Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1993-07-20 CC Packet
• • STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL 'o�(p July 20, 1993 SPECIAL MEETING REGULAR MEETING 4:30 P.M. Meeting 1. Discussion of contract with SEH for engineering services. 2. Jim Tennessen - Update on Efficiency Study for City Offices 3. Discussion of Fire Contracts for Grant, May & Stillwater Townships. 7:00 P.M. Meeting CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Special Meeting - June 22, 1993 Special Meeting - June 29, 1993 INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director 2. Police Chief 3. Public Works Dir. • 10. 4. Comm. Dev. Director 7. Fire Chief 5. Parks & Recreation 8. Building Official 6. Consulting Engineer 9. City Attorney City Clerk 11. City Coordinator 1 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This is the day and time for the continuation of the Public Hearing to consider a Minor Subdivision of lots 17, 18 & 19, Churchill & Nelson's 2nd Add., by adding a 5 ft x 150 ft. parcel to Lots 6,7 & 8, Churchill & Nelson's 2nd Add., located in the Two - Family Residential, RB Zoning Dist., 311 E. Burlington St., Case No. SUB/9335, Edna Andrewson, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Gazette on June 25, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. 2. This is the day and time for the continuation of the Public Hearing to consider a a Special Use Permit for operation of a painting business out of a residence at 507 W. Maple St. in the Two - Family Residential, RB Zoning Dist., Case No. SUP/93 -36, Forrest Cole; Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Gazette on June 25, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. 3 This is the day and time for the continuation of the Public Hearing to consider a Special Use Permit & Variance to the Bed & Breakfast Ordinance (another Bed & Breakfast is located within 900 ft) to conduct a four -guest room Bed & Breakfast at 1306 So. Third St. located in the Two- Family Residential, RB Zoning Dist., Case No. SUP /V/93 -39, John G. & Elizabeth Hilpisch, Applicants. Notice of the hearing was published in The Gazette on June 25, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. 1 4. This is the day and for the Public Hearing to consider a Planned Unit Development Permit for a 256,000 sq. ft. commercial development on a portion of a 67.8 acre parcel of land located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 36 & Co. Rd. #5 in the Bus.Pk. -Comm. Dist., BP -C, Zoning Dist., Case No. PUD/93 -23, Target & Sdper Valu, applicants. Notice of the hearing was Oublished in The Gazette on July 2, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. 5 This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Subdivision of a 67.8 acre parcel into 9 lots, 7 developable, ranging in size from 10.34 acres to 1.42 acres located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 36 & Co. Rd. #5 in the Bus.Pk. - Corm., BP -C, Zoning Dist., Case No. SUB/93 -24, Target & Super Valu, appalican s. Notice of the hearing was published in The Gazette on July 24, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. 6. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Variance to height requirement for construdtion of a single - family residence next to and north of 807 No. 4th St. in the Duplex Residential, RB Dist., Case No. V/93 -42, Amy & Tim Stefan, applicants. Notice of the hearing was published in The Gazette on July 9, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Review of Design Permit for extlerior renovation of the Commander Elevator for retail use in the Central Bus. Dist., CBD, Downtown Plan Dist., Case No. DR/93 -14, Mike McGuire, applicant. 2. Possible second reading of amendment to the Noise Ordinance allowing contractor to start at 7:00 A.M. 3. Possible second reading of amendment to Parking Ordinance making it illegal to remove chalk marks From parked vehicles in the Downtown Area. 4. Continuation of possible award of bid for Simms' house at 410 No. 4th St. 5. Possible award of bid for demolition of West Wing of Old Jr. High School. 6. Driveway permit for Trinity Lutheran Parking Lot. NEW BUSINESS PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS (Continued) CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution Directing Payment of Bills (Resolution No. 93 -124). 2. Applications (List to be supplied at meeting). 3. Ratification of Council Poll of July 8, 1993 scheduling Special Council Meeting for July 13 to discuss, Asbestos Removal Bid. 4. Set Public Hearing date of August 3, 1993 for the following Planning Cases: a. Case No. ZAM /93 -40 - A change of zoning of Lots 1,2, & 3, Block 2 & Outlot C of Feely's Add. (between Charter Oaks & Courage Center along Curve Crest Blvd.) from Bus. Pk. -Ind. to Medium Density Multiple Family Residential, RCM, Leonard & Elizabeth Feely, Applicants. b. Case No. SUP /93 -41 - A Special Use Permit for a modification to an existing Bed & Breakfast permit to increase the number of guest rooms • • s w from three to four at 801 W. Pine St., Two - Family Residential, RB Zoning Dist., Jon Graybill, Applicant. c. Case No. V/93 -43 - Variance to the one -story allowable for an accessory structure to construct a two -story garage at 225 No. Greeley St. in the RB, Two - Family Residential Zoning Dist., Garry & Sara Gilberg, Applicants. d. Case No. BM/93 -44 - Building Moving Permit to move a home into the City of Stillwater from another municipality to a proposed location of Lot 5, Block 11, Staples & May's Add., located at 850 No. Martha St. in the Two - Family Residential, RB Zoning Dist., Joel K. Wahlin, Applicant. e. Case No. SUP/93 -45 - Special Use Permit for a thirty car parking lot located just south of the Brick Alley Parking Lot in the RB, Duplex Residential Dist., Andiamo Enterprises L.L.C., Applicant. COMMUNICATIONS /REQUESTS COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (Continued) QUESTIONS /COMMENTS FROM NEWS MEDIA ADJOURNMENT 3 1 • THIS AGREEMENT made as of the day of in the year Nine- teen Hundred Ninety -Three by and between the CITY OF STILLWATER, hereinafter called the CITY and SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC., 3535 Vadnais Center Drive, St. Paul, Minnesota, hereinafter called SEH. WHERE AS, the CITY intends to retain SEH to assist the City relating to investiga- tions, preliminary studies, design and construction of public improvements, including resident project representation, construction staking and such miscellaneous field sur- veys as necessary to advise the City on issues relating to such public improvements. ® NOW, THEREFORE, the CITY and SEH for the considerations hereinafter set forth agree as follows: A. GENERAL AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. SECTION I - GENERAL SERVICES SEH shall act as the CITY'S day to day professional representative and perform the following as directed by the City Council or its authorized representative. The following shall be considered normal City Engineer duties and shall be compensated for on an hourly basis in accordance with Section V.B.b.: 1. Conduct Reviews and Investigations and Prepare Reports on Project Feasi- bility. 2. Prepare applications and supporting documents for government grants, loans or advances. 3. Assist the City to obtain approvals from authorities having jurisdiction • over a project, for projects under $100,000 construction cost (Section V.B.2.) Page No.1 4. Prepare Easement Descriptions and Drawings 5. Prepare right -of -way descriptions and drawings and assist the City in right -of -way procurement. 6. Provide additional services due to significant changes in the general scope of a project or its design including but not limited to changes in size, com- plexity of character or type of construction, for projects under $100,000 construction cost (Section V.B.2.). 7. Prepare change orders or other services and supporting data in connection with a change of the project condition which is inconsistent with the origi- nal design intent, for projects under $100,000 construction cost (Section V.B.2.). 8. Observation of construction and consulting services to the City during the construction of a Project under $100,000 construction cost (Section V.B.2.). 9. Provide Resident Project Representation and construction staking work as described in Exhibit A. 10. Assist in the start -up, testing, adjusting and balancing during the operation of equipment or systems, for projects under $100,000 construction cost (Section V.B.2.); or any requirements by Public Works for all equipment un- der their jurisdiction. 11. Prepare record drawings showing changes made during construction based on data furnished by the Contractor which SEH considers signifi- cant. 12. Prepare Assessment Rolls 13. Provide professional services made necessary by the default of a Contrac- tor or by defects in the Contractor's work in the performance of the con- struction contract. 14. Provide services as an expert witness for the City in any litigation or other proceedings. Pagff No. 2 • • • 15. Review and /or prepare Environmental Assessment Worksheets and En- vironmental Impact Statements. 16. Review and evaluate statements or documents prepared by others. 17. Prepare and update City maps. Updates shall be at least once yearly. 18. Serve as City Engineer and perform the normal duties as City Engineer pertaining to Mn /DOT Municipal State Aid reporting and recordkeeping; Metropolitan Wastewater Control Commission annual reporting; answer- ing citizens' questions by telephone and any other duties the City may re- quire as City Engineer. 19. Other services rendered not in connection with a specific Improvement Project as described in Section II, for which SEH has been retained. 20. City staff shall review any requirements for "emergency service" that may occur, requiring the need for SEH services, between City Council Meetings. City staff will obtain council approval for such services and order SEH to proceed with said services. B. MEETING ATTENDANCE SEH shall attend meetings as directed by the CITY. Meetings shall include but are not necessarily limited to the following: 1. City Council Meetings 2. Public Agency Meetings 3. Court Hearings 4. Planning Commission Meetings 5. City Staff Meetings C. PUBLIC WORKS ASSISTANCE 1. SEH shall furnish a qualified Senior Technician to coordinate with City Public Works Superintendent to review any maintenance requirements which may be required as normal duties of a City ENGINEER. Page No. 3 The Senior Technician shall be available to meet with the Public Works Su- perintendent for the above requirements a maximum of 10 hours per month under the terms of this agreement. The Senior Technician shall re- port to the ENGINEER anything requiring engineering decisions pertain- ing to the meetings with the Public Works Superintendent. The ENGINEER shall inform the Council of any items requiring review and an estimate of cost for the Engineering Services. Any other Senior Technician time beyond the 10 hours per month limit, or for time spent concerning improvement projects other than normal mainte- nance /city engineer duties shall be as stated in this contract. 2. SEH shall furnish a qualified Engineer to coordinate with City Public Works Superintendent to review maintenance and scheduling require- ments which may be required as normal duties of a City Engineer. The En- gineer shall be available to meet with the Public Works Superintendent for the above requirements, a maximum 20 hours per month under the terms of this agreement. The Engineer shall inform the Council of any items re- quiring review and an estimate of cost for the Engineering Services. Any other Engineer time beyond the 20 hours per month limit, or for time spent concerning improvement projects other than normal maintenance/ city engineer duties shall be as stated in this contract. Page No. 4 • • • A. GENERAL SECTION II - IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SEH shall design and prepare plans and specifications and provide general construction services for Improvement Projects over $100,000 construction cost (Section V.B.2.) as directed by the CITY. Individual improvement projects shall be identified and the scope and detail thereof described in a brief Supplemental Letter Agreement submitted by SEH to the CITY which letter proposal shall provide details for payment to SEH. Written acceptance and /or authorizing council action of any agreement submitted will be required prior to commencing work. B. DESIGN PHASE After SEH has received authorization to proceed with the final design phase, SEH shall: 1. On the basis of the approved preliminary documents, prepare construction drawings and specifications for the Project or such a portion thereof as out- lined by the CITY. Such plans and specifications shall be prepared in accor- dance with CITY requirements and the requirements of those State and /or Federal Agencies from whom approvals must be obtained. 2. Advise the CITY of any adjustment of the project cost estimate caused by changes in scope, design requirements or construction cost, and furnish a revised cost estimate for the Project based on the completed drawings and specifications. 3. Furnish sets of plans and specifications for CITY and Agency review. 4. Prepare proposal forms and notice to bidders. 5. Assist the CITY in obtaining and evaluating bids and awarding Contracts for the construction of the Project. 6. Assist in the preparation of the Contract Agreement. Page No. 5 C. OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION PHASE During the construction phase, SEH shall: Provide observation of construction consisting of the Project Manager or Principal Engineer's time required on the Project during construction to perform the following duties: 1. Make visits to the site at intervals appropriate to the various stages of con- struction to observe as an experienced and qualified design professional the progress and quality of the executed work of the Contractor(s), and to determine in general, if such work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. The SEH Project Manager or Principal Engineer shall not be required to make exhaustive or continuous on -site inspections to check the quality or quantity of such work. SEH shall not be responsible for the means, methods, techniques, sequenc- es or procedures of construction selected by the Contractor(s) or the safety precautions and programs incidental to the work of the Contractor(s). SEH'S efforts will be directed toward providing a greater degree of confi- dence for the CITY that the completed work of the Contractor will conform to the Contract Documents, but SEH shall not be responsible for the Con- tractor's failure to perform the construction work in accordance with the Contract Documents. During such visits and on the basis of the Project Manager or Principal En- gineer's on -site observations, SEH will keep the CITY informed of the progress of the work and will endeavor to guard the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the work of the Contractors. This obligation does not in- clude anything related to safety. It is agreed that safety matters are Con- tractor's responsibility. SEH may disapprove work as failing to conform to the Contract Documents. 2. Review samples, schedules, shop drawings, the results of tests and inspec- tions and other data which the Contractor is required to submit, but only for conformance with the design concept of the project and compliance with the information given in the Contract Documents. Such review shall not extend to means, methods, sequences, techniques or procedures of con- Page No. 6 • • • struction or to safety precautions and programs incidental thereto. SEH shall receive and review (for general content as required by the specifica- tion), maintenance and operating instructions, schedules, guarantees, bonds and certificates of inspection which are to be assembled by the Con- tractor in accordance with the Contract Documents. 3. Consult with and advise the CITY, act as the CITY'S representative at the Project site, issue all instructions of the CITY to the Contractor and prepare routine change orders as required. 4. Review the Contractor's Application for Payment, determine the amount owing the Contractor and make recommendations to the CITY regarding the payment thereof. SEH'S recommendations are based on on -site observations as experienced and qualified design professionals. The recommendations by SEH consti- tute a representation to the CITY that to the best of their knowledge, infor- mation and belief, the work has progressed to the point indicated on said application and the quality of work is in accordance with the Contract Doc- uments, subject to the results of any subsequent test called for by the Con- tract Documents and any qualifications stated in SEH's recommendations. 5. Conduct a site visit to determine if the project is substantially complete and conduct a final site visit to determine if the work has been completed in ac- cordance with the Contract Documents. Such site visits may include repre- sentatives from the CITY and /or other involved governmental agencies. If the Contractor has fulfilled all of his obligations, SEH may give written no- tice to the CITY that the work is acceptable for final payment. 6. SEH shall not be responsible for the acts or omissions of any Contractor, or of any subcontractor or supplier, or any of the Contractor(s)' or subcontrac- tor's or supplier's agents or employees or any other persons (except SEH'S employees and agents) at the site or otherwise furnishing or performing any of the Contractor's work; however, SEH shall not be released from lia- bility for failure to properly perform duties and responsibilities assumed by SEH in the Contract Documents. Page No. 7 Further, SEH shall not be responsible if conditions at the site of the work are different than the conditions predicted following general observations at the site, review of existing plans and records made available to SEH by the CITY for the specific site and review of soils data resulting from formal soils investigation programs undertaken. SEH shall endeavor to provide the CITY with construction plans, specifications and contract documents that conform to site conditions identified during site investigations, but it is recognized that unknown conditions may exist that cannot be discov- ered until complete site excavations are made and that SEH does not bear the responsibility for their discovery or for additional construction costs that may result from the unknown conditions. 7. SEH Services listed under Section II. C. shall be considered observation of construction in accordance to Section V. B. 1. SECTION III - THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY A. THE CITY SHALL: 1. Provide full information as to its requirements for the Project. 2. Assist SEH by furnishing all available information pertinent to the Project. 3. Guarantee access to and make all provisions for SEH to enter upon public and private lands as required for SEH to perform his work under this Agreement. 4. Provide such legal, accounting and insurance counseling services as may be required for the Project. 5. Give prompt written notice to SEH whenever the CITY observes or other- wise becomes aware of any defect in the project. 6. Furnish television inspection of sewers, land surveys, soil borings, labora- tory material tests, soil tests and other special items pertinent to the Project. 7. The CITY shall be responsible for the accuracy and /or omissions of data consisting of, but not limited, to computations, as built drawings, and maps furnished by the CITY. 8. Bear all costs incidental to compliance with the requirements of this Section III. Page No. 8 • • • • SECTION IV - PERIOD OF SERVICES A. STANDARD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES The services called for in Section I.C., Standard Professional Services, shall continue until terminated. B. IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS After the CITY'S acceptance of the preliminary report and upon written authorization from the CITY and agreement as to the final scope of the Project, SEH shall proceed with the performance of the services called for in Sections I.A and II.B. of this Agreement. SEH shall deliver the completed construction drawings, specifications and cost estimates for all authorized work on the project in accordance with the Supplemental Letter Agreement submitted by SEH for each individual project. SECTION V - PAYMENTS TO SEH A. DAY TO DAY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AND MEETING A11ENDANCE UNDER SECTION I: 1. SEH shall be compensated on an hourly basis according to Section V.B.b., monthly, for services described in Section I.A. Said compensation shall be paid at SEH's current billing rate at the applicable employee rate plus the cost of expenses as outlined in Section V.C. 2. Meeting Attendance For attendance at CITY Council Meetings, Planning Commission Meetings, Staff Meetings and Public Hearings not connected with a specific project SEH shall be paid a flat rate of $50.00 plus the cost of expenses as outlined in Section V.C. For all other meetings, SEH shall be paid at SEH's current billing rate of the applicable employee plus the cost of expenses as outlined in Sections V.C. and V.D. SEH shall bill the CITY monthly for services in Sections I.B. Page No. 9 B. IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS UNDER SECTION II: 1. Design Phase a. Fee Schedule 1. SEH shall be compensated for Preparation of Plans and Spec- ifications (described in Section II.B. in accordance with the enclosed four Fee Curves expressed as a percentage of con- struction. During the design phase (preparation of plans and specifications) SEH shall be paid monthly. Monthly pay- ments shall be based on SEH's current billing rates of the ap- plicable employee, as outlined in Section V.C. Total payments to SEH for work described in Section II.B. and II.C. shall be the total of the fee amount. Eighty percent (80 %) of the fee shall be for plans and specifications and twenty percent (20 %) shall be for observation of construction. Services compensated for on a fee basis do not include test borings, property surveys, material testing, resident inspec- tion, staking out of work or revisions to the work due to changes in scope. 2. The fee schedule basis for compensation to SEH shall apply to projects over $100,000 construction cost. For projects under $100,00 construction cost, the CITY shall compensate -SEH on an hourly basis for the design phase and for observation of construction in accordance to Section V.B. b. 3. Project construction cost to be used as a basis for payment shall be based on one of the following sources with prece- dence in order of list. a The total actual construction contract price. b SEH'S most recent cost estimate for the project as ap- proved by the CITY upon completion of the final design. Page No. 10 • • • • 4. The project construction cost does not include SEH'S fee, the cost of the land or right -of -way, or compensation for and /or damages to property unless this Agreement so specified, nor does it indude the CITY'S legal, accounting or insurance counseling services, or interest charges incurred in connec- tion with the Project. 5. If any portion of the Project is not bid or put under Contract for a period of twelve months after completion of the final design phase, SEH'S compensation for preparation of plans and specifications for that portion shall be based in one of the following sources with precedence in the order listed. a The lowest Contractor's bid. b SEH'S most recent cost estimate for such portion of the project as approved by the CITY. b. Hourly Basis SEH shall be compensated monthly for Preparation of Plans and Specifications (described in Section I.A. and II.B.) on an hourly basis for projects under $100,000 construction cost. Monthly payments shall be based on SEH's current billing rates of applicable employ- ees plus the cost of expenses as outlined in Section V.C. The SEH billing rates are induded with this Agreement as Exhibit B. These billing rates are subject to review and change on an annual basis on April 1 according to SEH's annual review policy. SEH will furnish the City with a new billing rate schedule (Exhibit B.) after April 1 each year and before May 1 each year. SEH will provide an estimate of the costs for the preparation of the Plans and Specifications in the Supplemental Letter Agreement. It is agreed that after 90% of costs have been incurred, SEH will notify the CITY and confer with representatives of the CITY to determine the basis for completing the work. Page No. 11 1. Public Works Assistance SEH shall be compensated for Public Works Assistance on an hourly basis at the actual rate of the applicable employee plus payroll cost and 1% fee; as defined in Section IC. Payroll cost is presently 1.34 times the hourly rate of the SEH employee. This rate is reviewed on a Fical Year basis beginning July 1st of each year and is subject to change. SEH will notify the CITY of the payroll cost rate at the beginning of each Fiscal Year. 2. SEH shall also provide the services of the project manager to the CITY for one eight -hour day, free of charge, as a value added service for the CITY to assist in any requirement the CITY may have for a project manager in the course of the normal engineering duties of a City Engineer. 3. Construction Phase C. EXPENSES SEH shall be compensated monthly for services described in Section I.A.9. Said compensation shall be paid at SEH's current billing rate of the appli- cable employee plus the cost of expenses as outlined in Sections V.C. 4. Other Services SEH shall be compensated monthly for other services not in connection with a Specific Improvement Project including day -to-day services ordered by the CITY. Said compensation shall be paid at SEH's current billing rate of the applicable employee Plus the cost of expenses as outlined in Sections V.C. The following expenses represent expenditures made by SEH, its employees, or professional consultants specifically for the Project and shall be paid for as agreed in this Section V. Expenses include 10% for cost of administration. 1. Transportation 2. Lodging and meal expense connected with a specific Project, authorized in advance by the CITY, an amount not to exceed $55.00 per person per day. Page No. 12 • • • 3. Fees paid, in the name of the CITY, for securing approval of authorities having jurisdiction over the Project. 4. Plan and specification reproduction. 5. Other special expenses connected therewith, required and authorized by the CITY. D. GENERAL 1. If this Agreement is terminated upon completion of any phase of SEH's services, the monthly progress payments shall be made in accordance with Section V.A. and V.B. If SEH's services are terminated during the phase of the work, SEH shall be paid for services performed during such phase. Payment during such phase shall be based on an hourly rate as described in Section V.A. and V.B. plus reimbursable expenses as described in Section V.C. Page No. 13 A. INDEMNIFICATION SECTION VI - GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Notwithstanding the Scope of Services to be provided by SEH pursuant to this Agreement or Supplemental Letter Agreements, it is understood and agreed that SEH is not a user, handler, generator, operator, treater, storer, transporter or disposer of hazardous or toxic substances, pollutants or contaminants as any of the foregoing items are defined by Federal, State and /or local law, rules or regulations, now existing or hereafter amended, found or identified in the City. It is further understood and agreed that services SEH will undertake, for the CITY'S benefit, are potentially uninsurable obligations involving the presence or potential presence of hazardous or toxic substances, pollutants or contaminates. Therefore, the CITY agrees to hold harmless, indemnify and defend SEH and SEH's officers, subcontractor(s), employees and agents from and against any and all claims, losses, damages, liability and costs, including but not limited to costs of defense, arising out of or in any way connected with, the presence, discharge, release, or escape of hazardous or toxic substances, pollutants or contaminants of any kind, except for such liability as may arise out of SEH's sole negligence in the performance of services under this Agreement. B. LIMITATIONS ON SEH'S LIABILITY The CITY hereby agrees that to the fullest extent permitted by law SEH's total liability to the CITY for any and all injuries, claims, losses, expenses, or damages whatsoever arising out of or in any way related to a project or this Agreement from any cause or causes including, but not limited to, SEH's negligence, errors, omissions, strict liability, breach of Contract or breach of warranty shall not exceed the total sum paid on behalf of or to SEH by SEH's insurers in settlement or satisfaction of CITY's claims under the terms and conditions of SEH's insurance policies applicable thereto. SEH shall provide the CITY with insurance coverage limit of $1,000,000. The terms of insurance shall be reviewed on an annual basis. Page No. 14 • C. REUSE OF DOCUMENTS • D. ASSIGNMENT • All documents, including original drawings, and specifications, prepared by SEH pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of service in respect to the Project. They are not intended or represented to be suitable for reuse by the CITY or others on extensions of the Project or on any other Project. Any reuse without written verification or adaptation by SEH for the specific purpose intended will be at the CITY'S sole risk and without liability or legal exposure to SEH; and the CITY shall indemnify and hold harmless SEH from all claims, damages, losses and expenses including attorneys' fees arising out of or resulting therefrom. All project documents consisting of original drawings, estimates, specifications and field notes are the property of the CITY and will be supplied on request. The ENGINEER may, at his expense, retain reproducible copies of drawings and copies of other documents, in consideration of which it is mutually agreed that the ENGINEER will use them solely in connection with the Project. SEH shall not, without the written consent of the CITY assign any interest or obligation in this Agreement. E. INSURANCE SEH shall secure and maintain such insurance as SEH deems necessary or appropriate to protect SEH from claims under Worker's Compensation, accidents or claims for bodily injury, death or property damage which may arise from the performance of SEH's services under this Agreement. SEH shall provide the CITY with insurance coverage limit of $500,000. The terms of insurance shall be reviewed on an annual basis. F. TERMINATION This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon seven days written notice should the other party fail substantially to perform in accordance with its terms through no fault of the party initiating the termination. In the event of termination SEH shall be paid compensation for services performed to termination date, including expenses then due and all terminal expenses. Page No. 15 G. FAILURE TO MAKE PAYMENTS If the CITY fails to make any payment due SEH for services and expenses within forty -five days after receipt of SEH'S statement therefor, the amounts due SEH will be increased at the rate of 1% per month from said forty -fifth day, and in addition, SEH may, after giving seven days' written notice to the CITY, suspend services under this Agreement until SEH has been paid in full all amounts due for services, expenses and charges. If, through no fault of the CITY, corrections are required to be made on the monthly invoice, and, said invoice is returned to SEH for correction, then; the forty -five day period shall recommence upon the date the invoice is returned to and received by the CITY. APPROVED: CITY OF SHOR'$LLIO N C. BY B ADDRESS FOR GIVING NOTICES: Page No. 16 3535 Vadnais Center Drive St. Paul, MN 55117 • This is an Exhibit attached to, made a part of and incorporated by reference with the Agreement for Professional Services, between THE CITY OF STILLWATER, hereinafter called the CITY and SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC., hereinafter called SEH. If requested by the CITY, or recommended by SEH, and approved in writing by the other, 1) one or more full time Resident Project Representatives (RPR), experienced in the type of construction proposed, will be furnished and directed by SEH in order to provide • additional representation at the Project site during the construction phase and, 2) SEH will provide necessary field survey personnel experienced in the type of construction proposed to place construction stakes for use by the Contractor in constructing the project. Through more extensive on -site observations of the work in progress and field checks of materials and equipment by the RPR and assistants, SEH shall endeavor to provide further protection for the CITY against defects and deficiencies in the work of CONTRACTOR; but, the furnishing of such services will not make SEH responsible for or give SEH control over construction means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures or for safety precautions or programs, or responsibility for CONTRACTOR's failure to perform the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents and in particular the specific limitations set forth in Section II.C. of the Agreement. The duties and responsibilities of the RPR are limited to those of SEH in 1) The agreement with the CITY and SEH, and 2) in the construction Contract Documents, and 3) further limited as follows: • EXHIBIT A TO AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES A LISTING OF THE DUTIES, RESPONSIBILITIES AND LIMITATIONS OF AUTHORITY OF THE RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE Page No. 17 A. GENERAL RPR is an agent of SEH at the site, will act as directed by and under the supervision of SEH, and will confer with SEH regarding RPR's actions. RPR's dealings in matters pertaining to the on -site work shall in general be with SEH and CONTRACTOR keeping the CITY advised as necessary. RPR's dealings with subcontractors shall only be through or with the full knowledge and approval of CONTRACTOR. RPR shall generally communicate with the CITY with the knowledge of and under the direction of SEH. DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILI I'lES of RPR 1. Schedules: Review the progress schedule, schedule of Shop Drawing sub- mittals and schedule of values prepared by CONTRACTOR and consult with SEH concerning acceptability. 