the nancing s. Any to the 1, if the ortgage standing rreason that erty Y Mr. James E. Danielson, P.E. November 3, 1989 Page 2 will have a material adverse impact upon the developer's ability to repay fhe tax increment financing. We have required, as a condition to the performance of any of the obligations of the City, that the developer's insurance company agree in writing with the City that (i) the City does have an insurable interest in the property to the extent of the unpaid tax increment financing; (ii) the City will be named as a loss payee on the developer's hazard insurance policy; and (iii) the City will have a right to keep the policy in force even if it is to be cancelled as to the developer. We are asking the insurance company to commit at this point to a schedule of premiums for insurance of the City's interest in the property, perhaps with an inflation escalator. As you are also aware, Mr. Duffy has been extremely concerned about the potential handling of any excess costs for the "Public Improvements" over $450,000. The City Council has imposed a $450,000 limit on the City's contribution to the project. Mr. Duffy has agreed that he will waive any right of objection or appeal of the Chapter 429 assessment so long as it does not exceed $50,000. We all understand that if the costs appear to exceed $500,000, we will be sitting down to discuss whether there are ways to scale back the scope of the project to reduce the cost. The final main issue relating to the Development Agreement involves the letter of credit to be supplied by Mr. Duffy. We had previously required a letter of credit for the entire term of repayment of the tax increment financing in an amount equal to the then unpaid balance. Mr. Duffy has indicated that this is simply not feasible for him. He has offered a letter of credit for the actual tax increment (i.e. $31,500 per year), annually renewable for the first five years of the project. Obviously, if the developer fails to renew the letter of credit as promised, we will have a claim against the guarantors. In the event of a default in the obligations of the developer, the developer has agreed that the City may revoke the right of occupancy of the subject property upon thirty (30) days prior written notice. Obviously, this is a drastic remedy and may be subject to contest by the tenants, if not the developer. It is my understanding that this Development Agreement will be submitted to the Council for tentative approval next Tuesday. I will be happy to answer any questions at that time. This Agreement does not comply with the initial directives of the City Council, at least as to the amount of the letter of credit. However, it does represent what Mr. Duffy has described as his "best effort" in this regard. Very truly yours, WINTHROP & WEINSTINE � By - ho M. Hart Js'l TMH/jl Enclosure E CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the day of and between The City of Mendota Heights-Tffie- "Cityll)—,a State of Minnesota, having its principal offices at City Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota and Lexington (the" Developer"), a Minnesota partnership with its W I T N E S S E T H; DRAFT #4 11/3/89 11 I by itatutory -�it—y-7o the Hall, 11C1 Victoria Square Partnership principal office at WHEREAS, the City is a statutory city of the fourth class organized and existing pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of Minneote and is governed by the city council (the "Council") of the City; and 1 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Municipal Development Districts Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 through 469.134, as amended (the "Act"), the Council is authorized to establish development districts In order to provide for the development and redevelopment of the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Minnesota Tax increment Financing Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 (the "Tax Increment Act"), as amended, the Council is authorized to finance the capital and administration costs of a d?velopment district with tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district established within such development district; and WHEREAS, the Council has adopted the Development Program (the "Development Plan") on May 5, 1981 creating Development District Number 1 (the "Development District") pursuant to the Act; and WHEREAS, in connection with the Development Plan the Council of thCity has established a tax increment financing district pursuant to the Tax Increment Act; and I WHEREAS, the Council amended and expanded the tax increment l financing district on April 15, 1986 (collectively, the "Tax Increment District"); and WHEREAS, In order to achieve the objectives of the Development Pla the City is prepared to acquire certain parcels of real property located in th City and convey a portion of such real property to the Developer, and undertake certain demolition and site improvement activities on the parcels acquired by the City all in order to assist in making a proposed development by the Developer more feasible; and WHEREAS, the City believes that the development of the Developme t District pursuant to this Agreement, and fulfillment generally of the terms of this Agreement, are in the best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals and welfare of its residents, and in accord with the public purposes and provisions of applicable federal, state and local laws under which te Program is being undertaken and assisted; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual. obligations of the parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows: ARTICLE I. Definitions Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a differe V t meaning clearly appears from the context: "Act" means the Municipal Development Districts Act, Minnesot Statutes, Sections 469.124-469.134, as amended. "Agreement" means this Agreement, as the same may be from t modified, amended, or supplemented. "City" means the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota. !me to time "Construction Plans" means the plans, specifications, dra ings and documents related to the Development Property and the constr ction work to be performed by the Developer on the Development Property including, but not limited to, the following: (1) as built survey of Development Property, (2) site plan; (3) foundation plan; (4) basement plans; (5) floor plan for each floor; (6) cross sections of each (length and width); (7) elevations (all sides); and (8) facade and landscape plan. "Council" means the city council of the City. "County" means the County of Dakota, Minnesota. "Developer" means Lexington Square Partnership, a partnership, and its successors and assigns. Minnesota "Development District" means the Development District Numbe 11 created by the City pursuant to the Development Plan. "Development Plan" means the Development Program for Development District Number 1 adopted by the Council on May 5, 1981, a the same may be amended. "Development Property" means the real property described in and shown ng on Schedule A of this Agreement consisting of Parcels A throH. "Event of Default" means an action described in Section 9� 1 of this Agreement. "Guarantee Letter of Credit" means the irrevocable letter required to be provided by the Developer pursuant to Section Agreement and issued by a financial institution(s) reasonably to the City and otherwise in form and substance acceptable to t -2- of credit 6.1 of this acceptable he City. "Minimum Improvements" means an approximately 25,000 square foot commercial facility to be constructed by the Developer on a portion of the Development Property. "Project" means the acquisition of the Development Property and construction of the Public Improvements and Developer's Minimum Improvements, collectively, thereon. "State" means the State of Minnesota. "Tax Increment" means that portion of the real estate taxes paid with respect to the Development Property which Is remitted to the City as tax increment pursuant to the Tax Increment Act. "Tax Increment Act" means the Tax Increment Financing Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174-469.179, as amended. "Tax Increment District" means the Tax Increment Financing District Number 1 created and amended by the City pursuant to the Tax Increment Plan adopted in connection with the Development Plan. "Tax Increment Plan" means the Tax Increment Financing Plan adopted by the City on May 5, 1981, In connection with the creation of the Tax Increment District. "Tax Official" means any City or county assessor; County auditor; City, County or State board of equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the State, or any State' or federal district court, the tax court of the State, or the State Supreme Court. "Unavoidable Delays" means delays which are the direct result of strikes, shortages of materials, war or civil commotion, delays which are the direct result of unforeseeable and unavoidable casualties to the Minimum Improvements, the Development Property or the equipment used to construct the Minimum Improvements, delays which are the direct result of, governmental action or inaction beyond the control of Developer, delays which are the direct result of judicial action commenced by third parties, citizen opposition or action affecting the Project or adverse weather conditions, or to any other cause or action beyond the reasonable control of the party seeking to be excused as a result of its occurrence. ARTICLE 11. Representations and Warranties Section 2.1. Representations bX the City. The City makes the following representations as the basis or the undertaking on its part herein contained: a. The City is a statutory city of the State with all the powers of a statutory city of the fourth class duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. Under the provisions of the Act and any other applicable laws, the City has the power to enter into this Agreement and carry out its obligations hereunder. -3- b. The City has created, adopted and approved the Develop in accordance with the terms of the Act. c. The Developer covenants that the cost of the Minimum Irr to be completed on the Development Property (including c costs, architect fees, construction interest, survey fees, soil excluding acquisition of the Development Property) shall be nc One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00) and further cov the initial market value of the Minimum Improvements, when cc the Development Property, will be not less than One Million Tv Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($1,250,000). Developer enter into an assessment agreement, In form set forth on hereto, among the City, Developer and the Dakota County office, agreeing that the above minimum value shall remain in f► the remaining term of the Tax Increment District. District movements ►nstruction esting but less than nants that npleted on Hundred agrees to Exhibit D Assessor's rce during d. The City makes no representations, guaranty or warranty, either express or implied, as to the Development Property, or any portion thereof, its condition, or its suitability for the Developer's purposes or needs or the economic feasibility of the Project. Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties b Developer represents and warrants a the Developer. The a. The Developer is a Minnesota partnership which has duly authorized the execution and implementation of this Agreement through pr per action of its partners. b. in the event the Development Property is conveyed to the (Developer, then the Developer shall operate and maintain the Minimum Improvements in all material aspects in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Development Plan and all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, environmental, zonin , building code and public health laws and regulations provided that the Developer need not comply to the extent any grandfathering provisi n permits noncompliance). c. The Developer is or shall be the owner of the portion of the Development Property on which the Minimum improvements will be constructed. d. The Developer shall construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance with all applicable local, state or federal energy -c nservation laws or regulations. e. The Developer shall obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet, in a timely m neer, all requirements of all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations wWch must be obtained or met before the Minimum Improvements may be lawfully constructed. f. Neither the execution and delivery of this Agree ent, the consummation of the transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement is -4- prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of, the terms, conditions or provisions or any corporate restriction or any evidences of indebtedness, agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Developer is now a party or by which it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing. g. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the purchase price of the Development Property under this Agreement Is substantially less than Its fair market value and further represents and warrants that it would not be able to undertake the Project without the assistance to be provided by the City under this Agreement. h. The Developer shall cooperate with the City with respect Jo any litigation commenced with respect to the Development Plan or the Project. ARTICLE 111. Acquisition and Conveyance of Property; Public Improvements Section 3.1. Description of Land Transactions. The Developer is or will be the fee owner of thatportion ot 5e Development Property on which the Minimum Improvements will be constructed. That portion of the Development Property is referred to herein and shown on the attached Exhibit A as Parcel H. The City and Developer acknowledge and agree that in orc er to make the Developer's development aesthetically attractive it is necessary for certain land transactions and improvements to take place involving the parcels of property adjacent to Parcel H and shown on Schedule A. In that regard, the parties acknowledge that the following land transactions will take place in connection with the Developer's development hereunder; a. Upon the execution of this Agreement; and delivery to and acceptance by the City of: (1) a written report by a recognized environmental consulting and/or testing firm showing to the City's sole satisfaction, as the City in its sole discretion shall determine, that Parcel H, including without limitation, surface water, ground water, soils and improvements located therein, contains no toxic or hazardous substance or waste; and (2) the Guarantee Letter of Credit, and the City shall, subject to Unavoidable Delays and provided no Event of Default has occurred and is continuing hereunder, proceed to acquire Parcels A, B, C, D, E and F as shown on attached Exhibit A, if necessary through the exercise of the City's power of emineFT domain. The City shall use its best efforts to acquire such parcels in order to be able to convey title and possession thereof to the Developer and, upon such events, the Developer agrees to promptly purchase such parcels from the City. b. The City will convey Parcel E to the Developer, pursuant to Section 3.3, for use in connection with the development of the Minimum improvements. c. The City will make application to the Minnesota Department of Transportation ("Mn/DOT"), the owner of Parcel G for conveyance of Parcel G to the City for One Dollar ($1.00). In the interim, Developer will provide to the City, as a condition to the issuance of a building permit for the Project, either: (i) an easement or license pursuant to which Mn/DOT has agreed to allow construction of lot over and across Parcel G for use in connection with the (ii) evidence that the parking facilities otherwise serving the Pr all City requirements. Section 3.2. Timing of Land Transactions. The consummation o transactions refference in section ion .'i—of this Agreement constitute precedent to the City's and Developer's proceeding to und+ development contemplated herein. Parcels B, C, D, E, and F arr owned by one of the general partners of the Developer. The conditions pursuant to which the City will acquire such Parcels s forth