2. Conferences and Meetings: Attend meetings with CONTRACTOR, such as preconstruction conferences, progress meetings, job conferences and other project- related meetings, and prepare and circulate copies of minutes thereof. 3. Liaison: a. Serve as SEH's liaison with CONTRACTOR, working principally through CONTRACTOR's superintendent and assist in understand- ing the intent of the Contract Documents; and assist SEH in serving as the CTTY's liaison with CONTRACTOR when CONTRACTOR's operations affect CITY's on -site operations. b. Assist in obtaining from OWNER additional details or information, when required for proper execution of the Work. 4. Shop Drawings and Samples: a. Record date of receipt of Shop Drawings and samples. b. Receive samples which are furnished at the site by CONTRACTOR, and notify SEH of availability of samples for examination. Page No. 18 • • • • c. Advise SEH and CONTRACTOR of the commencement of any Work requiring a Shop Drawing or sample if the submittal has not been approved by SEH. 5. Review of Work, Rejection of Defective Work, Inspections and Tests: a. Conduct on -site observations of the Work in progress to assist SEH in determining if the Work is in general proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. b. Report to SEH whenever RPR believes that any Work is unsatisfac- tory, faulty or defective or does not conform to the Contract Docu- ments, or has been damaged, or does not meet the requirements of any inspection, test or approval required to be made; and advise SEH of Work that RPR believes should be corrected or rejected or should be uncovered for observation, or requires special testing, in- spection or approval. c. Verify that tests, equipment and systems start -ups and operating and maintenance training are conducted in the presence of appro- priate personnel, and that CONTRACTOR maintains adequate records thereof; and observe, record and report to SEH appropriate details relative to the test procedures and start -ups. d. Accompany visiting inspectors representing public or other agen- cies having jurisdiction over the Project, record the results of these inspections and report to SEH. 6. Interpretation of Contract Documents: Report to SEH when clarification and interpretations of the Contract Documents are needed and transmit to CONTRACTOR clarifications and interpretations as issued by SEH. 7. Modifications: Consider and evaluate CONTRACTOR's suggestions for modifications in Drawings or Specifications and report with RPR's recom- mendations to SEH. Transmit to CONTRACTOR decisions as issued by SEH. Page No. 19 8. Records: a. Maintain at the job site orderly files for correspondence, reports of job conferences, Shop Drawings and samples, reproductions of orig- inal Contract Documents including all Work Directive Changes, Ad- denda, Change Orders, Field Orders, additional Drawings issued subsequent to the execution of the Contract, SEH's clarifications and interpretations of the Contract Documents, progress reports, and other Project related documents. b. Keep a diary or log book, recording CONTRACTOR hours on the job site, weather conditions, data relative to questions of Work Di- rective Changes, Change Orders or changed conditions, list of job site visitors, daily actfivities, decisions, observations in general, and specific observations in more detail as in the case of observing test procedures; and send copies to SEH. c. Record names, addresses and telephone numbers of all CONTRAC- TORS, subcontractors and major suppliers of materials and equip- ment. 9. Reports: a. Furnish SEH periodic reports as required of progress of the Work and of CONTRACTOR's compliance with the progress schedule and schedule of Shop Drawing and sample submittals. b. Consult with SEH in advance of scheduled major tests, inspections or start of important phases of the Work. c. Draft proposed Change Orders and Work Directive Changes, ob- taining backup material from CONTRACTOR and recommend to SEH Change Orders, Work Directive Changes, and Field Orders. d. Report immediately to SEH and the CITY upon the occurrence of any accident. Page No. 20 • • • • 10. Payment Requests: Review applications for payment with CONTRACTOR for compliance with the established procedure for their submission and forward with recommendations to SEH, noting particularly the relation- ship of the payment requested to the schedule of values, Work completed and materials and equipment delivered at the site but not incorporated in the Work. 11. Certificates, Maintenance and Operation Manuals: During the course of the Work, verify that certificates, maintenance and operation manuals and oth- er data required to be assembled and furnished by CONTRACTOR are ap- plicable to the items actually installed and in accordance with the Contract Documents, and have this material delivered to SEH for review and for- warding to OWNER prior to final payment for the Work. 12. Completion: a. Before SEH issues a Certificate of Substantial Completion, submit to CONTRACTOR a list of observed items requiring completion or correction. b. Conduct final inspection in the company of SEH, CITY, and CON- TRACTOR and prepare a final list of items to be completed or cor- rected. c. Observe that all items on final list have been completed or corrected and make recommendations to SEH concerning acceptance. C. LIMITATIONS OF AUTHORITY Resident Project Representative: 1. Shall not authorize any deviation from the Contract Documents or substi- tution of materials or equipment, unless authorized by SEH. 2. Shall not exceed limitations of SEH's authority as set forth in the Agree- ment or the General Provisions to the Letter Agreement or the Contract Documents. Page No. 21 3. Shall not undertake any of the responsibilities of CONTRACTOR, subcon- tractors or CONTRACTOR's superintendent. 4. Shall not advise on, issue directions relative to or assume control over any aspect of the means, methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of con- struction unless such advise or directions are specifically required by the Contract Documents. 5. Shall not advise on, issue directions regarding or assume control over safe- ty precautions and programs in connection with the Work. 6. Shall not accept Shop Drawing or sample submittals from anyone other than CONTRACTOR. 7. Shall not authorize CITY to occupy the Project in whole or in part. 8. Shall not participate in specialized field or laboratory tests or inspections conducted by others except as specifically authorized by SEH. PagE No. 22 • • EXHIBIT B Proposed Staff Assigned Principal Engineer Richard E. Moore, P.E. Project Manager Barry C. Peters, P.E. Resident Project Representative /Senior Technician Timothy A. Moore Public Works Assistance Timothy A. Moore Richard E. Moore, P.E. SEH Corporate Billable Cost Range Use of Additional Personnel When Required Project Engineer /Architect /Planner Design Engineer /Architect /Planner Lead Technician Senior Technician Technician Associate Technician Word Processor General Clerical FIELD STAFF Page No. 23 Billable Cost $94.50 $71.25 $48.30 $21.80 $42.65 $49.50 - $90.00 $37.50 - $64.50 $43.50 - $63.00 $42.00 - $55.20 $33.00 - $44.55 $28.50 - $37.35 $27.90 - $41.40 $27.00 - $41.40 $43.50 - $63.00 $30.00 - $40.50 $36.75 - $60.75 $24.00 - $35.25 Lead Project Representative Project Representative Survey Party Chief Survey Assistant OTHER Mileage $.30 /mile Printing, postage, reproduction, and duplicating costs Out -of- pocket costs such as field supplies, stakes, etc. NOTE: This schedule is reissued annually. New contracts which will overlap the reissue date shall provide for the anticipated changes in the contractual language. Issued: April 12, 1993 Expires: April 11, 1994 SERVICE SUMMARY OF BILLING PROCEDURES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS AGREEMENT Engineering Reviews, Investigations, Reports and Project Feasibility Plans and Specifications for Projects Under $100,000 Construction Cost Plans and Specifications for Projects over $100,000 Construction Cost Observation of Construction for Projects Under $100,000 Construction Cost Observation of Construction for Projects Over $100,000 Construction Cost RPR and Staking Services (All Projects) Day -to -Day City Engineer Duties Meeting Attendance for Specified Meetings Meeting Attendance Public Works Assistance One -day (8 hours) Engineering Service BILLING AGREEMENT BASIS SECTION Hourly V B.b. Hourly V B.b. Fee V B.a.1: 5. Hourly V B.b. Fee V B.a.1. Hourly V B.b. Hourly V B.b. Flat Rate V A.2. Hourly V B.b. Hourly V B.b.1. None V B.b.2. • • • T T 0 T a) W I. co 0.1 1 10 NET CONSTRUCTION COST, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS COMPENSATION FOR PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION FOR RESIDENTIAL STREETS (EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST) C) co CO 0.1 1 NET CONSTRUCTION COST, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS COMPENSATION FOR PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION FOR RESIDENTIAL STREETS, UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE FACILITIES (EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST) 1- Z w U w 0 Z Z 0 Q Z w 0 2 0 w w w 0 rn co co 0.1 1 10 NET CONSTRUCTION COST, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS COMPENSATION FOR PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION FOR MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS (EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST) N 0 0) co CD 0.1 1 10 NET CONSTRUCTION COST, MILLIONS OF DOLLARS COMPENSATION FOR PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND OBSERVATION OF CONSTRUCTION FOR DOWNTOWN BU6NESS DISTRICT IMPROVEMENTS (EXPRESSED AS A PERCENTAGE OF CONSTRUCTION COST) • • TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Diane Deblon, Finance Director DA: July 14, 1993 RE: FIRE CONTRACTS M E M O R A N D U M Attached as Exhibit A is a cost allocation for the fire contracts based on the five -year averaging. Exhibit B is a detailed five -year averaging schedule for each township that was used in the calculation of the amounts. 1992 -93 1992 Actual Allocation Actual Cost Percent Based on Contract Allocation Increase 1993 Budget Grant Township 66,774 67,861 1.6% 71,563 May Township 39,025 42,842 9.7% 45,179 Stillwater Township 57,398 58,732 2.3% 61,935 I would recommend the 1993 - 1994 fire contracts be increased to the 1992 Actual Cost Allocation amounts. This would be a contract amount of $67,861 for Grant Township, $42,842 for May Township and $58,732 for Stillwater Township. EXHIBIT A - COST ALLOCATION it f iitti tt itift tf tttii t t iff i itf i iM tt COMBINED AVERAGES Stillwater - -- Grant Township May Township Stillwater Township Total COST OF FIRE PROTECTION Total COST ALLOCATION (1) Stillwater - Grant Township May Township Stillwater Township Total TOWNSHIP CONTRACT AMOUNTS Grant Township May Township Stillwater Township Total ASSESSED ESTIMATED ESTIMATED AVERAGE TOTAL FIRE RUNS VALUATION POPULAITON HOUSEHOLDS ttittittifii* ift t 1* wt.*** f ft f 1111111/ ft ttitf 68.721— 274.86% 12.53% 50.12% 7.91% 31.64% 10.841 43.38% 100.00% 400.00% ACTUAL BUDGET 1992 1993 t l t i t t t t t i t t t t t t t i t t t t t i t t t i t t t t *11111* h *Itt.tt.it.t t t t.ttt i t t l.i 1 1 t h * * ** t._.__. Operating Costs $495,342 $524,136 Depreciation $43,774 $43,114 Administration (.05% of Operations) - $2- $2,6 -24 $541,593 $571,134 $372,158 -- $392,457 $67,861 $71,563 $42,842 $45,179 $58,732 $61;935 $541,593 $571,134 - - 166 774 -- --.- $71 $39,025 $45,179 $57,398 $61,935 $163,197 $178,677 1992 Adj. for Gordy P.E.R.A & Fire Relief 1993 Adj. for Fire Relief % Inc. 7.17% 15.77 %% 7.90% - 68.46 % - - - - -- 65. -25% 69.-15% 12.00' 11.01% 15.03% 12.17% 11.31 8.91% 7.98% 1.52% 7.23' 11.63% 11.14% 10.961 9.46 (1) The cost allocation is by multiplying the total fire protection cost by each service area's combined five - - year- average. EXHIBIT B - FIVE YEAR AVERAGES tt ltl tttt ttttttttttttttttytttttttttt ttttt tttttttttttt ttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt ttttt tttt tttttttt tttttttttt *It SCHEDULE A. FIRE RUNS Stillwater City Grant Township Hay - Township Stillwater Township SCHEDULE B. GROSS & NET TAX CAPACITY Stillwater City Grant Township May Township Stillwater Township SCHEDULE C. ESTIMATED POPULATION Stillwater City Grant Township May Township Stillwater Township SCHEDULE D. ESTIMATED HOUSEHOLDS Stillwater Grant Township May Township Stillwater Township * 67% OF ACTUAL tt 60% OF ACTUAL Total - -Total Total Total . it .. tt tt 5 YEAR AVERAGE 1992 1991 1990 1989 1988 68.46% 221.40 225 229 11.01% 35.60 36 29 -8.91% 28.80 20 25 11.63% 37.60 40 34 100.00% 323.40 Net Tax - - - - - Capacity 65.251 $10,496 $10,145 15.03% $2,418 $2,304 7.98 % - -- $1,284 $1,295 11.74% $1,888 $1,926 - 100.00 % - - - -- $16 --$15 671 - -- $15,919 - - -- 69.15 % - - - 12.77% 1.52% - 10.56 % 100.00% 20,090 13,893 -- - 14598 - - --- 14218 - - 13882 2,566 2625 2519 2531 1,511 1571 1542 1521 4121-----2247 . 2 0 6 6 72.00% 5,019 5259 5246 t 1 1 . 3 1 % .- _ 788 - 818 - .. 803 1.23% 504 512 501 9.46% 659 691 668 100.00% 6,971 193 185 36 30 32- - 38 46 19 Net Tax Net Tax Net Tax Capacity- Capacity- Capacity - $10,120 $10,212 $9,967 $2,430 $2,312 $2,236 -$1,357 $1,148 $1,131 $2,012 $1,821 $1,699 5105 801 574 651 4715 175 473 655 215 47 29 49 Gross Tax Capacity $11,977 $2,748 $1,482 $1,984 $15,613 - -- 115,039 - -- $18,191 13,282 13,485 2,621 2,466 1,459 1,458 2124 -- - - -- 2,015 4,711 146 -- 462 625 • • • SPECIAL MEETING Absent: None Also Present: STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 22, 1993 The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Hooley. Present: Councilmembers Bodlovick, Cummings, Funke, Kimble and Mayor Hooley. City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Consulting Engineer Moore Public Works Director Junker Water Board Secretary McKean City Clerk Johnson Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette 1 7:00 P.M. Others: Jack Jewell, Dennis Breu, George Hafner, Rod Hobson, Scott DeMarre, David Hartung, Susan Moses, Brian Longseth, Ross Bushman, Colleen Callahan, Patricia Hanson, Orwin Carter, Richard Waterfield, Vince Capperelli, Jean Schweitz, Chris Charleson, Mrs. Goldstrand, Peggy Doeksen. 1. This is the day and time for the public improvement hearing on the Southeast Area Improvement Project, L.I. 285. Notice of the hearing was published in The Stillwater Gazette on June 11 and 18, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. Consulting Engineer Moore proceeded to explain the project, stating it includes the Old Quarry Area and consists of sanitary sewer, watermain, streets and drainage. He then proceeded to explain the various alternates for the sanitary sewer system with Alternate 1 having one small lift station and a sewer with an 8" gravity flow. Alternate 2 would add additional sewer to the portion flowing into Oak Park Heights system. Jack Jewell, 415 So. William St., asked some questions about Alternate 2 and the flow into the Oak Park Heights system. Mr. Moore explained that it would bring the southerly area into the Oak Park Heights system and would require a lift station on the north end. Alternate 1 would be the least costly for operation and most efficient. Council directed Staff to look at drainage and if it would be possible to construct some storm sewer on Fifth Ave. and nearby streets. Two MSA streets are on this system where funds would be received from Mn /DOT. Mr. Moore then explained the mock assessment roll and City policy regarding assessments. He stated the total project cost is 1.6 million with Alternate 1 being the least Stillwater City Council Minutes June 22, 1993 Special Meeting expensive and provides flow into the City system. Alternate 1 has approximately 20 homes on the Oak Park Heights system. Oak Park Heights would be compensated by charging the City on a rate per gallon. George Hafner, 1017 4th Ave. So., asked who the Engineer was and information on construction costs. Discussion followed which included methods used to construct sewers in rocky area. Mr. Hafner stated he does not want blasting done. City Attorney Magnuson stated the contractor would furnish a bond that would protect the home owners from damage. Rod Hobson, 1329 Hillcrest, stated he has been on the Oak Park Heights sewer system for many years and would oppose the project. He asked if he would be assessed if he already has sewer and the answer was no. Scott DeMarre, 1312 4th Ave. So., asked if the City requires hookup to the sewer if his septic system is still working and Staff replied this is usually done within one year. Discussion followed with a modification to the previous answer that more time could be given for hookup, or required when the system fails or when the house is sold. David Hartung, 910 So. 5th Ave., asked how payment of assessments would be made and it was explained that usually it is spread over ten years at 8% and he could use his own contractor to run the service lines to his house. Brian Longseth, 518 E. Burlington, asked whether the assessment for the improvement can exceed the benefit to his home and this item was discussed. Susan Moses, 1009 5th Ave. So., asked questions concerning the decision as to who has to be included and the cut off point as to when a resident has to hook up to the sewer. Ross Bushman, 1215 5th Ave. So., asked to have the survey regarding resident feelings on construction of the sewer explained. Mr. Moore stated the Council did receive a' petition, an informational hearing was held and residents appeared in favor of the project. A man stated he has three lots on 5th Ave. and asked whether one of them would become a buildable lot if sewer is put in. It was stated that if a lot is charged for a system thenlit has to be a buildable lot. Colleen Callahan stated she two lots, one being a big back yard, and they have put the two together into one lot. They are being assessed for the storm sewer per lot. Mr. Moore xplained the mock assessment roll is not the final assessment roll and ever in the drainage area contributes to the system. 2 • • Stillwater City Council Minutes • June 22, 1993 Special Meeting • • A lady asked if Staff had looked at other sources of funding and Mr. Moore answered in the affirmative. Patricia Hanson, 510 Quarry Lane, stated they have a private road where they do not get any city services and asked why they were included in the project. Mr. Moore explained that the City would have to acquire easements in this case. Ms. Hanson asked if the street would benefit from City services and Mr. Moore stated that would be determined by the City. Ms. Hanson stated Quarry Lane is on limestone and asked if the assessment is based on blasting costs. Mr. Moore explained the extra expenses incurred for the removal of rock. Orwin Carter, 1029 3rd Ave. So., asked for an explanation of water service charges and Mr. Moore explained that the galvanized water service will be replaced with copper within the right -of -way because galvanized services do not meet health standards. Mr. Carter asked if streets will be redesigned to take care of flooding problems and Mr. Moore stated these streets will have curb and gutter with a better drainage system. Discussion followed regarding a survey of residents to obtain their feelings on whether the project should be done. Discussion also included action from the Pollution Control Agency if pollution was discovered. Brian Longseth stated concerns about hidden costs and favors a questionnaire. Richard Waterfield, 1316 4th Ave. So., asked if any investigation has been done of smaller places that are at risk. Mr. Moore explained that the sewer project has to be constructed all the way down stream to make it work. Further discussion occurred on clarification of assessments. Scott DeMarre further discussed the costs of the sewer and hook -up and the need to hook -up within a year. It was stated that Council would be receptive to a reasonable time to hook -up to sewer. Vince Capperelli, 1215 4th Ave. So., further discussed costs of sewer and hook -up. He is also concerned the PCA may make them remove their tanks. Mr. Moore explained that any costs over and above these mentioned are costs on private property and these costs are very individual. Suggestions and discussion followed regarding the high costs for residents, whether the PCA has done any studies on the aquifer and a requirement that all septics have to be pumped out every other year. Public Works Director Junker reviewed some of the problems with septic systems, such as the houses on 4th and 5th Ave. with 50 ft. lots where 3 Stillwater City Council Minutes June 22, 1993 Special Meeting they have no room to put in a septic, and stated that if the City is willing to pay 50% of the cost and give each resident five years to hook up the assessment is less now than in 1975. The City cannot tolerate sewer running over the top of the ground. He suggested the tanks could be pumped and filled with sand. Jean Schweitz, 1023 5th Ave., stated the City is giving residents the option of hook up later on and requested that those of us who have problems be given the chance to have them taken care of. Ms. Schweitz asked questions regarding payment of assessments and Mr. Kriesel stated she could pay off the assessment at any time. Dennis Breu, 1318 3rd Ave. So., asked if the project could be broken down into smaller sections and Mr. Moore said if it is a smaller project, the costs may be higher. Mrs. Goldstrand, 1309 Hillcrest Dr., said she doesn't think the north and south hill residents should have to be involved because of the small number of people who need tnis -- also she would like to be able to accept or reject the project. A lady at 915 4th Ave. So., asked for information on the possible structural damage and how the City will handle homes because of blasting. Mr. Moore again addressed blasting and the removal of rock to facilitate the project. Chris Charleson, 1030 4th Ave. So., asked if it was possible to be assessed over a longer period of time and it was stated that Council can set any terms. Peggy Doeksen, 503 E. Burlington, stated she will be paying a high assessment and her home is worth $70,000. It was stated that her home will appreciate because of the improvement. Councilmember Funke stated he is the Council representative for many of these people and would like to personally hear from them. Other comments made were that of a man who thinks people have "sticker shock" over this and the mentality is that everyone else should pay for it. Another person asked if any consideration was given to the improvement when NSP put in gas mains. Discussion included the history of the project, and going through neighboring yards to pick up watermain. Mr. Magnuson explained that sometimes easements are located across neighbors yards, but it is not a good practice. Utilities should be located in the right -of -way. • • • • • Stillwater City Council Minutes June 22, 1993 Special Meeting Council recessed and reconvened at 8:50 P.M. City Attorney Magnuson explained the process for public improvements and stated this hearing is the first time the public had a right to express their views. The second time will be the assessment hearing. Decision on the project can be continued up to six months from tonight. Mayor Hooley closed the public hearing. Council discussion followed, including consideration of a 20 year plan for payment of assessments and inclusion of a five year time limit for hook -up to the system. It was noted that this decision can be made at the assessment hearing. Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to adopt the appropriate resolution ordering the public improvement for the Southeast Area Sanitary Sewer Project and directing the Engineers to prepare the plans and specifications. (Resolution No. 93 -111) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Cummings, Funke, Kimble and Mayor Hooley. Nays - None Mr. Moore explained the process that follows which includes the Engineers prepartion of all plans for the project, presentation of these to Council and Council direction for the Engineers to seek bids and then make the award. 2. Possible discussion of Professional Services Agreement with SEH. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to postpone a decision on the contract for Short - Elliott- Hendrickson, Inc. and discuss this item at a later date. (All in favor). Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Funke to amend the previous motion to include the scheduling of a workshop on Engineering contract at a Special Meeting on July 20, 1993 at 4:30 P.M. (All in favor). 3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Priority Classification of Stillwater City Dump. Mr. Kriesel explained that the PCA is conducting a study to determine what kind of contaminants are being released in the City dump. 4. Potential Problems in River Flooding Request from P.D. Pappy's for storage of items Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to approve the storage of property from P.D. Pappy's Bar & Restaurant in two trucks placed west of their property during the river flooding. (All in favor). Mr. Kriesel distributed a handbook on flood preparedness and explained further regarding procedures. Certain manholes are being sandbagged and 5 Stillwater City Council Minutes June 22, 1993 Special Meeting the Nelson St. and Aiple Lift Stations are being diked. Mr. Moore stated pumping will be started tonight and pumps will be rented from Northern and Johnson Brothers at approximately $500 per week. New pumps cost several thousand dollars. Mr. Moore will check into the purchase of pumps for the City. Discussion of possible closing of the bridge followed. Mayor Hooley stated he would like to keep the Council informed on a daily basis. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to authorize the Mayor to take whatever steps are necessary on an emergency basis during the flood. (All in favor.) Sealcoating of Streets Mr. Kriesel stated there are some streets that need to be added to the sealcoating project and some intersections in Croixwood. This item would add approximately $50,000 to the sealcoating project which would still be within City budget. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to approve the funding of sealcoating for streets as outlined by City Coordinator Kriesel and Consulting Engineer Moore, at an added cost of approximately $50,000. (All in favor). - Employment of Leo Miller as P.T. Code Enforcement Officer Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to adopt the appropriate resolution employing Leo Miller on a part -time basis as Code Enforcement Office. (Resolution No. 93 -112) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Cummings, Funke, Kimble and Mayor Hooley. Nays - None Discussion of "Attention Light" for Council Chambers Mayor Hooley explained the "attention light" which will be added in front of each Councilmember and Staff position place on the dais to alert the Mayor to any specific item needing mention during a Council meeting. Motion by Councilmember Funke, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to approve the Council "attention 1tght" as explained by Mayor Hooley. (All in favor). Discussion of flooded Kolliner's beach & Lowell Park with impact on July 4th celebration Council discussed the above item with the possibility of setting the fireworks off from a barge in iver or changing the date of the display. The Sesquicentennial Committee will meet tomorrow morning and come to a decision. Staff will contact the contractor for the display, to determine if another date could be chosen. • • • Stillwater City Council Minutes June 22, 1993 • Special Meeting • • ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to adjourn the meeting to Executive Session at 9:50 P.M. (All in favor). ATTEST: Park & Recreation Commission Councilmember Cummings stated he will be calling a meeting of the Park & Recreation Commission for possibly next week to go over the budget process with the Parks Supervisor. CITY CLERK 7 MAYOR Resolutions: No. 93 -111 - Ordering improvement & preparation of plans & specs for S.E. Sanitary Sewer Project, L.I. 285. No. 93 -112 - Employment of Leo Miller as P.T. Code Enforcement Officer. U!:1*; `J3 11:3U FA\. U1G .lJU Z15) bta J1. FALL water • THE BIp7HPLACE OF MINNESOTA July 14, 1993 Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council; The Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission strongly supports the adaptive reuse project of the Commander Elevator. The elevator, which was constructed in 1898, is historically significant as defined in the Stillwater Historic Context "Stillwater Late Nineteenth Century Agricultural Development (1860's- 1910's) ". Although it is not formally a locally designated historic site, it should be preserved. Stillwater played an important role as a farm trade center of Washington County and St. Croix County. This building is one of the last remnants along the riverfront from this context, The Commission reviewed the design of the project at their regular meeting of July 12, 1993. The project was unanimously approved with remarks that the adaptive reuse project is sensitive to the visual image of the elevator. Preservation of our historic resources is valuable for the future of Stillwater. Preservation does not mean just saving the "Victorian" structures but saving those remnants, whdther of high architectural quality, or in this instance, a grain elevator. We hope you, as a City Council, respect the preservation and adaptive reuse of a structure which has been part of our community for almost one hundred years. S' c ely, r r+_ J f'Johnson Jay Michels Tim Stefan Katherine Francis Pat Qual ey Brent Peterson Howard Lieberman Bob Kimbrel CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55052 PHONE: 612-439 LJUUZ /UUZ • The elevator is essentially preserved in its existing form with some modifications which include windows and door openings as shown. The proposal is sensitive to the elevator's form. Wood decking is added on the south elevation. The metal siding will remain as will the "Commander" sign. 411 The elevator is not in the Historic Commercial District but is a part of the history of the community as defined in the context "Stillwater and the Late - Nineteenth Century Agricultural Development (1860's - 1910's) (attached). Not just "beautiful" structures are considered historic. This structure has served the community for 100 years and should remain a viable and visible image of the community. There is no market for grain in Stillwater but there is a market for retail trade. Not many individuals would take on a project to preserve this type of structure. • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. DR/93 -14 Project Location: 421 East Nelson Street Comprehensive Plan District: Central Business District Zoning District: CBD Applicant's Name: Mike McGuire Type of Application: Design Permit & Special Use Permit PROJECT DESCRIPTION: An adaptive reuse project of the Commander Elevator at 421 East Nelson Street. DISCUSSION: As a condition of approval for the Commander Elevator, specific first floor plans are submitted. The plans show each elevation of the elevator and how the structure will be modified in order to allow for a retail use to be conducted. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. All signage shall be reviewed by the Design Review Committee. 2. All previous conditions of approval (SUP/88 -23) shall remain. RECOMMENDATION: Approval as conditioned. FINDINGS: The proposal meets the intent of the Downtown Design Guidelines. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval. Stillwater Planning Commission June 14, 1993 John G. and Elizabeth Hilpisch, owners, presented the application. The home is currently up for sale, and many potential buyers have been interested in the home as a Bed and Breakfast. The Hilpisch's are requesting the Special Use Permit in order to make the home more marketable. They do not intend to run a B &B themselves. The Heritage Preservation Commission has reviewed the request and approved the four bedroom B &B use. There is parking available for four cars on the site. Mr. Russell stated that one letter in support of the Hilpischs was received from a neighbor. There were no objections from the audience. Duarte Elliott made a emotion that the Commission is sympathetic to the request but cannot tike _, position because the applicants would not be the operators of the B &B, and therefore delay the decision until the owners and operators make application for a Bed and Breakfast permit. Darwin Wald seconded. Jay Kimble asked that the motion be amended to deny the request with a statement to the City Council of the Planning Commission's findings. Mr. Elliott amended the motion: to deny but with sympathy to the request because the home represents what a Bed and Breakfast should be; denial is based upon the distance from an existing B &B and because the applicants would not be the operators. Don Valsvik seconded. Motion failed 3 -3. Jay Kimble moved to approve the special use permit request, based on the uniqueness of the home and the hardship shown. Glenna Bealka seconded. Motion again failed 3 -3. Motion by Jay Kimble, seconded by Darwin Wald to continue the case to July 12. Carried 6 -0. OTHER BUSINESS Consideration of. Ordinances 1. Conservation Ordinance limiting development of sloped areas. Motion by Duane Elliott, seconded by Glenna Bealka to recommend approval of the draft Conservation Ordinance, with one amendment: using Mean Sea Level as a base. Carried 6 -0. 2. ,tome Water Ordinance requiring review of storm water damage. Motion by Duane Elliott, seconded by Don Valsvik to recommend approval of the Storm Water Ordinance. Carried 6 -0. The meeting adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Submitted by: Shelly Schaubach, Recording Secretary 4 Stillwater Planning Commission June 14, - 1993 He also was concerned that only one single family residence per lot will be allowed. Mr. Russell clarified that each lot must have access to a public street for development exceeding one single family home. These lots have access only to a private road. Chairman Fontaine asked if there could be assurance given to existing property owners that the extension of the sanitary sewer will not be their responsibility. Mr. Russell stated that if they are required to hook up to the sewer, they will have to share in the cost. The Commission agreed on a seventh condition: The owner of Lots A, B, and C will pay for extending the main sewer line from 1st and Wilkins to Broadway and Wilkins. Brian Palmer, 1005 N. 1st Street, and owner of 1012 N. Broadway, stated that he would not want to see duplexes built in the area. A resident of 1011 N. 1st Street stated she supports only one home per parcel. Sonya Simkins also supports only one residence on each lot. Tom Thomsen, who lives south of Parcel C, stated that his house extends into Lot C and would like to see this cleared up. He is also in favor of single family homes in the area. Motion by Duane Elliott, seconded by Darwin Wald to approve the Subdivision request with seven conditions. Carried 6 -0. Case No. SUB/93 -25 - Minor Subidivison of lots 17, 18, and 19, Churchill and Nelson's Second Addition, by adding a 5 ft. x 150 ft. parcel to Lots 6, 7 and 8, Churchill and Nelson's Second Addition, 311 East Burlington Street. Edna Andrewson, Applicant. The applicant was not present. Motion by Glenna Bealka, seconded by Jay Kimble to continue the case to July 12. Carried 6 -0. Case No. SUB/93 -38 - Minor Subdivision adding the south 10 ft. of Lot 4, Block 3, Thompson, Parker and Mower's Second Addition to Lot 6 of the same addition located in the Two Family Residential, RB, Zoning District, at 229 North Everett Street. Joan Schafer, representing the owner, Elizabeth Swanson, presented the request. Mrs. Swanson owns both lots and is making the request in order to make the lot legal size and therefore more saleable in the future. Motion by Darwin Wald, seconded by Duane Elliott to approve the subdivision request. Carriecc. 6 -0. Case No. SUP /V/93 -39 - A Special Use Permit and Variance to the Bed and Breakfast Ordinance (another Bed and Breakfast is located within 900 feet) to conduct a four guest room Bed and Breakfast at 1306 South Third Street. The property is located in the Two Family Residential, RB Zoning District. Stillwater Planning Commission June 14, 1993 Motion by Don Valsvik to approve Case No. PUD/93 -23 with eleven conditions, and the conditions requested by the Design Review Committee, plus condition No. 12 requiring landscaping of the pond at the time Outlot R is developed. Seconded by Darwin Wald. Carried 6 -0. Motion by Duane Elliott, seconded by Don Valsvik to approve Case No. SUB/93 -24 with one condition. Carried 6 -0. Case No. V/93 -34 - A Variance to the Sign Ordinance for construction of a 19 square foot sign on a canopy of an existing building in the Two Family Residential, RB, Zoning District at 808 North Fourth Street. Dave Majeski of Consolidated Lumber Company presented the request. He stated that in 1988 he was granted a variance for 33 sq. ft. but it was never used. The new sign will not be lighted. Duane Elliott questioned why a larger sign is needed. Amy Steffan, 807 N. Fourth, across the street asked why the sign will be made out of plywood. She also asked if there is any landscaping requirement. Mr. Russell stated that there is not. Don Valsvik stated that he feels the request is reasonable considering the location of the building. Motion by Don Valsvik, seconded by Darwin Wald to approve the variance request. Carried 5 -1 (D. Elliott opposed) Case No. SUP /93 -36 - A Special Use Permit for operation of a painting business out of a residence at 507 West Maple Street in the Two Family Residential, RB, Zoning District. The applicant was not present. Motion by Darwin Wald, seconded by Don Valsvik to continue Case No. SUP/93 -36 to the July meeting. Carried 6 -0. Mary Welkert, 518 W. Maple Street, stated that she attended the meeting to voice her objection to a business in the neighborhood. Case No. SUB/93 -37 - Resubdivision of two lots, (2.48 acres), into three lots of .65 acres, .65 acres, and 1.18 acres, located in the Two Family Residential, RB, Zoning District at 1023 North Broadway. Robert McGarry, owner, presented the request. His home currently has a well and septic system. It will cost approximately $25,000 to sewer the area, which will be assessed to the benefiting property owners. Mr. McGarry questioned several of the conditions of approval. Condition No. 2 was amended to read: The existing residence shall be connected to City sanitary sewer system before building permits are issued to Lots A or C. Date: June 14, 1993 Time: 7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARINGS STILLWATER PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Members Present: Gerald Fontaine, Chairman Glenna Bealka, Duane Elliott, Jay Kimble, Darwin Wald, and Don Valsvik Steve Russell, Comm. Dev. Director Ann Pung - Terwedo, Planner Absent: Dorothy Foster, Rob Hamlin, and Kirk Roetman APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion by Darwin Wald, seco ded by Glenna Bealka to approve the minutes of May 10, 1993, as submitted. Carried 6 -0. Case No. PUD/93 -23 - Planned Unit Development permit for a 256,000 square foot commercial development on a portion of a 67.8 acre parcel of land located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 36 and County Road 5 in the Business Park - Commercial, BP -C, Zoning District. Target and Super Valu, Applicants. Case No. SUB/93 -24 - A Subdivision of a 67.8 acre parcel into nine lots, seven developable, ranging in size from 10.34 acres to 1.42 acres located on the northeast quadrant of Highway 36 and County Road 5 in the Business Park- Commercial, BP -C. Target and Super Valu, Applicants. Cases 93 -23 and 93 -24 were presented together. Steve Russell gave background information on the site: City gave approval in 1986 for a shopping center on the site which did not proceed. The West Business Park Plan was then prepared to provide direction for development of the site. Jim Theuseh of Target Real Estate Group presented the proposal. A revised site plan was distributed to the Commission. The architect from RSP Architects presented the exterior design of the plan and John Dietrich of RLK Associates presented the land- scaping plan. Duane Elliott asked about plans to landscape the pond. Al Krueger, who lives directly south of the property, asked if the school district had been notified of these plans. He is concerned for the safety of the high school students because of the amount of traffic that will be generated. Sonya Simkins stated she drives County Road 5 at night and it is very dark and asked if there will be more lighting put in place. Elaine Krueger stated that she is lso concerned about the traffic as there is parking space for up to 2,000 cars at the new high school. • • July 14, 1993 Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 -4898 Dear Mr. Russell: As you requested, we have reviewed the above referenced Planning Case. This is for Lot 3, Block 3, Carli and Schulenberg's Addition to the City of Stillwater on North Fourth Street. This property is located north of Hickory Street. The Hickory Street Ravine is the outlet for the storm sewer system for much of the area north of School Street, and it is also where a large trunk sanitary sewer is located. • We visually reviewed the wall on Lot 3 and it appears to be sound. However, we would recommend that a structural engineer review this wall to determine the structural integrity of the wall. We concur with the Conditions of Approval as stated in your letter of review to the Planning Commission dated July 12, 1993. A site drainage grading plan should be done, even though it is minimal, to demonstrate the pattern of water flow, particularly since the garage will be below the sidewalk grade on Fourth Street. In addition, we feel that a structural engineer should review the structure, particularly the steel beam construction and /or the span across the ravine itself because of the unusual construction of the structure and the proposed height. We recommend that City Engineer assist the building inspector in review of the soils report and any structural investigation of the City's retaining wall on Fourth Street, and review of the structural plans for the building. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, REM/ kam SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST PAUL. MN 55110 612 490 -2000 800 325 -2055 ARCHITECTURE • ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION MINNEAPOLIS, MN ST CLOUD, MN RE: City of Stillwater City Engineer Planning Case No. V/93 -42 SEH File No. A -STILT .7280.00 Richard E. Moore, P.E. City Engineer CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON, WI • WEST i✓�>✓v�Ti nfJ (FAGIN NoptTH 411 ;T) — — • fl � Nop�tN * ¶. lr l.6'iPA'TIoN chore -po., U?? F! P IIo'- D" rtio Fldz. ioo o° au' - I 1 I 1 80+, 1 ,moo 1 +i t1 • • • • • • T 9 0 • - z. N o ru 3 r 0 4'1 'o ,.., -,,,,,, = _ = . t x ...: I? , r ir- c c -F3 o r -- • - s ° ,I% _:.; .1% 1 ° ..; oF is .....z. r - •L -11 .21 — , r • 11, 111 le 1!11 t • • .4 • 0 • • 30 June 93 City of Stillwater Planning & Zoning Commission 214 No. 4th St. Stillwater MN 55082 RE : HEIGHT VARIANCE / HOUSE BUILDING PERMIT TO ALL MEMBERS, We are applying for a residential building permit which requires a height variance. We are proposing to build a home on a unique site located at 809 North Fourth Street. I have enclosed a set of plans (site plans, elevations, floor plans). THE SITE The parcel of land is 70' x 150' (10,500 SF). Its physical features are a 100+ year old stone retaining wall 17' high, two steep sloping surfaces forming a gully, two large cottonwood trees, several 12 " dia. elms. and misc. ground cover. The gully does not carry surface water from off site areas. An old railing exists in disrepair along the sidewalk and stone wall. The site has been to date a spot for dumping garbage, lawn clippings and miscellaneous debris. OUR PROPOSAL We intend to build a single family home on the above parcel. We have studied the site, its environment, the adjacent neighbors and have designed a home that we feel addresses the unique site in a sensitive, creative and efficient manor. As the plan indicates, we intend to bridge the gully to minimize our impact on existing grades, drainage, vegetation, and limit our footing foundation work. We then propose a 3 floor (lower, main, upper) residence resting on two steel beams (see plans enclosed). The building mass was created to be compatible with the neighbors north and south. The materials selected are to be expressive of the commercial structure south and residential property north. The bridge allows existing contours to remain and enables us to retain as much existing vegetation possible. We are intending to plant ground cover (woodland, wildflower seed mix) and coniferous trees to enhance the woodland character of the property. The site currently drains along the bottom of the gully. This drainage flow will be retained and eventually enhanced as a site feature. We anticipate the large elms and one large cottonwood will remain. We will probably eliminate the one cottonwood which is topped. The stone wall is being cleaned up and the garbage removed from the gully. The railing will be replaced. VARIANCE This unique site has presented a problem in defining a ground plane in which to measure a maximum building height. (Current city ordinance limits height to 35' and 21/2 stories). If the height is measured from the gully elevation we are exceeding the height. We are requesting a variance to the ordinance to accept the structure as proposed. We feel the height of our home should be measured from the main level which is the same elevation as the street. The exposed lower level should be considered similar to a walkout. This brings the height of our home within the limit. We realize we could address our site as typical and bury the lower level keeping the height within the limit. We have choosen not to because we felt it was not a sensitive solution to the site and the city would also recognize this and grant a variance. We also request we are included on the 20 July 93 City Council meeting. Respectfu Tim and Amy Stefan SR CASE NUMBER PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM Street Location of Property: Logal Description of Property: \✓V1 Gv Owner: Name [� ,. Address Address Typo of Request: Aaplicant (if other than owner): Name Description of Request: `-> Uut Caso Number Fee Paid � / Date Filed 7 L ' ,L X3 Phone: o Phone: Rezoning ___ Approval of Preliminary Plat ___ Special Use Permit ___ Approval of Final Plat _ Variance ___ Other *NOTICE: ENGINEERING FEES MAY BE BILLED TO APPLICANT. Signature of Applicant: Date of Public Hearing: NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back of this form or tached, showing the following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3. Dimensions of front and side set - backs. 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. 5. Street names. 6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. 7. Other information as may be requested. ___ by the Planning Commission on `4 subject to the following conditions: _ Approved ___ Denied Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on following conditions: Comments: (Use other side), (duce) subject to the at- ATTACHMENTS: - Plans. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION.: Approval with conditions. 2 RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. A grading/drainage plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director before building permits are issued. 2. The method of connecting to water and sewer main shall be approved by the Water Department and Public Works Departments before building permit approval. 3. The railing along the sidewalk shall be repaired or replaced to protect pedestrians from the adjacent steeply sloped areas before construction of the residence begins. 4. A soils report shall be provided to the Building Inspector to certify the safety and proposed construction of the structure on the site. 5. The structural stability of the wall along North Fourth Street shall be certified by a qualified professional before a building permit is issued for the residence. 6. If possible, sanitary sewer services shall be provided from North Fourth Street. • • • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. V/93 -42 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: July 12, 1993 Project Location: 809 North Fourth Street Comprehensive Plan District: Residential Zoning District: RB, Duplex Residential Applicant's Name: Tim and Amy Stefan Type of Application: Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The request is to construct a single family residential residence on a 10,500 square foot lot located in the Duplex Residential District. DISCUSSION: The proposal is for a single family residence and single car garage. Two variances are required; one for the height of the structure and one for the garage setback from the street. The site is irregular and requires a unique design to be developed. The development regulations for the district allows a height of 2 1/2 stories and 35 feet. The structure measured from the street (west) elevation is 38 feet in height and three levels. As measured from the north or side elevation, the structure is two stories and 28 feet. The second variance is for the garage. The garage is proposed to be set back 20 feet from the street. A 24 foot set back is required. The site is unusual because of its topographic condition. A ravine runs through the center of the site leading to a major drainage way to the rear of the site that serves as a stormwater runoff channel and sanitary sewer line for the area. The design of the residence fits the site. The residence bridges the ravine and would appear as a two story residence from Fourth Street if it could be seen with the 54 foot set back. The design is not typical of Stillwater but the site is unique. The proposed single family residence is consistent with area land use. Sewer and water services are available to the site. Special soils information would have to be provided by the developer to insure the stability of the slopes and foundation. Visually, the project would not impact the riverway or require special utility or access considerations for the City. No drainage or grading plans have been submitted for the project, although the site plan shows major trees to remain. Utilities to the site are available but the method of servicing the site must be approved by the City Utilities Department. 1 CASE NUMBER Date Filed PLANNING ADMINISTRATIVE FORM < , �� t om. ��'��'�� Street ocation of Prop� - a y oo� Logal Doscription of Property: Owner: Name Address Applicant (if other than owner): Name Address 4 e ) i7/1r z Type of Request: ___ Rezoning ___ Special Use Permit ___ Variance /v 05 z7 c _-€4 Description of Request: NOTE: Comments: (Use other side). o5'C� oSc -' Case Number -Wi Fee Paid ____7 Phone - 2 2 /ti c 0 7 S& Phone: ___ ApprovaI of Preliminary Plat ___ Approval of Final Plat Other eL rO.IC � �o���.'1 �p .4 /44% - CC' v4'7" 7rste /c , _ Signature of Applicant: Date of Public Hearing: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back of this form or at- tached, showing the following: 1. North direction. - d structure cr. lot. i. vC..� .v.. of p ro��s .Jw. 3. Dimensions of front and side set- backs. 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. 5. Street names. 6. Location of adjacent existing buildings. 7. Other information as may be requested. Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho Planning Commission on subject to the following conditions: 4 ���?` c ' ti th M\gg3 `� 61 GO OF iilLad.kitfi Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on subject to the following conditions: • PLANNING, APPLICATION REVIEW CASE N0. SUP/93 -36 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: June 14, 1993 PROJECT LOCATION: 507 West Maple Street Comprehensive Plan District: Two Family Residential Zoning District: RB APPLICANT'S NAME: Forrest Cole TYPE OF APPLICATION: Special Use Permit PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Special Use Permit for operation of a painting business out of a residence at 507 West Maple Street. DISCUSSION: The request is to conduct a painting business out of a home at 507 West Maple Street. At the time of this written report, the applicant has not given a written description of how he would be conducting his business, if customers would be coming to his home, or if he will be storing paint or other type of materials at this residence. The structure does not have a garage or any type of storage shed on the property. Conditions of Approval: 1. The Fire Department shall inspect any storage areas on the property related to the paint business. A report shall be filed with this case. 2. No signage identifying the business is allowed. 3. No paint customers are allowed at the residence. 4. No more than three deliveries (UPS or related) are allowed per week. Findings: The proposed use will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Attachments: - Application Form. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: Approval as conditioned. • • sneet Z of L Sheets ,JOB NO: None • •ova vv...✓ 4■4•6/41.4... •. v t.. 1• 11 ♦11V1\ JVUN CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY * Parcel A add "Together with" * Parcel B add "Subject to" BARRETT M. STACK STILLWATER, MINN. 55082 MINNESOTA REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR Tel. No. 439 -5630 SURVEY MADEEXCLUSIVELY FOR: Mrs. Edna Andrewsen, 311 East Burlington St.. Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 DESCRIPTION: Proposed Utility Easement Description: (To be added to Parcel A and Parcel B Desc. on Sheet 1) * an easement for utility purposes over, under and across all that part of the West 5.00 feet of the East 10.00 feet of Lots 18 and 19, Block 1, Churchill and Nelson's 2nd Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota, which lies northerly of a line drawn parallel with and 66.00 feet southerly of the northerly line of said Lot 19. • PROPOSED COMBINED ANDREWSEN PARCEL DESCRIPTION: The West Half of Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block t, Churchill and Nelson's 2nd Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. and The East 5.00 feet of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block 1, Churchill and Nelson's 2nd Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. Together with (add the above utility easement description) I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of Minnesota. //r, Date April 22, 1993 Rcg.No 13774 SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS JOII NO: None PROPOSED ANDREWSEN MINOR SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY N a tl • 2 o II SURVEY MADE EXCLUSIVELY FOR, Mrs. Edna Andrewsen, 311 East Burlington St., Stillwater, MN. DESCRIPTION' PROPOSED PARCEL A DESCRIPTION: The East 5.00 feet of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block 1, Churchill and Nelson's 2nd Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota. Containing 750 sq. ft., more or less. Subject to and together with any other valid easements, reservations or restrictions. PROPOSED PARCEL 8 DESCRIPTION: (together with utility easement on Sheet 2 of 2 Sheets) All that part of Lots 17, 18 and 19, Block 1, Churchill and Nelson's 2nd Addition to Stillwater, Washington County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the East 5.00 feet thereof. Subject Ntotandetogether with 64.00 reservations q. ft., more or less. ons or restrictions. NOTES: (subject to utility easement described on Sheet 2 of 2 Sheets) ITirs proposed subdivision is subject to a p o Indicates 1/2" I.D. iron pipe set markedby plug inscribed 13774. Orientation of this bearing system is assumed. "M" Indicates measured value. "R" Indicates recorded value. Existing overall parcel is described in Book 155 of Deeds, Page 495, Wash. Co. records. Underground or overhead public or private utilities on or adjacent the located in conjunction with this survey. E. Burlington St. Crated by deed as noted hereon. parcel were not 4 -22 -93 Revision Note: 1 Added Sheet 2 of 2 GO sheets, proposed utility easement ¢ i',r C e�rEO Br on Parcel B. E. OLEO BMS I QU/PZ /NG TDN 5 l• BeQC 2 ¢ APR O6EOS PA,r.6 Sy/ I F ti k't : e.awl2•t .007gar_ /3Gs/,w -- s.ei ,:4 --� � 1 - - _ • aS/ L4.00 1 / 45.5/ � I 1 J r / 1 1 I 1 ' X t.:! s , 11 ^ it I c./° 1 1 W V frar V 1 4 1 4 Si i I L. / / , eerVet! - ' O i. \l �� 3 ; SET , ,I; , Q 17 w PARC6,C 14 = 1 k 1.. d 0 //oc. / N �' 4 k. ' V ' 1 'n 1 s ` ' �.,v� / 82A-. 1 k D/V6 I ,1 1 I ' sw 1 w l / AO t\.— \�; - 48.42 _ ` / 40 7 0.42 BARRETT M. STACK STILLWATER, MINN. 55082 MINNESOTA REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR Tel. No. 439 -5630 11 hereby certify that this survey, plan, Of 1111011 naa 1 m a aeduly my supervision Re Land Surveyor a under the lass, of the State of Minnesota. Date Aprl l 21 , 1993 K6,N eo 13774 tb 2 • Comments; (Use other side), PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW Plannin CASE N0. SUB/93 -35 9 Commission Meeting: June 14, 19 Project Location; 31 93 1 East Burlington Com prehensive Plan District: Two Family Resid Zoning D istrict: RB ential Applicant's Name. Edna Andrewsen Type of Application; S ubdivision Project Description: Minor subdivision Of Lots 17 , 18, and 19 (303 East Burlington ), Churchill a Nelson's Second Churchill and Addition, b Nelson's Second by adding a 5 Addition (311 f t, parcel Discussion; East to Lots 6 7, and 8, The request Burlington), ' Lots l quest is to subdivide presently 18 and 19 to Lots 6a five f • s tructure be in built 0 °t wid parcel (750 meets g on Lots 7, and 8 (311 East square feet not meet the the five foot setback 18 and Burlington), A feet) from variance may minimum setback minimum for 19 (303 East Burlington). is 15 ft Y be regtired, he existing an attached g � 0 g ) • The 9 house garage but may ATION: at 311 East B urlington. q Approval. RECOMMEND F INDINGS: 1 the proposed land Plan�rements of RBA vision is the Two Family cResiid n tia with use and ential the u District and Com r lot SiZe ATT ACHMENTS : - Survey p ehensive - House Site Plan - Application Form. PLANNING COMMISSION I Approval. RECOMMENDAT ON; • • Donations and Revenues Expenditures COMMITTEE APPROVED /ANTICIPATED SESQUICENTENNIAL EXPENSES SESQUICENTENNIAL BUDGET OVERVIEW JULY 14, 1993 Total Funds Remaining Closing Ceremony Invitations (previously purchased) $176.00 Parade (Banners for Parade) Telephone • FUNDS REMAINING AFTER SESQUICENTENNIAL COMMITTEE EXPENSES OTHER DEDICATED EXPENSES Aviation Days Wildwest Days TOTAL $52,154 $26,290 $25,864 $ 8,824 $15,000 500 505 $24,829 $ 1,035 $ 2,000 $ 3,500 FUNDS WHICH NEED TO BE RAISED OR DELETED FROM THE BUDGET IN ORDER TO BREAK EVEN ON THE FUNDING FOR SESQUICENTENNIAL $4,465 • • • CERTIFICATION OF MINUTES RELATING TO $1,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993A $1,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993B $1,840,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL OUTLAY BONDS, SERIES 1993C Issuer: City of Stillwater, Minnesota Governing Body: City Council Kind, date, time and place of meeting: A regular meeting held on July 20, 1993, at 7 :00 o'clock P.M. at the City Hall. Members present: Members absent: Documents Attached: Minutes of said meeting (pages): RESOLUTION NO. 6- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF: $1,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993A $1,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993B $1,840,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL OUTLAY BONDS, SERIES 1993C TERMS OF PROPOSALS I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting recording officer of the public corporation issuing the bonds referred to in the title of this certificate, certify that the documents attached hereto, as described above, have been carefully compared with the original records of said corporation in my legal custody, from which they have been transcribed; that said documents are a correct and complete transcript of the minutes of a meeting of the governing body of said corporation, and correct and complete copies of all resolutions and other actions taken and of all documents approved by the governing body at said meeting, so far as they relate to said bonds; and that said meeting was duly held by the governing body at the time and place and was attended throughout by the members indicated above, pursuant to call and notice of such meeting given as required by law. WITNESS my hand officially as such recording officer this day of July, 1993. City Clerk • Councilmember introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption i • • RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE AND SALE OF: $1,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993A $1,400,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993E $1,840,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL OUTLAY BONDS, SERIES 1993C BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the City), as follows: Section 1. purposes. It is hereby determined to be in the best interests of the City to issue its: (a) General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993A, in the principal amount of $1,000,000, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 469 and 475, to finance public improvements within the City's Redevelopment District No. 1; (b) General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B, in the principal amount of $1,400,000, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 429 and 475, to finance public improvements, as more fully described on Exhibit A attached hereto; and (c) General Obligation Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1993C, in the principal amount of $1,840,000, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, to finance various capital outlay purchases for the City. Section 2. Terms of Proposal. Springsted Incorporated, financial consultant to the'City, has presented to this Council a form of Terms of Proposal for the Bonds described in Section 1 which are attached hereto and hereby approved and shall be placed on file by the Clerk. Each and all of the provisions of the Terms of Proposal are hereby adopted as the terms and conditions of the Bonds and of the sale thereof. Springsted Incorporated, as independent financial advisers, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2, paragraph (9) is hereby authorized to solicit bids for the Bonds on behalf of the City on a negotiated basis. Section 3. Sale Meeting. This Council shall meet at the time and place shown in the Terms of Proposal, for the purpose of considering sealed bids for the purchase of the Bonds and of taking such action thereon as may be in the best interests of the City. Attest: Clerk Mayor • The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: • • and the following voted against the same: whereupon the resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE • ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,000,000 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993A Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, August 17, 1993, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated September 1, 1993, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1994. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the • books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1996 $65.000 1997 $65,000 1998 $70,000 1999 $75,000 2000 $75,000 2001 $80,000 2002 $85,000 2003 $90,000 2004 $ 95,000 2005 $ 95,000 2006 $100,000 2007 $105,000 OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax increment income from the City's Tax Increment Financing District No. 6. The proceeds will be used to finance public improvements within the City's Redevelopment District No. 1. TYPE OF PROPOSALS • Proposals shall be for not less than $990,000 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $10,000, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a • Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of • matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms ID of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any Toss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT • The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred 00 Saint Paul, Minnesota o 55101e t elephone (612) 223- 3000 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 40 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated July 20, 1993 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL • • /s/ Mary Lou Johnson Clerk • THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,400,000 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993B Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, August 17, 1993, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. The Bonds will be dated September 1, 1993, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1994. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the • books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1995 $175,000 1996 $175,000 1997 $175,000 1998 $175,000 DETAILS OF THE BONDS 1999 $175,000 2000 $115,000 2001 $115,000 OPTIONAL REDEMPTION TYPE OF PROPOSALS 2002 $115,000 2003 $115,000 2004 $ 65,000 The City may elect on February 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments against benefited property. The proceeds will be used to finance various improvement projects within the City. • Proposals shall be for not Tess than $1,386,000 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $14,000, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of • matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Obligations qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Obligations. Any increased costs of issuance of the Obligations resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the Issuer has requested and received a rating on the Obligations from a rating agency, the Issuer will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Obligations have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Obligations. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS • If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers • shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any Toss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other • information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 60 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated July 20, 1993 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL • /s/ Mary Lou Johnson Clerk THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE • ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: $1,840,000 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL OUTLAY BONDS, SERIES 1993C Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, August 17, 1993, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated September 1, 1993, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1994. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1995 $165,000 1996 $200,000 1997 $205,000 1998 $215,000 1999 $225,000 2000 $ 85,000 2001 $ 90,000 2002 $ 95,000 TERMS OF PROPOSAL -i- 2003 $100,000 2004 $100,000 2005 $ 65,000 2006 $ 70,000 2007 $70,000 • 2008 $75,000 2009 $80,000 OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. The proceeds will be used to finance various capital outlay purchases for the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS Proposals shall be for not less than $1,821,600 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in • the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $18,400, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a • bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals • without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Obligations qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Obligations. Any increased costs of issuance of the Obligations resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the Issuer has requested and received a rating on the Obligations from a rating agency, the Issuer will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Obligations have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Obligations. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect • thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT • Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no • more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 75 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated July 20, 1993 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL • /s/ Mary Lou Johnson Clerk • • • Recommendations For City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,000,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993A $1,400,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B $1,840,000 General Obligation Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1993C Study No. S0784L3M3N3 stillwat.ci SPRINGSTED Incorporated July 16, 1993 • • • July 16, 1993 SPRINGSTED PUBLIC FINANCE ADVISORS Home Office 85 East Seventh Place Suite 100 Saint Paul, MN 55101 -2143 (612) 223 -3000 Fax: (612) 223 -3002 Mayor Charles M. Hooley Honorable City Council Mr. Nile Kriesel, Coordinator Ms. Diane DebIon, Finance Director Stillwater City Hall 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 -4898 Re: Recommendations for the Issuance of: $1,000,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993A $1,400,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B $1,840,000 General Obligation Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1993C 120 South Sixth Street Suite 2507 Minneapolis, MN 55402 -1800 (612) 333 -9177 Fax: (612) 349 -5230 16655 West Bluemound Road Suite 290 Brookfield, WI 53005 -5935 (414) 782 -8222 Fax: (414) 782 -2904 6800 College Boulevard Suite 600 Overland Park, KS 66211 -1533 (913) 345 -8062 Fax: (913) 345 -1770 1800K Street NW Suite 831 Washington, DC 20006 -2200 (202) 466 -3344 Fax: (202) 223 -1362 We respectfully request your consideration of our recommendations for the issuance of these three issues. A summary of the sizing and composition of each of the issues is attached as Appendix I to these recommendations. We will address each of the issues separately and then those items which are common to all three issues will be discussed at the end of the recommendations. $1,000,000 General Obligation Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993A Proceeds of this issue will fund the Supervalu (CUB) Tax Increment Project which proceeds will be used to demolish the old High School and construct parking facilities. The City has created a Tax Increment Financing District No. 6 which is part of the scattered site redevelopment district established by the City back in 1985. The City has entered into a development agreement with Supervalu dated June 30, 1993 and an assessment agreement with the County and the developer dated June 30, 1993. Supervalu will construct minimum improvements to the old Junior High School (East Wing) of not less than $3.3 million of incremental valuation. Based on current tax rates and assessment rates this will produce, after the City has received its 10% administrative fee, $118,215. That incremental income will be adequate to repay the $1,000,000 of bonds. The composition of the bond issue as shown on the following page: • • City of Stillwater, Minnesota July 16, 1993 Proiect Cost Asbestos Removal $ 140,000 Demolition /Clearing 135,000 Construction /Improvements (Estimate) 550,000 Total Project Costs $ 825,000 Contingency @ 10% 82,500 Capitalized Interest 64,713 Costs of Issue /Bond Discount 27,787 Total Bond Issue $1,000,000 Appendix II is the repayment schedule which demonstrates that assuming current market rates exist at the time of the bond issue, and assuming the incremental income as projected, the bonds can be amortized over a term ending February 1, 2007. It is our understanding the City wishes to amortize the bonds as quickly as possible without having to resort to other revenues of the City. $1,400,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B Proceeds of this bond issue will finance six improvement projects which are under construction or will be under construction shortly for which all of the costs will be assessed against the benefited properties. We have included 50% of the City sidewalk project costs which are being assessed with the remaining 50% being financed in the capital outlay bonds. The composition of the bond issue is as follows: Project Cost City Sidewalks $ 196,500 Highlands II 370,800 Green Twig Way 132,227 Gloves Addition 103,451 Highlands III 185,000 Highlands IV 406,000 Subtotal $1,393,978 Bond Discount/Miscellaneous 6,022 Total Bond Issue $1.400,000 Appendix III shows the repayment schedule for this bond issue with repayment based upon assessment income as generated in Appendix IV. The Gloves Addition special assessment is spread over 15 years instead of the traditional 10 -year period. This would require principal payments on the bonds of about $5,000 a year in those last five years. We are recommending that those small payments be lumped together into the 2004 payment, shortening the issue, and to the extent that there are any remaining assessments after the bonds are paid off, those revenues can come back to the City in the Improvement Fund for other projects. As demonstrated in Appendix III, the cash flow provides a positive balance throughout the life of the issue, assuming normal payments of special assessments, without additional prepayments or delinquencies. Page 2 City of Stillwater, Minnesota July 16, 1993 • $1 ,840,000 General Obligation Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1993C Proceeds of this issue will fund the usual capital outlay projects undertaken by the City each year. Three improvement projects are also included within this issue for that portion not specially assessed against benefited property. These include the City's share of the McKusick/Neal Street and Trail Project totaling $340,000, the tax - supported portion of the city sidewalks, and the City's share of the South East Area Sewer Project. The remaining share of the South East Area Sewer Project will be specially assessed against benefitted property and bonded in 1994 to reduce what would otherwise be a rather substantial amount of capitalized interest since the special assessments will not be filed until 1994. The composition of the issue is as follows: • • General Fund: Administration /Finance $ 10,805 Plant 21,000 Police 64,933 Fire 25,000 Inspection 400 Public Works - Streets 135,000 Public Works - Shop 5,000 Subtotal General $ 262,138 Library 16,284 Park 61,900 Sewer 20,000 Solid Waste 5,000 Lily Lake 57,870 Subtotal Capital Outlay $ 423,192 L.I. 261 McKusick /Neal (With Trail) 340,000 L.I. 274 City Sidewalks 196,500 L.I. 285 South East Area Sewer - City Share 840,000 Subtotal All Capital Outlay $1,799,692 Costs of Bond Issuance 21,908 Underwriter's Discount 18,400 Total Bond Issue $1,840,000 Appendix V is the repayment schedule for this bond issue. We have attempted to break apart those costs which have different useful lives. For instance, the City sidewalks and the general capital outlay projects have useful lives of up to five years. Those costs total $635,000 and are amortized as shown in Column 3. The McKusick /Neal Project will have a useful life of about ten years and those costs are amortized as shown in Column 4. The South East Area Sewer Project will have a useful life of at least 15 years or longer, and we have amortized those costs over 15 years as shown in Column 5. The total amount repaid each year is shown in Column 6. The total debt service, including the 5% required overlevy, is shown in Column 10. This issue will require a tax levy be certified beginning in 1993 for each of the years 1993 through 2007. Page 3 City of Stillwater, Minnesota July 16, 1993 S Rating All three issues are general obligations of the City and as such will require a rating review from Moody's Investors Service. Moody's will provide a single rating which will apply to all three issues and we anticipate that rating will continue to be the excellent "A" rating the City currently retains. • • Special Redemption We are recommending that all three issues retain the right to prepay bonds maturing February 1, 2002 and beyond as early as February 1, 2001 at par. This will provide the City with an opportunity to prepay some of the bonds if additional tax increments or special assessment prepayments are received. Reimbursement Federal arbitrage regulations restrict the City from reimbursing itself with bond proceeds for expenditures prior to receipt of the bond proceeds. The City is permitted to reimburse itself if it has undertaken a formal declaration of intent to reimburse itself and, in fact, reimburses itself the latter of either 18 months after the expenditure has been made or 18 months after the project has been placed in service. This is an expansion of the time frame from the previous 12 -month limitation. The City staff has advised us that the proper procedures have been put in place for reimbursement on these projects and therefore you will be in compliance with those provisions of the Act. Rebate The total of these three bond issues is $4,240,000. The City does not reasonable expect to issue additional tax- exempt bonds during 1993, and therefore will qualify itself as a "small issuer" under the Tax Reform Act. This permits the City to avoid rebate calculations and repayments. The debt service funds for these issues are also exempt from rebate. Bank Qualification Since the City will not be issuing $10,000,000 of tax- exempt bonds during 1993, these bonds will also be declared bank - qualified. Sale Date We recommend all three issues be offered for sale on Tuesday, August 17, 1993 with bids to be received in the offices of Springsted Incorporated at 11:30 A.M. The bids will be verified for accuracy, tabulated and presented to the Council for action at your regular meeting that evening. Proceeds will be available approximately 30 days later. Respectfully submitted, mmc SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 4 • • Project Number L.I. 261 L.I. 274 L.I. 285 Project Tasks Asbestos Removal Demolition / Clearing Construction / Improvements (Est.) Total Project Costs Contingency @ 10% Capitalized Interest Costs of Issue / Bond Discount Total Bond Issue Project Number Project Identification L.I. 274 City Sidewalks L.I. 276 Highlands II L.I. 282 Green Twig Way L.I. 283 Gloves Addition L.I. 289 Highlands III L.I. 293 Highlands IV Totals Bond Discount /Misc. Total Bond Issue Project Identification McKusick / Neal City Sidewalks South East Area Sewer 1993 Capital Outlay Projects Subtotal Costs of Issue /Discount Total Bond Issue City of Stillwater, Minnesota 1993 Bond Financings Composition of Issues G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993A (SUPERVALU INC.) Prepared 15— Jul -93 by SPRINGSTED Incorporated Task Cost 140,000 135,000 550,000 825,000 82,500 64,713 27,787 1,000,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B Project 1 Amount Cost ; Assessed 196,5001 196,500 370,800 370,800 132, 227 132,227 103,451 103,451 185,000 185,000 406,000 406,000 1,393,978 1,393,978 6,022 1,400,0001 Project 1 Repayment Cost Term 340,000 10 Years 196,5001 5 Years 840,0001 15 Years 423,192 ; 5 Years 1,799,692 40,3081 1,840,000 Assessments Filed 11/1/93 11/1/92 11/1/92 11/1/92 11/1/93 11/1/93 G. O. Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1993C (Tax Supported) Term Years 5 10 10 15 10 10 APPENDIX I Interest Rate 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% 8.00% Summary (Rounded) 5 Years 635,000 10 Years 345,000 15 Years 860,000 Total 1,840,000 s \stiII93 S0784L3 Page 5 rn 1993 1995 0 0.00% 64,713 64,713 64,713 0 0 0 (0) 1994 1996 65,000 3.30% 45,680 110,680 0 110,680 116,214 118,215 2,001 1995 1997 65,000 3.60% 43,535 108,535 0 108,535 113,962 118,215 4,253 1996 1998 70,000 3.90% 41,195 111,195 0 111,195 116,755 118,215 1,460 1997 1999 75,000 4.10% 38,465 113,465 0 113,465 119,138 118,215 (923) 1998 2000 75,000 4.30% 35,390 110,390 0 110,390 115,910 118,215 2,306 1999 2001 80,000 4.50% 32,165 112,165 0 112,165 117,773 118,215 442 2000 2002 85,000 4.70% 28,565 113,565 0 113,565 119,243 118,215 (1,028) 2001 2003 90,000 4.85% 24,570 114,570 0 114,570 120,299 118,215 (2,084) 2002 2004 95,000 5.00% 20,205 115,205 0 115,205 120,965 118,215 (2,750) 2003 2005 95,000 5.10% 15,455 110,455 0 110,455 115,978 118,215 2,237 2b04 2006 100,000 5.15% 10,610 110,610 0 110,610 116,141 118,215 2,075 2005 2007 105,000 5.20% 5,460 110,460 0 110,460 115,983 118,215 2,232 Dated: 9- 1 -1993 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 8- 1 -1994 Total Capital- Net Projected Year of Year of Principal ized Levy 105% Increment Levy Mat. Principal Rates Interest & Interest Interest Required of Total Income (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) TOTALS: 1,000,000 406,008 1,406,008 64,713 1,341,295 1,408,360 1,418,580 Bond Years: Avg. Maturity: Avg. Annual Rat T.I.C. Rate: 8,456.67 Annual Interest: 8.46 Plus Discount: 4.801% Net Interest: 4.901% N.I.C. Rate: City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,000,000 G.O. Tax Increment Bonds, Series 1993A SUPERVALU INC. Project 406,008 10,000 416,008 4.919% Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. - The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. m m Prepared 15-Jul-93 by SPRINGSTED Incorporated Annual Cumulative Surplus Surplus (11) (12) (0) 2,001 6,254 7,714 6,791 9,096 9,538 8,510 6,426 3,676 5,913 7,988 10,220 Composition of Issue Project Costs 907,500 Capitalized Interest Bond Discount Costs of Issuance Total 64,713 10,000 17,787 1,000,000 s\stillcub S0784N3 • • City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,400,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B Six Projects Dated: 9- 1 -1993 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 8- 1 -1994 Year of Year of Levy Mat. Principal Rates (1) (2) (3) (4) 1993 1995 1994 1996 1995 1997 1996 1998 1997 1999 1998 2000 1999 2001 2000 2002 2001 2003 2002 2004 2003 2005 2004 2006 2005 2007 2006 2008 TOTALS: 1,400,000 Bond Years: 7,308.33 Avg. Maturity: 5.22 Avg. Annual Rate: 4.295% T.I.C. Rate: 4.482% 175,000 3.00% 175,000 3.30% 175,000 3.60% 175,000 3.90% 175,000 4.10% 115,000 4.30% 115,000 4.50% 115,000 4.70% 115,000 4.85% 65,000 5.00% O 5.00% O 5.00% O 5.00% O 5.00% Total Principal Interest & Interest (5) (6) 78,877 50,428 44,653 38,353 31,528 24,353 19,408 14,233 8,828 3,250 0 0 0 0 Annual Interest: Plus Discount: Net Interest: N.I.C. Rate: 253,877 225,428 219,653 213,353 206,528 139,353 134,408 129,233 123,828 68,250 0 0 0 0 313,911 1,713,911 313,911 14,000 327,911 4.487% Projected 105% Assessment of Total Income (7) (8) 266,571 236,699 230,636 224,021 216,854 146,321 141,128 135,695 130,019 71,663 0 0 0 0 1,799,607 273,070 250,094 237,647 225,198 212,750 161,003 151,698 142,394 133,087 73,483 9,104 8,552 8,000 7,444 1,893,524 Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. Prepared July 14, 1993 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Annual Cumulative Surplus Surplus ( ( 6,499 13,395 7,011 1,177 0 14,682 10,570 6,699 3,068 1,820 9,104 8,552 8,000 7,444 6,499 19,894 26,905 28,082 23,978 38,660 49,230 55,929 58,997 60,817 69,921 78,473 86,473 93,917 • City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,400,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 19938 Six Projects TOTALS L.I. 274 - City Sidewalks Filing Date: 11/ 1/1993 date to 12/31/1994. PROJECTED ASSESSMENT INCOME Prepared July 14, 1993 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 1 of 3 L.I. 276 - Highlands II L.I. 282 - Green Twig Way Filing Date: 11/ 1/1992 Filing Date: 11/ 1/1992 Filing Collect Interest Interest Interest Year Year Principal @ 8.000% Total Principal @ 8.000% Total Principal @ 8.000% Total 1992 1993 37,080 34,622a 71,702 13,223 12,346b 25,569 1993 1994 39,300 18,347c 57,647 37,080 26,698 63,778 13,223 9,520 22,743 1994 1995 39,300 12,576 51,876 37,080 23,731 60,811 13,223 8,462 21,685 1995 1996 39,300 9,432 48,732 37,080 20,765 57,845 13,223 7,405 20,628 1996 1997 39,300 6,288 45,588 37,080 17,798 54,878 13,223 6,347 19,570 1997 1998 39,300 3,144 42,444 37,080 14,832 51,912 13,223 5,289 18,512 1998 1999 37,080 11,866 48,946 13,223 4,231 17,454 1999 2000 37,080 8,899 45,979 13,223 3,173 16,396 2000 2001 37,080 5,933 43,013 13,223 2,115 15,338 2001 2002 37,080 2,966 40,046 13,220 1,058 14,278 2002 2003 2003 2004 2004 2005 2005 2006 2006 2007 196,500 49,787 246,287 370,800 168,110 538,910 132,227 59,946 192,173 c) Includes interest from filing a) Includes interest from filing b) Includes interest from filing date to 12/31/1993. date to 12/31/1993. • • City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,400,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 19938 Six Projects L.I. 283 - Gloves Addition Filing Date: 11/ 1/1992 PROJECTED ASSESSMENT INCOME Prepared July 14, 1993 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 2 of 3 L.I. 289 - Highlands III L.I. 293 - Highlands IV Filing Date: 11/ 1/1993 Filing Date: 11/ 1/1993 Filing Collect Interest Interest Interest Year Year Principal @ 8.000% Total Principal @ 8.000% Total Principal @ 8.000% Total 1992 1993 6,897 9,659a 16,556 1993 1994 6,897 7,724 14,621 18,500 17,273b 35,773 40,600 37,908c 78,508 1994 1995 6,897 7,173 14,070 18,500 13,320 31,820 40,600 29,232 69,832 1995 1996 6,897 6,621 13,518 18,500 11,840 30,340 40,600 25,984 66,584 1996 1997 6,897 6,069 12,966 18,500 10,360 28,860 40,600 22,736 63,336 1997 1998 6,897 5,517 12,414 18,500 8,880 27,380 40,600 19,488 60,088 1998 1999 6,897 4,966 11,863 18,500 7,400 25,900 40,600 16,240 56,840 1999 2000 6,897 4,414 11,311 18,500 5,920 24,420 40,600 12,992 53,592 2000 2001 6,897 3,862 10,759 18,500 4,440 22,940 40,600 9,744 50,344 2001 2002 6,897 3,310 10,207 18,500 2,960 21,460 40,600 6,496 47,096 2002 2003 6,897 2,758 9,655 18,500 1,480 19,980 40,600 3,248 43,848 2003 2004 6,897 2,207 9,104 2004 2005 6,897 1,655 8,552 2005 2006 6,897 1,103 8,000 2006 2007 6,893 551 7,444 TOTALS 103,451 67,589 171,040 185,000 83,873 268,873 406,000 184,068 590,068 a) Includes interest from filing b) Includes interest from filing c) Includes interest from filing date to 12/31/1993. date to 12/31/1994. date to 12/31/1994. • • City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,400,000 G.O. Improvement Bonds, Series 1993B Six Projects T O T A L - - - L Filing Collect Year Year Principal Interest Total 1992 1993 57,200 56,627 113,827 1993 1994 155,600 117,470 273,070 1994 1995 155,600 94,494 250,094 1995 1996 155,600 82,047 237,647 1996 1997 155,600 69,598 225,198 1997 1998 155,600 57,150 212,750 1998 1999 116,300 44,703 161,003 1999 2000 116,300 35,398 151,698 2000 2001 116,300 26,094 142,394 2001 2002 116,297 16,790 133,087 2002 2003 65,997 7,486 73,483 2003 2004 6,897 2,207 9,104 2004 2005 6,897 1,655 8,552 2005 2006 6,897 1,103 8,000 2006 2007 6,893 551 7,444 TOTALS 1,393,978 613,373 2,007,351 PROJECTED ASSESSMENT INCOME Prepared July 14, 1993 By SPRINGSTED Incorporated Page 3 of 3 • Dated: 9- 1 -1993 Mature: 2- 1 First Interest: 8- 1 -1994 1993 Net Tax Capacity: 9,441,345 Interest rates are estimates; changes may cause significant alterations of this schedule. The actual underwriter's discount bid may also vary. City of Stillwater, Minnesota $1,840,000 G.O. Capital Outlay Bonds, Series 1993C APPENDIX V Total Year of Year of Principal Repayment Principal 105% Tax Levy Mat. 5 Year 10 Year 15 Year Total Rates Interest & Interest of Total Rate ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 1993 1995 110,000 25,000 30,000 165,000 3.00% 109,505 274,505 288,230 3.053% 1994 1996 125,000 30,000 45,000 200,000 3.30% 72,348 272,348 285,965 3.029% 1995 1997 130,000 30,000 45,000 205,000 3.60% 65,748 270,748 284,285 3.011% 1996 1998 130,000 35,000 50,000 215,000 3.90% 58,368 273,368 287,036 3.040% 1997 1999 140,000 35,000 50,000 225,000 4.10% 49,983 274,983 288,732 3.058% 1998 2000 35,000 50,000 85,000 4.30% 40,758 125,758 132,045 1.399% 1999 2001 35,000 55,000 90,000 4.50% 37,103 127,103 133,458 1.414% 2000 2002 40,000 55,000 95,000 4.70% 33,053 128,053 134,455 1.424% 2001 2003 40,000 60,000 100,000 4.85% 28,588 128,588 135,017 1.430% 2002 2004 40,000 60,000 100,000 5.00% 23,738 123,738 129,924 1.376% 2003 2005 65,000 65,000 5.10% 18,738 83,738 87,924 0.931% 2004 2006 70,000 70,000 5.15% 15,423 85,423 89,694 0.950% 2005 2007 70,000 70,000 5.20% 11,818 81,818 85,908 0.910% 2006 2008 75,000 75,000 5.25% 8,178 83,178 87,336 0.925% 2007 2009 80,000 80,000 5.30% 4,240 84,240 88,452 0.937% • TOTALS: 635,000 345,000 860,000 1,840,000 577,582 2,417,582 2,538,461 Bond Years: 12,446.67 Annual Interest: 577,582 Avg. Maturity: 6.76 Plus Discount: 18,400 Avg. Annual Rat 4.640% Net Interest: 595,982 T.I.C. Rate: 4.771% N.I.C. Rate: 4.788% Prepared 15-Jul-93 by SPRINGSTED Incorporated s \sti1193c S0784L3 Page 11 • THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: $1,000,000 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION TAX INCREMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993A Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, August 17, 1993, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central lime, of the same day. The Bonds will be dated September 1, 1993, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1994. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1996 $65,000 1997 $65,000 1998 $70,000 1999 $75,000 TERMS OF PROPOSAL DETAILS OF THE BONDS 2000 $75,000 2001 $80,000 2002 $85,000 2003 $90,000 OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge tax increment income from the City's Tax Increment Financing District No. 6. The proceeds will be used to finance public improvements within the City's Redevelopment District No. 1. TYPE OF PROPOSALS 2004 $ 95,000 2005 $ 95,000 2006 $100,000 2007 $105,000 Proposals shall be for not Tess than $990,000 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $10,000, Page 12 payable to the order of the City. if a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. REGISTRAR • The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms • of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any Toss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. Page 13 • 1 • OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 40 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated July 20, 1993 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Mary Lou Johnson Clerk Page 14 THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,400,000 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 1993B Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, August 17, 1993, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated September 1, 1993, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1994. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the • purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: 1995 $175,000 1996 $175,000 1997 $175,000 1998 $175,000 1999 $175,000 2000 $115,000 2001 $115,000 OPTIONAL REDEMPTION SECURITY AND PURPOSE TYPE OF PROPOSALS 2002 $115,000 2003 $115,000 2004 $ 65,000 The City may elect on February 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. In addition the City will pledge special assessments against benefited property. The proceeds will be used to finance various improvement projects within the City. Proposals shall be for not Tess than $1,386,000 and accrued interest on the total principal • amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $14,000, Page 15 payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1%. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Obligations qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Obligations. Any increased costs of issuance of the Obligations resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the Issuer has requested and received a rating on the Obligations from a rating agency, the Issuer will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Obligations have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Obligations. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the • Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Page 16 • Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. SETTLEMENT Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any Toss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 60 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated July 20, 1993 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Mary Lou Johnson Clerk Page 17 THE CITY HAS AUTHORIZED SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED TO NEGOTIATE THIS ISSUE ON ITS BEHALF. PROPOSALS WILL BE RECEIVED ON THE FOLLOWING BASIS: 1995 $165,000 1996 $200,000 1997 $205,000 1998 $215,000 1999 $225,000 2000 $ 85,000 2001 $ 90,000 2002 $ 95,000 TERMS OF PROPOSAL $1,840,000 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL OUTLAY BONDS, SERIES 1993C Proposals for the Bonds will be received on Tuesday, August 17, 1993, until 11:30 A.M., Central Time, at the offices of Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota, after which time they will be opened and tabulated. Consideration for award of the Bonds will be by the City Council at 7:00 P.M., Central Time, of the same day. DETAILS OF THE BONDS The Bonds will be dated September 1, 1993, as the date of original issue, and will bear interest payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing August 1, 1994. Interest will be computed on the basis of a 360 -day year of twelve 30 -day months. The Bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000 each, or in integral multiples thereof, as requested by the purchaser, and fully registered as to principal and interest. Principal will be payable at the main corporate office of the registrar and interest on each Bond will be payable by check or draft of the registrar mailed to the registered holder thereof at the holder's address as it appears on the books of the registrar as of the close of business on the 15th day of the immediately preceding month. The Bonds will mature February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: OPTIONAL REDEMPTION The City may elect on February 1, 2001, and on any day thereafter, to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2002. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such order as the City shall determine and within a maturity by lot as selected by the registrar. All prepayments shall be at a price of par plus accrued interest. SECURITY AND PURPOSE The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which the City will pledge its full faith and credit and power to levy direct general ad valorem taxes. The proceeds will be used to finance various capital outlay purchases for the City. TYPE OF PROPOSALS 2003 $100,000 2004 $100,000 2005 $ 65,000 2006 $ 70,000 2007 $70,000 2008 $75,000 2009 $80,000 Proposals shall be for not less than $1,821,600 and accrued interest on the total principal amount of the Bonds. Proposals shall be accompanied by a Good Faith Deposit ( "Deposit ") in • the form of a certified or cashier's check or a Financial Surety Bond in the amount of $18,400, payable to the order of the City. If a check is used, it must accompany each proposal. If a Page 18 Financial Surety Bond is used, it must be from an insurance company licensed to issue such a bond in the State of Minnesota, and preapproved by the City. Such bond must be submitted to Springsted Incorporated prior to the opening of the proposals. The Financial Surety Bond must identify each underwriter whose Deposit is guaranteed by such Financial Surety Bond. If the Bonds are awarded to an underwriter using a Financial Surety Bond, then that purchaser is required to submit its Deposit to Springsted Incorporated in the form of a certified or cashier's check or wire transfer as instructed by Springsted Incorporated not later than 3:30 P.M., Central Time, on the next business day following the award. If such Deposit is not received by that time, the Financial Surety Bond may be drawn by the City to satisfy the Deposit requirement. The City will deposit the check of the purchaser, the amount of which will be deducted at settlement and no interest will accrue to the purchaser. In the event the purchaser fails to comply with the accepted proposal, said amount will be retained by the City. No proposal can be withdrawn or amended after the time set for receiving proposals unless the meeting of the City scheduled for award of the Bonds is adjourned, recessed, or continued to another date without award of the Bonds having been made. Rates shall be in integral multiples of 5/100 or 1/8 of 1 %. Rates must be in ascending order. Bonds of the same maturity shall bear a single rate from the date of the Bonds to the date of maturity. No conditional proposals will be accepted. AWARD The Bonds will be awarded on the basis of the lowest interest rate to be determined on a true interest cost (TIC) basis. The City's computation of the interest rate of each proposal, in accordance with customary practice, will be controlling. The City will reserve the right to: (i) waive non - substantive informalities of any proposal or of matters relating to the receipt of proposals and award of the Bonds, (ii) reject all proposals without cause, and, (iii) reject any proposal which the City determines to have failed to comply with the terms herein. BOND INSURANCE AT PURCHASER'S OPTION If the Obligations qualify for issuance of any policy of municipal bond insurance or commitment therefor at the option of the underwriter, the purchase of any such insurance policy or the issuance of any such commitment shall be at the sole option and expense of the purchaser of the Obligations. Any increased costs of issuance of the Obligations resulting from such purchase of insurance shall be paid by the purchaser, except that, if the Issuer has requested and received a rating on the Obligations from a rating agency, the Issuer will pay that rating fee. Any other rating agency fees shall be the responsibility of the purchaser. Failure of the municipal bond insurer to issue the policy after Obligations have been awarded to the purchaser shall not constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery on the Obligations. REGISTRAR The City will name the registrar which shall be subject to applicable SEC regulations. The City will pay for the services of the registrar. CUSIP NUMBERS If the Bonds qualify for assignment of CUSIP numbers such numbers will be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print such numbers on any Bond nor any error with respect • thereto will constitute cause for failure or refusal by the purchaser to accept delivery of the Bonds. The CUSIP Service Bureau charge for the assignment of CUSIP identification numbers shall be paid by the purchaser. Page 19 • • SETTLEMENT • Within 40 days following the date of their award, the Bonds will be delivered without cost to the purchaser at a place mutually satisfactory to the City and the purchaser. Delivery will be subject to receipt by the purchaser of an approving legal opinion of Dorsey & Whitney of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which opinion will be printed on the Bonds, and of customary closing papers, including a no- litigation certificate. On the date of settlement payment for the Bonds shall be made in federal, or equivalent, funds which shall be received at the offices of the City or its designee not later than 12:00 Noon, Central Time. Except as compliance with the terms of payment for the Bonds shall have been made impossible by action of the City, or its agents, the purchaser shall be liable to the City for any loss suffered by the City by reason of the purchaser's non - compliance with said terms for payment. OFFICIAL STATEMENT The City has authorized the preparation of an Official Statement containing pertinent information relative to the Bonds, and said Official Statement will serve as a nearly -final Official Statement within the meaning of Rule 15c2 -12 of the Securities and Exchange Commission. For copies of the Official Statement or for any additional information prior to sale, any prospective purchaser is referred to the Financial Advisor to the City, Springsted Incorporated, 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101, telephone (612) 223 -3000. The Official Statement, when further supplemented by an addendum or addenda specifying the maturity dates, principal amounts and interest rates of the Bonds, together with any other• information required by law, shall constitute a "Final Official Statement" of the City with respect to the Bonds, as that term is defined in Rule 15c2 -12. By awarding the Bonds to any underwriter or underwriting syndicate submitting a proposal therefor, the City agrees that, no more than seven business days after the date of such award, it shall provide without cost to the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded 75 copies of the Official Statement and the addendum or addenda described above. The City designates the senior managing underwriter of the syndicate to which the Bonds are awarded as its agent for purposes of distributing copies of the Final Official Statement to each Participating Underwriter. Any underwriter delivering a proposal with respect to the Bonds agrees thereby that if its proposal is accepted by the City (i) it shall accept such designation and (ii) it shall enter into a contractual relationship with all Participating Underwriters of the Bonds for purposes of assuring the receipt by each such Participating Underwriter of the Final Official Statement. Dated July 20, 1993 BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL /s/ Mary Lou Johnson Clerk Page 20 • • iho • 1. Recitals. RESOLUTION NO. 93- RESOLUTION RELATING TO FINANCING OF CERTAIN PROPOSED PROJECTS TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE CITY OF STILLWATER; ESTABLISHING COMPLIANCE WITH REIMBURSEMENT BOND REGULATIONS UNDER THE INTERNAL xr v vun CODE Be It Resolved by the City Council (the Council) of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the City), as follows: a. The Internal Revenue Service has issued Section 1.103 -18 of the Income Tax Regulations (the Regulations) dealing with the issuance of bonds, all or a portion of the proceeds of which are to be used to reimburse the City for project expenditures made by the City prior to the time for the issuance of bonds. b. The Regulations generally require that the City make a prior declaration of its official intent to reimburse itself for such prior expenditures out of the proceeds of subsequently issued borrowing, that the borrowing occur and the reimbursement allocation be made from the proceeds of such borrowing within one year of the payment of the expenditure or, if longer, within one year of the date the project is placed in service, and that the expenditure be a capital expenditure. c. The City desires to comply with requirements of the Regulations with respect to certain projects hereinafter identified. 