in a separate agreement between the City and such owner. agreement a parking Project or oject meet the land conditions -take the presently :erms and all be set Section 3.3. City Conveyance of Parcel E. Immediately upon he City's acquisition of Parceland —the remote - -55T any buildings or improvements existing thereon, the City shall convey Parcel E to the Developer for utilization in connection with the development of the Minimum improvemen s. Such conveyance shall be made by use of a standard warranty deed. The purchase price to be paid to the City by the Developer in exchange for the conveyance of Parcel E shall be $1.00. Section 3.4. Place of Document Execution, Delivery and Recording. a. Unless otherwise mutually agreed by the City and the Dev toper, the execution and delivery of all deeds and the payment of an purchase price shall be made at the offices of Winthrop & Weinstine (counsel to the City), 3200 Minnesota World Trade Center, 30 East Seven h Street, St. Paul, Minnesota, 55101. b. All instruments of conveyance shall be in recordable forrr and shall be promptly recorded in the proper office for the recordation of debts and other -instruments pertaining to the Development Prope ty. The Developer shall pay all costs for such recording. Section 3.5. Title. a. City shall acquire, at Developer's sole expense, a commitmnt for the issuance of an owner's title insurance policy with respect to Pa cel E. b. Within ten (10) days after the City has received said comrr City shall deliver a copy of the commitment to the Develo commitment shall be obtained from a title insurance company lic business in the State and shall insure the title to the is Property up to the amount of the purchase price to be p, Developer to the City. The commitment shall commit the insr issuance of an owner's title insurance policy (ALTA FORM name the City and Developer as the proposed insured partie ceptified to date, include searches for bankruptcies and state judgments, tax and other liens and for all special assessment pending. The commitment shall include full mechanic's lien c available, and coverage for matters revealed by a survey gaps). The Developer shall be allowed twenty (20) days al r� tment, the >er. The nsed to do evelopment id by the rer to the B"), shall , shall be ind federal ; levied or average, if (including ter receipt thereof for examination of said commitment and deliver to the City of a list of objections to title. The City shall use its best efforts to cure any such objections within sixty (60) days. c. The City shall voluntarily take no actions to encumber title to Parcel E between the time the City acquires Parcel E to the timer at which Parcel E is conveyed executed to the Developer. Section 3.6. Acquisition and Develo ment by City. The City agrees that it will, In connection With e Project un er a e certain activities herein as Public Improvements. For purposes of this Agreement, the Public Improvements shall mean the demolition and removal of the existing structures located on Parcels A, D and E. in addition, the Public Improvements shall include the grading and landscaping of such Parcels and the construction of a public frontage road realignment, ail of which are as shown on the Preliminary Development Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The City agrees to use its best efforts to commence and completeco�uction of the Public Improvements will be completed by the time the Minimum Improvements are completed and open for business. The City will also cause the Development Properties, and each of the parcels thereof, to be surveyed by a licensed surveyor. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, the aggregate cost to be paid by the City for the surveying of the Development Property, acquisition of Parcels A, B, C, D and E, the demolition and removal of the existing structures located on Parcels A, D and E and the Public improvements shall not exceed Four Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($450,000) (the "Public improvement Cost"). The Developer hereby acknowledges and agrees that, except as hereinafter set forth, the cost for the above in excess of $450,000 shall be assessed against the Project as a special assessment pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429 with repayment of such excess plus interest at 8% per annum with payments over a period of at least twenty (20) years. The Developer hereby waives notice, hearing and right of appeal with respect to such special assessment so long as such special assessment shall not exceed Fifty Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($50,000.00). If the special assessment does In fact, or is at any time projected to, exceed $50,000, the parties agree to cooperate with one another and negotiate in good faith a reduction in the scope of the Public Improvements or other allocation of the cost thereof. The Developer shall hold the City, harmless pursuant to Section 9.6, from any claim, demand, damages, actions or causes of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the Public Improvements. ARTICLE IV. Construction of Minimum Improvements Section 4.1. Construction of Minimum Improvements. The Developer agrees that it will construct the Minimum improvements on arcel H of the Development Property in accordance with the approved Preliminary Development Plan. IA Section 4.2. Preliminary Development Plan. a. The City has approved the Preliminary Development Plan a by the Developer. b. If the Developer desires to make any material chane Preliminary Development Plan, the Developer shall submit th( change to the City for Its approval. The Developer acknowl upon entering this Agreement, the City in no way waives it final approval of materials and submissions required herein, but not limited to, final plans and specifications and the City reserves its right to deny approval of any plans and permits Developer fail to proceed in accordance with this Agreement ane perform in total compliance with the obligations herein requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance and City's Ordinance and other applicable City codes and ordinances afl Development Plans and/or Development Property. c. Developer's Con'struction of Improvements. The Develol that in connection with Its Deve opmen' 15 an hereunder, th undertake certain activities which are referred to herein as Improvements. For purposes of this Agreement, the Improvements shall mean the creation, maintenance and reps south end of Parcels A, B, C, D and E of a berm with elevatio than those set forth on the grading plan attached hereto as Exi plantings of a double row of coniferous (Black Hill Spruce or trees offset at 25 feet on center planted 5 feet high. Notwithsl above, the Developer agrees to retain and maintain the existinc walls and landscaping on said Parcels until such time of issui Certificate of Completion. In addition, Developer agrees 1 Parcel A as "open space" in a condition satisfactory to Developer shall provide to the City, as a condition to isst building permit, a written covenant in recordable form from th the residential lots immediately south of the Development Proje, above -referenced coniferous threes located on such lot, maintained, replaced if damaged or diseased and will not r without the prior written consent of the City. Section 4.3. Completion of Construction. Subject to Unavoidable Developer sha-Trac leve substantial completion of the construct Minimum Improvements by , 1990. All work with res Minimum Improvements to be constructed or provided by the Dever Development Property shall be done in a good and workmanlike n quality materials and in strict compliance with the Preliminary Devel, as submitted by the Developer and approved by the City. The Developer agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, successor in Interest to the Development Property, or any part th the Developer, and such successors and assigns, shall diligently p completion the development of the Development Property th construction of the Minimum Improvements thereon, and that such c shall in any event be completed within the period specified in this of this Agreement. Prior to the City furnishing the Develop Certificate of Completion pursuant to Section 4.4, the Developer IF -1z submitted e in the proposed edges that right of including, expressly >hould the /or fall to and the ubdivislon acting the er agrees it it shall ieveloper's feveloper's i r on the is not less !bit C and quuivalent) 3nding the screening ice of the maintain the City. ance of a owner of t that the will be a removed slays, the n of the =ct to the er on the nner with iment Plan nd every reof, that )secute to augh the nstruction vection 4.3 r with a shall make reports, in such detail ,and at such times as may reasonably be requested by the City, as to the actual progress of the Developer with respect to such construction. ARTICLE V. Insurance Section 5.1. Development. The Developer shall provide and maintain at all times during process of constructing the Minimum Improvements for the benefit of the Developer and the City and, from time to time at the request of the City, furnish the City with proof of payment of premiums on: (1) Builder's risk insurance, written on the so-called "Builder's Risk -- Completed Value Basis," in an amount equal to one hundred percent (1000 of the replacement value of the Minimum improvements at the date of completion, and with coverage available in nonreporting form on the so-called "all risk" form of policy. (2) Comprehensive general liability insurance (including operations, contingent liability, operations of subcontractors, completed operations and contractual liability insurance) together with an Owner's Contractor's Policy with limits against bodily injury and property damage of not less than $3,000,000 for each occurrence (to accomplish the above -required limits, an umbrella excess liability policy may be used). (3) Worker's compensation insurance, with statutory coverage. (4) Performance bond and labor and material payment bonds in an aggregate amount equal to not less than ninety percent (90%) of the value of the Minimum Improvements; provided, however, that all subcontracts or material contracts in excess of $25,000 shall be covered by such bonds. Section 5.2. Casualty. The Developer shall provide and maintain for the term of the Tax In-c—re—m—e-n—F District, for the benefit of the Developer and the City, and, from time to time at the request of the City, furnish the City with proof of payment on fire and casualty insurance in an amount equal to one hundred percent (1000 of the replacement value of the Minimum Improvements against loss or damage by fire, windstorms, hail, explosion, vandalism, malicious mischief, civil commotion, water leakage and damage of any kind from any nature whatsoever and such other risk or risks of a similar or dissimilar nature and such other coverages as are now, or may in the future be, customarily covered with respect to buildings and improvements similar in construction, general location, use, occupancy and design to the Minimum Improvements. Unless the Public Improvement Cost shall have been paid in full to the City, Developer agrees that if fire or other casualty shall impair the Minimal Improvements, Developer shall repair and restore the Minimal Improvement to as near their condition prior to the fire or other casualty as reasonably possible as soon as possible, subject to delays for causes beyond Developer's reasonable control. Such insurance policy shall be issued by an insurance company reasonably acceptable to the City and shall not be subject to modification or termination without sixty (60) days prior written notice to the City and shall name the City as a loss payee. Within days from and W11 after the date hereof as a condition to any obligation of the City hereunder, Developer shall deliver to the City a written covenant fromDeveloper's Insurance company setting forth the following: (i) acknowledging a d agreeing that the City has and shall continue -to have an insurable interest In the Development Property measured by the unpaid balance of the Public improvement Cost, and (ii) acknowledging and agreeing that, In the event that the subject policy is cancelled or terminated, that City shall have the irrevocable right to keep such policy in effect so long as there remains an unpaid balance of the Public Improvement Cost by paying to suc insurance company annual premiums in accordance with a schedule to be then upplied by such Insurance company and which shall be acceptable to the City. ARTICLE Vi. Tax increment Section 6.1. Tax Guarantee. a. Beginning in calendar year 1992, in the event that the reI property taxes generated by the Development Property in any year i less than $62,500, the City shall provide notice to the Developer of such fact and the amount of the deficiency in taxes. b. The obligation of the Developer to make the payments provided for in this Section 6.1 shall be absolute and unconditional irrespecive of any defense or any rights of setoff, recoupment or counterclair�n it might otherwise have against the City or any other government body or other person; c. Notwithstanding the Guarantee Letter of Credit provided for herein, the Developer agrees and covenants that if for any reaso # the Tax Increment in any calendar year is not sufficient to pay the amortization in equal installments of the Public Improvement Cost over a term of sixteen (16) years (the "Annual Repayment Amount") then Developer and each general partner of the Developer, joint and severally, shall pay, upon demand by the City, to the City the difference betweer the Tax Increment actually derived and the Annual Repayment Amount. d. Prior to delivery to the Developer of the deed to Parcel pursuant to this Agreement, the general partners of the Developer shall deliver to the City a personal guaranty in the form attached as Exh�eoper (the "Guaranty") fully executed by the general partners of the e and guaranteeing performance of the Developer's obligation to pay any short fall in Tax Increment as provided for here in Section 6.1. e. Prior to delivery to the Developer of the deed to Parcel E pursuant to this Agreement, and as security for Developer's guaranty Linder this Section 6.1 the Developer shall also deliver to the City the Guarantee Letter of Credit in a form satisfactory to the City for an amou t equal to $3),500. The Guarantee Letter of Credit shall be available for payments to the City not less than five (5) years from initial issuance arid delivery thereof. Any Guarantee Letter of Credit may have an expirati n at least one year from the date when the City receives the Guarantee Letter of Credit; provided, however, that if such Guarantee Letter of Credit Ma expires prior to a date five (5) years from the delivery of the original Guarantee Letter of Credit, then thirty-five (35) days prior to the expiration date of the Guarantee Letter of Credit, the Developer shall provide a substitute Guarantee Letter of Credit to the City, in the same form and in the same amount, with an expiration date of at least one year from the expiration date of the prior Guarantee Letter of Credit. After five (5) years from and after the date of initial delivery of the Guarantee Letter of Credit, 'Developer shall not be obligated to provide a substitute therefor. Upon tender by the Developer of the substitute Letter of Credit, the City will exchange the prior Guarantee Letter of Credit for such substitute. The City may draw upon the entire amount of the Guarantee Letter of Credit in the event that: (I) the Developer fails to pay any deficiency in taxes pursuant to this Section 6.1; .(1!) the Developer fails to provide a substitute Guarantee Letter of Credit as required in this Section 6.1; or (III) an Event of Default occurs. No draw on the Letter of Credit shall, in and of Itself, constitute a termination of this Agreement or absolve the Developer of Its obligations hereunder. ARTICLE ViI. Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer Section 7.1. Representation as to Development. The Developer further recognizes that, in view o a e importance of the development of the Development Property to the general welfare of the community and (b) the substantial financing and other public aids that have been made available by the City for the purpose of making such development possible, the qualifications and identity of the Developer, are of particular concern to the community and the City. The Developer further recognizes that it Is because of such qualifications and identity that the City is entering into the Agreement with the Developer, and, in so doing, is further willing to accept and rely on the obligations of the Developer for the faithful performance of all undertakings and covenants hereby by it to be performed. Section 7.2. Prohibition Against Transfer of Property and Assignment of Agreement. For the foregoing reasons, the Developer represents and agrees that prior ri to completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements: a. Except only by way of security for, and only for, the purpose of obtaining financing necessary to enable the Developer or any successor in interest to the Development Property, or any part thereof, to perform its obligations with respect to making the Minimum Improvements under the Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by the Agreement, the Developer (except as so authorized) has not made or created, and that it will not, make or create, or suffer to be made or created, any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or lease, or any trust or power, or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to the Agreement or the Development Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the same, without the prior written approval of the City. b. The City shall be entitled to require, except as otherwise provided in the Agreement, as conditions to any such approval that: (I) any -11- proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, as determined by the City, necessary and adequa a to fulfill the obligations undertaken in the Agreement by the Developer 1.or, in the event the transfer is of or relates to part of the Development Property, such obligations to the extent that they relate to such part; (ii) any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory tote City and In form recordable among the land records, shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the City, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Developer under the Agreement and agreed to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Developer is subject (or, in the event the transfer is of or relates to part of the Development Property, such obligations, conditions, and restrictions to the extent that they relate to such part) unless the Developer agrees to continue to fulfill those obligations, in which case the preceding provisions of this Section 7.3(b)(ii) shall not apply: Provided, that the fact that any transferee of, or any other successor in Interest whatsoever to, the Development Property, or any part ther of, shall, whatever the reason, not have assumed such obligations or o agreed, shall not (unless and only to the extent otherwise specifically F rovided in the Agreement or agreed to in writing by the City) deprive or limit the City of or with respect to any rights or remedies or controls w th respect to the Development Property or the construction of th Minimum improvements; it being the intent of this, together with other provisions of the Agreement, that (to the fullest extent permitted by law 3nd equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specificall t provided otherwise in the Agreement) no transfer of, or change with iespect to, ownership in the Development Property or any part thereo , or any Interest therein, however consummated or occurring, an whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate, legally or practically, to deprive or limit the City of or with respect to any rights or remedies or controls provided in or resulting from the Agreement with respe t to the Development Property and the construction of the Minimum Improvements that the City would have had, had there been no such transfer or change; (iII) there shall be submitted to the City for review all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting tra sfer; and if approved by the City, its approval shall be indicated to the Developer in writing. In the absence of specific written agreement by the City to the contrary, no such transfer or approval by the City thereof shall be deemed to relieve the Developer, or any other party bound in any way by the Agreement or otherwise with respect to the construction of t e Minimum Improvements, from any of its obligations with respect thereto or from any of its other obligations under this Agreement. ARTICLE VIIi. Events of Default r Section 8.1. Events of Default Defined. The term "Event of De mean, whenever it is used in M5greement (unless the contex- provides): an ult" shall otherwise a. Failure by the Developer to commence and complete the Development Plan on or before in strict performance with the terms, conditions, and limitations of s Agreement; b. Failure by the Developer at any time before the Certificate of Completion Is Issued to strictly observe or perform any Sovenant, condition, obligation, or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement and the continuance of such failure for thirty (30) days after written notice thereof from the City; c. A petition of bankruptcy is filed naming the Developer as debtor, and such petition is not dismissed within ninety (90) days of the date of filing thereof; d. Failure of the City to observe or perform any covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be observed or performed hereunder. Section 8.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default occurs, in addition to all other remedies available to the City at law or in equity or elsewhere in this Agreement (1) the City may suspend its performance under the Agreement until it receives assurances from the Developer, deemed adequate by the City, that the Developer has cured its default and will continue its performance under the Agreement, and (2) the City may take any one or more of the following actions after provision of (30) days written notice to the Developer (and, in the case of 8.2.e. below, to the tenants of the Development Property as well) of the Event of Default by the City, but only if the Event of Default has not been cured within said (30) days, the Developer does not provide assurances to the City reasonably satisfactory to the City that the Event of Default will be cured as soon as reasonably possible: a. The City may withhold the Certificate of Completion. b. The City may draw on the Guarantee Letter of Credit. c. The City may enforce the Developer's guarantee provided to the City pursuant to this Agreement. d. The City may terminate this Agreement. e. The City may revoke the right of Developer and/or any tenants of the Development Property to occupy the same. Section 8.3. Other Use of Development Property UponDefault. if, prior to conveyance of the Development Property toto the�'eve—Toper, an went o of Default occurs and is not cured within thirty (30) days (or satisfactory assurances deemed adequate by the City that the Event of Default will be cured are not provided by the Developer to the City) then the City shall have no further obligation to transfer title to the Development Property to the Developer pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, and the City shall be free to retain or dispose of the Development Property as it shall determine. Section 8.4. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the ity�or Developer is Intended to be exclusive of any other -13- available remedy or remedies, but each and every such tamed cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy givenunder shall be this agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by s atute. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon ny default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to b a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. In order to entitle the City or the Developer to exercise any remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be required by this Article VIII. Section 8.5. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement contained n thisAgreement shoul a breacheEr by eithe party and thereafter waived by the other party, such waiver shall be limi ed to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive ( any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. ARTICLE IX. ' .. .11. ILifiMPROJIM Section 9.1. Conflict of interests• City Representatives Not ndividuali Liable. No member, o icia , or employee ot the City shiRl have any persona inTerest, direct or indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to the Agreement which affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he is, directly or indirectly, interested. No member, official or employee of the City shall be personally li ble to the Developer, or any successor in interest, in the event of any defaui or breach by the City or for any amount which may become due to the D veloper or successor or on any obligations under the terms -of the Agreement except in the case of willful misconduct. Section 9.2. Restrictions on Use. The Developer shall not discri mate upon the basis of race, co or, cree , sex or national origin in the sale, lease, or rental or in the use or occupancy of the Development Property or any Improvements erected or to be erected thereon, or any part thereof Section 9.3. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of this Agreement are n eennc ed to orhall be merged by reason of any deed transferring any interest in the Development Property and any suc deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the provisions and covens is of this Agreement. Section 9.4. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and Sections of the Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions. Section, 9.5. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly this Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication Agreement by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail, postage prep receipt requested, or delivered personally! and -14- provided in under the rr delivered aid, return a. in the case of the Developer, is addressed to or delivered personally to the mailing or delivery address the Developer will, from time to time, furnish to the City; and b. in the case of the City, is addressed to or delivered personally to the City at 1101 Victoria Curve, Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 or at such other address as the City may, from time to time, designate In writing and forward to the Developer. Section 9.6. Indemnification. Developer agrees, that anything to the contrary herein notwithstanding, the City and its agents, officers, council members or employees shall not be liable or responsible in any manner to the Developer, the Developer's contractors, material men, laborers or to any other person or persons whomsoever, for any claim, demand, damages, actions or cause of action of any kind or character arising out of or by reason of the execution of this Agreement, the transaction contemplated hereby, the acquisition, construction, installation, ownership and operation of the Project, the Public Improvements and/or Development Property. The Developer will indemnify and save the City harmless from any and all claims, demands, damages, actions or causes of action or the cost of disbursements, and the expenses of defending the same, specifically including, without intending to limit the categories of such costs, costs and expenses for City administrative time and labor, cost of engineering and planning services, and cost of all legal services rendered, and other direct out-of-pocket expenses incurred, in connection with defending such claims as may be brought against the City for acts, directly or indirectly related to occurring at or about, or resulting or arising from the Public Improvements, Development Property and/or Development Property. In addition, the Developer agrees to reimburse the City for any and all costs and expenses, including without limitation attorney fees, paid or incurred by the City in connection with or relating to: enforcing performance of any covenant or obligation of any party under either this Agreement or the Guaranty. Section 9.7. Covenants. All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations ofi the City contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the City and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant, employees, independent contractor, consultant and/or legal counsel of the City. Section 9.8. Governing Law. The City and Developer agree that this Agreement shat a governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota and acknowledge that this Agreement is the type of agreement described in Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176(5). Section 9.9. Time is of the Essence. Time shall be of the essence in this Agreement. Section 9.10. Termination. The parties acknowledge and agree that either party hereto mayterm n� ate this Agreement, whereupon neither party shall have liability hereunder, upon the giving of 10 days written notice of its intention to so terminate the Agreement upon the occurrence of any of the following: a. The Developer has failed to obtain a written commitment for mortgage or other financing sufficient to construct the Minimum improvements by am February 28, 1990 and proof thereof has not been presentd to and approved by the City prior to such date. b. The City has failed to reach agreements with the presentowners of those portions of the Development Property which the City is o ligated to acquire hereunder by December 31, 1989. Section 9.11. Counterparts. This Agreement is executed In any (number of counterparts, each ot which shall constitute one and the same Instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has caused this Agreement t be duly executed in its name and behalf and its seal to be hereunto duly affixed and the Developer has caused this Agreement to be duly executed on or, as of the date first above written. THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By I Attest: Its City er LEXINGTON SQUARE PARTNERSHIP MD -2 EXHIBIT Form of Guaranty In order to induce the City of Mendota Heights, Minnesota (the 11(fity"), to pay the "Public Improvement Costs," as that term Is defined in that certain Development Agreement dated , 1989 (the "Development Agreement") by and between the City and tFe proceeds of which will benefit Lexington Square Partnership, a Minnesota partnership (the "Developer"), the undersigned hereby unconditionally and absolutely jointly and severally guarantee payment to the City of (i) the Public Improvement Costs and (ii) any and all other sums payable by the Developer in accordance with the terms of the Development Agreement. No notice of any renewal, compromise or extension of the Development Agreement or of any modification in the terms of the same need to be given to the undersigned, who hereby consent to each of such acts. The undersigned hereby expressly waive presentment, demand, notice of nonpayment, protest and notice of protest on any obligation and also acceptance of this guaranty. The undersigned agree that possession of this instrument of guaranty by the City shall be conclusive evidence of due delivery hereof by the Developer. This guaranty shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Minnesota, in which state it shall be performed by the undersigned. Dated this day of , 1989. EXHIBIT A (Parcel H) I x .! coooll— z �, EXHIBIT B (Preliminary Development Plan) EXHIBIT D 10 (Assessment Agreement) 300 1111hL) HVLrNUt"u•1G. • ovi l t k vo • 1hVO4 W V VW 0t4U1u%1: • r.V. OVA LV 4i _.__.--____-___.._-_____-_____.._r.-.-_____.._..._____---I-..._..__..____._..._-----__I------- N0V- ?-8S FR 1 1 2: @6 0 P _ �<^• PENDLE HANSEN BAGNE, INC INSURANCE - BONDS "The Name You Know W The Service You Trus!" f T November 20 1989 Mr. John buffy Duffy Development 10850 County Road 15 Plymouth, Mn, SS441 RE: Lexington Square Shopping Center Mendota Heights Dear John, You asked me to write you a letter outlining how we could structure insurance for the Lexington Square Shopping Centr project to satisfy conoerns brought up by the oity of Mond to Heights regarding their tax increment financing. My suggestion is that there aro throe options available to the city which should protect them,from ineuranoo problems regording their tax increment financing. First would be a thirty day notioe of cancellation of the Policy for the city. You said they were more Interested in a slx y day notice and I think that can be arranged, however a thirty day notice is far more common. Secondly, we could name the city as a lose payee on the poicy. That way, in the event of a loss the draft for payment of he loss.would bo made payable to the insured as well as any 1 as payees and the mortgagees on the policy, And lastly, since the city has in essence financed part of the building, they have inaurable interest in the building and they could choose to insure the building themselves. 1 believe that these three things would protect the city v ry adequately for their interest which would be generated by he tax inoraments. If you nava any further questions or comments, Johne pleas give me a call. SincereY yours, 9oott Bagne SO/bb CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Danie Acting City AdqiAlator SUBJECT: Braslau Contract DISCUSSION: November 3, 1989 Last meeting Council reviewed a proposal from David Braslau t consulting services to assist the City in implementing the airport proposal (the fanned corridor). Mr. Braslau's original proposal i total of 21 tasks with a budget of $48,088. Council directed Mr. reduce his proposal to include only the first ten tasks, which tak process up to the implementation of the 180 day test. Attached is Mr. Braslauls proposal amended to reflect Council' guidance. Also attached is a copy of a letter from Mr. Braslau to requesting to be on their December agenda to "get the ball rolling" ACTION REQUIRED: Review David Braslauls proposal and if COuncil desires to ap agreement pass a motion authorizing the Acting City Administrator the agreement on behalf of the City. Mr. Braslau will be present any questions regarding his proposal. JED:dfw provide oise luded a aslau to the e the execute answer david braslau dbassociates, incorporated 1313 5th street s.e. • suite 322 • minneapolis, mn. 55414 • telephone. 6121331-4571 22 Oc James E. Danielson, P.E. Director of Public Works City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 RE: Letter of Agreement for Professional Services - Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor System - MASAC Process Dear Jim: ber 1989 In accordance with the discussion at the City Council meeting of 0 tober 17, 1989, I have prepared this letter of agreement which includes press tation of the Corridor to MASAC through development of a 180 -day test. This effort includes Tasks 1 through 10 of our proposal submitted to you on October 12, 1989 (included here as Attachment A) and work estimat d through August 1990. As noted in our proposal (Attachment A), the task level of effort and schedule are estimated only and may change depending upon what is required during the process. The total cost estimate for the ten month period November 1989 through August 1990 is $14,688. I would propose that this agreement between the City of Mendota Heights and David Braslau Associates, Inc. for profes- sional services through development of the 180 -day test be limited 4o $15,000. If the work described in our proposal is no longer needed because of actions taken by MASAC, the MAC, or the FAA, it is understood that this ag eement can be modified or terminated by the City of Mendota Heights with written notice. This letter will serve as an agreement between the City of Mendota I David,Braslau Associates, Inc. to perform the work described above s by you as a representative of the City and myself as a representatii Braslau Associates, Inc. Asingerely, Agreed to by y David Braslau James E. Danielson President Acting City Administrator Date ights and en signed of David In ATTACHMENT A PROPOSED FOLLOW-THROUGH PROGRAM EAGAN/MENDOTA HEIGHTS CORRIDOR PROPOSAL Submitted by David Braslau Associates, Inc. with Robert Collette, Air Traffic Consultant INTRODUCTION This proposal covers the level of effort which may be needed to carry the revised Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor System through to approva by the Federal Aviation Administration. The steps identified here are based upon those developed for evaluation of the Runway Use System which is considered to be the appropriate procedure to be followed. This begins with a formal presentation to MASAC of the proposal and is completed with FAA ad ption of the procedure or a modified version thereof. ANTICIPATED WORK PROGRAM The following tasks are anticipated: TASK I Prepare Formal Presentation to MASAC This will build upon presentations to date and recommi from MASAC representatives to ensure adequate coverag proposal. TASK 2 Presentation to MASAC lations of the The proposal will be presented to MASAC, tentatively ate Decem- ber 5, 1989 meeting. TASK 3 Participate in MASAC Operations Committee Robert Collette will request to be assigned to the HASAp Opera- tions Committee to participate in discussions of the proposal. ' DBA will provide assistance as necessary. . TASK 4 Interim Liaison with Mendota Heights Depending upon the course of deliberations at the Operations Com- mittee, further input or reaction from Mendota Heights may be necessary. r TASK 5 Operations Committee Presentation to MASAC The meeting at which the presentation is made to the will be attended. TASK 6 MAC Operations and Environment Committee Meetings MASAC Continued deliberations and refinement of the proposal s likely at this stage. Participation at some of these meetin s is an- ticipated. TASK 7 Interim Liaison with Mendota Heights This task provides for additional input and reaction t the MAC committee deliberations. TASK 8 MAC meetings to finalize and adopt the proposal MAC meetings will be attended as necessary to suport the proposal. TASK 9 Assist/Support MAC recommendations to the FAA Additional information may be needed or helpful at this stage to provide support of the MAC recommendations to carry out 180 -day test of the proposed Corridor System. TASK 10 Assist in development of 180 -day test This will involve location of monitors, data to be colle ted, and procedures to be followed during the 180 -day test. Someork from this task may be needed for the meetings described above. TASK 11 Monitor test results during the test During the test, it would be helpful to continuously mo itor the results and provide interim information to Mendota Height . TASK 12 Test results evaluation The test results will be evaluated in terms of effectiveness in reducing or redistributing -noise impacts over Mendota Hei hts. TASK 13 Report to Mendota Heights on Test It is proposed that a formal report to the City Council on the test results be made. TASK 14 Participate in MASAC Operations Committee As the Operations Committee reviews and evaluates thet st data, Robert Collette will continue to participate as needed ith sup- port from DBA. TASK 15 Participate in Public Meetings Public meetings will be held by MASAC to discuss the test and solicit input. It would be helpful if these meetings tended. TASK 16 Operations Committee Presentation to MASAC results were at - The meeting at which the presentation is made to the full MASAC will be attended. TASK 17 MAC Operations and Environment Committee Meetings Continued deliberations and evaluation of the test is likely at this stage. Participation at some of these meetings is an- ticipated. TASK 18 Interim Liaison with Mendota Heights Additional input from Mendota Heights may be solicited during this stage. TASK 19 Final Public Meetings Final public hearings will be held by MAC before the pl in can be adopted. Attendance at these meetings would be helpful. TASK 20 MAC meetings to finalize and adopt the plan Attendance at MAC meetings to finalize and adopt the p an would also be helpful. TASK 21 Documentation of the Process and Plan Documentation of the process and final plan will be prepa ed. MASACPRO.WK1 MEND HIS 03 PROPOSED WORK TASK TO CARRY THROUGH THE CORRIDOR SYSTEM PROPOSAL TASK DESCRIPTION DH Hours RC Hours Asst Hrs EXPENSES REMARKS ----- ----------------------------- -------- 1 Prepare for MASAC Presentation -------- 6 --------- 4 -------- 8 50 --------------- Visuals/text/pre-meeting contacts 2 MASAC Presentation 3 3 20 Formai presentation of proposal 3 Operations Committee Meetings 4 24 6 100 Attendance at meetings/related work 4 L£ason with Mendota Heights 6 2 4 50 Progress reports/liason with Mendota Heights 5 Ops Presentation to MASAG 2 2 20 MASAC meeting where Ops committee makes recommendations 6 MAC OLE Committee Meetings 4 12 4 50 OLE committee meetings/related work 7 Liason with Mendota Heights 6 2 4 50 Progress reports/liason with Mendota Heights 8 MAC Meetings 8 8 20 Attend MAC meetings/related discussions 9 MAC recommendations to FAA 2 4 20 Review recommendations from Mendota Heights viewpoint 10 180 -day test Development 16 16 24 200 Help develop test procedures/noise monitoring 11 Test Monitoring 48 48 80 500 Monitor results during test period 12 Test Evaluation 48 48 80 500 Evaluate operations/noise impacts and benefits 13 L£ason with Mendota Heights 6 2 4 50 Progress reports/liason with Mendota Heights 14 Operations Committee Meetings 4 24 6 100 Attendance at meetings/related work 15 Public meetings 6 6 2 20 Attend public meetings 16 Ops Presentation to MASAC 2 4 20 MASAC meeting where Ops committee makes recommendations 17 MAC OLE Committee Meetings 4 12 4 20 OLE committee meetings/related work 18 Liason with Mendota Heights 6 2 4 50 Progress reports/liason with Mendota Heights 19 Public Meetings 4 4 2 20 Attend public meetings 20 MAC Meetings 8 8 20 Attend MAC meetings/related discussions 21 Reports/documentation 18 12 24 200 Prepare interim reports and documentation for City Council TOTALS 211 247 256 HOURLY RATES $90 r $70 r $38 r4;2,080 Average hourly rate for Technical/Administrative Assistants TOTAL ESTIMATED BUDGET $48,088 david braslau associates, incorporated 1313 5th street s.e. • suite 322 • minneapolis, mn. 55414 • telephone: 61 2-:331-4571 31 October 1989 Walter Rockenstein, Chairman Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council c/o Faegre & Benson 2500 Norwest Center 90 South 7th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402-3901 RE: Request for Placement on MASAC Agenda Dear Mr. Rockenstein: The City of Mendota Heights has asked that our firm make a prese tation to MASAC on a revised proposal for the Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor a the ear- liest possible convenience. Formal approval of our agreement to represent the City in this effort will be considered at the November 7, 1989 Council Meeting. I will confirm this with you or let you know immediately if there are any changes in the current plan. In the meantime, I would like to request that we be placed on the genda of the MASAC meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 5, 1989 or the January 1990 meeting, if you feel that would be more appropriate. The presentation would constitute a formal submittal to MASAC of the City of Mendota Height proposed Eagan/Mendota Heights Corridor System adopted by the City Council at their meeting of October 3, 1989. The presentation would be made by myself and Robert Collette, Air Tr ffic Con- sultant, and would involve use of an overhead projector which we could provide if necessary. The presentation would provide a quick background of •the proposal and -the reasons for each of its elements. I assume that some repre- sentatives of the City of Mendota Heights other than the MASAC rept sentative may wish to attend the meeting. We will also request at that time that Robert Collette be appointed as an interim member of the MASAC Operations Committee should MASAC accept the proposal for review. Attached is a copy of the resolution as adopted by the Mendota Heights City Council. It may be more appropriate to use a signed version if this is to be included in a mailing to MASAC representatives. Please let me know if you have any questions and we look forward to the opportunity to appear before MASAC. Sincerely, David Braslau President cc: James Danielson, City of Mendota Heights Robert Collette r coincide with a regular Council meeting, and two Mondays, November 20th and December 4th are taken as well. At the direction of Council, the City's Department heads have met and prepared potential budget cuts at the 3%, 5% and 7% levels. The original budget as proposed was austere, and the potential cuts would have a dramatic impact on the City's operations. If Council wishes to consider budget reductions at the 3, 5, and 7% levels, staff requests that a second workshop be held with the department heads. This would provide an opportunity for Council and staff to discuss the cuts and their impact on City operations. It is not anticipated that there will be many, if any, residents appearing at the City's public hearing. Staff therefore suggests that Council consider rescheduling its December 5th meeting to Wednesday, December 6th and conduct the hearing on the December 6th agenda. We also suggest that Council establish Wednesday, December 20th as the alternate. If the levy is not adopted on December 6th, Council should be prepared at that hearing to reschedule the December 19th meeting. Revisions have been made in the proposed budget to reflect the changes discussed at the Council budget workshop. If Council chooses to conduct a second workshop as recommended by staff, it should be held enough in advance of the hearing to allow staff to prepare revisions and compile proposed budget copies for distribution to Council on December 1st. The document must be available to the public prior to the hearing. All of the Tuesdays in November are committed to Council or Commission meetings. Acting Administrator Danielson will be out of town from November 14th through the 17th. We therefore recommend that the workshop be conducted on Monday, November 13th, at 6:00 P.M. ACTION REQUIRED Several actions are required. They are: 1. Motion to rescind Resolution No. 89-109, "Resolution Amending Tentative 1989 Levy Collectible in 1990,11adopted on September 19, 1989, and to adopt the proposed "Resolution Amending Tentative 1989 Levy Collectible in 1990. 2. Motion to reschedule the December 5th meeting to Wednesday, December 6th. 3. Motion to schedule a public hearing on the proposed levy at 7:45 P.M. on December 6th. 4. Motion to schedule a budget workshop (if desired) for 6:00 P.M. on November 13th or at a date and time more convenient to Council. d CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 89 - RESOLUTION AMENDING TENTATIVE 1989 LEVY COLLECTIBLE IN 7990 WHEREAS, the 1988 State Tax Law requires the City o Mendota Heights to certify a tentative tax levy for the ear 1990 prior to November 5, 1989; and WHEREAS, the levy may be adjusted prior to December 28, 1989, 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 ir the year 1990: General Fund $1,902,384 Emergency Preparedness 1,500 Fire Relief 12,650 Infra Structure Reserve 50,000 Watershed District 35,000 Total General Levy Subject to Limitation $2,001,534 Special Debt Levies MWCC Sewer Debt 30,000 Equipment Certificate 152,000 Park Bonds 55,000 Improvement Bonds 17,400 $ 254,400 Total Tentative Levy $2,255,934 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the levy shall be amended following budget hearings to reflect the adopted City budget. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Tentative Tax Resolution No. 89- is hereby rescinded. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heigh this seventh day of November, 1989. CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS r By Charles E. Mertensotto Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO October 30, 1989 TO: Mayor, City Council, Acting City Admini r. FROM: Klayton Eckles Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Furlong Area Street Repairs DISCUSSION At the last City Council meeting, Council directed Staff check into the possibility of getting MnDot to reconstru the turn radii at the interestions of Lakeview, Furlong, Kendon, and Victory with Highway 55. MnDot has informed Staff that the state might be willing to perform the construction, but all costs for doing so woull be charged to the City. Since all the black top work has be n completed on their project, it would require the state's contractor to come back to do the work (which means a cha ge order) . If Council does want the work done despite the fact it can't be done at no charge, then Staff would be inclined to recommend that the repairs be completed as a separate project by purchase order. The City could then assess the costs Dr just absorb them (absorbing them would be contrary to our proposed rehabilitation plan). The cost of the improvements are estimated at about $5,00 There is no recommendation at this time, Staff reequests Council direct Staff on the next course of action. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO October 30, 198 TO: Mayor, City Council, City Admi4s or FROM: Klayton Eckles Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Sewer Availability Charge Refunds DISCUSSION Mr. Jim Schwartz, 1286 Kendon Lane, has requested that the city refund his SAC charge for the sewer service that he never received. Normally this would be an unusual reque t, but Staff has learned that the Metro Waste Control Commi sion (which requires the SAC charges) has a new policy in pla e which entitles a refund to those on septic systems that aid a SAC charge. From 1973 to 1986 the MWCC policy required all building permits to pay a SAC charge. Now the MWCC only requires a SAC charge when a connection is made to the sewer. Therefore the MWCC is allowing cities to request a refund on all SAC charges that were paid on septic systems installed between 1973 and 1986 and are still in place. If a refund is given, the homeowner will have to pay a SAC charge if and when the septic is converted to a sanitary sewer system. There are about 11 residences in Mendota Heights which mm -et these criteria; four along Dodge Lane, three along Delaware, and four in the Furlong area. It seems appropriate to give a refund to the homeowners 3ince .t -herr its highly unlikely there will ever be sewer in th se areas. There is no cost to the city if a refund is give other than the Staff time required to process the refund. A refund would also make the bookkeeping easier. In order to get the refunds processed, a formal request must be initiated by the City Council. The only difficulty in giving the SAC refunds is the possibility that someone may be overlooked. If we happea to miss someone who is eligible, we would be pressed to res and to their requests for a refund after the fact (when we can no longer receive any more money from the MWCC). Staff recommends Council make a formal request to the that it give a SAC refund. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO ACTION REQUIRED If Council wishes to request that the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission give Sewer Availability Charge refund, should pass a motion adopting RESOLUTION 89 RESOLUTIO] REQUESTING THE METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION REFI ALL ELIGIBLE SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGES IN THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS. • , it City of Mendota Heights Dakota County, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 89 - RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISS REFUND ALL ELIGIBLE SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGES IN THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has implemeed a new policy of refunding sewer availability charges to residents on reptic systems; and WHEREAS, residents of Mendota Heights have requested a refund;1and WHEREAS, these residents reside in areas that may never recei sanitary sewer. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Mendota Heights formal requests that the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission refund the ity of Mendota Heights all Sewer Availability Charges on to the residences that paid one between 1973 and 1986, and are still on a septic system. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mendota Heights this 7th November, 1989. I CITY COUNCIL CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS By - Charles E. Mertensotto-, ATTEST: Kathleen M. Swanson, City Clerk day of 11 October 19, 1989 Mayor Mertensotto City of Mendota Heights Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor and Council Members, It is with deep regret that I resign from the Parks Commi! ;sion. Working on the Parks Commission the past four yea, h7Tb en a real growth experience for me and very rewarding. particularly proud to have been involved in championing t e passage of the recent park referendum. Right now however, a time commitment is a problem for me. I can't devote the time that I believe should be devoted -10 the Park Commission. I would like to take a sabbatical aid someday return to finish a personal 10 year commitment to the Park Commission. I'll miss the espirit de corps of the commission. They'r a wonderful group of people to work with. This is not good-bye, only Auf Weidersehen. c: John Huber M Sincerely, A7)a. -tJ C� - Bev Lachenmayer 10010 a7 November TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Ds Acting Cit ator SUBJECT: CommissionTApointments DISCUSSION: There are two vacancies on the City's Commission to be filled. The vacancies have been advertised in th below). It has been Council's past practices to intery interested candidates before making a selection. If Co wants to continue with that practice, they should set a the interviews. James Awada William Healey Steven Kleinglass ACTION REQUIRED Establish a for the Planning suggests that we for interviews. JED:mlk Applicants received to date: selection procedure for appointing new and Park and Recreation Commission. S - could begin the November 17th meeting AHts* see for C0111Miss1ons When Mendota Heights selected Burton Anderson Oct. 10 to fill the council seat 1 left by Elizabeth Witt's resignatiWa vacancy sl�Tated an'the planning Commission. The city is now trying to fill that commission seat, and another vacancy anticipated �.-- .on the Parks and Rec Commission. • - - Volunteers to serve on these bodies are asked to app- ly by mail to Mayor Cha le Mer Building,ng,1101 Victoria Curve, S Mendota Heights, 55118. Application deadline is 4 p.m., Friday, Nov. 10. 3, 1989 hat need Sun (see cil ime for members :aff it 6:30 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November 1, 19 To: Mayor, City Council and Acting City Atr' From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistan(� Subject: Review of LMC Legislative Policies and Des Voting Delegate DISCUSSION for P nation of The League of Minnesota Cities will be holding its annual legislative adoption conference on Thursday, November 15th at the Hotel Sofitel in Bloomington. I have attached a re istration form that describes the program and agenda. Anyone int rested in registering should contact me. The LMC has sent us a 1990 Proposed City Policies and Priorities document for us to review prior to our voting at the adoption meeting. Because this document is 90 pages long, I have not provided copies for each Councilmember. If you wi h to have a copy please contact me. The Council will need to designate a voting delega Legislative Conference. In past years we have provid with an opportunity to review the proposed policies, questions about those legislative policies and to give to the voting delegate. However, because of the tim: council meetings and the conference we will have to ro designee to review the legislative proposals and t feedback from Councilmembers. ACTION REQUIRED To designate a voting delegate for the Conference, and to discuss with and give directives to delegate on any legislative policy that may be of concern to Council. 0 :e for the d Council raise any lirections ng of our ly on our i receive islative e voting Brest or League of Minnesota Cities October 20, 1989 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, MN 55101.2526 (612) 227-5600 (FAX: 221.0986) TO: Mayors, Managers, and Clerks FROM: Donald A. Slater, Executive Director RE: 1990 Proposed Legislative Policies and Priorities I am very pleased to transmit to you a copy of the League of Minnesota Cities' 1990 Proposed Legislative Policies and Priorities. These policies will be considered for final adoption by the membership at the League's Policy Adoption Meeting on November 16, 1989, at the Hotel Sofitel in Bloomington. An agenda and registration form are attached for your information. The League of Minnesota Cities owes a great debt to the dedicated city officials who worked as members of the League's policy committees on the 1990 legislative policies. They spent many hours developing this policy document. The Legislative Committee, which is comprised of the board of directors and each policy committee chair, reviewed and approved the committee's recommendations. The Legislative Committee sends the 1990 Proposed Policies and Priorities to the membership for their consideration. I strongly encourage your city to attend the Policy Adoption Meeting on November 16. The meeting begins with sessions on environmental issues (at 9:00 a.m.), open meeting law (at 9:45 a.m.), and property tax legislative issues (at 10:30 a.m.). Come to hear first hand from legislators what their plans will be for the 1990 session. The Policy Adoption Meeting will.conclude,with the policy adoption session which begins at 1:45 p.m. To register for the Policy Adoption Meeting, please return the attached registration form to the League of Minnesota Cities, c/o Finance Department, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101. _= OVER =_ League of Minnesota Cities Policy Adoption Meeting Thursday, November 16, 1989 Name Title Address Zip Code Registration per person: $25.00 Make checks payable and - MAIL TO: Leaeue of MInnesota Cities.183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101 Housing reservation farm MAIL TO: League or Minnesou Cities 5601 W. 78th Street Policy Adoption Mt eting Minneapolis, MN 55435 -3899 November 16, 19 89 (612) 835-1900 To insure spacelrate availability, please respond prior to Name November 1, 1989. -' Representing Please specify: 65 + Tax Singl (One Person) Address 65 + Tax Doub a (Two People) City State Zip I will arrive after 4:00 p.m. Please guarantee the reservation with: Month Der Yeo AnirdT=r Month Day Year (Credit Card) Number and Expiration Date Artird thte Depanwe Date Check in time 3:00 p.m. Check out time 12:00 noon P11011c: { } Hotel SoCtel, Minneapolis 8:011 u.tn. Registration 12:011-1:45 p.m. Lunch -- Transportation issues Commissioner Len Levine, mpatinient or 9:1111.9:45 a.m. Environmental Issues Transportation Commissioner Gerald Willet, Pollution Control 2:00-4:30 Adoption of LMC leglsl tive Apency p.m. policies Mike Robertson, Director, Office of Waste Opening remarks -• LhiC Pre idem Millie MacLcod. Management Councitmemher, oorliead Adoption of rales governing ie polity adoption 9:45-10:15 a.m. Open meeting law meeting Mark Anfinnson, Counsel, Minnesota Newspaper Consideration or proposed legislative policies and Association priorities Senator Randy Peterson " 1. Development strategies 2. Elections and edi' s 3. General lcgislatioi i and personnel 10:15-10:30 a.m. Break 4. Land use, energy, rnvironment. and transportation 111:311-11:45 a.m. Property tax issues 5. Revenue sources G. reder.il legislativ Due to the uncertainty in die property tax area, die Lcaguc is unable to provide tentative speakers for the Other business property tax issues session. Our goal is to have the chairs of die House and Senatc Tax Committees. Adjournment • invited to s eak LMC Policy Adoption Registration Form November 16, 1989 Rote Soiitel, Minneapolis City: Contact Person: Telephone N Name Title Address Zip Code Registration per person: $25.00 Make checks payable and - MAIL TO: Leaeue of MInnesota Cities.183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101 Housing reservation farm MAIL TO: League or Minnesou Cities 5601 W. 78th Street Policy Adoption Mt eting Minneapolis, MN 55435 -3899 November 16, 19 89 (612) 835-1900 To insure spacelrate availability, please respond prior to Name November 1, 1989. -' Representing Please specify: 65 + Tax Singl (One Person) Address 65 + Tax Doub a (Two People) City State Zip I will arrive after 4:00 p.m. Please guarantee the reservation with: Month Der Yeo AnirdT=r Month Day Year (Credit Card) Number and Expiration Date Artird thte Depanwe Date Check in time 3:00 p.m. Check out time 12:00 noon P11011c: { } 183 University Ave. East St. Paul, AIN 55101.2526 League of Minnesota Cities (612) 227-5600 (FAX: 221.0986) LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES POLICY ADOPTION MEETING RULES 1. Registration. Registration shall remain open from the previously announced opening of conference registration until completion of policy adoption. 2.Voting Privileges only one delegate per city shall be permitted to vote on-policy. proposals, priorities, or motions. Each current LMC member city shall designate one official as delegate (and may select another city official as an alternate) for voting purposes. Only those officials with voting cards for their cities shall be eligible to vote. Possession of the voting card of the city and the signed voting card register shall be evidence that the holder'of the voting card is the city's delegate for purposes of voting. 3. Committee Reports The chair or vice chair of each committee shall present the committee report and move adoption of the policy statements. After adoption of policy language, the chair or vice chair shall move adoption of priority rankings. The chair shall place on the agenda for discussion, a proposal to make a substantive change in the language of a proposed policy, change a priority, or to take a position which the appropriate policy committee chair or representative states was not considered by the committee. The text of nonprocedural motions and amendments, other than changes in policy priorities, must be submitted in writing to the chair prior to debate. 4. Disputes Disputes regarding eligibility to vote shall be referred to the LMC General Counsel and may be appealed to the conference. Such reports or appeals shall be a special order of business and may be taken up at any time a new question (main motion) is in order. If 5. Limits on Debate Each speaker shall be limited to three minutes on any debatable question. The chair may extend the debate limits in order to consider an issue if numerous delegates request to be heard on the issue. == OVER == Policy Adoption Meeting Rules (cont'd) 5. Limits on Debate (cont'd) The chair may reduce the time allotted for debate in orde to complete policy adoption, but in no case shall the length of time be reduced to less than three minutes per side. 6. Parliamentary Procedure Precedence. The policy adoption process shall be govern d by the LMC Constitution, these rules, and Roberts Rules of Order Revised. The conference shall be its own judge of these rules and oberts Rules of Order. Appeal of the Chair. Debate of the motion "appel of th ruling of the chair", rule #6 notwithstanding, shall be limited to two minutes by the appealer and two minutes by the chair. Either may designate another eligible voting delegate (or LMC officer or board member) to speak in his/her place. Changes. Motions to "rescind" and "reconsider" shall rewire a two -thuds vote of delegates present and voting. 