2. Official Intent Declaration. a. The City proposes to undertake the following projects described on Exhibit A attached hereto. b. Other than (i) expenditures to be paid or reimbursed from sources other than a borrowing or (ii) expenditures permitted to be reimbursed pursuant to the transition provision of Section 1.103- 18(1)(2) of the Regulations or (iii) expenditures constituting of preliminary expenditures as defined in Section 1.103- 18(i)(2) of the Regulations, no expenditures for the foregoing projects as identified on Exhibit A have heretofore been made by the City and no expenditures will be made by the City until after the date of this Resolution. c. The City reasonably expects to reimburse the expenditures made for the costs of the designated projects out of the proceeds of the debt (the Bonds) to be incurred by the City after the date of payment of all or apportion of the costs. All reimbursed expenditures shall be capital expenditures as defined in Section 1.150 -1(h) of the Regulations. d. This declaration as a declaration of official intent adopted pursuant to Section 1.103 -18 of the Regulations. 3. Budgetary Matters. As of the date hereof, there are no City funds reserved, allocated on a long -term basis or otherwise set aside (or reasonably expected to be reserved, allocated on a long -term basis or otherwise set aside) to provide permanent financing of the expenditures related to the projects other than pursuant to the issuance of the Bond. This Resolution, therefore, is determined to be consistent with the City's budgetary and financial circumstances as they exist or are reasonably foreseeable on the date hereof, all within the meaning and content of the Regulations. 4. Filing. This Resolution shall be filed within 30 days of its adoption in the publicly available official books and records of the City. This Resolution shall be available for inspection at the office of the city clerk at the City Hall (which s the main administrative office of the City) during normal business hours of the City of every business day until the date of issuance of the Bonds. 4. Reimbursement Allocations. The City's financial officer shall be responsible for making the "ri?imbursement allocations" described in the Regulations, being generally the transfer of the appropriate amount for proceeds of the Bonds to reimb'rse the source of temporary financing used by the City to make payment f the prior costs of the projects. Each allocation shall be evidenced y an entry on the official books and records of the City maintained for the bonds, shall specifically identify the actual prior expenditure being reimbursed, or in the case of reimbursement of a fund or account in accordance with Section 1.103 -18, the fund or account from which the expenditure was paid, and shall be effective to relieve the proceeds of the Bonds from any restriction under the bond resolution or other relevant legal documents for the Bonds, and under any applicable state statute, which would apply to the unspent proceeds of the Bonds. Adopted this 20th day of July 1993. Attest: city clerk Mayor 1 • • • • . Project Description Highlands Phase IV McKusick /Neal Avenue /Trail CUB /Jr. High Parking Lot Southeast Area Sewer, L.I. 285 City Sidewalks, L.I. 274 EXHIBIT A Estimated Cost to be reimbursed From Bond Proceeds $ 406,000 $ 340,000 $ 950,000 $1,680,000 $ 393,000 • SPECIAL MEETING The meeting was called to order by Mayor Hooley. Present: Councilmembers Bodlovick, Cummings, Funke, Kimble, and Mayor Hooley Absent: None Also Present: STILLWATER CITY - COUNCIL MINUTES .June 29, 1993 7:00 p.m. City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Public Works Director Junker Consulting Engineer Moore Recording Secretary Schaubach Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette Others: STATEMENT BY MAYOR HOOLEY Leo Lohmer, Eric Scott, Paul Lacy, Jerry Wallrech, Val Finneman, Karl Karlson, Rod Lawson, Howard Lieberman, Don Valsvik, Jack Krongard, Judy Lacy, Chuck Dougherty, Don Martin, Tim Old, Nancy Canning, Ken Carlson, John Baer, Paul Randall, Tim Schmolke, Al Ruttger, Steve Bliven, Charlotte McIntosh, Richard Kilty, Angela Anderson, Lois Rusted, Mick Forsky, Bob Hasty, Don Fixmer, Cy Gills, Elwood Johnson, Gene Ristow, Kathleen Faint, James Rusell Mayor Hooley clarified a statement reported in the Stillwater Gazette indicating a possible sales tax in Stillwater_. Mayor Hooley stated that a sales tax is not his intent, but that he is considering a user tax or tourist tax which will require further study by the Council. PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT HEARING, L.I. 274 1. This is the day and time for the public improvement hearing on the Sidewalk Improvement Project, L.I. 274. Notice of the hearing was published in The Stillwater Gazette on June 18 and 25, 1993 and mailed to affected property owners. Consulting Engineer Moore described the sidewalk repair program. No new sidewalks would be installed. In some areas only sections of sidewalks will be replaced. Estimated cost of the project is $5 per square foot, for a total estimated project cost of $392,948. Property owners would be assessed 50 percent of the cost. Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meting June 29, 1993 Mayor Hooley opened the meeting to public comments. Leo Lohmer, 303 W. Olive, stated that his sidewalk should be on the National Register because IL was put in, at the latest, in 1920. Eric Scott, 233 N. Harriet, asked for reassurance that new sidewalks will not be put in where none exist. Mr. Moore confirmed this. Paul Lacy, 713 S. 2nd, questioned why street and sidewalk reconstructions are not done simultaneously. Mr. Kr i esel responded that S. 2nd street will net be reconstructed for at least two years. Jerry Wailrech, 222 and believes it can foot: estimated cost. that his sidewalks Junker stated that shape. Karl Karlson, reevaluated. fine. Mr. be replaced. for his neighbor, Mr. Kaske does not feel his sidewalks Howard Lieberman, 914 S. Mr. Moore stated that W. Laurel, is concerned about the cost be done for less than the $5 per square Val F i nneman, 715 S. 6th St., asked be reevaluated. Public Works Director Mr. Finneman's sidewalks were in good 1315 S. 4th St., asked if his had been Mr. Juriker stated that these sidewalks were Karlson asked for a letter stating his would not Rod Lawson, 906 S. Greeley St., speaking also at 824 S. Greeley, stated that he need replacement. Greeley, asked about his property. 10 feet of his sidewalk need replacement. Mr. Lieberman asked about the rights of the property owner if they disagree with the assessment. City Attorney Magnuson stated that the homeowner has a right to appeal the assessment in District Court. Don Val =fik, representing Trinity Lutheran Church, asked that the church sidewalk be removed from the list because the Church is hiring its own contractor to repair the sidewalk, curb and gutter and parking lot. Jack Krongard, 1112 -111.4 6th Ave. S., stated that his sidewalks are in like -new condition. Mr. Moore stated that he will take another look at these sidewalks. Judy Lacy, 713 S. 2nd St., asked if she could remove her sidewalks and replace them with sod. Mr. Magnuson stated that the sidewalk is public property. Chuck Dougherty, 306 W. Olive, asked how much of his sidewalk is included in the replacement. Mr. Moore stated that 14 feet will have to be replaced. Don Martin, 718 W. Myrtle, asked how much of his sidewalk needs replacement. Pete 2 • • Stillwater City Council Minutes Special Meeting June 29, 1993 Haefler, 501 W. Laurel, also asked how much of his sidewalk is included. He also questioned how the determination is made whether a sidewalk will be replaced. Tim Old, 502 N. Everett, questioned why his sidewalk is included when it is a dead end. Nancy Canning, 717 S. 2nd St., stated that her sidewalk is in good shape. Bob Delanger, 713 W. Olive, asked what parts of his sidewalk will need to be replaced. Staff agreed to look at the properties in q u e s t i o n , Ken Carlson, 117 E. Burlington, stated that he does not understand why some areas of the City have sidewalks on both sides of the street and some areas have no sidewalks at all. John Baer, 812 6th Ave. S., stated that the sidewalk is not continuous in his area. Paul Randall, 218 W. Maple, asked to have the Maple Street sidewalk reevaluated. Tim Schmolke, 506 W. Laurel, asked for written standards by which the sidewalks are judged, and also asked that the City inform residents of how to maintain their sidewalks. Al Ruttger, 919 W. Myrtle, stated that his sidewalk is cracked because of the loaders picking up snow in the winter. He also questioned how thick the new sidewalks will be. Steve Bliven, 613 Olive St. W., asked for an inspection of his sidewalks. Charlotte McIntosh, 807 S. 2nd St., agreed that her sidewalks are in need of repair, but is also concerned about the condition of 2nd Street. Richard Kilty, 807 S. 4th St., asked for information on the number of injuries in the City caused by poor sidewalks. Council stated he could get that information at City Hall. Angela Anderson, 1121 N. 4th St., stated that there are other sidewalks in her area that need replacing. She is also concerned that the new sidewalk will affect her retaining wall. Lois Rusted, 602 W. Olive, had a complaint about a vacant lot next to her which is not maintained. Nick Forsky, 406 W. Olive, asked about the time line for the project. Bob Hasty, 1104 S. 3rd, asked what will be done on Hancock Street. Don Fixmer, representing Ken Fixmer, 628 S. 3rd St., stated he is in favor of the sidewalk program, but feels that Willard Street_ should he redone also. Cy Gills, 516 W. Myrtle St., asked for an inspection of his sidewalk. Mark Walker, 33 W. Aspen, stated that his is the only sidewalk in a five block area. Elwood Johnson, representing the Seventh Day Adventist Church on 5th and Laurel, asked if this property was in the program. Gene Ristow, 209 W. Laurel, stated that he does not want to 3 Stillwater City council Minutes- Special Meeting June 29, 199? pay for new sod when his sidewalk is replaced. He has not been able to grow grass on the boulevard because of the salt from the street. Kathleen Faint, 715 S. 4th St., and James Russell, 921 N. 2nd, each asked about the amount of sidewalk on their property that will need replacing. Mayor Hooley closed the Public Hearing. Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember. Funke to adopt the appropiate resolution ordering the Sidewalk Improvement Project, L.T. 274 and directing the City's Consulting Engineer t� prepare the plans and specifications. (Resolution No. 93 -115) Ayes - Councilmernbers Bodlovick, Cummings, Kimble, Funke, and Mayor Hooley Nays - None EXTENSION OF FIRE CONTRACT Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to extend the current Fire Contract to August 1, 1993. (All in favor) SOLID WASTE AGREEMENT Mayor Hooley repor that Junker Sanitation has agreed to two amendments to te Solid Waste Contract. Approval of the contract will be pl ced on the July 6 agenda. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Cummings to adjourn the meeting at 10:20 rpm. (All in favor) ATTEST: Resolutions: No. 93 -115 - Ordering LT.274 Submitted by: Shelly Schaubach Recording Secretary CITY CLERK 4 MAYOR • • 0 U H • _ - ._ •""-^- 444 -4I•4 E L E V 1 1 0 Ni ...._;,..---,.-.. . , . : . : 1 1 ',1 A • • , ..........-.... ■•■• 4.-.4.4 ' 4 ; I .-......a.,--- •••■•--.. , , , , t 4, . 7 ,: '‘ • ' ' A ' ■ • • • •••• • ■ , ir - 1 , - • ; 1; • . t ... • • ="4, ;„) • • • . , • i ; - t /1 THE ELEVAT0F. - - ' 41441,111trk • ...... •444,4. ••.^ • ` • n' 34 " ha.1. • 1 • :1 . : ! ' • e* :L E T t•I 5 " 4 - = r Z1 :r 1 , • : • : . 1 . .: . ..1.--4 • ..4.:4-,.... _ • t , . e i j. .• i, „ „ i ! '. 1 f -'•,;,,-, '„.!, ,.---' . ---, - .. • , , . ,,-. !!!! -.5 J.., . : 44. ..1 ..<, ... , . I ---;*''rV'W'r.'n'' - . - . ! ---• - • . - -. , i- '' 1 1 ' I i . 1 : 1 t• 1:. T •,- ' 1 5 ' , ;,- -ja- ,. ., _ , ,.'1 ---------- 1 , . ' :',-,',. i .f , , •4,, , ,-s - __ ... , f i ' • ' - -r-r, •,-. Fip!!'"• ^,!! TeE EL • • Ott* 1 . • �r Z 7 7 goy .. - *� � 0 7 iT E L G V T E O f +i tHS., E L. E V • • • • r--%) „AI ( t ; TT ---- - 117 - 7 -t L VAT toN ...... , ; 1 ■ ,- . , _;.,_i . 1----- H r , ‘ ::- , \ .; :1 ,:. 2 l •-• j '' 1-:::' 1 .1.-„,./ ._) i l• , ----- : . ■:.if . . — i ; s i / • . ,11 • • :-' ji e LVAto fC • 3 A • : IJ 0 t1 _F • 1 .1 L 1 i" f 1,1 I • 10 i u • eb) 0 0 4— z .4 = u r 0 --r 1 0 0 0 • 4 '3 7 _ s go j w v tL 0 2. • • • Dated this day of ATTEST: Mary Lou Johnson, Clerk ORDINANCE NO. - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 38.04 OF THE STILLWATER CITY CODE ENTITLED NOISE CONTROL AND REGULATION The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: Subd.l. Amending Chapter 38.04 Subdivision 3, Subd.3. Construction Activities is hereby amended to hereafter read as follows: 3. Construction Activities. No person shall engage in or permit construction activities involving the use of any kind of electric, diesel, or gas - powered machine or other power equipment except between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on any weekday or between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. on any weekend or holiday. Subd.2. In all other ways, Chapter 38.04 of the Stillwater City Code shall remain in full force and effect. Subd.3. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after the passage and publication according to law. 1993 Charles M. Hooley, Mayor • • TO: Mayor and City Council FR: City Coordinator DA: July 16, 1993 RE: BIDS ON SIMMS' HOUSE M E M O R A N D U M After further review and consideration of the bids the City received on the Simms' property, I would recommend that the Council award the bid to Jill and Rolf Greenhalgh for the bid amount of $31,000. I have discussed the potential rehab costs with people who I believe are very knowledgeable about building rehab. All of these people are of the opinion that given the expenses already incurred and the additional costs of rehabing the property the city would probably be able to reduce its loss. • am/ Proposal of PROPOSAL FORM for the purchase of 410 North 4th Street, Stillwater, Minnesota. TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF MINNESOTA: Ladies and Gentlemen: In accordance with your Solicitation for Bids for the purchase of 410 North 4th Street and in conformity with the Information to Bidders on file /- i � n /� the office of the City Clerk, I hereby certify that I/12_, (l U'iry P`l tf /hG�'/'pcir i1 /' mss he only person(s) interested in this proposal as principal, that it is made without collusion with any person, firm or corporation, that an examination has been made of the Information • to Bidders referred to above, and the building itself. 1 agree to purchase the building for the purpose set forth in my bid and in accordance with all terms and conditions contained in the Information to Bidders and I further agree to pay to the City of Stillwater for the purchase of the aforesaid property the sum of // / 7` /) /1 ,1 r/ S9si rC rvot90 //Jed Dollars. I also agree to execute within ten (10) days of the acceptance of this proposal by the City, the required Purchase Agreement and the required Development Agreement, according to the forms that are made a part of the Information to Bidders. 1. My /Our proposed use of the building is • 2. The ownership of the building will be as follows: P ATTACHMENT PROPOSAL FORM (1) PROPOSED USE Renovation as single - family residence, owner occupied, or if I determine that the renovation is uneconomical to follow the restrictive covenant Exhibit A, the City would waive the requirements so that I can raze the building. In its place, I will construct a Queene -Anne style house appropriate for the neighbor ood and especially in relation to and consideration of adjacent re idences, with the owners' cooperation and approval of plans. (T ese plans are available to the City Planning Director.) I am aware of the historic heritage of Stillwater and have pursued alternative purchases of residential properties for the last two years but they would have required excessive funding beyond the market value of the finished house. I am also aware that the City has considered other economic alternatives of historic buildings that have been identified by the Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission, even to the extent of allowing demolition, as in the recent matter of the junior high school. (Renovation was not a condition of the sale.) a • • • follows: 3. My /Our financing for the purchase will be provided as 4. I /We need the following variances: c7r! r/ 4e 5. I /We have the following plans for the exterior of the building: � p lr , t /e 9 $ ,- g49 ( 9 d B / /i)/ /e—A ( , ( 2 /7 .0: efe /ley 6. I /We have the following plans . building: __-2& 4191'1 c"" for the interior of the Enclosed herewith is a certified check, cashier's check, cash DG deposit or bid bond in the amount of ,-- C7e7 Dollars, being at least five percent (5 %) of the proposal, made payable to the City of Stillwater as a proposal guarantee, which it is agreed by the undersigned will be forfeited in the event the Purchase Agreement and Development Agreement are not executed within 10 days, if awarded to the unde igned. (Th &Jouuu 3 • • for the purchase of 410 North 4th Street, Stillwater, Minnesota. TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF MINNESOTA: Ladies and Gentlemen: In accordance with your Solicitation for Bids for the purchase of 410 North 4th Street and in conformity with the Information to Bidders on file in the office of the City Clerk, I hereby certify that I Proposal of PROPOSAL FORM L L G R N w +4 A l4 ��o off. (Srocks J. 1 LL 2.E RA LS A Rib R s � am /are the only person(s) interested in this proposal as principal, that it is made without collusion with any person, firm or corporation, that an examination has been made of the Information to Bidders referred to above, and the building itself. I agree to purchase the building for the purpose set forth in my bid and in accordance with all terms and conditions contained in the Information to Bidders and I further agree to pay to the City of Stillwater for the purchase of the aforesaid property the sum of 1 t R Y - NE -- cLs A Dollars. I also agree to execute within ten (10) days of the acceptance of this proposal by the City, the required Purchase Agreement and the required Development Agreement, according to the forms that are made a part of the Information to Bidders. 1. My /Our proposed use of the building is +0 rer ova0.te- a k. yr e. sore. - +D s i ho l e ok m v bMt. _.V\ C ■V ■■ 'I+. 2. The ownership of the building will be as follows: • within 10 days, if GQ.EEN tAlk LGA 'R..c) l._ F S f a u-s • 3. My /Our financing for the purchase will be provided as follows: C:Qy� tptr\0. - �tDv\ c A . berSo c . Sc4VI'his 11 home r as� 0.h m+1' . ect1.1.1 f U, s.L ©h wM - �- v*,anc i� (AC-L. 1`A 1-I FA tPurclnase Plus a m ,cr-0..m ,Ptea52 See, 4. I /We need the following variances: 4 CC.PACt, e:1,4 e have deposit or bid bond in the amount warded We. AD ■ 5e. e -�- e, 'me -ttor. -Fino. one _ t 60,r co - hoh buck wo (AA le i -tt o-}e- Yr . �4, -t- ba- -coy- cx\A\. S - 1 -1 41 o. Weo • building: atiA oyh -�- \r e. t(:).\‘-- Kc e3. SA f Y. V100 & d ,4 S t (S\N Gh & 0 r VII B 0 CA're, as r e s re 6. I /We have the following plans for the interior building: S �CLL'b 0,.1r1 `(~e.N.N. V'ck rs10 (4 M 1/:41\ e.y t s 4 r t ho Wt) o W O , \ ck e L c j cots s t.c� tAx* , k t e o.5 r * s 4-E d274-1),! ` owing plans for the exter?or of the ake- O 1"t" � UAK\ \'n Lki (\ t G�h qL Se e o Y^ of the Dollars, being at least five percent (5 %) of the proposal, made payable to the City of Stillwater as a proposal guarantee, which it is agreed by the undersigned will be forfeited in the event the Purchase Agreement and Development Agreement are not executed to the undersi ned. 1�- u_cison v\Js• 5zio\ t 38(0-2.s57 W: CGta 3 34t■ • Enclosed herew�l.th is a certified check, cashier's check, cash of ©he.7k6USCJ 'Sever, te nd r e A. a crs • • Jill Greenhalgh (& husband Rolf ) Proposal for 410 N. 4th St. Renovation 22— Jun -93 Remodel Scope & Estimate Summary This plan is to restore the building at 410 N. 4th Street to a single family home, with the existing structure, woodwork, and layout remaining basically unchanged. Description Labor Hrs. Labor $ Fees / Materials Outside Contracts $17,520 Exterior Work 630 $9,450 $7,775 Interior Work 1,405 $21,075 $12,240 Total: 2,035 $30,525 $37,535 Additional Cost: Building Permit $ unknown at this time Construction / Renovation Plan: • Contract Work: to be done by outside contractors Labor: to be done by Rolf (& Jill ) Materials: to be paid for during the course of the one year renovation Project Costs & Financinq Cost of Property: $31,000 Cost of Project: $37,535 Total: $68,535 Financing would be provided by the following: Initial Deposit: $1,750 Savings / Cash on Hand $6,000 Other Personal Assets $25,000 * Renovation Financing $35,785 Total: $68,535 * Note: Other personal assets refers to equity on existing 100 yr. old home which is nearing major remodel completion. This house would be sold as 410 N. 4th St. became inhabitable. Additional Note: the above estimates include the complete construction of a two car garage. • Depending on weather & timing of renovation, this portion of costs and labor could be postponed until the other major work is substantially completed. Cost and labor for garage: $4,400 and 160 hrs. Cost without garage: $ $64,135 Remodeling We are interested in purchasing the house for sale at 410 N. 4th Street. We plan to renovate the house and keep it as our home. Over the past two and one half years we have lived in and renovated two houses which were each over 100 years old. The first was a large Victorian house in Stillwater; the second is in Hudson. Through unexpected circumstances, we were approached by a buyer and ended up selling our home in Stillwater, although this was not our original intention. Thus we have ended up living in Hudson since March, in a home which we purchased with the intent to renovate and re —sell. We are anxious to return to our home of Stillwater, and believe the 4th Street house would offer us this opportunity. Over the past 5 years, Rolf has been self — employed in home repair and remodeling. His resume includes the following: • • • Sheet Rock: ceilings & w • Texture ceilings • • • • • • • • • Roof: complete tear —off and re— roofing of a 3,800 sq. ft. Victorian home Soffit & Fascia Repair & Replacement Painting: Interior & Exteri Jill Greenhalgh (& husband Rolf ) Proposal for 410 N. 4th St. Renovation 23— Jun -93 History & Construction Resume Hs Refinish Hardwood Floors r sand, stain & varnish antique parquet floors & hardwood floors r, currently painting a Victorian house in period style Wallpapering: strip off ol , put up new Plumbing: modify existing plumbing, install shower, install bathroom fixtures Complete bathroom remodels Complete kitchen remod I Complete construction of dormer Complete basement remodel Misc. Other: fencing, door hanging, demolition, frame —up, window repair • Area 1. Cement Work 2. Furnace 3. Electrical • 4. Plumbing 5. Asbestos Abatement • 6. Basement Clean —Up Jill Greenhalgh (& husband Rolf ) Proposal for 410 N. 4th St. Renovation 22— Jun -93 Remodel Scope & Estimate Outside Contracts Description Replace retaining wall & front steps Removal of existing furnace & oil tank Install Gas lines. Install new Furnace Replace radiator pipes & valves Service Upgrade — 150 Amp service. Electrical repair & misc. replacements & code compliance Replace burst or leaking pipes, relocate $2,000 plumbing for kitchens & showers, misc. upgrades Removal of misc. deteriorating radiator pipe insulation in basement, possible vacuuming, spray encapsulant, and proper disposal of all abated materials Estimate of 32 hours labor, 2 dumpsters @ $100 each. Total Estimated Cost: Cost Estimate $4,000 $8,000 $2,500 $500 $520 $17,520 Area 1. Window Repair 2. Front Porch 3. Siding, Soffitts & Fascia 4. Garage & back "Porch" room 5. Driveway & Yard 6. Painting 7. New Garage Jill Greenhalgh (& husband Rolf ) Proposal for 410 N. 4th St. Renovation 22— Jun -93 Remodel Scope & Estimate Exterior Work Description Replace numerous broken panes of glass, re —putty all windows, immediate replacement of broken combination windows, later replacement of deteriorat remaining comb '. nation windows Rent house jack & jack up front porch Complete replacement of porch floor Spindle & railing', replacements (est 20 spindles @ approx. $10 each) Tear off aluminum siding Remove rotting soffitts & fascia, replace Scaffolding Rental (2 weeks @ $100 /wk) Demolition & removal Dumpsters for siding & garage demolition & misc. debris (est 8 @ $100 ) Clear out brush & overgrowth 1 — 2 Dumpsters Complete exterior paint job Build & roof a new double garage Concrete — outside contractor Misc. Wiring — Outside contractor Total Estimated Cost: Labor Estimate Materials 50 hrs. $200 12 hrs. $750 ed 24 hrs. $50 24 hrs. $250 16 hrs. $225 24 hrs. 40 hrs. 80 hrs. 40 hrs. 160 hrs. 160 hrs. @ $15 / hour 630 hrs. $9,450 $17,225 • $350 • $200 $800 $150 $400 $3,000 $1,000 $400 $7,775 • • Area 1. Doors 4. Insulation 6. Bathrooms * 7. Kitchen * 8. Interior Painting 9. Misc. Other Jill Greenhalgh ( & husband Rolf ) Proposal for 410 N. 4th St. Renovation 22— Jun -93 Remodel Scope & Estimate Interior Work Description Labor Estimate Materials 2 new front doors (double), 2 other new doors, misc. missing doors, & combination storm doors, appropriate latches, locks, deadbolts 2. Floors —wood Sand, stain & varnish all wood floors Sanding — 3 times, rent a drum sander Stain, misc. costs of sandpaper, etc. Varnish — 10 gallons @ $20 each 3. Walls & Ceilings Demolition of deteriorated ceilings & walls (all perimeter walls) @ approx 8 hours per room. Equivalent of 8 rooms, 2 -3 dumpsters for debris Approx 1 1/2 rooms per 8 hours, 8 room 45 Materials 40 sq. ft. @ $7 = $37.50 /room + Vapor barrior • 5. Sheet Rock Re —sheet rock interior walls. Approx. 200 24 hrs. per room. Mud, tape, & sand 320 Materials: sheet rock screws, sanding screens, @ 2 buckets mud per room @ $7 each 320 Renovate /Update 3 existing bathrooms Tear out all old fixtures Additional labor per bathroom: 24 hrs. Materials per bath: approx $1,000 Misc. flooring @ 8 hrs. per floor Build a kitchen Appliances est. @ $600 fridge, $325 range, $300 dishwasher Cabinets Flooring & materials 48 hrs. $1,000 8 hrs. 60 hrs. 16 hrs. 48 hrs. 64 hrs. 16 72 24 64 24 Paint all interior walls, at approximately 64 8 hours per room Antique & reproduction light fixtures 12 Buy & install * Note: related plumbing, electrical & sheet rock costs & labor budgeted elsewhere @ $15 / hour 1,405 hrs. $21,075 Total Estimated Cost: $33,315 $300 $300 $200 $200 $250 $300 $100 $500 $50 $50 $115 $3,000 $350 $1,225 $3,000 $200 $350 $750 $12,240 • 4') • Proposal of PROPOSAL FORM ✓ �,_/ / Y- - 4124 6"( 4 6rz/FFi for the purchase of 410 North 4th Street, Stillwater, Minnesota. TO THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, COUNTY OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF MINNESOTA: Ladies and Gentlemen: In accordance with your Solicitation for Bids for the purchase of 410 North 4th Street and in conformity with the Information to Bidders on file in the office of the City Clerk, I hereby certify that .1 /we ✓E ,5=.46 / r17i A 6 7i/ mare the only person(s) interested in this proposal as principal, that it is made without collusion with any person, firm or corporation, that an examination has been made of the Information • to Bidders referred to above, and the building itself. I agree to purchase the building for the purpose set forth in my bid and in accordance with all terms and conditions contained in the Information to Bidders and I further agree to pay to the City of Stillwater for the purchase of the aforesaid property the sum of 7w-<<v7 ESC /77 Tr/e ;/1 icr) A% c 17/r/ti I also agree to execute within ten (10) days of the acceptance Dollars. of this proposal by the City, the required Purchase Agreement and the required Development Agreement, according to the forms that are made a part of the Information to Bidders. 1. My /Our proposed use of the building is AE�� � 72" • / t /-/l/y'ic Y ,J J. = L-. iv c- 2. The ownership of the building will be as follows: ✓4--F, t y 2 C 2 2-4 'J . ' Y ,s 6 - ?7/ 3. My /Our financing for the purchase will be provided as follows: c45,-/ / /L':'['�i �� =� /j' 4. I /We need the following variances: "4/ 7 — , i 6. I /We have the building: R Ei fyz,/!' &Fuca 4, yYr£ jx see ?C//f2• Cc r ✓v C.727- 7 L /Tff � lU 7 ,e1/..: c_ !,'Aif/ f?Eti10 ✓C KiT C'Yt' C./... 5 4Od f//< .V1'41 c '= 7 Fe-ac..., Enclosed herewith of C r!/% � fG':2 /'c s %fci NC- I - c c ✓ili'/ c , Y "Li 4.7 5. I /We have the following plans for the exterior of the �/✓i' t/<= /' c/i /. �cJjG'�� Tc: G. 's SL / / /JCS /�c (7. : ✓U /' building: fzHZE 6-?r,2 C A6 lei ?cam. - fez -' l zea/z fro,st) 712 A�Z'AeX /4 , =7Yc following plans for the interior of the AbV 7. <7,‘ -A:e S // T 4 /39 C 4.7/ 44.972v a certified check, cashier's check, cash deposit or bid bond in th7 amount of 1 /5716. -- " Dollars, being at least five percent (5 %) of the proposal, made payable to the City of Stillwater as a proposal guarantee, which it is agreed by the undersigned will be forfeited in the event the Purchase Agreement and Development Agreement are not executed within 10 days, if awarded to the undersigned. • • • • • TO: Stillwater City Council RE: Simms property -Bid of 6/25/93 Jeff Griffith 903 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 PH: 439 -0449 July 13, 1993 Dear Council Members, As a bidder on the Simm's property, I would like to offer additional information for consideration in the upcoming council meeting. I included a minimum of detail with my bid (as the original bid request stated that detailed plans and cost esti- mates were to accompany the development agreement within 10 days (after) award). Since I am unable to attend the 7/20 meeting, I wish to provide some clarification by letter. As I stated at the 7/6 Council meeting, my intent would be to complete a major restoration /renovation, maintaining the property as a single family dwelling, with careful attention to the building's historic character. Due to the extreme disrepair of the property, I anticipate an expenditure in the neighborhood of $80,000 for improvements. I feel that I possess the experience, drive, and financial committment to see this challenging project to completion. In the fifteen years I have lived in Stillwater, I have restored two residential properties (the latest being a 3500 sq. ft. 1890 home converted into a B &B, which my wife and I now operate as the Battle Hollow Bed & Breakfast on N. 4th St.). As you are doubtlessly aware, one of the concerns with a project of this magnitude is "unknowns ". A costly "surprise" can significantly add to project costs. I feel that my estimates (attached) present a realistic completion cost of a quality restoration. I also have the financial resources to "weather" some of the "unexpecteds ". I have recently had the good fortune to sell my interest in a small business, which affords me the time and financial committment to dedicate to a project of this scope. In order to ensure timely completion, I would be willing to place an escrow amount with the City, to be drawn down as repairs are completed (with interest accruing to me), in the amount of the major repairs anticipated. This would give the City "iron- clad" protection to see completion on the project, and prevent another costly condemnation on a half- completed job. In conclusion, I hope you will give my proposal adequate review. I am interested very much in maintaining and preserving this property and returning it to use. I apologize that I will be unable to attend the council meeting, and would look forward to discussing any of these issues in detail, upon my return after 7/24. Above all, I hope that the Council remains steadfast in its desire to preserve this 125 year old (1868,I believe) resource. Thankyou for your consideration and time. Sincer y if Griffith • SIMMS RENOVATION 410 N 4th St. PROJECT OUTLINE / "BALL PARK" Cost Estimates DESCRIPTION: Briefly,my plan is to renovate the house as a single family dwelling with these minor floor plan alterations: 1) Garage razed,2i car garage constructed at rear of site (detached). 2) Middle addition rebuilt and modernized into kitchen /family room. 3) Downstairs bath converted to full with minor floor plan change. 4) Upstairs "kitchen" removed, bath added. 5) Closet relocated under stairway. 6) Optional gas fireplace first floor. Externally the house would be renovated to an appropriate Greek Revival style, with the removal of the non - original porches and siding; repair of the roof and chimney with doors4nd windows being repaired /replaced as necessary. The house would be painted in appropriate historical colors. Improvements would also include addition of a rear driveway,rebuilding of the front wall /steps and landscaping as required. It is anticipated that the project would be completed in several phases, with completion no later than 14 months from start of contracting (assuming bid acceptance allows sufficient time prior to freezeup this fall). • PHASE 1- SITE PREPARATION Total Estimate $4400 1. Develop site access- clear and develop driveway at rear of property (approx 100' x 12' gravel /class 5 material 2. Cleanup and dumpster removal of trash inside and outside the property. PHASE 2- STRUCTURE REPAIR /MODIFICATION Total Estimate $16,900 1. Demolition /removal of existing garage and side room 2. Gut Middle kitchen addition area. 3. Stabilize foundation /tuckpoint /sill damage carpentry. 4. Miscellaneous demolition carpentry repairs. 5. Repair Chimney /Roof (main house) 6. Reroof Kitchen area /addition. 7. Repair /Replace outside doors,windows as required. 8. Repair interior structural cracks and address structural defects. 9. Replace front wall (62') and steps with poured concrete PHASE 3- RENOVATION /ROUGH -IN: MECH. PLBG. ELEC. Total Estimate $18,100 1. Install new update natural gas boiler system. a)Repair existing damage to radiator system. b)Asbestos abatement /Removal from old heating system. c)Gas hookup/ optional waterline replacement to street. 2. Plumbing Repair a)Replacement of interior water lines, damaged waste and sewage lines b)Water heater installation c)Add tub rough -in to } bath,first floor. d)OPTIONAL: rough in upstairs bath. 3. Electrical a)Update service panel to 100 amp (min) or 200 amp. b)Repair /replace house wiring as required to meet code, including GFI's etc. -2- SIMMS RENOVATION EST. (continued) PHASE 4- IMPROVEMENTS TO KITCHEN ADDITION Total Estimate $8000 1 .Mechanical /Plumbing /Electric Rough -in 2.Structural carpentry 3.Replacement /addition doors windows 4.Renovation -side porch (south) 5.Sheet -rock/ refloor • • PHASE 5- EXTERIOR MODIFICATIONS Total Estimate $7600 1.Remove aluminum siding,te pair /replace clapboard. 