7. Number of "A" Priorities A motion to change a proposed policy's priority to an "A" must also propose another "A" proposed policy, within tha section, to be reduced below an "A" priority. The final "A" priority policies shall not exceed the number propose conference by the Legislative Committee. priority same .umber of to the CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November 2, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Danielson, Acting City Admin SUBJECT: Sommerset Water Hook Up DISCUSSION Fire Marshal, Paul Kaiser, is requiring that Sommer Country Club install a fire sprinkler system in their cl house. The club house is currently not served with City water and they will need to extend a six inch (611) water from Dodd Road. The costs for making this modification be very expensive. A watermain was installed along the west side of the country club in Dodd Road in 1963 (Project 6207). The country club was not assessed for the costs. They did he up to sanitary sewer at that time and were assessed for one hundred foot (1001) lot. Staff suggests a similar philosophy be followed for the watermain, charge them f03 hundred feet (1001) of frontage with interest. Water Assessment Rate $6.50/ft. Interest @ 6% 100 x $6.50 = $ 650.00 26 years @ 6% _ $1,014.00 $1,664.00 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the country club be charged a $1,664.00 hook up charge to utilize the City watermain or Dodd Road. ACTION REQUIRED r If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation, they should pass a motion establishing a $1,664.00 hook up charge to allow Sommerset Country Club connect to the City watermain on Dodd Road. JED:kkb et lead ill one CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November 2, 1989 To: Mayor, City Council and Acting City d trz From: Kevin Batchelder, Administrative Assistanv/'Y"i'�' Subject: Valley View Heights Park DISCUSSION or At the October 24, 1989 Parks and Recreation ommission meeting, Valley View Heights resident Dave Ayers appeared to testify on behalf of his neighborhood about the enhancements planned for "Curley's Tot Lot." These enhancements ar part of the recently successful Parks Referendum. During the discussion, Mr. Ayers stated hat the neighborhood wished to have the park formally named "Valley View Heights Park". The Parks and Recreation Commission felt that this was in line with the other parks, which are all named after streets or neighborhoods they are located by. RECOMMENDATION The Parks and Recreation Commission voted unai recommend to City Council that "Curley's Tot Lot" be and formally named and referred to as "Valley View Hei ACTION REQUIRED If City Council desires to implement the Recreation Commission's recommendation, they should pa designating the park located in Valley View Heights View Heights Park." r )usly to ficially s Park." Lrks and a motion "Valley 1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA CONTRACT FOR PARK DEVELOPMENT This Agreement, made and entered into this 6th day of September, 1988, by and between the City of Mendota Height Dakota County, Minnesota (hereinafter called the "City") a Valley View Heights Civic Association, Inc. (hereinafter called the Association). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Association has requested the City to provi for playground improvements on Lot 10, Block 1 of Curley' Valley View Addition located at the intersection of Culle Avenue and Timmy.Street and WHEREAS, the City has agreed to prepare the lot for construction of playground equipment by the Association a to provide up to $4,000.00 toward the cost of the equi subject to the Association maintaining it. NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the t parties as follows: 1. The City will grade the lot according to the attach plan dated June 1, 1988. Grading will be completed ,approximately October 15, 1988. 2. The City will extend the culvert through the park, approximately 175 feet. 3. The City will sod high traffic and erodible areas seed the remaining areas. The City will also prov pea rock in the area designated for the playground structure. fl 4. The Association will select the play structure to be installed subject to the City's approval. The City wi�l purchase the play structure with the city's costs to limited to $4,000.00; any additional cost will be paid by the Association. The City reserves the right to approve the location of any structures and the City w3 coordinate the installation of the equipment with the installers. 5. The Association will perform all routine maintenance on the park including, but not limited to lawn mowing, weeding, fertilizing, and routine upkeep of the equipment. 6. The City will provide liability insurance for itself and will have the Association named as an Additional Insured on the City's insurance policy. The Association will annually reimburse the City for the additional premium attributed to the additional Insure provision. 7. In the event that the Association initiates litigati [1 based on or arising out of this agreement, including n action seeking specific performance, the prevailing party in such litigation shall be entitled to reimbursement from the non -prevailing party of all co t and expenses including attorney's fees incurred in connection with such litigation. 8. For all purposes under this agreement, written noticelto the City shall be addressed to the City of Mendota Heights C/O City Administrator at its City Hall addre s, notice to the association shall be addressed to the lhst known president of the Association at his residentia address within the.City.af Mendota,,Heights; and such written notice shall be legally sufficient to provide notice to each of the parties. 9. In the event that the Association fails to maintain the park to a standard equivalent to those maintained by the City for other community parks, the City shall provide the Association with written notice of its findings of such failure. If, within 30 days of the mailing of such notice by the City the Association has not brought the park up to acceptable standards, the City may at its option and without further notice, remove the facilities and equipment, and revert the use of Lot 10 Block 1 Curley's Valley View Addition to its underlying zoning use. 10. Either party may terminate this agreement upon 180 days prior notice to the other party. Upon such termination, the City shall have sole discretion over the use or disposal of the property, consistent with underlying zoning. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS Charles E. Mertensotto, Mayor Z .,41 athleen M. Swanson, City Clerk 1 David L. Ayerq, .A4--- President1Valley View J,74s Civic Association, Inc. CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Novem TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Danielson 11 Acting City Admil?! or SUBJECT: CDBG Agreement Modification 2, 1989 DISCUSSION: Attached is a letter from Dakota County HRA requesting a modiLication to the City's agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached agreement modificat.on as requested. ACTION REQUIRED: If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation they should pass a motion authorizing the Mayor to execute the attached agreem nt on behalf of the City. JED:dfw .1 E` -OTA COUNTY Housing& Redevelopment Authot ity id 1W 2496:145th St. W * Rosemount, MN 55068 * 112-7 October 23, 1989 Kevin D. Frazell, City Administrator Mendota Heights City Hall 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mr. Frazell: The Dakota County HRA administers the (CDBG) program in Dakota County. The Agreement with your community in late community to participate in the CDBG Community Development County entered into a 1983 or early 1984 au program. Dakota County was just notified by the Department of Housing Development that we are being required to add one item to th Cooperation Agreements. We are being required to add a stat specifying that pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501 (b), the unit of government is subject to the same requirements as a subrecip including the requirement for a written agreement. Such agr only required when a municipality actually receives funds fr County's entitlement allocation rather than being administer the Dakota County HRA office. Essentially, this amendment i substantive, but we are being required by HUD to make this a', change as a condition of receiving future grant funds. Jock Grant .00peration .orizing the and Urban existing ment ocal ent, ements are m the d through not endment The County Attorney's office has determined that it is not n',cessary to have the City Council or Town Board approve this amendment, however, it must be sicined by the Mayor. We would like your cooperation in having the attached supplement signed by your Mayor and returned to our office by November 10, 1989. Failure to obtain the signed amendments by the deadline may affect the County's qualification as an entitle ent community and/or the County grant amount; your assistance wi h this matter is greatly appreciated. I have enclosed a copy of the required supplement which must be signed and returned to our office, a copy of the original Cooperati n Agreement, and a return envelope. "AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER" _2_ Please do not hesitate to contact our office with any questi ns, either Mark Ulfers or I can answer questions regarding this issue. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, C Kari R. Gill Deputy Director Enclosure .1 • SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXISTING COOPERATION AGREEMI FOR THE DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF DAKOTA, State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "COUNTY" and the City of Mendota Heights , hereinafter referred to as "COOPS TING COMMUNITY", said parties to this agreement each being governmental units. of the State of Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59. The parties further agree that pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501 (b), the Municipality is subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, including a written agrement as set forth in 24 CFR 570.503. Such agreements are only entered into when a Municipality chooses to propose a project and actually will receive funds from the County's entitlement allocation. The parties have caused this Agreement to be duly exec#ed. APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION: COUNTY OF DAKOTA, STTE OF MINNESOTA t Assistant County Attorney Date: Chairman of its County Board Date: City/Township of (Strike One) By: Its Mayor Date: CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November 2, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Danielson, Acting City Admi s o SUBJECT: U.S. West Park Building DISCUSSION Last summer during the U.S. West Fiber Optics/Park Shelter plan review and approval, one of the City's engineering technicians thought that there had been an Error made on the sizing of the water service. He changed th water service lead to the City's side of the building f om a two inch (211) lead to a one inch (111) lead. That was t e way it was then constructed. When U.S. West's mechanical engineer, who designed the size of the lead discovered the change, he informed us that he had sized the line at two inches (211) because there could be a problem with the flush valves on the toilets if it were only one inch (111). I discussed his concern with a St. Paul Water Utility Engineer. He agreed that there "could" be a problem, however, the likelihood of it ever occurring was rather remote. I wrote a letter to St. Paul Water Utility informing them that the City would accept the one inch (111) line with the potential problem. I then received a conference call from, I believe, the architect, the engineer and a U.S. West representative. They stated that it was their building and they did not want to have any threat of mechanical failure involved with it. They insisted that the line be changed to a two inch (211). •I conceded that it was our error and that we would have to fund the replacement line. Attached is the bill from U.S. West for the replacement line. There is adequate money available within the Water Revenue Fund to cover this bill. RECOMMENDATION Staff requests that Council authorize funds be used from the Water Revenue Fund to pay this bill. ACTION REQUIRED If Council desires to implement the staff request, they should pass a motion approving the bill and authorizing the expenditure from the Water Revenue Fund. I 1%."WESr US WEST Real Estate 2800 Wayzata Blvd. Room 370 Minneapolis, Mn. 55405 October 02, 1989 Jim Danielson Public Works Director City of Mendota Heights Mendota Heights, Minnesota 55118 RE: Reinstallation of water service for 640 Mendota Heights Road Dear Mr. Danielson, As agreed in our phone conversation on August 10, 1989 US WEST made arrangements to change the ill water service to the specified 211 water service for the US WEST site at 640 Mendota Heights Road, Mendota Heights, Minnesota. US WEST is requesting payment from the City of Mendota Heights for the sum of $7,050.00. Enclosed is an itemized statement for all costs associated with the installation of the water service. Please feel free to call me on 344-2481 with any questions you may have concerning this request. sincerely, M. L. Ensteness Manager -Project MLE: pac Engineering r„ r " R1117l4OHANDUM DATI,: August 10, 1989 Tti3: US WEST SITE 74067 CONVERSED WITH: Mike E-nsteness, US WEST Jim Danielson, Mendota heights Tom Johnson, City of St. Paul plater Dept. Dan Cripes, Amberker . Garth lti s tau, Langer Carl Raseher, Dakota Plumbing & Ideating NOTES: the ADKINS ASSOCIATION in ARCHITECTS 901 JEFFERSON VE. ST. PAUL, MN 55102 The inadequate water service problem to the City of Mendota I ieights side of the building has now been resolved. The problem originated when the City of Mendota Heights chann-ed their water service to 1" from the 211 specified. We explored opti ns for correcting this and verified with Tom Johnson and Carl Rascier of Dakota'Plumbing that the service is indeed 111. Because of tie flush valves used on the toilet fixtures the 111 service will be in dequate to operate this facility. At 11:20 a.m. I confirmed with Air. Jim Danielson that the on y solution to this problem is to replace the coater service with a 2" lice from the main and that we will proceed with this work with Dakota Plunbing. Jim Danielson indicated that he will reimburse US WEST for this xtra cost. the ADKINS ASSOCIATION ine. By Patrick F. Quinn, AIA PFQ:mlg cc: Mike Ensteness Garth Ristau Dan Cripes 11 DATE: . August 15, 1,989 RE: US -WEST SITE 74067/Municipal Park Shelter the ADKINS ASSOCIATION In ARCHITECTS 901 JEFFERSON AVE. St. PAUL MN 55102 , 224-13 Langer Construction is to arrange for the repla'dement of the I" water service to the Municipal side of the building with a 21, service. Hold water piping as close as possible to the NW corner of the property en- croaching as little as possible on adjacent westerly property. Permis- sion is granted to -remove tree In vicinity if needed. Per*form this work as soon as possible and be -advised of grounding well casing, NSP service and other utilities in Immediate area. Billing for said additional work is to be presented to US WEST with reimbursement. from the City of Mendota Heights. the ADKINS ASSOCIATION ine. pa -r-Ick F. Quinn, AIA PFQ:mlg ect Mike Ensteness Ken Dallman Langer Construction Amberker Associates Mendota Heights Jim Danielson I'MANGER CONSTRUCTION August 29, 1989 Mr. Pat F. Quinn . Adkins Associates Inc. 901 Jefferson Avenue St. Paul, MN 55102 RE: U.S. West Fiber Optic Building Mendota Heights, MN Dear Pat: 54 E. Morela d Ave West St 55118 ''^^'~~'^~r~' ~~-~ - R|� -_ -- ^�� Following is a recap of the change orders for the above project. - 1. Add to install 2" copper water line and associated Kenea7ly Excavating $ 800.00 Dakota Plumbing 4,143.00 Ren Franklin Electric 579.00 Langer Construction CO. - to _ 200.00 . recede approximate 150 ft. Langer Construction Co. - 340.00 General Conditions Reinstall VCT flooring required 75.00 at plumbing Stub. Total $6,137.00 Contractor's Fee @ 15% 920.00 TOTAL ADD $7^050.00 2. Ben Franklin additional cost as follows. , NSP Charges $2,993.00 Furnish and install two (2) 30 326.00 amp 240 volt receptacles for U.S. West per Ralph Stinger. Add for panel for construction. 300,00 -- Total $3,619.00 Contractor's Fee @ 15% 542.00 TOTAL ADD t4`]6],00 referenced work. »mequal odponuoityemployer Page 2 ws .e 3. Plywood walkway requested by Hike Esteness. Langer Construction $ 250.00 Total Add $ 250.00 In closing, I am requesting a change order be processed for the amount of $11,461.00 at your earliest convenience. Please call if yo have any questions concerning the above information. Sincerely, LANGER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Garth T. Ristau Project Manager CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Novembex 2, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Daniel Acting City Ad a or SUBJECT: Barton-Aschman tntr ontract DISCUSSION: The Barton-Aschman contract to complete design services for the Park Bond Referendum was distributed as an add-on agenda item last meeting. Council desired to have more time to review the document and tabled action until this meeting. In as much as I distributed the contract last meeting I have not recopied it, however if anyone needs one please call. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the agreement as presented. CitAttorney Hart has also reviewed and approved the agreement. I ACTION REQUIRED: If Council desires to implement the staff recommendation they should pass a motion authorizing the Mayor to execute the agreement on behalf of the City. JED:dfw .1 CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November 2, 1989 TO: Mayor, City Council and Acting C t minstrator FROM: Klayton H. Eckles Civil Engineer SUBJECT: Acquired Properties DISCUSSION: Mendota Heights currently has six properties which have been acquired. Staff is working to remove the structur% and close the wells on all the properties. On Friday at 4:00 P.M. bids will be received on the sale and xemoval of the residential homes. Bids will also be received on capping of t wells. The results of these bids will be available at the Council meeting. Attached is a memo from Fire Chief John Maczko which requests that the fire department be allowed to use three of the buildings for fire drill. It is possible that we could receive a bid on one of the three homes. More infromation on this issue will be available*on Tuesday when the results of the bids are known. KHE:dfw .11 .^ `' ~ � . 'r , � . . ' � . ^ .^/ .� � . . . � � a November 2, 1989 To: Chief John Maczko From: George Lowe, Training Coordinator I propose that we use the three houses at 2241, 2243, and Highway #55 for drill until May 1, 1990. As you know, it has been at least a year and a half since had a house in which to train. I can envision a number of evolutions for which we can us houses. For example, we could conduct smoke drills for s rescue, and ventilation techniques. We could have ladder overhaul and salvage drills could be practiced. Fighting fires is something we need to practice. The multitude of would give us ample opportunity. z These houses are located so that we could use Acacia Boul access during the winter months. Using these houses woul a tanker operation. We have not done that for a consider period. There is always the possibility of a mutual aid drill wit departments. Tankers are one of the main reasons for mut calls, and a tanker operation on Acacia would work nicely would reacquaint firefighters from other communities with that they need special adapters in order to get water out hydrants. These houses are ideal for drills because they sit back a the main highway. We could drill without traffic interfe come back to drill some more without being concerned that premises had been altered in any way. The reason I would like to keep them until May 1 is becau weather is so unpredictable. We can drill in weather dow 0 F., but it gets a little brutal drilling in temperatur than that, or in high wind chills. Therefore, it would b for our department to have them until May 1, 1990. r 2245 we have these :arch and drills. interior rooms !vard for l necessitate ,ble i other gal aid it the fact of our ,ay from ,ence and the e our to !s lower best CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO November) TO: Mayor and City Counc'1 FROM: James E. Da el o Acting City Ad trator SUBJECT: Neighborhood Parks - New Play Structures DISCUSSION: 3, 1989 Staff consulted with various play equipment suppliers and dete mined that the best approach for the Park and Recreation Commission was to solicit design proposals for each park from the suppliers. This is a commonly used method in this industry. A fixed price for each park is determined and the various suppliers will submit a design to fit the funds alloted. There is no low bidder and the advantage to the -City is that we may get desin offers which include equipment valued in excess, of our "fixed price". Park and Recreation Commission requests that Council invite suppliers of play structure equipment to submit design proposals for the installation of play equipment in the following six city parks: Wentworth, Marie Friendly Hills, Rogers Lake, Valley Park and Ivy Park. In addition to new equipment the costs allocated per park shall include the reuse of existing equipment that is considered usable and meets current Consumer Prodct Safety Commission guidelines. The amount allocated to each of the lix park play equipment improvements is $17,500. Suppliers shall submit drawings, photos, or detailed descriptions of proposed play structure for each site by Noon, December 12, 1989• RECOMMENDATION: The Park & Recreation Commission recommends that Council authorize that proposals be accepted from various play equipment suppliers for additional playground equipment to be installed at six neighborhood parks for an amount not to exceed $17,500 per park. ACTION REQUIRED: . If Council desires to implement the Park and Recreation Commis: request they should pass a motion aurthorizing the Commission to so: proposals. All costs to be funded by the Park Bond Referendum and i award to be approved by the City Council. JED :dfw ion's icit inal CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEMO Novembe TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Dan' e Acting City d rator SUBJECT: Dakota County Hepresentative DISCUSSION: Councilmember Witt was the City's HRA-CDBG Committe and now that she has resigned a new representative need: appointed. The meetings are few, 2-3 per year and I hat attended the first one. The focus of the meetings are t and approve CDBG projects for the Dakota County communit District 2 (upper Dakota County). ACTION REQUIRED: Appoint a new City CDBG (District 2) committee JED:mlk 2, 1989 e member to be e already o review ies in )er. . CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS MEW TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Dani Acting City ACes rator SUBJECT: Cable TV Representative DISCUSSION: Novemberl Councilmember Witt was the City Councilts Cable Commission re tive. Due to Liz's resignation, the Council needs to appoint a re The Commission meets monthly on the first Wednesday of the month. here at Mendota Heights City Hall and according to Executive Direc Hanson the meetings typically run from 7:30 P.M. to about 10:00 P. Holly said that she will either meet with or send a packet of information to our new appointee informing who ever it is about t. duties, etc. ACTION REQUIRED: Appoint a Councilmember to be the Mendota Heights Cable Commi JED: df w FrA 2, 1989 esenta- %cement. hey meet r Holly CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS 999W October 17, 1989 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: James E. Danielson, Acting CityA trator , .1. V, SUBJECT: Add On Agenda for October 17, 1989 One item is recommended to be moved to the consent calendar (**). Additional information is submitted for fc items already scheduled (*). 3. Agenda Adoption It is recommended that Council adopt the revised agenda printed on pink paper. 51. D.A.R.E. Program Item 8d was for Council information only but inadvertently was placed under New Business, recommend moving this item to the Consent Calendar. 8a. Presentation from David Braslau See attached news article addressing Eagan's response to our corridor study. 8b. Request for Traffic Control See attached letter of support from Dakota's Children. 8e. Contract with Barton-Aschman See attached contract with Barton-Aschman. Contract been approved by City Attorney Tom Hart. 8f. School District Negotiation Task Force The School District tabled their item to appoint a negotiating committee at their meeting yesterday. They d this to evaluate their options on its makeup. Superinten Anderson suggests that in order to keep things moving, Councilmember Blesener and I meet with him next week for preliminary discussions on the agreement. JED:kkb a, an. WE :Yvuray wsp Community Neer a p VQk~,Q, "M i3 octobK,s,1 . res hts'�cor� d.or tud Eagar �lll .ond_0:1Mendota�_Hei By BRENDA GODERIAN • = :-supposed: to reflect the noise of The report was written by vdanger of implementing the pro-�: :_. sig ding the Metropolitan Airport* , << :, r ,: "' • airplane traffic passing above it.. David Braslau Associates a firm_ . cedure• Abatement Commission of.,�- .. A study commissioned by the Eagan contends it has complied that has done much noise coo- = =' ``For'a variety* of reasons; the = ' its validity and then bringing it to'., ..;•• city of Mendota Heights regar- , ' by zoning the area for commer-- sultation, and by Robert Collette, :implementation of such apro--�;�• the Metropolitan Airports Com; -3 ding airport noise -is :being ` tial and industrial uses; it also - a consultant and former Federal posal would result in the perms- _ mission and then to the characterized in Eagan as a _ ' contends that Mendota Heights :Aviation Administration '� nent and irreversible degradationMetropolitan Council - justification for its decisions to has allowed recent housing de= manager. The use . of Collette of the corridor concept, he allow homes to be built in the air- : velopments to be built in their shows no concern for impartial-' wrote. - :' Another factor possibly on the port noise corridor. _ - .• 'commissioned'by portion of the corridor. _ 'recommendations studies, according to Jon Hohens- "Mendota Heights is being sold side of Eagan is that MAC is y' bili Hoheasteih io have The report, =If.-. report tein, assistant to the Eagan city . a of goods," said probably not too anxious .• •. Mendota Heights•and presented -were implemented, greater areas 'administrator, because the FAA at the Oct...•10 meeting: "The another air traffic test so soon'; to the city council in September, of Eagan would have more noise.: finds the corridor restricting of reportmakes no effortto relate to after the Runway Use System suggests fanning of airline traffic The report has the "fan" going as its practices. - ' land use and neighborhoods. test completed this summer. , . • : '= over a greater area of Eagan and 'far as the Unisys site on Pilot — The report feeds on blaming-.• '' .."If we fight with each other,. ' The Eagan committee has set:' Iendota Heights during the eight -' Knob and Yankee Doodle Roads. the -victim philosophy, 'HoheiLs- _ : we're missing the point and that's the special meeting date to head peak tra is htsnrso The Eagan Airport Relations tem added. "Hiring an 'FAA :_ the airport," headded =:: ;: .off Mendota Heights before it gets :, . -manager The report throviian4ther wall - the re rf to be the consultant is . '-%If a fight is being discouraged, : ' toMASAC.: between- the %two' cities, which '::sad Eagan's staff response to ita woman to be standing up to the neighboring have been trying to find a resolu- 'its Oct 10 meeting The tom- your marriage counselor, _ e encouraged. Letting = ' It is also awaiting a MASAC =• tion to where the air traffic cor- ` suttee decided a response to the '-said. "' .... '_ . the proposal get as ar as n the issue, which was •: . ridor lies and how the airlines report is needed and it will meet . He wrote a 10 -point response to "would be a mistake for Fagan, •• supposed to have should route their planes over the 'again Oct. 30 to discuss options, - the Mendota Heights study: He .:.officials said. However, Mendota ' . this siunmer. That report is com-. 2 area. The corridor is a three-mile = : including suggesting to the City points out what Eagan sees as - -Heights has a number of steps in. pleted, according to Hohenstein,'=f wide strip between -the two cities. _' `_Council s study of its own or re- ..historical inaccuiracies in 'the front of it' before -that could .' � but has not been released to the.'; . . Land uses, in -*the corridor .are :::questinganarbitrator. -",,_ — ' commissioned study ,and the '-.become reality, .including per: public . �:�'..• .. i� 1'��a:•.f.- •�.�.•.� �a•.!i • ' •:.�i�1Vfa`i iaa�:41. sr•. a ,'.:•. � �`.'.L. •l:r�i•i-i •..i }.a •.t.'i .. ..-i �..r► a : a w'•�a .a.v- t.. a a �..i ..'s•a'a•a'i'�•:.•�'. i'T`i �•►. .moi .��1: Y�'•!�', 1 October 13, 1989 Mayor and City Council City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118 Dear Mayor Mertensatto and Members of the Council: By this letter, we would like to support the efforts of and Leslie Winter and the other members of, our neighborh who are concerned about the safety of the neighborhood residents due to the increased traffic over the past sev years. We are new members to the neighborhood and realize that, times, we have also added to the increased traffic. However, we are very concerned about the effect of speed make it a priority concern for our staff to drive safely 01 lat I and r The effect of increased traffic is an issue for all of Mendota Heights as the density of neighborhoods increase . We respectfully ask the Council Members to realize the effects of our community's growth, and to actively addre s the need for traffic control. sincerely, Kathleen LeMay Executive Director 732 Cheyenne Lane cc: John and Leslie Winter 694 Cheyenne Lane N NC* 400 West Marie Avenue, West. St. Paul, Minnesota 55118 + 6112-455-1286 �j PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. AND THE CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA FOR PARK PLANNING AND DESIGN SERVICES THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of by and between the CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, hereinafter referre CITY and BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED, a Minnesota with a regular place of business at 111 Third Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN, 55401, hereinafter referred to as the CONSULTANT, WITNESSETH: 11 d fn as the co poration Suite 350, That the CITY and the CONSULTANT, for the consideration hereinafter named, agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK TO BE DONE That the CITY agrees to and hereby does retain and employ the CONSULTANT and the CONSULTANT agrees to perform Professional Services hereinafter mentioned upon the project, entitled Park Planning and Design Services, hereinafter referred to as the PROJECT and more particularly described in attached Attachment A and B, a part hereof, including without limitation performance and completion of Tasks 1 through 3, as described on Attachment B, with respect to each project/park described in Paragraph 4.11.5. ARTICLE 2. MEETINGS The CONSULTANT shall attend and/or conduct meetings with the CITY, its commissions or the general public as described in Attachment B or therwise as reasonably necessary. All additional meetings, other than those requested by the CONSULTANT, shall be determined to be additional service and billed on a time and expenses basis incurred by the CONSULTANT. ARTICLE 3. TIME FOR COMPLETION The CONSULTANT agrees that work under this Agreement will begin within seven days after receipt of Authorization to Proceed. The term of the Agreement for the performance of services hereunder shall be through January 1, 1991, for the scope of services as described in Attachment A and B; and following the date of Authorization to Proceed. In this regard, it is agreed that the "not to exceed" payment figure set forth in Article 4 herein ias been established in anticipation of an orderly and continuous progress of the PROJECT through completion of the work. ARTICLE 4. PAYMENT TO THE CONSULTANT 4.10 Method of Payment I 4.11 The CITY shall pay to the CONSULTANT for services performed in accordance with this Agreement as follows: 4.11.1 Payment to the CONSULTANT for services described in Attachment A and 8 of this Agreement shall be on an upset maximum cost not to exceed basis as set forth in Paragraph 4.11.5 below for the hours actually spent thereon for the persons in the following classifications at the following ranges in hourly rates. These rates include compensation for all salary costs, payroll burden, general and administrative overhead and professional fee. Classification Principal Associate Senior Associate Associates Technicians/Draftsman Clerical and Other Support Staff Hour Billing Rates $65-80 45-70 35-55 30-40 25-35 4.11.2 The CONSULTANT shall be reimbursed at cost for the Direct Expenses when incurred in the performance of the work including computer services, travel and expenses, reproduction and photographic costs and the like. These costs will be contained within the specified not to exceed amounts for each park or park group as set forth in Paragraph,4.11.5 below. Any cost item in excess of $750 shall be subject to the CITY's prior written approval. 