2.Remove non- original porch (east) and north side room. 3.Replace missing millwork,soffit,fascia, shutters. 4.Construct appropriate main entryway 5 .Prepare /Prime /Paint PHASE 6- INTERIOR REPAIRS - FINISH WORK 1. Repair /Replace plaster /sheetrock 2 .Repair /Refinish /Reconstruct millwork. 3.Plumbing fixtures replaced /added as needed 4.Kitchen appliances /cabinets 5.Floor Refinish /Carpet 6.Paint and wall covering PHASE 7- GARAGE /EXTERIOR /LANDSCAPING 1. Removal /replanting 2.Construction 2} car garage 3.Walkway to garage OPTIONAL ADD -ONS Gas Fireplace(first floor ) Replace water hookup ( ?) Pave Drive - Bituminous Total Estimate $18,800 Total Estimate $8200 TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $82,000 These discretionary add -ons would be added as budget permits - approx $6000 • LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 93 -124 ABM Equipment & Supply Ace Hardware American Institute CPA's American Linen Arrow Building Center A T & T A T & T Biff's, Inc. Bd. Water Commissioners Burlington Northern Railroad Copy Duplicating Cleveland Cotton Products Croix Oil Company Ecolab Pest Elimination Equipment Supply Inc. Gopher State One Call Greeder Electric Company G & K Services Home Decorating Images Past & Present I. S. D. #834 Junker Sanitation Service Junker Sanitation Service Junker Sanitation Service Kress, Kenneth Labelawn Turf Farm Labor Relations Zsociates Lakes Gas Company Law Enforcement Equipment Magnuson, David Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Miller Bag Company Miller Excavating Mn. Chiefs of Police Minn Comm Mn. Conway Fire & Safety 3 M Mn. Correctional Facility Mn. Correctional FMcility Motorola, Inc. Nardini Fire Equipment Northern Water Works Supply One Hour Express Photo Richmar Construction Robert C. Vogel & Associates St. Croix Car Wash Sealmaster, Inc. Shiely Company Snyder Drug #75 Southam Business Communications Stafford, R. H. Washington County Treasurer Repair Vactor Supplies Membership - Deblon Towel Service Supplies Lease /Rental Leased Equipment Portable Rental Pipe Leases Repair Copy Machine Hand Towels Gas Pest Control Services A/C Locate Request Repairs -Lift Stations Uniform Rental Paint Photo Supplies Refreshments -DARE Rolloff -Simms Lift Stations Sale of Garbage Bags Reimburse- Expenses Sod -Storm Sewer Services - Arbitration Gas for Crack Filling 2 Door Shields Legal Services Sewer Service Charges Sand Bags Digging /Sand Permits Rental - 3 Pagers 3 Helmet Shields $ 1,189.65 81.36 90.00 27.70 135.94 331.68 54.37 274.13 73.08 8,000.00 88.32 157.54 3,444.60 218.33 653.89 54.00 362.00 1,347.19 272.85 36.16 35.25 310.00 170.40 2,113.75 118.12 10.65 907.50 96.00 61.76 5,159.00 98,255.00 1,096.95 1,199.14 18.57 342.51 75.69 Signs 184.99 ICR Forms /Parking Tickets 1,325.07 Lowell Park Books 4,268.52 Radio Equipment 579.36 Inspection 75.50 Repairs - Orleans Lift 194.31 Film Processing 18.41 Payment No. 2 /Final 1,710.00 Evaluation -West Wing 120.00 Squads Washed 51.12 Crack Filler 1,334.23 Sand 56.71 Film /Cat Food 17.41 Advertise -Bids 392.94 TIF #3 140.00 Stillwater Gazette Stillwater Towing T. A. Schifsky & Sons Tennessen Associates Thompson Hardware Company Twin City Testing Uniforms Unlimited U. S. West Communications Valley Auto Supply Warning Lites Yocum Oil Company ADDENDUM TO BILLS Abrahamson Nurseries A T & T Bailey, Charles Baker, Sharon Capital Communications Copy Duplicating Products G. F. O. A. Interpoll Laboratories Maritronics Mn. Clerks & Finance Assn. Mn. Cellular One Mn. State Fire Chiefs Assn. Motorola, Inc. N. W. Tire & Battery Co. Roettger, David St. Croix Animal Shelter Stillwater Sign Company Tee's Plus Wardell, Leslie Warning Lites, Inc. APPROVED FOR PAYMENT Publications Lift Pump /Tow Squad Asphalt Services Supplies Testing Uniforms Telephone Auto Parts Rented Lites Diesel Fuel /Motor Oil Shrubs Long Distance Calls Sidewalk Repairs Part Time Sec'y. Re- Program Radios Developer /Annual Mte. Newsletter /Membership Water Sampling Repair Traffic Counter Membership Mobile Phone Membership Service Agreement Repairs /Tires Reimburse- Parking June Fees 6 Signs DARE Supplies Reimburse- Expenses Barricades Adopted by the Council this 20th day of July, 1993. 354.03 80.00 234.94 4,744.84 92.06 647.00 573.22 1,876.54 359.11 267.62 1,861.73 109.35 90.19 1,600.00 49.50 27.50 637.67 180.00 86.40 129.00 25.00 21.84 140.00 270.47 866.57 2.25 698.60 100.00 66.49 537.53 96.01 • • • 1 • APPLICATIONS July 20, 1993 Contractor's Licenses Barthelmy Roofing Roofing Renewal P.O. Box 9412 No. St. Paul, Mn. 55109 Brewster & Sons Roofing Roofing Renewal 4405 Olson Lake Tr. No. Lake Elmo, Mn. 55042 Hoffman Corporation General Contractor New 2019 Valley Fair Mall Appleton, Wi 54915 • • • M E M O TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: MARY LOU JOHNSON, CITY CLERK DATE: JULY 16, 1993 SUBJECT: RATIFICATION OF COUNCIL POLL OF 8, 1993 City Coordinator Kriesel conducted a telephone poll of the City Council requesting to schedule a special meeting to discuss and possibly award the bid for removal of asbestos from the West Wing of the Old Jr. High School. All members voted in favor of the meeting. • • TO: FR: DA: RE: Mayor and City Council Diane Deblon, Finance Director July 15, 1993 UTILITY BILL ADJUSTMENTS The following are requests for and recommendations made for utility bill adjustments: Reason for Request 1. Defective water softener replaced in March 2. Leaky toilet fixed 3. Leaky toilet fixed M E M O R A N D U M Recommendation Reduce April 93 and future billing to prior average of 23 /gal. /qtr. Reduce April 93 billing to prior 15 /gal. /qtr. Reduce April 93 billing to prior 16 /gal. /qtr. and future average of and future average of • • RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION VACATING PART OF A FORMERLY TRAVELED WILLOW STREET WHEREAS, a Petition was presented praying for vacation of a part of a formerly traveled Willow Street in the City of Stillwater, Minnesota hereinafter described; and, WHEREAS, the City Council did determine that the Petition was sufficient; and the City is a Home Rule Charter City of the Third Class and that it was proper for them to proceed with the vacation pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §440.135; and WHEREAS, at a meeting duly called for that purpose, the City Council did on the 20th day of July, 1993 determine that the proposed vacation would not interfere or defeat the public interest or adversely affect the public and that it would be in the best interests of the City of Stillwater and the abutting owners that the portion of street be returned to the tax rolls. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the Petition be in the same is hereby granted, that the following Street as formerly traveled, be and the same are here by vacated: All that part of the formerly traveled Willow Street of the NWI /4 of Section 21, in Township 30 North, of Range 20 West, Washington County, Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing on a line produced 640.00 feet West of the East line and running parallel with said South line 85.00 feet to the point of beginning of the parcel being described; thence continuing West, parallel with said South line 105.00 feet; thence South, parallel with said East line, 135.00 feet; thence East, parallel with said South line, 105.00 feet; thence North parallel with said East line, 135.00 feet to the point of beginning. According to the United States Government Survey thereof. (Shown as "Parcel" 2 on the enclosed survey attached hereto as Exhibit "A ") BE IT FURTHER RESVOLVED, that a copy of this Resolution duly certified by the City Clerk shall be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of Washington County, Minnesota. Adopted by affirmation vote of all members of the City Council this 20th day of July, 1993. ATTEST: Mary Lou Johnson, Clerk Charles M. Hooley, Mayor • • • • ti 4 07 .•,S #./ /. /s 00 5£/ i • • 00.1•!/ ...7,57,//, /t w N1 OAj no 00 'PS/ •- . P 4- r Ps, al • • July 12, 1993 Mr. Alvin R. Burk II 4770 Centerville Road #311 White Bear Lake, MN 55127 Dear Mr. Burk: Please let this letter serve as permission from the City of Stillwater for your skydiving team to perform at the Aviation Days exhibition as part of the Sesquicentennial Celebration. This exhibition will be held in Lowell Park. We understand you will provide four (4) skydivers at the event, skydiving at about 6:00 P.M. on Friday, August 6 and Saturday, August 7, dropping two chutists each;, pass. One will land north of the bridge. and the other' ? ?, :south. City Staff will provide two 100x100 areas -for the .iF --- 9 4 .AY 'landing area. F.A.A. clearance and other responsibilities are yours. GOOD LUCK!! We look forward to Aviation Days, August 6, 7 and . 8th. .7:0!4/ Charles M. Hooley Mayor CH /sm illwater _______,, THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612 - 439 -6121 rrom ine U eNri _ of Po- V r v \%_,EAK,c__OL Community Development Stillwater, Minnesota ti C5 ( P LovJa v L\r-zr-Q_ „'fir • • • M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and City Council FR: City Coordinator DA: July 16, 1993 RE: ADJUSTMENT TO GARBAGE COLLECTION ACCOUNT Accompanying this memo is a letter from Bruce and Victoria Brillhart explaining the billing situation that developed in July 1, 1992 when the City went to a volume base fee collection system. This issue was left "hanging" for over a year because it was believed that a solution to the problem would be negotiated with the other changes that have been in the process of being negotiated over the past six months and which led to the revised solid waste collection agreement. However, the problem was not resolved and the issue recently went to the Dispute Resolution Committee. There findings are shown on the enclosed DRC management form. I agree with the DRC and would recommend that the Brillhart's utility bill be adjusted to reflect a charge for one 90 gallon container retroactive to July 1, 1992. Mr. Bob Fritts 1575 N. Second St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Bob: I have been notified that you are the City of Stillwater's representative to the Dispute Resolution Committee regarding Junker Sanitation. I have a long standing dispute that needs to be cleared up. We have been unable to get either Junker Sanitation or the City to address our problem and this committee sounds like the right place to start over. My wife and I run the Ann Bean House Bed & Breakfast at 319 W. Pine. Ever since July of 1992 we have been billed as a duplex, under our protest. We notified Junker Sanitation in July, and the City of Stillwater shortly after of this problem. We appeared before a workshop of the City Council this year and were told something would happen and to wait. We read in the Stillwater Gazette that Bed & Breakfasts would no longer be billed as a duplex. (Indeed, based on our informal investigation, we believe we are the only Bed & Breakfast in town being billed as a duplex.) Last week we received another bill as a duplex. It has been a year and it is time to get this cleared up. What we want to clear this up is: 1. Eliminate the billing as a duplex 2. Cancel all payments due an past due amounts on the duplex account. Acct # 30 -07 -00490 Balance: $249.28 from July 1, 1992 to present 3. Continue to bill our househ Id for the one 90 gallon container that we do use. Acct# 07 -00490 Currently paid up to date. 4. Have Junker Sanitation remove the second 90 gallon container that we do not use and have never used. Sincerely, Bruce & Victoria Brillhart . Mr. Nile Kriesel, City of Stillwater nn Bean House April 29, 1993 If there is any additional information you require or help I can provide, please call me. I appreciate your attention to this matter. An Elegant Victorian Bed and Breakfast 319 'W Pine Street Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 430 -0355 • • O M r 4 rr �H• • j Pt n M rt n DRC Complaint Management Stillwater sanitation service PROBLEM # 9313 Source Ann Bean House B &B FRITTS%'LEVELITE DISPLAYS 612 439 9663 P.01 Address 319 W. Pine Phone 430 -0355 ISSUE: Explained in 4/29/93 letter to all parties: Since July 1992 this account has been billed as a duplex against the owners protest, and they were delivered a 2nd. 90 gallon container which they have never used. Their complaint is that they have been charged for services not rendered nor needed and they want the account corrected. 0: , f7 7 / RESPONSE: The DRC finds no clear basis in the existing contract for charging Bed & Breakfast for two containers when one will suffice. The actions suggested by the owners to clear up this situation seem reasonable to the D. 30 day nnmP, -nnt• _ Pmh1 Am raenl s rcA') V.-.-• AT., DONALD L. BEBERG • CHIEF OF POLICE • water THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA POLICE DEPARTMENT TO: NILE KRIESEL FROM: LEO MILLER REF: CODE ENFORCEMENT STATUS REPORT DATE: JULY 15, 1993 THE FOLLOWING CODE VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN DOCUMENTED BY THIS OFFICER DURING THE PAST TWO WEEKS. COURTESY LETTERS WILL BE MAILED TO THE TIMOTHY J. BELL CAPTAIN PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE NEXT FEW DAYS. PROPERTY INSPECTION WILL BE MADE ON THE VIOLATIONS 14 DAYS AFTER THE MAILING OF THE COURTESY LETTER. NON- COMPLIANCE WILL WARRANT A WARNING LETTER WITH A 10 DAY LIMIT TO TAKE CARE OF THE VIOLATION. I WILL CONTINUE TO LOCATE VIOLATIONS WITHIN THE CITY AND TAKE THE PROPER COURSE IN DEALING WITH THESE MATTERS. A NUMBER OF VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN RESOLVED BY PERSONAL CONTACT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER. LOCATION VIOLATION STATUS 1400 BLOCK W. LINDEN HIGH GRASS /WEEDS PENDING 500 BLOCK W. OLIVE HIGH GRASS /WEEDS PENDING CURVE CREST & INDUSTRIAL HIGH GRASS /WEEDS RESOLVED INDUSTRIAL BLVD HIGH GRASS /WEEDS PENDING • TOWER & INDUSTRIAL HIGH GRASS /WEEDS RESOLVED 212 North Fourth Street, Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Business Phone: (612) 439 -1314 • 439 -1336 • FAX: 439 -0456 Police Response / Assistance: 911 LOCATION VIOLATION TOWER DRIVE WASHINGTON AVE (1) WASHINGTON AVE (2) WASHINGTON AVE (3) CURVE CREST BLVD WEST ORLEANS 708 PINETREE TRAIL WASHINGTON SCHOOL GROUNDS 1213 S 4TH ST 305 W. STILLWATER AVE 503 W. SYCAMORE 1214 N 2ND ST 1004 S. HOLCOMBE ST 820 N. 4TH ST 304 E. HAZEL ST 101 E. HAZEL ST 317 W. LAUREL S T 411 W. LAUREL ST 122 S. GREELEY ST 8G2 $, 1ST ST 1221 N. CARNELLIAN ST 619 W. ANDERSON ST HIGH GRASS /WEEDS HIGH GRASS /WEEDS HIGH GRASS /WEEDS HIGH /GRASS /WEEDS HIGH GRASS /WEEDS HIGH GRASS /WEEDS HI Ii GRASS /WEEDS HI Chi GRASS BURNED OUT HOME BURNED OUT HOME REFUSE IN YARD REFUSE IN YARD 2 ABANDONED VEHICLES HOME SIDING VIOLATION REFUSE IN YARD 3 4BANDONED VEHICLES HIGH GRASS /WEEDS REFUSE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE REFUSE /SCRAP METAL /TIRES 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 2 ABANDONED VEHICLES 4 ABANDONED VEHICLES 2 ABANDONED VEHICLES 4 ABANDONED VEHICLES 9 ABANDONED VEHICLES • STATUS RESOLVED PENDING RESOLVED PENDING RESOLVED PENDING PENDING RESOLVED RESOLVED RESOLVED RESOLVED PENDING PENDING RESOLVED PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING • PENDING PENDING • • • • LOCATION 1018 S. 7TH ST 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 415 W. SYCAMORE ST 510 W. SYCAMORE ST 407 S. 6TH ST 901 W. MAPLE ST 620 S. BROADWAY 106 N. OWENS ST 522 W. ELM ST 904 S. 5TH ST 123 W. MYRTLE ST 207 MARYKNOLL DR 1109 W. MULBERRY ST EO A MILLER CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER cc MAYOR HOOLEY CHIEF BEBERG CAPT BELL CITY ATTORNEY VIOLATION 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE REFUSE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 1 ABANDONED VEHICLE 4 ABANDONED VEHICLES TIRES /CAR PARTS _3 STATUS PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING PENDING • • July 20, 1993 Allen Zepper City Of Stillwater 216 N. 4 Street Stillwater, MN. 55082 Robert V. Hegner 8282 Stillwater Blvd. N. Lake Elmo, MN. 55042 (612) 779 -0662 Dear Mr. Zepper I Robert Hegner, Propose to the city of Stillwater, the following terms for a contract Building Inspector. The following cost difference of terms is dependent upon certain benefits that could be offered by the City of Stillwater. i.e. Health care - City Vehicle - Omissions Insurance and the intended time of the contract. 1). $15.00 per hour. With full benefits. 2). $18.00 per hour. No Health Care but, use of City vehicle and omissions insurance covered by the Uniform Building Code Section 202 (f), 1988 version. 3). $22.50 per hour. No Health Care - No ommssions insurance but, use of City vehicle for inspection purposes. Mr. Zepper, Enclosed are copies of my Resume, Degree in Building Inspection, References, Licenses, Letters of recommendation and Certifications To provide you with full understanding of my capabilities. The above fees for service are somewhat negotiable and contract service could start immediately. Sincerely.. Robert V 'egner • • • MEMO TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: MARY LOU JOHNSON, CITY CLERK DATE: JULY 16, 1993 SUBJECT: INCREASE IN WAGES FOR PART -TIME RECORDING SECRETARY, SHELLY SCHAUBACH. I am requesting a wage increase for Shelly Schaubach, Part -Time Recording Secretary for the City. Shelly is a very proficient and valuable employee, taking and transcribing minutes and in some cases, drafting letters, for various Council, Planning Commission, Park & Recreation and other Commissions and Committees of the City. She was employed in 1987 and has not had a raise since August, 1989. Shelly's current wage is $9.00 /hr. I am requesting Council to grant her an increase of $1.00 /hr. to $10.00 /hr. effective August 1, 1993. (She works an average of 28 hr. /mo.). • • • Nile Kriesel City Coordinator 214 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Nile: MAGNUSON & THOLE LAW OFFICE LICENSED IN MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN THE GRAND GARAGE & GALLERY 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET SUITE #260 P.O. BOX 438 STILLWATER, MN 55082 TELEPHONE: (612) 439 -9464 TELECOPIER: (612) 439 -5641 July 12, 1993 Legal Assistants DAVID T. MAGNUSON Gail A. Mahr ERIC C. THOLE Shelley L. Sundberg RE: Personal Use of Publicly Owned Automobiles The 1993 Legislature enacted Chapter 315 Section 16 as an amendment to Minnesota Statues §471.666 dealing with personal use of publicly owned automobiles. Except for public safety vehicles any City owned car may now only be used for authorized local government business and personal use that is clearly incidental to the use of the vehicle for government business. The automobile may be used in connection with work related activities during hours when the employee is not working and for use by a person who is away from the local government on extended business or for the use of an employee who is authorized to do business away from the work station. I enclosed a copy of the law that will take effect on August 1st of 1993. I would recommend that we review City policy with regard to personal use to make sure it is in compliance with this statute. Please call me with any questions. DTM \kb Enclosure Yours very truly, David T. Mac nuso*t tz? LEGISLATURE e's annual wages ance pay shall not accumulated sick section 471.61 to does not include group insurance oe excluded from everance pay for a to the employee exceed five years ,ted employee dies due must be paid it as provided in aving employment kiCE PAY FOR A compensated em- veen the employee is section, and the ract; approved by the lent incentive offer ‘r-nment who meet .ion certifying that: ....al unit of govern- ; +92; ayment contracts or 'fits throughout the )92, will, at the time ?rnment, result in a d i subdivision 2 was c guarantee in lieu '`.hin a specific local ace pay guarantee o a process for the an exemption under due consideration responsibilities in rents for a hie .:1 '.YMENTS; TIME iyment to a highly: - ams have been Sled, written employment :vernment during] j l‘tabdivision must be- :�dy's- approval of a date of the public , ayment pursuant 1993 REGULAR SESSION Ch. 315, § 17 this subdivision, or the employee to whom the payment is to be made, may rescind or reject the payment, prior to the effective date )f the governing body's approval. Sec. 16. 471.666 PERSONAL USE OF PUBLICLY —OWNED AUTOMOBILES PRO- HIBITED. Subdivision 1. DEFINITIONS. For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply: (a) "Local government vehicle" means a vehicle owned or leased by a political subdivision of the state of Minnesota or loaned to a political subdivision. (b) "Political subdivision" means a statutory or home rule charter city, county, town, school district, metropolitan or regional agency, or other special purpose district of this state. (c) "Local government employee" or "employee" means an individual who is appointed or employed by a political subdivision. including all elected officials of political subdivisions. ' Subd. 2. RESTRICTED USES. A local government vehicle may be used only for authorized local government business, including personal use that is clearly incidental to the use of the vehicle for local government business. A local government vehicle may not be used for transportation to or from the residence of a local government employee, except as provided in subdivision 3. Subd. 3. PERMITTED USES. A local government vehicle may be used by a local government employee to travel to or from the employee's residence: i in connection with work - related activities during hours when the employee is not working; 02 if the employee has been assigned the use of a local government vehicle for authorized local government business on an extended basis, and the employee's primary place of work is not the local government work station to which the employee is permanently assigned; or if the employee has been assigned the use of a local government vehicle for authorized local government business away from the ork station to which the employee is permanently assigned, and the number of miles travel, or the time needed to conduct the business, will be minimized if the employee uses a loc government vehicle to travel to the employee's residence before or after traveling to the place of local government business. Subd. 4. EXCEPTIONS. This sectiob does not apply to public safety vehicles that are owned or leased by a political subdivision'. Sec. 17. Minnesota Statutes 1992, section 475.66, subdivision 3, is amended to read: Subd. 3. Subject to the provisions of any resolutions or other instruments securing obligations payable from a debt service fund, any balance in the fund may be invested (a) in governmental bonds, notes, bills, mortgages, and other securities, which are direct obligations or are guaranteed or insured issues of the United States, its agencies, its instrumentalities, or organizations created by an act of Congress, excluding mortgage- backed securities that are defined as high risk pursuant to subdivision 5, or in certificates of deposit secured by letters of credit issued by federal home loan banks, (b) in shares of an investment company (1) registered under the Federal Investment Company Act of 1940, whose shares are registered under the Federal Securities Act of 1933, and (2) whose only investments are in (i) securities described in the preceding clause, except that mortgage- backed securities defined as high risk pursuant to subdivision 5 do not apply to shares of an investment company, (ii) general obligation tax- exempt securities rated A or better by a national bond rating service, and (iii) repurchase agreements or reverse repurchase agreements fully collateralized by those securities, if the repurchase agreements or reverse repurchase agreements are entered into only with those primary reporting dealers that report to the Federal Reserve Bank o F New York and with the 100 largest United States commercial banks, (c) in any security which is (1) a generl obligation of the state of Minnesota or any of its municipalities, or (2) a general obligation of another state or local government with taxing Powers which is rated A or better by a national bond rating service, or (3) a general obligation of the Minnesota housing finance agency or (4) a general obligation of a housing finance agency of any state if it includes a moral ) bligation of the state, or (5) a general or revenue Additions are indicated by underline; deletions by strikeout 1239 • • THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA MEMORANDUM TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: MAYOR HOOLEY DATE: JULY 9, 1993 SUBJECT: LEGISLATIVE RULING The State of Minnesota recently ruled it is not legal for any city employee to use a city auto for private use unless the role of that employee could be classified as one of emergency or that the individual may be called in an authoritative manner in case of an emergency. Our City Administrator drives a city vehicle for private use. In my opinion, this use falls into the category of "may be called in emergencies in an authoritative manner ". Therefore, I request the Council to support me in my decision to have Nile Kriesel continue to use the city vehicle and be called upon in case of an emergency. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612- 439 -6121 efrti tP P 0 fr L vvti )Yrjte/ • - July 20, 1993 Dear Mayor and CounciLMembers: The City of Stillwater received bids for the building demolition of the west wing of the Junior High School on Thursday, July 15, 1993. Five bids were received ranging from a low of $134,469.00 to a high of $419,663.00. The low bid was submitted by J & D Enterprises of Duluth, Minnesota. The Engineer's Estimate was $250,000.00. J & D Enterprises completed a project for the U.S. Department of Labor Job Corps. Center Demolition in Minot North Dakota in 1992. This project value was in access of • $900,000.00. J & D also completed a demolition project for the University of Minnesota Duluth in 1993. This was the demolition of the old main building. The value of this project was $300,000.00. We have checked both references and we were unable to reach the contact person with the Department of Labor. However, we did reach the person responsible with the University of Minnesota Duluth. They said that J & D Enterprises had completed the project satisfactorily. We therefore recommend award of the project to J & D Enterprises, Inc. from Duluth, Minnesota. Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 -4898 If you have any questions, please contact me. REM /kam SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE 200 SEH CENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 612 490 -2000 800 325 -2055 ARCHITECTURE • ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL • TRANSPORTATION RE: Stillwater, Minnesota West Wing Jr. High School Building Demolition and Asbestos Removal SEH File No. A- STILL3320.00 MINNEAPOLIS, MN ST. CLOUD, MN Sincerely, r 4 c: Steve Russell, Community Development Director Diane Debion, Finance Director David Junker, Public Works Director Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator Dennis McKean, Secretary, Water Board I Richard E. Moore, P.E. City Engineer CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON. WI • • ra M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director DA: July 15, 1993 RE: ENVIRONMENTAL xtvizw OF STILLWATER MARKET PLACE PROJECT Background The Minnesota Environmental Policy Act requires that certain projects dependent on size, location and type undergo environmental review. The City of Stillwater is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for reviewing project environmental information and making a determination regarding the environmental review. This memo and the attached reports desire the project and potential environmental impacts. Based on a comparison of the two projects it is recommended that the Environmental Assessment Worksheet and negative declaration approved for the Woodland Lakes Project meets the (environmental review) requirements for the current project. Analysis A description of key components of the Woodland Lakes Project and Stillwater Market Plan Project was prepared to compare the projects. The Stillwater Market Place Project is smaller in terms of building area, parking spaces and lot coverage. Less runoff will be generated by the current project. As with the Woodland Lakes Project, no significant noise, air or water quality impacts will result based on the proposed project design and conditions of project approval. Attached to this report is a description of the Woodland Lakes Project and Stillwater Market Place Project, Environmental Assessment Information for the Stillwater Market Place Project, the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the original Woodland Lakes Project, and Notice of Decision. Recommendation Based on comparison of the two projects, it is determined that the Stillwater Market Place Project is similar to the original Woodland Lakes Project and there has been no substantial change in the proposed project that may affect the potential for significant adverse environmental effect. (Resolution) Attachments: • Description of Woodland Lakes Project and Stillwater Market Place Project • Stillwater Market Place Environmental Assessment Information • Environmental Assessment Worksheet Woodland Lake Project • Record of Decision, Minnesota Environmental Quality Board, June 11, 1986 Whereas, the City of Stillwater did receive, review and approve plans for the Woodland Lakes Project on June, 3, 1986; and Attest: RESOLUTION NO. 93/(4 111 RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLW1TER DETERMINING THE ADEQUACY OF ENVIRONMENTAL ittvirfr FOR THE ST WATER MARKET PLACE PROJECT Whereas, the City Council of the City of Stillwater did approve, after review of an Environmental Assessmeint Worksheet, a Negative Declaration for the Woodland Lakes Project; and Whereas, the Woodland Lake Project did not proceed and the City has received application for a revised Stillwater Market Place Project; and Whereas, the City Council h reviewed information describing and comparing the new project with the Woodland Lakes Project and information describing potential environmental impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, that based on the information and staff recommendation the City Council does determine that the new Stillwater Market Place Project is similar to the Woodland Lakes Project and is not substantially different and that the previously approved EAW and Negative Declaration shall meet the requirements of Environmental Review for the current project. Adopted by Council this 20th day of July, 1993. city clerk Mayor 1 • • • • a DESCRIPTION OF WOODLAND LAKES PROJECT AND STILLWATER MARKET PLACE PROJECT Below key descriptive characteristics of the Woodland Lakes Project (approved by the City of Stillwater in 1986) is compared with the Stillwater Market Place Project, currently being considered by the City Council for PUD approval. The purpose of this comparison is to determine if the current project is substantially larger or different from the previously approved Woodland Lakes Project and needs a new separate environmental review. Project Description General: Land Area Building Area Proposal parking Land Disturbed Utilities: Water Use Sewage Flow Storm Water Runoff 67.72 acres 499,300 square feet 2,330 spaces 67.72 acres Not Determined .08 mg /d 31.9 af Potential Impact Areas (within standard): Noise Y Air Quality Y Water Quality Y Woodland Lakes Stillwater Market Place 67.84 acres 414,000 square feet 2,220 spaces 57.8 acres .12 mg /d .1 mg /d 23 af Y Y Y EIS Scoping STILLWATER MARKET PLACE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INFORMATION (JULY 1993) This environmental assessment information is being used to compare the reports of the current project with the impacts of a previous report for which a negative declaration was issued. Based on this review, a determination will be made on the adequacy of the previous negative declaration. 1. Project Title: Stillwater Market Place 2. Proposer: Target Stores, Inc. Contact Person: Jim Theusch, AIA Title: Project Administrator Address: P.O. Box 1392 Minneapolis, MN 55440 -1392 Phone: (612) 370 -5844 3. RGU: City of Stillwater Contact Person: Steve Russell, AICP Title: Community Development Director Address: 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone: (612) 439 -6121 4. Reason for preliminary EAW Preparation: Mandatory EAW Citizen Petition RGU Discretion Proposer Volunteered If EAW or EIS is mandat ry give EQB rule category number(s): 4410.4300, subp. 14.B(1) "For construction of a new.. .commercial...facil'ity...equal to or in excess of...(2) third or fourth class city, 200,00 square feet" [gross floor space] Previous Negative Declaration approved by RGU June 3, 1986. 5. Project Location: ' Township 30N Range 20W 1/4 Section: SW 1/4 of Section 32 County: Washington City /Township: Stillwater /Stillwater Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: a. A county map showing the general location of the project: See Figure 1 1 b. Copy(ies) of USGS 7.5 minutes, 1:24,000 scale map (photocopy of OK) indicating the project boundaries. • • See Figure 2 c. A site plan showing all significant project and natural features. Figure 3 shows the site layout for the proposed development Figure 4 shows significant existing natural features for the site. Figure 5 shows the post - development site drainage and ponding areas for storm water run off management. Figure 6 shows a post development utility plan. Figure 7 shows an SCS Soils classification map. Figure 8 is a letter from the Minnesota Historical Society. Figure 9 shows area of storm water drainage system. Traffic Analysis Supplement. 6. Description: Give a complete description of the proposed project and ancillary facilities (attach additional sheets as necessary). Emphasize construction and operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or produce wastes. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities. Located at the northeast quadrant of Washington C.S.A.H. #5 and State Highway #36 is a vacant 67.84 acre parcel. The site is within the corporate city limits of the City of Stillwater with Stillwater Township west of C.S.A.H. #5 and Oak Park Heights south of Highway #36. The site is currently zoning BP -C (Business Park Commercial) and BP -O (Business Park Office). The BP -C zoning allows for commercial Retail Developemnt compatible for the proposed Target Stillwater development (refer to Figure 3 -- Site Plan). The proposed Target Stillwater development will occupy 27.2 acres of the 67.84 acre parcel. The site plan identifies the first phase development which includes the completion of Curve Crest Boulevard to County Road #5 and the continuation of the North Frontage Road /Neal Avenue to Curve Crest Boulevard. The proposed street design has been presented and conceptually approved by the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT), Washington County and the City of Stillwater. Target and SUPERVALU will be co- developers of this site with the first phase of development to consist of 116,800 s.f. Target Store a 42,500 s.f. retail store and a 88,000 s.f. Cub Foods store. The Planned Unit Development, PUD, submission requests concept and final site plan approval for the 27.2 acre Target parcel. Outlot A is designated as the open space stormwater ponding area. Outlot B will be graded in conjunction with phase one per the grading plan and made available for future commercial development. All public roadways and utilities will be designated by the City of Stillwater in coordination with the private developer's plans. It is the developer's intent to work with the City of Stillwater, Washington County and MnDOT to coordinate the public improvements and site development plans for the first phase. The project administrator for Target is Jim Theusch, AIA, who shall be the principal contact for the project with the City of Stillwater. The site design, engineering, landscape architecture and preliminary environmental informaton has been provided by RLK Associates, Ltd. Richard Koppy, P.E. is the principal in charge of the site development with John Dietrich, ASIA, as the project manager. RSP Architects will be the project architect for Target Stores. Planmark will represent SUPERVALU as the grocery store engineers and architects. These participants will serve as the developer's primary contacts on the project design through the City PUD review process and the construction of Phase One of the Target parcel. The proposed phase one development is being projected for a 1994 construction date to b coordinated with the proposed County Road #5 improvements. It is the developers intent to have the adjacent roadways of Curve Crest Boulevaid and the Frontage Road /Neal Avenue constructed concurrently with the }building development. MnDOT has indicated that the north Frontage Road may be extended east to Washington Avenue as part of the phase one development. The Highway 36 improvement project adjacent to this site, originally scheduled for 1995, may not occur until 1997 or latter dependent on the availability of MnDOT funds. This development will provide the area residents with quality discount shopping. The development is consistent with the West Stillwater Business Park Plan prepared by the City of Stillwater and adopted as a part of the Comprehensive Plan in 1989. The site has previously been graded. The drainage ponds scheduled for Outlot A will be enlarged to accommodate the runoff associated with this development. Provide a 50 or fewer word description of project: The propose project is a 384,000 s.f. retail commercial development consisting of a Target Store, Grocery Store, specialty retail space and as many as four outlot for stand along retail and 30,000 s.f. of restaurant development for a total of 414,000 s.f. projected. 7. Project Magnitude Data: Total Project Area (acres) or Length (miles): 67.84 acres Number of Residential t Unattached: nits: none 3 Attached: Commercial /Industrial /Institutional Building Area (gross floor space): Total square feet: 414,000 s.f. • • • • Indicate Area of Specific Uses: Office: Manufacturing: Retail: 384,000 s.f. Other Industrial: Warehouse: Institutional: Light Industrial: Agricultural: Other Commercial (specify): (restaurant) 30,000 s.f. 8. Permits and Approval Required: 9. Land Use: Sq. Ft. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and funding required: Unit of Government Type of Permit /Approval Status Federal: None State: Minnesota Pollution Sanitary Sewer Extensions To be filed Control Agency: Indirect Source Permit To be filed Minnesota Department Water Main Extensions To be filed of Health: MnDOT Municipal State Aid Street To be filed Frontage Road Approval To be filed Municipal: City of Stillwater Building Permit To be filed Grading Permit To be filed Describe current and recent past land use and developemnt on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss compatibility of the project with adjacent and nearby land uses; indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazard due to past land uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks. The tract of land to be developed had been cropland for many years. The site had been graded and a storm water retention pond constructed on the site for a previously proposed commercial retail development that was never constructed, the site is presently zoned for commercial use. Currently the site exists in an open pasture /grassland state as the result of grading operations which took place a few years ago. The future roadway and utility systems will extend Curve Crest Boulevard and the Frontage Road /Neal Avenue transportation network per the West Stillwater Business Park Plan. The land east of the proposed developemnt is the Stillwater Business Park, this area has developed primarily as commercial /light industrial. This area has been developing for approximately i5 years. The area west of C.S.A.H. #5 is in Stillwater Township. See Figure 4 for existing conditions: 10. Cover Types: Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development (before and after totals should be equal): Types 2 to 8 Wetland Wooded /Forest Brush /Grassland Cropland Urban /Suburban Lawn Landscaping Impervious Surface Total 11. Fish, wildlife and Yes No Before (acres)+ After (acres) 5 1.66 2.49 2.66 2.51 63.52 6.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 15.30 0.00 67.84 ecologically sensitive resources: 41.53 67.84 a. Describe fish and wildlife resources on or near the site and discuss how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. MnDot's resident wildlife biologist has reviewed an adjacent project on West Orleans Stree =. He has determined that three threatened or endangered species, Lampsilis, Higginsi the Peregrine Falcon and the Bald Eagle may inhabit areas in Washington County. The Higgin's Eye Mussel has been found in the St. Croix River. The high bluffs adjacent to the river provide potential nesting sites for both the falcon and eagle. However, the proposed project is located several miles from the St. Croix River and will not impact the river or bluffs. Therefore, there w11 be no impact on threatened or endangered species. b. Are any state- listed endangered, threatened or special- concern species; rarF plant communities; colonial waterbird nesting colonies; native prairie or other rare habitat; or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? • • • • If yes, describe the resources and how it would be affected by the project. Indicate if a site survey of the resources was conducted. Describe measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. 12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources: Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, impoundment) of any surface water (lake, pond, wetland, stream, drainage ditch)? Yes No If yes, describe the water resource to be affected and describe: The alteration, including the construction process; volumes of dredged or fill material; area affected; length of stream diversion; water surface area affected; timing and extent of fluctuations in water surface elevations; spoils disposal sites; and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts. The existing storm water detention pond capacity will be increased by approximately 6 acre /feet of storage capacity. The outlet culvert under County Road 5 and the existing drainage ditch to the west of County Road 5 will continue to carry storm water. Improvement will be made to the channel to reduce erosion and promote the removal of sediment. Flow capacity will not be increased in the existing drainage ditch to the west of the site. [See Figure 9]. 13. Water Use: a. Will the project involve the installation or abandonment of any well? Yes No For abandoned wells give the location and unique well number. For new ells, or other previously unpermitted wells, give the location and purpose of the well and the unique well number (if known). b. Will the project require an application of ground or surface water (including dewatering)? Yes No If yes, indicate source, quantity, duration, purpose of the appropriation and DNR water appropriation permit number of any existing application. Discuss the impact of the appropriation on ground water levels. c. Will the project require connection to a public water supply? Yes No If yes, identify the supply, the DNR water appropriate permit number of the supply and the quantity to be used. The water service is p oposed to be connected to the City of Stillwater municipal system from rve Crest Boulevard and looping back into the system located in the orth Frontage Road for State Highway #36, Tower Drive, and extending to County Road #5. It is estimated that at full development the projec= will use 0.12 mg /d. The City water system has been planned to accommodate developemnt of the site. All necessary City permits will be adhered to. 14. Water - related Land Use Management Districts: Does any part of the project site involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100 -year flood plain or a state of federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? 16. Soils: Yes No If yes, identify the district an discuss the compatibility of the project with the land use restrictions of the district. 15. Water Surface Use: Will the project change the number or type of water craft on any water bod7? Yes Bedrock: 49B 120 153E 264 No If yes, indicate the current projected watercraft usage and discuss any potential overcrowding or conflicts with other users or fish and wildlife resources. Approximate depth (in feet) to: Groundwater: Minimum: Average: Minimum: Average: Antigo Silt Loam Brill Silt Loam Santiago Silt Loam Freeon Silt Loam 20 feet 25 feet NA NA Describe the soils on the site, giving SCS classifications, if known. (SCS interpretations and soil boring logs need not be attached.) See Figure 7 for soil type location information: 7 342B &C 367B 507 302B &C Kingsley Sandy Loam Campia Silt Loam Poskin Silt Loam Rosholt Sandy Loam • • • 17. Erosion and Sedimentation: Give the acreage to be graded or excavating and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: Acres: Cubic Yards: 46 acres. Balanced cut and fill Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. See Figure 5 for sedimentation and erosion control features. Grading will be placed to minimize impact. Describe the erosion an sedimentation measures to be used during and after construction of the project. The existing ditch drainage system that runs through the site will be replaced by storm sewer. The existing ditch west of County Road 5 will under go erosion control /bank stabilization improvements. Erosion and storm water runoff will be controlled during construction by silt fences, earth diversion dikes and sediment ponds. Areas disturbed during construction will be seeded, sodded or paved during the restoration phase of construction. Grading will be phased to minimize disturbance and erosion. 18. Water Quality - Surface Water Runoff: a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe methods to be used to manage and /or treat runoff. A hydraulic analysis of the surface and storm water runoff for the proposed site and surrounding area has been completed. The "Hydrology Guide for Minnesota" published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service was used as reference material for the analysis. The design was based on a 100 -year 24 -hour rainfall event for detention basins. The present site runoff for a 100 -year storm event is approximately 11.5 acre -feet. After completion of the proposed development, the site runoff will increase to approximately 23 acre - feet. A detention basis at the southwest corner of the site will control the rate of flow. This detention basin will also act as a sediment control basin. The detention basin to be enlarged during construction will be sized to accommodate the additional site runoff created by the proposed development. See Figure 5. b. Identify the route(s) and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site. Estimate the impact of the runoff on the quality of the receiving waters. (if the runoff may affect a lake consult "EAW Guideline$" about whether a nutrient budge analysis as needed.) Storm water runoff generated in the project will discharge into Long Lake. Erosion /Sediment control for the project area is addressed in Section 17 of tlis EAW. Outlet /skimming structures will be constructed on the outlet p`pes of the Stillwater Target /SUPERVALU Development detention basing The proposed detention /sediment basin will be in accordance with the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) requirements for water level stabilization of Long Lake. 19. Water Quality — ,Water Waters: a. Describe Sources, quantities and composition (except for normal domestic ewage) of all sanitary and industrial water produced or treated at the site. All of the proposed building pads will generate normal domestic sewage. The estimated average daily flow from the site is 0.1 mg /d. b. Describe any waste treatment methods to be used and give estimates of composition after treatment, or if the project involves on -site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of the site conditions for such systms. Identify receiving waters (including ground water) and estimate the impact of the discharge on the quality of the receiving waters. (If the runoff may affect a lake consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a nutrient budget analysis is needed.) This sewage will be treated at the Stillwater Waste Water Treatment Plan. There is a adequate plant capacity to treat the projected flow. The proposed development is in accordance with the Comprehensive Sewer Plan. c. If wastes will be discharged into a sewer system or pretreatment system, identify the system and discuss the ability of the system to accept the volume and comparison of the wastes. Identify and improvements which will be necessary. N/A 20. Ground Water - potential for Contamination: a. Approximate depth (in feet) to ground water: None. Minimum: 20 feet b. Describe any of the following site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formation' /karst conditions, soils with high infiltration rates, abandoned or unused wells. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environme tal problems due to and of these hazards. 9 Average: 25 feet • • • • c. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present on the project site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. None. 21. Solid Waste: Hazardous Wastes: Storage Tanks: a. Describe the types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes to be generated, including animal manure, sludge and ashes. Identify the method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there will be a source separation plan, list type(s) and how the project will be modified to allow recycling. The proposed development and their operations will generate mixed municipal solid waste. Compostable food wastes will be generated by kitchen activities associated with the restaurants and grocery store spoilage. Grass clippings and other gardening /turf maintenance wastes may also be amendable to composting. The balance of the waste profile is expected to be largely made up of paper, corrugated cardboard and plastics, with some glass and metals. Maximum recycling alternatives will be employed by the waste hauler which services this development. It is anticipated that only a fraction of the solid waste generated. by this development will be land filled. b. Indicate the number, location size and use of any above or below ground tanks to be used for storage of petroleum products or other material (except water). None are proposed. 22. Traffic: Parking spaces added: 2,200 stalls projected for full development. Phase I Development is projected to provide 1,308 parking spaces. Existing parking spaces (if project involves expansion): None. Estimated total Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated: A traffic study generated specifically for this project (Benshoof and Associates, Inc) outlined in this report has estimated average daily traffic generated to be 31,000 to 37,000 Daily Trip Ends. A comparable traffic study (Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc.) projecting 336,000 s.f. of retail and 97,000 s.f. of office development would generate 32,000 ADT. 10 Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated (if known) and its timing: The Benshoof and Associates, Inc., study projected the 4:30 to 5:30 p.m. time frame -- trip generated 2,600 - 3,200 trip ends. The Short Elliot Hendrickson, Inc., study estimated 1,920 trip generated during peak hour traffic. (Traffic studies are corporated in this report by reference.) For each affected road indicate the ADT and the directional distribution of traffic with and without the project. Attached is a traffic analysis section which identifies the ADT, Directional Distribution, Impact on Level of Service and Improvements to the Roadway Network. This traffic section was extracted from the Indirect Source Permit application. Specifically for ADT and trip distribution accompanying traffic study prepared by Benshoof.and Associates, Inc., for specific roadway projections. Provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on the affected roads and describe any traffic improvements which will be necessary. Attached is a traffic analysis section which identifies the ADT, Directional Distribution, Impact on Level of Service and Improvements to the Roadway Network. This traffic section was extracted from the Indirect Source Permit application. Specifically for capacity analysis, level of service and traffic congestion on related roadways to this project refer tcp pages T6 and T7. See Indirect Source Permit Applications ac Associates, Inc ompanying traffic study prepared by Benshoof and for specific roadway projections. 23. Vehicle related air emissions: Provide an estimated of the effect of the project's traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts. (If project involves 500 or more parking spaces, consult "EAW Guidelines" about whether a detailed air quality analysis is needed.) Air quality impacts of the proposed development are evaluated by estimating carbon monoxide (CO) impacts at sensitive receptor locations along the accese roads to and from the project site. The CO concentrations are predicted using models of traffic flow and vehicular emission rates. Vehicular emission rates are estimated using the MOBILES Mobile ource Emissions Model to adjust baseline emission rates to the post - development project year. The CAL3QHC model is used to disperse the roadway vehicle emissions to sensitive receptor locations. The predicted concentration at each of these receptor locations is then compared with Minnesota ambient air quality standards which are set at levels to protect the most sensitive portions of the population. The State standards are 30 ppm and 9 ppm for one -hour and eight -hour averaging times, respectively. The air quality impact prediction methodology required a number of assumptions to be made regarding traffic flow, meteorology and vehicle 11 • characteristics. Using worst -case or conservative assumptions for these facts, preliminary modeling indicates that the maximum predicted impacts very near the intersection that is anticipated to have the greatest potential for significantly impacting sensitive receptor locations (CSAH 5 and Curve Crest Blvd.) are within the state standards. The modeling indicates that the maximum one -hour impact will be approximately 30 percent of the standard and the maximum eight -hour impact will be approximately 80 percent of the state standard. 24. Stationary Source Air Emissions: Will the project involve any stationary sources of air emissions (Such as boilers or exhaust stacks)? Yes No If yes, describe the sources, quantities and composition of the emissions; the proposed air pollution control devises; the quantities and composition of the emissions after treatment; and the effects on air quality. 25. Will the project generate dust, odors or noise during construction and /or operation? Yes No If yes, describe the sources, characteristics, duration and quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify the locations of sensitive receptors in the vicinity and estimate the impacts on these receptors. During construction, airborne particulate fugitive dust emissions will temporarily increase. Available mitigation measures will be employed to reduce the dust emissions from the construction activities. The mitigating measures will include the watering of areas undergoing grading or earth moving, planned selective grading and staged development, timely job site clean-up, haul road maintenance and ceasing operations during periods of high winds. Construction noise impacts were considered. However, no measures are being proposed to minimize construction noise because the project is not expected to produce unusual amounts of noise and because there are no noise sensitive receptors in the area. The closest receptor is the existing farm house located 200 feet west of County Road 5. The predicted noise level would be an L10 of 63.9dBA which is less than the state standard of 65dBA. Construction will occur consistent with city construction noise limits. 26. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site: a. Archaeological, historical or architectural resources? Yes No 12 See Figure 8 b. Prime or unique farmlands? Yes No c. Designated parks, recreation areas or trails? Yes No d. Scenic vi ws and vistas? Yes e. Other unique resources? Yes No Yes No If any items are answered yes, describe the resource and identify any impacts on the 1-esource due to the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. There is an isolated stand of mature oak trees along the eastern property line. The trees will be preserved except at the location where Curve Crest Boulevard is extended into the development. 27. Will the project create adverse impacts? (Examples include: glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plums from cooling towers or exhaust stacks.) No Yes No If yes, explain. 28. Compatibility wth plans: Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive 1 nd use plan or any other applicable land use, water or resource management plan of a local, region, state or federal agency? If yes, identif7 the applicable plan(s), discuss the compatibility of the project with the provisions of the plan(s) and explain how any conflicts between the project and the plan(s) will be resolved. If no, explain. City of Stillwater West Business Park Plan 1989 a part of the City Comprehensive Plan. 29. Impact on infratructure and public services: Will new or expended utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? Yes No If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure /services needed. 13 • • (any infrastructure that is a "connected action" with respect to the project must be assessed in the "EAW ", see "EAW Guidelines" for details.) Figures 3, 5, 6 and 9 show road and utility improvements and are described and discussed under the subject heading. 30. Related developments: Cumulative Impacts: a. Are future stages of this development planned or likely? Yes No If yes, briefly describe future stages, their timing and plans for environmental review. Future development on the outlots north of Curve Crest Boulevard and west of Phase I development have been considered in the EAW and the ISP application. b. Is this project a subsequent stage or an earlier project? Yes No If yes, briefly describe the past development, its timing and any past environmental review. c. Is other development anticipated on adjacent lands or outlots? Yes None identified. No d. If a, b or c, were marked yes, discuss any cumulative environmental impacts resulting for this project and the other development. 31. Other potential environmental impacts: If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts which were not addressed by items 1 through 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation. 32. SUMMARY OF ISSUES: (This section need not be completed if the "EAW" is being done for "EIS" scoping; instead, address relevant issues in the draft Scoping Decision document which must accompany the "EAW ".) List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is commenced. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or maybe considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions. Traffic: Additional traffic generated by the project will use existing and improved roadways in the vicinity of the project. The traffic analysis prepared for the Indirect Source Permit Application does 14 include background traffic for the study area. The traffic analysis has been prepared for one year after completion of the project. Traffic - - projections for background, project generated and cumulative traffic has been made for peak and average 8 -hour conditions for use in capacity and air quality analysis. The proposed roadway design has been developed in part to accommodate project and area generated traffic. This project is being coordinated with MnDOT (Frontage Road and Highway 36/5 interchange improvements) and Washington County CR #5 roadway improvements. Vehicle related air emissions: Vehicle related emissions will accompany the increase in traffic generated by the project. A detailed air quality analysis has been prepared for the Indirect Source Permit Application. This analysis has estimated vehicular carbon monoxide emissions and concentrations at sensitive receptor sites. No significant negative air quality standards have been identified. The Indirect Source Permit Application process will also review vehicle emissions air quality impacts. Noise: Increased noise levels can be expected near roadways with traffic growth. A nois analysis has been prepared for the Indirect Source Permit Application at critical commercial and residential receptor sites. Existi g noise levels have been estimated to permit an assessment of relative noise impacts. Based on projected noise levels, no significant long -ter_n noise impacts have been identified. Summary of Issues RGU Signature: Date: All potential significant issues have been mitigated through project design (traffic) or through compliance with city and state agency permits. I hereby certify that the information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of nrf knowledge. Title 15 • • D T 1 .N0K. CC R V • r Ji f a 4 n _ ..�.1 y - - 6 x 1 JJ 34 1 t 53 1_ R ■ RT W >5 ti R r. R 12W LYISCON$IN Washington Highway Map- • .5 w.. cau.r.S..R SITE LOCATION i D .Ir i�. ®gyps: X nu; pRarkg * a, zu MIS I [ NZ 11 CAE 11; SITE BOUNDARY Y 9 7 922 Mainstreet Hopkins. Mn. SMEL 55343 (612) 933 -0972 \ ASSOCIATES LTD. fax: (612) 933 -1153 SCALE 1:124000 o f 1000 0 1000 2000 3 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET 1 5 0 I 1 KIL OMETER CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 FEET NATIONAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DATUM OF 1929 USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP STILLWATER QUADRANGLE 1 MILE MINN. QUADRANGLE LOCATION FIGURE 2 • ('.r) X18 MIMIC rP • — 0 rK r55�iCiij � 41 F FFFFFFFFF F FFFFF F .111111111 ,111,,,1,,,1,,,,, 11,11„1,1 . s - : ,. 3 3 1 PRELIMINARY STILLWATER 0 TARGET SITE PLAN TARGET 41 " 1.1 - 1. 6'• W 1 1 1 1 .711:2..117 qr. -- --ti... 1 1 • V0 01 111111116 P t i5651rii:iE g FFFFFFFFFFF s 1 ,1........ ssf.f .tlt1 t31 -•rt w (411) 911-IIf1 • 1:0 P o 1 • April 7, 1993 Mr. Mike Bymers RLK Associates Ltd. 922 Mainstreet Hopkins, Minnesota 55343 Dear Mr. Bymers: Re: Target Stillwater Development; SW /4 S32, T30, R20, Washington County MHS Referral File Number: 93 -1486 Thank you for consulting with our office during the preparation of an EAW for the above referenced project. There are no reported historic properties in the project area, and we feel that the probability of any unreported properties is low. Therefore, based on available information, we conclude that project is unlikely to affect any his- toric properties. Please note that this comment letter dges not. address the .requirements of Sec- tion 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, pro- cedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact Dennis Gimmestad at 612 - 296 -5462 if you have any questions regarding our review of this project. BLB:dmb MINNESOTA. HISTORICAL SOCIETY l�I tta L. Bloomberg Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer 345 KELLOGG BOULEVARD WEST / SAINT PAUL. 'MINNESOTA 55192 -1906 / TELEPHONE: 6I2- :96 -6I26 FIGURE 8 1 '3 I � D CH TO BE IMPRQVED BASIN s•.n !i•,...••••■•. p M b. DETENTION /SEDIMENT ', SCALE: 1"-1000 . x..4131 0I•r arty ,. • • 1 �! • n~ -••,emu 1 • 1 - f • STORM SEWER t -• • • . 1 , • POND-- of' OND- o'' . —_ - -J au..•e.• • SUPPLEMENT TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SECTION TARGET /SUPERVALU - EAW • ADT Forecasts and Directional Distribution The annual average daily traffic volumes (ADT) for the major access routes are derived in Table 3.2 and shown in Figure 3.1. These volumes represent the 1993 estimated, the 1997 forecast without the development, the development generated traffic, and the 1997 forecast with the development. TABLE 3.2 EXISTING AND FORECAST ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUME (ADT) TH 36 TH 5 CSAH 5 W of E of E of S of N of N of Year TH 5 TH 5 Washington St. TH 36 TH 36 Curve Crest 1990 22,500 25,000 25,000 10,000 9,860 9,860 1993 24,050 27,350 27,350 11,540 10,920 10,920 Estimated 1997 26,100 30,500 30,500 13,580 13,030 13,030 Forecast Without Development Site 3,030 2,420 6,050 1,610 7,060 5,040 Generated Traffic Volume 1997 29,130 32,920 36,550 15,190 20,090 18,070 Forecast With Development TH 36 62ND ST, N NOT TO SCALE • 10,920/13,030/7,060 /20,090 24,050/26,100/3,030 /29,130 11540 /13580/1,610/15,190 S8 T tis 1 r4/ N .�r BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10,920/13,030/5,040/18,070 1 A WILDPINE LA. PROJECT \i SITE , .\\ 27,350/30,500/2,420/32,920 • W. ORLEANS ST. --1 N G BEST at V 0 Z = w r Q 3 < H NORTH' FRONTAGE ROAD TH 36 J w CC 0 z ui . 7 60TH ST N. X7,350/30,500/6,050/36,550 FIGURE 3.1 ESTIMATED, FORECAST AND SITE GENERATED ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (ADT) 1993 ESTIMATED 1997 FORECAST WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT SITE GENERATED DAILY TRAFFIC 1997 FORECAST WITH DEVELOPMENT I xxx/xxx/xxx/xxx • • • • These volumes were produced by applying two factors. First, background traffic growth rates were applied directly to the 1990 ADTs to obtain the 1993 estimated ADT and 1997 forecast ADT without the development. The background traffic growth rates used for each route are shown in Table 3.3 and are based on historical traffic volume trends on the major access routes over the past several years. Route Location TH 36 E. of TH 5 TH 36 W. of TH 5 TH 5 S. of TH 36 CSAH 5 N. of TH 36 RATES OF BACKGROUND TRAFFIC GROWTH 1982 - 1990 1982 - 1990 1984 - 1990 1981 - 1991 Source of Data: Minnesota Department of Transportation and Washington County Public Works Department The second factor applied is the traffic volume generated by the proposed development site. From Table 3.1 the net daily weekday trips generated by the development is 28,808. This figure accounts for the 10 percent reduction for internal trips. Before distributing this volume to the major access routes, passby trips must also be taken into account. Passby trips represent traffic that is already on the major routes that is attracted to the development - traffic that is "passing by" the site. Thus, passby trips will not contribute to the traffic volumes on the major access routes (but must, of course, be applied to traffic on the local streets and their intersections with the major routes). Using the 1991 Trip Manual, 5th Edition, ITE as a guide, passby traffic for this development was estimated to be 30 percent. The daily trips to be distributed to the major routes then becomes 28,808 less 30 percent, or 20,166. This number represents the new, primary trips destined to and from the development on a typical weekday. Primary trips may be defined as trips made from home or other origin specifically to the development site and the return to home or to other destinations remote from the development site. Distribution of this traffic volume becomes a function of the orientation of the market population that will be attracted to the development and the routes most convenient for this use. In determining the directional distribution assignments, representatives of the major development tenants, Target and Cub, were contacted. Based on Target and Cub marketing information, the directional distribution of passby and primary traffic destined to and from the development site is shown in Figures 3.2 and 3.3, respectively. The distribution percentages shown in Figure 3.3 were used to distribute the 20,166 daily primary trips to the major access routes in Table 3.2 (site growth traffic volume). The 1997 forecast ADT with the development is then the summation of the 1997 forecast ADT without the develoment and the site generated traffic volume. PAGE T3 TABLE 3.3 Years of Data Annual Average Growth in Traffic Volume 3.13% 2.30% 5.12% 5.35% 62ND ST, N TH 36 " 41% 45% -)o- WILDPINE LA. / W. ORLEANS ST. \\ .t. GUEST B( V O , � E \ \ O \ \\ \ ■ z ¢ m Ill M. SITE �/ ' CA PROJECT \\.