4.11.3 The CITY shall make monthly payments to the CONSULTANT within 30 days of date of invoice based on computations made in accordance with the above charges for services provided and expenses incurred to date, accompanied by supporting evidence as required. 4.11.4 Payment to the CONSULTANT for services set forth in Attachment A and B of this Agreement, computed in accordance with those tasks described, shall not exceed $70,800, unless formally changed by 'Supplemental Agreement for extra work or changed conditions. Additionally, in the event that services are provided by the CONSULTANT beyond the contract completion date at the-CITY's written request as a result of circumstances beyond the control of the CONSULTANT, the "not to exceed" payment figure shall be subject to an upward adjustment established by Supplemental Agreement executed by both CITY and the CONSULTANT pursuant to the provisions of Article 5. 4.11.5 The CITY may elect to proceed with individual parks or projects independently. The CONSULTANT's compensation by project/park will be based upon, and will not exceed for any project/park, the following: 2 Project/Park Consultant Com A. Existing Neighborhood Parks $ 2,100 B. New Neighborhood Parks 9,000 C. Sibley Park 18,900 D. Mendakota Estates Park 21,100 E. Centex Park 19,700 ensation The CITY will notify the CONSULTANT in writing as to which projec proceed with and the initiation dates. The CONSULTANT will not responsible for any delays, penalties or conflicts result projects/parks initiated independent of one another. CONSULTANT proceed with any work relating to any project/park or proceed with "task" as identified in Attachment B on any project/park unless and receives written direction from the CITY to do so. ARTICLE 5. EXTRA WORK AND SERVICES NOT INCLUDED IN THIS CONTRACT If the CONSULTANT is of the opinion that any work they have been di perform is beyond the Scope of this Agreement, or that the level required significantly exceeds that estimated due to changes req the CITY, they shall promptly notify the CITY of that fact. The request the CONSULTANT to complete additional tasks for ad compensation by making written notification with previous agreemen work, additional compensation for same, and extension of time for c shall be covered by a Supplemental Agreement entered into by bot prior to proceeding with any extra work or related expenditures. ARTICLE 6. DOCUMENTS FORMING THE CONTRACT The contract documents shall be deemed to include this Agreement accompanying exhibits as part hereof. ARTICLE 7. ABANDONMENT, CHANGE OF PLAN AND TERMINATION Either Party has the right to terminate this Agreement, as to a combination of projects/parks upon seven days' written notice. In the CITY may at any time reduce the scope of this Agreement. Such in scope shall be set forth in written notice from the CIT CONSULTANT. In the event of unresolved dispute over change in changed conditions, this agreement may also be terminated. In the event of termination, all documents finished or unfinished, by the CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall be made availab' CONSULTANT to the CITY pursuant to Article 7, and there shall be r obligation of the CITY to the CONSULTANT under this Agreement, e payment of amounts due and owing for work performed and expenses it the date and time of termination, computed in accordance with Artic' In the event of a reduction in scope of the shall make available to the CITY all maps, materials and other documents pertaining to 3 t/park to be held i ng from will not the next until it rected to ►f effort jested by CITY may iitional Extra impletion parties with all ii or any addition, reduction Y to the scope or prepared e by the i further ;cept for :urred to e 4. PROJECT work, the C NSULTANT tracings, reports, resource the work or the PROD CT. All M such documents shall become the sole property of the CITY. The CITY will not reuse the CONSULTANT's work or construction documents for any purpose other than that prescribed in Attachment A or B without the CONSULTANT's consent. In any approved reuse of material by the CITY, the CITY will release the CONSULTANT from any related liability. ARTICLE 8. CITY'S RESPONSIBILITIES 8.10 To permit the CONSULTANT to perform the services required hereunder, the CITY shall supply, in proper time and sequence, the following at no expense to the CONSULTANT. 8.10.1 Provide, as and when necessary, field information including topographic mapping and boundary surveys, geotechnical information, land -use restrictions and required environmental, building or construction permits. Topographic mapping and boundary survey's shall be in a graphic form suitable for base map use. 8.10.2 Furnish, as required for performance of the CONSULTANT services (except to the extent provided otherwise in Attachments A and B), existing data prepared by or services of others, including public and private utility location and sizing, property ownership, public easements and any information relating to or describing the prescribed parks, their physical characteristics, engineering data or neighborhood requirements. 8.10.3 Designate in writing a person to act as CITY's representative with respect to the services to be rendered under this'Agreement. Such person shall have authority to transmit instructions, receive instructions, receive information, and interpret and define CITY's policies with respect to the CONSULTANT's services. 8.10.4 Provide access to and make all provision for the CONSULTANT to enter upon publicly owned property as required to perform the work. 8.10.5 Act as liaison with other agencies, public bodies or private individuals to carry out necessary coordination and negotiations. 8.10.6 Examine all reports, sketches, drawings, specifications, and other documents prepared and presented by the CONSULTANT, obtain advice of an attorney, insurance counselor or others as the CITY deems necessary for such examination, and render in writing, decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of the CONSULTANT. 8.10.7 Give prompt written notice to the CONSULTANT whenever the CITY observes or otherwise becomes aware of any development that affects the scope of timing of the CONSULTANT's services or any defect in work of the CONSULTANT. 8.10.8 Provide available "record" drawings and specifications for all existing physical plants or facilities that are pertinent to the PROJECT. 8.10.9 Provide other services, materials or data as may be set forth in Attachment A and B. I 8.11 The CONSULTANT shall be entitled to rely on the acc racy of completeness of information furnished by the CITY. If the CONSULT finds that any information furnished by the CITY is in error or is inade uate for its purpose, the CONSULTANT shall promptly notify the CITY. f ARTICLE 9. ASSIGNMENT This Agreement, being intended to secure the personal servic of the individuals employed by and through whom the CONSULTANT perfo ms work hereunder, shall not be assigned, sublet or transferred without th written consent of the CITY. In WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreemen the day and year first above written. t CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA BARTON-ASCHMAN ASSOCIATES, INC. By: By: —4�4 By: By: 5 ATTACHMENT A - CONSULTANT RESPONSIBILITIES AND PRELIMINARY PROJECT COSTS The following list enumerates the specific design elements by park that the CONSULTANT is responsible for and the related construction value as estimated by city staff. FACILITY/FEATURE PRELIMINARY CONSTRUCTION VALUE A. Existing Neighborhood Parks 1. Friendly Hills Park landscape parking area $ 5,000 2. Friendly Marsh Park wildlife viewing blind $ 2,070 elevated platform $ 3,795 interpretive signing $ 4,600 3. Ivy Hills Park additional landscaping $ 5,750 4. Rogers Lake Park landscape entrance $ 5,000 $ 26,215 Contingency (10%) $ 2,621 Subtotal (existing neighborhood parks) $ 28,837 B. New Neighborhood Parks 1. , Mendakota - play equipment $ 20,000 - common excavation $ 6,000 - top soil $ 4,000 - neighborhood softball $ 4,000 - landscaping $ 10,000 2. Hagstrom - King landscaping $ 13,000 •5 3. Victoria - Highlands grading $ 5,000 bench, bike rack, trash rec. $ 3,800 - half -court basketball $ 5,175 - parking $ 6,000 - playstructure $ 20,000 - landscaping $ 10,000 - seeding $ 10,000 $116,975 Contingency (101) $.11,697 Subtotal (new neighborhood parks) $128,673 Active Play Facilities (with support neighborhood park function C. Sibley Park - ballfield construction $216,000 - neighborhood amenities $ 30,000 $246,000 *Contingency (101) $ 24,600 Subtotal (Sibley Park) $270,600 D. Mendakota Estates Park - ballfield construction $231,000 - neighborhood amenities $ 44,000 $275,000 *Contingency (101) $.27,500 Subtotal (Mendakota Estates Park) $302,500 E. Centex Park - ballfield construction $208,000 - neighborhood amenities $ 30,000 "$238,000 *Contingency (101) $ 23,800 Subtotal (Centex Park) $216,800 PROJECT TOTAL $992,410 *Contingency factor has been reduced to 10 percent to accoun for the subtraction of design fees and related expenses. ATTACHMENT B - CONSULTANT SCOPE OF SERVICES TASK 1 - PRELIMINARY PHASE: PRELIMINARY STUDIES, SCHEMATIC LAYOUTS, COST ESTIMATES AND APPROVALS Task Objective To complete preliminary studies including schematic layouts, revised cost estimates and public or city approvals for the projects. Discussion The preliminary phase involves a firm establishment of what the individual projects will include, the location of the proposed facilities, cost estimate revisions, if required, and input and approval of the project. The preliminary basic services include: A. Consultation with the city to provide clarification and definition of the project requirements, review of available data, and discussions for general scheduling. B. Provide advice to the City of Mendota Heights about necessary field information to be furnished by the city or obtained by others. Necessary field information may include topographic and boundary surveys, geotechnical information, land -use restrictions, and environmental permits, if required. . C. The preparation of schematic layouts, sketches and conceptual design criteria with appropriate graphic exhibits. Schematic plans will graphically portray the proposed improvements including illustrative site plan layouts, alternate configurations for specific park elements, and support information from catalogs or other technical information. D. Input from the Park Commission, neighborhood or community and others will be solicited. The Park Commission will determine the amount of and extent of public participation. The consultant will be available to support the commission with technical presentations' at up to two public meetings. Additional meetings can be attended with compensation based upon the consultant's normal hourly rate. The consultant will also attend Park Commission meetings as required and City Council meetings to obtain their project approval. Task Product Schematic plans with revised cost estimates which have public input and the city's approval. Client Responsibility Provide input to the preliminary design phase including a leadershill role in determining appropriate public participation. In addition, the city will provide site topographic and boundary surveys suitable for use as base maps, and geotechnical information required to complete design work. A staff person from the city be assigned to the project to serve as liaison between the consultant and city staff or appointed officials. • TASK 2 - DETAIL DESIGN PHASE Task Obiect i ve To prepare detail plans, specifications and final cost estimates for the prescribed improvements. Discussion This phase will be undertaken after the city has approved the preliminary design phase and received appropriate input. Basic services for the detail design phase include: A. Prepare final detail drawings indicating the nature and extent of the project and its content. This will be done on the basis of the accepted preliminary design documents and the approved estimate of probable project costs. B. Prepare construction specifications to complement the detailed plans. Specifications will be prepared which outline project specific specifications and requirements particular to the consultant's prescribed project. C. Prepare and furnish to the client up to six sets of drawings, specifications and contract documents for final review by the city and other approving authorities. Final approved plans and specifications will be provided to the city for reproduction and distribution to contractors. D. The consultant will review and comment on basic documents relating to construction contracts provided by the city. These may include contract agreement forms, general conditions and supplementary conditions, invitations to bid and instructions to bidders. Task Product Completion of detail plans, specifications and probable construction estimates suitable for contractor bidding. Client Responsibility The city staff and the Park and Recreation Commission will provide constructive input into the design process, and review of final plans and specifications. The city will be responsible for the general specifications, general conditions and required permits. The city will reproduce and distribute final plans and specifications to facilitate contractor bidding. TASK 3 - CONSTRUCTION PHASE: BIDDING SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION SERVI Task Objective To assist the city in completing construction bidding and cons, services for the project's implementation. Discussion The basic services of this phase will include: W CES ruction Assistance to the city by reviewing contractor bids, cont actor's qualifications, and furnishing recommendations on the awar 'of the construction contract. B. Consultation with and advice to the city as to the acceptability of subcontractors and other persons or organizations propose by the general contractor. C. Consultation with and advice to the city as to the acceptability of substitute materials and equipment proposed by the general contractor or his or her subcontractors when substitution is allowed in advance of the contract award by the bidding documents. D. Review shop drawings as may be required by the bid docum nts and submitted by the general contractor or his or her subcontracto s. E. Make periodic visits to the site at intervals appropriat during various construction phases to observe, as an experienced and qualified design professional, the progress and the quality of the work being executed. Construction observation will be provided on an average of four hours per week. Additional construction observation may be requested of the consulting team by the city with additional compensation on an hourly basis. F. Assist the city in resolving technical conflicts or interpretation of the construction plans and specifications during the construction phase. G. Provide a final inspection with assistance by city sta f which identifies project imperfections and work yet to be complete through a "punch list" form. Task Product Construction services to guide project completion and ensure quality facilities. Client Responsibility The city will secure bids, approve contractor pay requests, and provide day to day site inspection and liaison during construction. O O `7 S/5- ON '/ ?J. .W '1/GV f a/uij d/4 i!) 'and uo/ iulxn 0996 5d0,< 3ntins O/YV7 'OW SNOg ani Ont LIUI/Ulf S/y5dL5/ � /- :c0 j i pp1 `5'.1(11 j)Dc ' bJo5WWW Jo 2/.nig ay/ J sMQ/ 2cy/ .yap in �Io/`?n.Jn punk p...timP /SInp d WO f /W// /ouo uo/ s/.+.�3dns pv.,i. p kw .9pun Jo ?w Aq paaod?Jd sal? path.'uo Ajn.ans uo,d s./N// /oy/ 6.11.1a0 197-1a4 I 0' 4.44't/ 'Lnaep potnsse Ue UO oae umogs sul'.'C ZT?O T UO TT €Z OU Q 0 Lio X05 -0d 1�y Q'eb yt e 1,07 • bs vob • ~ �P •t'losauutj4 'IC2uno3 rlo)Tra ` SZNOI IN VZOQN31? 30 SQNOd 3112 • •.:I )Iao18 `ZI �o'I • • ti • • sj • 1 0I • • • \ 3,or,t.z ,o// s' o! ¢- \ o• •— • ob'b. M ,c? ,9l ,0 N • • • e•'fc =JOOTI iuomoseg Es�a -aoop3 aGeaea cot =aojg do dol N •3EeuIeap Jo uot2oaaip salouaa '•ar'ls lasJJo aooJ 11 solouaa n •mngep Teatl..aan •a'A'9'N . •ano2uoo Guilstxa salouao_____ •anouoa posodoad salouaa • uoc�enO1) !iutl.stxa salouaa okb. • uoilPAOTa posodoad salouaa 81155 •uW 'pled 1s3M a p as p 3 aa6ue1 OZ aagnaj ,Cel : Joa AJ AHf1S AO LLV31.41. 3 o&