\\'■ w 0 CA NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD -11--- 35% TH 36 32 % -0- 60TH ST. N. t FIGURE 3.2 PASSBY TRIP DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION SF BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS • • • • 62ND ST, N -4-- 15% -0- TH 36 IR? BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS W. ORLEANS ST. O GVP GREG z rc w 2 y (1) (4 NORTH FRONTAGE ROAD ui 0 z 4- 30% -� rC5 %--* �- —� 60TH ST. N. J J W cc O Z w FIGURE 3.3 TH 36 PRIMARY TRIP DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION Caoacitv Analysis • Capacity analyses were conducted at the key intersections to determine the level of service currently in 1993 and in 1997 without and with the development. This analysis was based on the number of approach lanes shown in Tables 3.4 through 3.10 and assumes that traffic signals are in place at all intersections but Washington Street and North Frontage Road of TH 36. The results of the capacity analysis appears in Table 3.12. All signalized intersections exhibit level of service "D" or better for the 1997 conditions with the exception of TH 36 and Washington Street. This intersection currently operates at level of service "E ", and will operate at level of service "F" in 1997 under both conditions without or with the development, assuming no change in existing roadway geometries. Within the Twin Cities metropolitan area, level of service "D" is considered a minimum threshold for acceptable traffic operation. Upon further analysis at the intersection of TH 36 and Washington Street, a level of service "D" can be attained for 1997 with the development condition if the following three improvements are made: provide a free right turn for southbound Washington St. traffic to proceed west on TH 36 provide a double left turn movement for eastbound TH 36 traffic to proceed north on Washington Street provide a double left turn movement for southbound Washington Street to proceed east on TH 36 A concept plan for these improvements is illustrated in Figure 3.9. Intersection TABLE 3.13 LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR KEY INTERSECTIONS 1997 1997 1993 Without With Existing Develooment Develooment CSAH 5 and W. Orleans St. t) C C CSAH 5 and Curve Crest N N/A C CSAH 5 /TH 5 and North Ramp TH 36 ) B C CSAH 5 /TH 5 and South Ramp TH 36 1) B D TH 5 and 58th Street i) C C TH 36 and Washington Street E > F > F Washington Street and North Service Road 1) 1) Side street or rampltraffic stopped for main roadway. Main roadway traffic flows freely. • • • • l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TH 36 - SCAL 1 " =14F N b \ - N. ` �2 \ PROVIDE FREE RIGHT TURN LANE 1 O (CONDITION 1) J I � 1 I _ \ gee f - - - - �r1 J 0 1 t J u a � e C8 ;,sr W BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATIONENGINEERSANDPLANNE 1'o { -- PROVIDE DOUBLE LEFT 1 TURN LANE 0 0 4 c •••■• ••■■/ ■•• PROVIDE DOUBLE LEFT ��I I , I I 't TURN LANE I I I I . I I I I \ a. J 1 1 H I - . \, , 1.1 t I o FIGURE 3.9 0 ti CONCEPT PLAN FOR TH 36 AND WASHINGTON STREET TO ACCOMMODATE 1997 TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH THE DEVELOPMENT • • MARK APPROPRIATE BOX: C REGULAR EAW ❑ SCOPING EAW NOTE TO REVIEWERS: For regular EAWs. written comments should address the accuracy and completeness of the EAW information. potential impacts that may warrant investigation and /or the need for an EIS. For scoping EAWs. written com- ments should address the accuracy and completeness of the information and suggest issues for investigation in the EIS. Such comments must be submitted to the Responsible Government Unit (RGU) during the 30 -day period following notice of the EAW's availability in the EQB Monitor. Contact the EQB (metro: 612/296 -8253: non - metro: 1- 800. 652.9747. ask for envi- ronmental review program) or the RGU to find out when the 30 -day comment period ends. 1 . Project Name 2 . Proposer 4. 5. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Address Phone CITY OF STILLWATER NILE KRIESEL Contact Person 216 N. FOURTH ST. STILLWATER, MN 55082 439 -6121 Project Location: '/4 a. b. WOODLAND LAKES REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER SW ' /. Section Attach copies of each of the following to the EAW: 3. RGU Contact Person and Title Address Phone Describe the proposed project completely (attach additional sheets as necessary). (SEE ATTACHMENT) CITY OF STILLWATER NILE KRIESEL CITY COORDINATOR 216 N. FOURTH ST. STILLWATER, MN. 55082 439 -6121 32 Township 30N Range 20N County Name WASHINGTON City /7o1W4iiIiii, Name STILLWATER, MN 1. a county map showing the general area of the project. 2. a copy(ies) of USGS 7' /z minute. 1:24,000 scale map. 3. a site plan showing the location of significant features such as proposed structures. roads, extent of Rood plain, wetlands. wells, etc. 4. an existing land use map and a zoning map of the immediate area. if available. v• neasvn nn Lr..ir pi cyan aLiv”. _ List ail mandatory category rule "'s which apply: #6 MCAR 3.03 M. 1. b , 3.038 N.2, . Estimated construction cost $55,000,000 • Total project area (acres) 67.72 Acres or length (miles) 9 . Number of residential units or commercial. industrial. or institutional square footage 499,300 10 . Number of proposed parking spaces 2 ,330 11. List all known local. state and federal permits /approvals /funding required: (SEE ATTACHMENT) Level of Government Type of Application Status Federal: State: Local: 12 . Is the proposed project inconsistent w plan or any other adopted plans? If yes. explain: th the local adopted comprehensive land use 13 . Describe current and recent past land use and development on and near the site. (SEE ATTACHMENT) 14 . Approximately how many acres of the site are in each of the following categories? (Acreages should add up to total project area before and after construction.) Before After Before After Forest / Wooded 0 Wetland (types 3.81 Cropland b — U Impervious Surface U U Brush /grassland 0 / Other (specify) 15 . Describe the soils on the site. giving the'SCS soil classification types. if known. 49B ANTIGO SILT LOAM 342C KINGSLEY SANDY LOAM 302 B & C ROSHOLT SANDY LOAM 16 . Does the site contain peat soils. highly erodible soils, steep slopes. sinkholes. shallow limestone formations. abandoned wells, or any geologic hazards? If yes. show on site map and explain: 17 . What is the approximate dept+ feet) to: a. groundwater min. 4 J avg. b. bedrock NA min. NA avg. ® No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes 1 8. Does any part of the project are 'oive: a. shoreland zoning district? b. delineated 100 -year flood plain? c. state or federally designated river land use district? If yes, identify water body and applicable state classification(s), and describe measures to protect water and related land resources: 19 . Describe any physical alteration (e.g., dikes. excavation, fill. stream diversion) of any drainage system. lake, stream, and /or wetland. Describe measures to minimize im- pairment of the water - related resources. Estimate quantity of material to be dredged and indicate where spoils will be deposited. N/A 20 . a.Will the project require an appropriation of ground or surface water? If yes. explain (indicate quantity and source): b. Will the project affect groundwater levels in any wells (on or off the site)? If yes. ex- plain: 21 . Describe the erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after construction of the project. (SEE ATTACHMENT 22 . a. Will the project generate: -- 1. surface and stormwater runoff? .... No . Yes 2. sanitary wastewater? No Yes 3. industrial wastewater? � No _ Yes 4. cooling water (contact and noncontact)? X No Yes If yes, identify sources, volumes. quality (if other than normal domestic sewage). and treatment methods. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. (SEE ATTACHMENT) b. Identify receiving waters. including groundwater. and evaluate the impacts of the discharges listed above. If discharges to groundwater are anticipated. provide per- colation /permeability and other hydrogeological test data. if available. (SEE ATTACHMENT) 23 . Will the project generate (either during or after construction): a. air pollution? b. dust? c. noise? d. odors? If yes. explain. including as appropriate: distances to sensitive land uses: expected lev- els and duration of noise: types and quantities of air pollutants from stacks. mobile sources. and fugitive emissions (dust): odor sources: and mitigative measures for any impacts. Give the basis or methodology of estimates. • (SEE ATTACHMENT) No - Ye No ; ._, Yes No i._. Yes No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes ▪ No - Yes ▪ No 4. Yes No L. Yes No _ Yes I >r� -�••• �•.., a,w• ur nazaraous waste incluaing sludge_ J ashes that will be generated and the method and location of disposal: (SEE ATTACHMENT) 25. Will the project affect: a. fish or wildlife habitat. or movement of animals? b. any native species that are officially listed as state endangered. threatened. or of special concern (animals and /or plants)? If yes, explain (identify species and describe impact): (SEE ATTACHMENT) 26 . Do any historical. archaeological or architectural resources exist on or near the project site? If yes. explain (show resources on a site map and describe impact): 27. I will t he project cause the impairment or destruction of: a. designated park or recreation areas? i No b. prime or unique farmlands? No c. ecologically sensitive areas? No d. scenic views and vistas? No e. other unique resources (specify)? No If yes. explain: 28 . For each affected road indicate the current average daily traffic (ADT). increase in ADT contributed by the project and the directional distributions of traffic. Traffic data is shown in Exhibit 28. Most of the site traffic will be oriented towards County Road 5. 29 . Are adequate utilities and public services now available to service the project? If not. Signature what additional utilities and /or services will be required? ISSUES CAN BE MITIGATED BY COMPLIANCE WITH CITY AND STATE AGENCY PERMITS Tale `1 !1 ; l © No u Yes No ❑ Yes ® No ❑Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes ❑ No ® Yes Summary of Issues For regular EAWs. list the issues as identified by "yes" answers above. Discuss alternatives and mitigative measures for these issues. For scoping EAWs. list known issues. alternatives. and mitigative measures to be addressed in EIS. CERTIFICATION RY RESPONSISL.E (GOVERNMENTAL UNIT 1 hereby certify that the information contained in this document is true and complete to the best of my knowledge and that copies of the completed EAW have been made available to all points on the oMcial EQS distribution list. Doe (( 74 _911_,_ • • • • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) ATTACHMENTS 5. DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED PROJECT COMPLETELY. The proposed project involves construction of 499,300 S.F. of commercial /retail and office type space. Total develop- ment of the site (See Exhibit 4.b.3) is anticipated within 4 to 6 years. Also included in the project are sanitary sewer, watermain, drainage and street improvements to serve the proposed development. Construction of the public facilities to serve the site will start in August of 1986. Construction of these facilities is expected to be completed in 1987. Exhibits 4.b.3.a and 4.b.3.b schematically depict the proposed site improvements. The proposed Woodland Lakes site is zoned industrial. However, the commercial /retail land use in this area has been approved by the City of Stillwater. 11. LIST ALL KNOWN LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS /APPROVALS/ FUNDING REQUIRED: Level of Government Type of Application Status Federal: None State: Mn. Pollution Sanitary Sewer To Be Filed For Control Agency Extensions Mn. Health Dept. Watermain Ext. To Be Filed For Mn /DOT Municipal State To Be Filed For Aid Street Local: City of Stillwater Building Permit To Be Filed For 13. DESCRIBE CURRENT AND RECENT PAST LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT ON AND NEAR THE SITE. The tract of land to be developed has been cropland for many years. It is presently zoned for commercial /industrial use. The land east of the proposed development is the Stillwater Industrial Park. This has developed primarily as a commer- cial area. This area has been developing for approximately 14 years. The area west of C.S.A.H. 5 is in Stillwater Township. 21. DESCRIBE THE EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES TO BE USED DURING AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. 22.a Existing ditch drainage system will be replaced by storm sewer. The existing ditch west of C.S.A.H. 5 will be wid -,, ened and lined with riprap to accommodate increased runoff. Erosion and storm water runoff will be controlled during construction by silt fences, earth diversion dikes and sediment ponds. No material will be dredged from lake, stream or DNR wetland. Areas disturbed during construction will be reseeded or paved during the restoration phase of construction. (See Exhibit 21.a) 1. Surface and Stormwater Runoff A hydraulic analysis of the surface and storm water runoff for the proposed site and surrounding area has been completed. The "Hydrology Guide for Minnesota" published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service was used as reference material for t he analysis. The design was based on a 100 year 24 hour rainfall event for detention basins. The storm sewer was designed by the rational method for a 25 year return period. The total design runoff volume from the site is 31.9 acre feet. A series of detention basins (3 existing, 1 of which will be enlarged during construction) will control the rate of flow. All of the detention basins will also act as sediment basins. 2. unitary Wastewater 4 1 of the proposed building pads will generate normal domestic sewage. The estimated average daily flow from the site is 0.08 mgd. This sewage will be treated at the Stillwater wastewater treatment plant. The pro- posed development is in accordance with the Comprehen- sive Sewer Plan. 22.b Receiving Waters Storm' water runoff generated in the project area will be discharged into Long Lake. Erosion /sediment control for the project area is addressed in Section 21 of this EAW. Out- let /skimming structures will be constructed on the outlet pipes of the Woodland Lakes detention basin. The proposed detention /sediment basins are in accordance with the De- partment of Natural Resources (DNR) permit issued in May, 1976, for water level stabilization of Long Lake. 1 • 23. 23.a Air Pollution The project is anticipated to generate an increase in carbon monoxide levels due to the magnitude of new traffic which will be introduced by the development. The primary access to the site will be via Washington County Road 5 at the new shopping center entrance and at West Orleans Street. The carbon monoxide concentra- tion levels were studied for these two intersections since they will carry the bulk of the p.m. peak hour traffic. Vehicle emission rates for 1987 were calculated from a base emission rate and correction factors from the MOBILE 3 model. These calculations were performed using the EMCO3 microcomputer program. The emission rates were calculated to be 115 grams per vehicle per mile within 250 feet of the intersections and 30 grams per vehicle per mile outside the 250 foot limit. A number of receptor sites were studied. Residential dwellings are fairly remote (over 500 feet) from the intersections. However, a farm house is located some- what closer at about a 400 foot distance and it was chosen as a receptor. Future plans may include side- walks on the east side of County Road 5 so receptor sites were also chosen on the intersection street corners. Dispersion modeling was performed using the Caline 3 computer program. Variable assumptions were chosen to produce elevated carbon monoxide levels resulting from the poorest air quality conditions that might exist. A summary of the emissions and dispersion assumptions is presented below: Emission Assumptions Year of Analysis = 1987 Temperature = 20 degrees Fahrenheit Vehicle Classification Mix = Default Percentages Light Duty Vehicles = 68.7% Light Duty Trucks = 22.4% Heavy Duty Gas Trucks = 4.1% Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks = 4.8% Percent Cold Starts = 20.0% No platooning of vehicles assumed Dispersion Analysis Assumptions Wind Speed (u) = 1 Meter /Sec. (2.24 Miles /Hr) Wind Angle (BRG) = Variable 0 to 340 Degrees Stability Class = D Mixing Height = 914 Meters (3000 Feet) Averaging Time = 60 Minutes 23.b Dust 23.c Noise Surface Roughness (ZO) = 200 Centimeters Settling Velocity (VS) = 0 Centimeters /Sec. Deposited Velocity (VD) = 0 Centimeters /Sec. Since the area is largely undeveloped, a conservative ambient carbon monoxide concentration was estimated as 2.0 parts per million (PPM). The farm house receptor was found to experience its highest hourly reading at a wind angle of 170 degrees where the concentration was projected to be 5.0 PPM. This value is considerably less than the state standard of 30 PPM. Using a typical persistence factor of 0.60, the equivalent average 8 hour carbon - monoxide concen- tration would be 3.5 PPM well below the state standard of 9.0 PPM. The highest hourly concentration projected for the intersection corner receptors was 17.8 PPM. An 8 hour average was estimated at 7.3 PPM. Both values were found to be well below state standards. Based on the analysis, no mitigating measures are anticipated to be required. During construction, airborne particulate fugitive dust emissions will temporarily increase. All available mitigation measures will be employed to reduce the dust emissions from the construction activities. The miti- gating measures will include the watering of areas undergoing grading or earthmoving, planned selective grading and staged development, timely job site clean- up, haul road maintenance, and ceasing operations during periods of high winds. Construction noise impacts were considered. However, no measures are being proposed to minimize construction noise because the project is not expected to produce unusual amounts of noise and because there are no noise sensitive receptors in the area. As with air quality, the closest receptor is the exist- ing farm house located 200 feet west of County Road 5. P.M. peak hour traffic noise was predicted using the procedures of FHWA -RD -77 -108 from the Federal Highway Administration. The predicted noise level would be an L 10 of 63.9 dBA which is less than the state standard o 65 dBA ($AC -1). Since no other noise sensitive receptors are located i • S nearby, no mitigating measures are anticipated to be required. • • 24. 24.a Hazardous Waste No hazardous waste material (in sludge or ash form) will be generated from the proposed development. 24.b Solid Waste Solid wastes generated will mainly be paper and other packaging type materials. Some glass and metal prod- ucts are also anticipated. The total number of employ- ees at ultimate development is estimated at 1,099. A few of the retail /office locations will operate on a 5 day week. However, the majority of the commer- cial /retail locations are expected to operate 7 days per week. The resultant volume of solid waste is estimated at 205 cubic yards per week. This volume is based on 3.21 pounds of solid waste /employee /day* and a weight to volume ratio of 113 pounds per cubic yard.* *WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD RESOURCES MATERIAL "Hennepin County Comprehensive Recycling Study Volume 2, Page 5 - Commercial Waste Generation Rates by Pope -Reid and Associates, Inc. Dated July, 1985 A portion of the solid wastes could be disposed of in landfills both in Wisconsin and Minnesota depending on which local garbage hauler services the proposed devel- opment. The remaining solid waste will be recycled or be delivered to the local refuse derived fuel plant in Newport, Minnesota. 25. WILDLIFE SPECIES The Mn /DOT wildlife biologist recently reviewed an adjacent project on West Orleans Street. He has determined that three threatened or endangered species, Lampsilis, Higginsi, the Peregrine Falcon, and the Bald Eagle may inhabit areas in Washington County. The Higgin's Eye Mussel has been found in the St. Croix River. The high bluffs adjacent to the river provide poten- tial nesting sites for both the falcon and eagle. However, the proposed project is located several miles from the St. Croix River and will have no impact on either the river or the bluffs. Therefore, there will be no impact on these threatened or endangered species. • • • ..IS 2c Oe ..•.,.04 c 3•.•,0.••oo• 0 •oaa .,001 C ■oou■mu . • A ••■0•..1. ,. 62110 ST N. 55TH ST N 07■ Sr . 70••• ••• r , x 1.4...[... [fr (041• CO. 1 IIIStsall St It All o Sr Born sr STILLWATER TWP. CO. RO. 12 YZNO ST N 7 - - - I S.. 1 ' I St E MAP ?9A 1 AKES 1 1 1 1 1 1 BAYTOWN TWP. � SUN Sr ` i 1 — SS[N - 5 - - -- a p— X •11.41•1 Sr • .. � =- 1 Q 17. •a s • ft• -- - rS.wf fn. — T IN CITY OAK PARK HEIGHTS REGIONAL SETTING WOODLAND LAKES SCALE: 1" = 3000' EXHIBIT 4.b.1 = 941 \ 19 Summit od !h 30 i '1; \ 9a6 r'1 (7.1' ' • f M 0 c, Salem ` =L..= rt r' Caw o S U.S.G.S. WOODLAND LAKES SCALE:1% 2000' e' 'O /. C n4tatian • • n• iL I g a 2 R ., - • g sss'f A •4,14 0140 _ I ; I I • Y+YY .l 77171 4 D 9 4 4 9 s y. a3c'S oeoy 10eot 3 S PEC 0701 sCIrisfDzIKOZ .1u90131.>C3 49 03,1013 s h 4 4 4 4 9 9 a . h ,J (� OHtHI+H ffH {H 8 e C i e I I ___ N ■ i 1) .II ,II(IQ IrltiplilnlrrU nlnn fNMA un till, nnCWALK? ITITTMT b / a l e a 7e a) I umitur .1pll fthtullll1r e/ }fl � ..... ie e e 011 '1111 tom'1H'1�'},}'{I},H�1' ® VIl11lilth'„ 4� ^i U"I"'N .lIllllINII 11 I n. ''. nµ''{'''' p1`'�,H'{'y1 �ft. U11!1„ y'111i111111 0 te, UUe § VTTT1TTi - • I . y SSN y , � 1 l3 ir.,:s 4.IHHHW . I1:: : I�, 1 E . arY1''11I1'1µ1'1,{1,H1'I,�nY' : LI„",1V ` � tIHH� '$ H44HH}� OHIi!Hlf}f4H44}41� - $I1111HH40 �+HH4H�+H41M�i�litli'( {i::l ; 7lt 9 LOS 31 :13.,4'i: .S .09'L99 Jy O a 1 j J W 6ry �� ee � i(Ijttl - C I y 'IIIIrIiI; :lJ 4911M10l r EXHIBIT 4.b.3.a r C' S C- 4 . r. • «owe R 1 OLLi -v6o !d O9) ;52S9 euort.ty 'a[eos47o7s .y. altos Peoti >17eotawe3 .3 SPEC .e%'a .3®Oa7soan9(oo 41.1620® .1C ®mil A9 03dO13A30 7 333!R�_. 11 11111111 111 111/1i 9 9 9 ¢ 3 2 W N 2 0 cc d1 - s 3 0 1 d i i NV - - Y ¢ W q 2 cc 0 co a s 0 a / Ot+ tt,tttt++�t++tt+tr8 . LL io Q oo e , a C ice ° o ■ I/oµ'{ �11 W40 J U1; +H " 119 ¢ NCO ZQ }44 0 C." 11 * L� 1 91111!11111 !1111 Vi d3 1.10. 01 Ii s AN �1 n 1 t �� , }} ,I {{ I '}}'''�'}}';'{'{ I { I1 }} 1, }} , '}}'+�' • I ��Ut11 I . Iry n It} ' } ' Il` _ 1N i"111,;,,"O "� tltHiliia•/#{M� 4 OO t j 11 t l f �'�"'II''II 11 ,, I1 I1 I1' 4F tptt}ttt}+t�� Z ® ® *RI C _!nun ll 1a J 0+�++tt+tt+t�tttt+it+>s / ZN .09 L99 EXHIBIT 4.b.3.b cC 9. 14 I 0 ft I w qaEa I • ' F 1 i ii.$ >, w ; 11t111Ti4 � 414111 �f t{}llttti7m tl l- }tli 1.1:1T l }1. .:: 1 4tttlt+tt++tfl ` . '8 l 'f(TIIIt1!FI!O I ; 0- 1144iTitttl(t�nilillllfl.li.11 ' r 1Q1.1,1. ' .J �I �111U1111 ".!';n"t 11 ":�j . — CALM T.,, 11,11 I!Illtlll.r•. ) 54 __ 2) n A- ; 4 — $ ' 21 A A 0■ 39 L11�9 �u� — __I , 33/137 d 0 a 0 • • • • ZONING LEGEND CITY OF STILLWATER ONE FAMILY TWO FAMILY LOW DENSITY FAMILY MEDIUM DENSITY FAMILY HIGH DENSITY FAMILY GENERAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL PARK- COMMERCIAL INDUSTRAIL PARK- INDUSTRAIL GENERAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL GENERAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRAIL COMMERCIAL ONE 1 y 0 L _ GTr' Srgtr r.* DETENTION /SEDIMENT BASIN 7 • 71 r•JYk w.s «M1 •q SE 7.7F1RAE•ER :RIVE 07.1 OKS KVO r • r • It • . • 1 '1 • o.. • • AI mow c4 *0833 400..5 1 AGE ••E• T% \ • t PROPOSED WOODLAND LAKES SITE SCALE: 1".1000' r - • t r— • r CORPORATE Lthers i POND__ i F •O8F•GE •O.0 STORM SEWER • Q'CEIl/QM ( 47.7 . =YU11PIT 01 • • /; ice• ter ,L, C rya ► 11. 44.muler n 4 08 O0 110 ��/e --4 a.0 r i o ♦ */ 0 va • 1 11 4:0101 40141a� I an:.�1�,, I; :! l opn-tinmil �. .ralrr• 0.� O ' ', 0 0 i s -s "'� � 1� It O i /f C(»' tkur( raj J• .L 6800/10350/17150 / M / L / slat! ?*.a .0•00w — XX / XX / XX 1987 ADT N II • t DAILY TRIPS ADDED BY PROJ. EXISTING ESTIMATED ADT �—� DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION t• t 1500/460/1960 0.0•47 • v•s••• n a,• • 1. L K.00I \- F _ J ' � I wV t ..• t 15% 450 6 •..10 • EXHIBIT 28 r- MAYOR: Harry D. Peterson COUNCILMEMBERS: Ann Marie Bodlovick David C. Junker Jay Kimble Brad MacDonald TO: From: Date: Subject: EAW Review Agencies City of Sti June 5, 1986 THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA llwater ilIwatel: NOTICE OF DECISION REGARDING EAW FOR WOODLAND LAKES REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER. The Stillwater City Council considered the EAW and Review Agency comments at its meeting of June 3, 1986. After reviewing the information and conditions of project approval, including environmental mitigations, finding no probable significant impact the Council approved a negative declaration for the project. A copy of the EAW and mitigations are available for review at the Stillwater City Hall, 216 North Fourth Street. Steve Russell Community Development Director CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612- 439 -6121 CITY COORDINATOR: Nile L. Kriesel CITY CLERK: Mary Lou Johnson FINANCE DIRECTOR: Betty J. Caruso CITY ATTORNEY: David T. Magnuson Minnesota Environmental Quality Board • / 100 Capitol Square Building 9 9 550 Cedar Street St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Phone • June 11, 1986 Nile Kriesel City Coordinator 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Negative Declaration for Woodland Lakes Shopping Center Dear Mr. Kriesel: This letter acknowledges receipt of a negative declaration, indicating that no EIS will be prepared for the above -named project. • According to the Environmental Review Program rules at 6 MCAR 3.028 B.4., this decision is to be made known as well to all persons on the EAW distribution list, all persons who commented on the EAW, and anyone else who has requested notification. Your decision will be published in the EOB Monitor on June 16, 1986. In accordance with 6 MCAR 3.032 A., the prohibition on government approvals of the project is lifted. If possible, I would appreciate receiving a copy of your record of decision on the negative declaration for the EQB files if you did not enclose a copy with your negative declaration notice. Sincerely, Gregg M. Downing Environmental Review Coordinator (612) 296 -8253 Toll -free: 1- 800 - 652 -9747; ask for EQB, Environmental Review Program GD:gs AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Background M E M O R A N D U M � TO: Mayor and City Council FR: Steve Russell, Community Development Director DA: July 15, 1993 RE: PUBLIC UTILITY COST ALLOCATION AND TIF ASSISTANCE FOR STILLWATER MARKET PLACE PROJECT At the Council Meeting of January 19, 1993, the City Council reviewed a request for Tax Increment Financing Assistance from Target /Super Valu. After reviewing the application information, staff was directed to work with the developer on the request (attached). Since that time, staff has reviewed utility plans and cost estimates for public service to the development site. The developer and city staff has met with representatives from MnDOT and Washington County regarding improvements to the Highway 36 Frontage Road, Highway 36 and County Road #5. Areas of benefit, TIF policy, and previous assessments for the West Stillwater Business Park Area were also examined and applied to proposed public utility costs. Total project utility costs is estimated at $3,017,15.53 (see Table 1). Of that amount, the City and other area property owners cost (non- developer) is $2,034,265.27 while the • developers cost is $982,749.96. This amount is reduced by $103,624.00 for the City purchase of 3.6 acres of land for a community facility (Outlot E). The City will add the 3.6 acre site to the park dedication site of 3.6 acres resulting in a 7.2 acre community facility site. Other utility costs: sanitary sewer, water mains, storm drainage, street and lights have been allocated based on area of benefit or improvement location. State Aid for construction of the Frontage Road and Curve Crest Boulevard (an MSA Street) is anticipated. It is estimated that State Aid will amount to $700,000 to $800,000 of the project street improvements. It is estimated that TIF funds of $1,200,000 to $1,500,000 will be necessary to make the public improvements and purchase the land. Based on the proposed developemnt improvements, it is estimated that $160,000 of TIF will be generated per year consistent with TIF policy. This amount of increment is adequate to pay for the estimated City utility improvement costs. A development agreement will be entered into with the developer. The development agreement will reflect the cost allocation as listed in the Table 1. It should be remembered that the costs are estimates and the actual costs may be higher or lower. The same allocation formulas will be used to reduce or raise costs based on final figures. Recommendation "'Approval of public utility cost allocation and the purchase of 3.6 acres of land as described in Table 1 and direct staff to prepare the necessary development agreement for final city and developer approval. • ESTIMATED COST APPORTIONMENT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES AND PARK LAND PURCHASE PROPOSED TARGET /SUPER VALU STTLLWATER MARKET PLACE PROJECT Sanitary Sewer 43,162.16 Water Main 251,466.00 Drainage 57,913.55 Drainage Improvements Under CASH 5(2) 62,000.00 Streets 81,102.85(1) Lighting 21,250.88 Signals 78,749.83 Trunk Sanitary Sewer 111,981.70 County Road 5 Improvement(3) 6,000.00 Park Land Sale /Purchase(4) (103,624.00) (5) Target /Super Valu Neal Ave Site North 67,400.11 15,522.48 34,344.00 102,146.41 5,695.72 30,014.27 14,000.00 Total 713,626.97 269,122.99 General Notes regarding the cost estimates in Table - - -1: Tower Drive 6,572.77 38,293.51 8,819.12 58,034.64 3,236.10 114,956.14 City & Others 38,575.00 193,483.94 Table 1 Total 49,734.93 395,734.62 275,739.09 233,656.00 330,000.00 863,511.16(1) 1,104,795.06 3,260.00 33,442.70 191,250.00 269,999.83 291,949.03 433,945.00 20,000.00 103,624.00 103,624.00 1,919,309.13 3,017,015.23 MnDOT assistance of $300,000 added to City column. Costs are assessed by net drainage area. The project and cost estimates need further review during the feasibility study. Adjacent sites to be assessed for an 8 -foot wide bituminous trail. City has agreed to purchase approximately 3.6 acres of park land from Outlot E ($103,624) from the developer. Additionally, the City will pay for a proportionate cost on an area drained basis of stormwater ponding costs if constructed north of Curve Crest Blvd. It is understood that the costs in Table 1 are estimated and will be recalculated upon the receipt of actual bids based upon the detailed design plans. Formulas used to arrive at the estimated costs shown in Table 1 will be used to calculate the final costs for the specific property assessments. THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: JANUARY 14, 1993 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ASSISTANCE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL SITE LOCATED ON NE CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 5 AND HIGHWAY 36. The City of Stillwater has received a request from Target Stores, Dayton Hudson Corporation and Super Valu, Inc. for Tax Increment Financing assistance for the development of a retail commercial center. (See attached site plan and pre - application.) - r. The preliminary development proposal is for 239,000 square feet of retail space and five commercial outlots. The proposal would generate in excess of $ 5 • million dollars in added property value. ATTACHMENTS: Pre - application and Site Plan. The project is consistent with the land use designations contained in the West Business Park Plan. The developer has indicated a need for assistance to construct public improvements: Curve Crest Boulevard, provide sanitary sewer service, drainage and traffic improvements to the site. The developers w i l l be present at the Council meeting to give background on their interest in the site and answer questions. The assistance request is being made consistent with the City of Stillwater Tax Increment Financing Policy (attached). RECOMMENDATION: Direct Staff to work with developers in determining level of City Tax Increment Financing assistance consistent with TIF policy. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612 - 439 -6121 • 01/14/93 03:36 FAX 612 932 4528 )IPLS DIY MANAGMT JAN-13 -1553 16:51 FROM RLK ASSOCIA i t3, . Li D.... TO CITY OF .STZLLiiATER ' PRE - APPLICATION TAX INCREMENT FINANCIING ASSISTANCE 1111111011111111111 1111 93245226 F.03/03 • Legal name of applicant: Target Sores. Address_ 33 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55440 -1392 Telephone number: Telex # 205812 Name of contact person: Richard Brooks, Regional Real Estate Director REQUESTED INFORMATION Addendums shall be attached hereto addressing in detail the following: A map showing the exact boundaries of proposed development. 2. Give .a general description of the project including. size and location of building(s); business type or use; tragic information including parking, projected vehicle punts and traffic flow; ti mine of the project; outer Pertinent information. 3. The existing Comprehensive ?Ian Land Use designation and zoning of the property. Include a statement as to how the proposed' development will conform to the land use designation and how the property will be zoned,. Explain any discrepancies between the proposed development and the existing land use designation and 4_ A statement identifying the public improvements requested to be financed and why the costs of the improvement cannot be paid by the developer. S. A statement identifying the public benefits of the proposal including estimated increase in property valuation, new jobs to be created and other community assets. $. A written perspective of the developers company or corporation, principals, history and past projects. Applicant understands and agrees that the information contained in this application, and the information contained in items above, is intended for use by the City of Stillwater, its officers, employees, and agents in connection with the City's consideration of possible tax increment bond financing for appl i cart x s project; however, the City gives no assurance that this information may not be disclosed, in Whole or part, to persons other than City's officials, employees and agents. SIGNATURE Applicant's signature 144-2 0002 MSP "Buckle Down" TEL :612- 642 -0413 Jul 16,93 NO NF-8° 4 4 (40 July 16, 1993 Mr. Steve Russel Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater MN 55082 RE: Advance Funding Proposal for Frontage Road Construction SP 8204 -37 Dear Mr. Russel: Minnesota Department of Transportation Metropolitan Division Waters Edge Building 1500 West County Road B2 Roseville, Minnesota 55113 As you know, Mn /DOT has proposed the construction of a frontage road In the N.E • quadrant of TH 5 /CR 5 at the TH 36 Interchange in the City of Stillwater. This frontage road will extend an Inplace frontage road system, which will reduce certain trips from entering TH 36. In addition it will serve as a traffic bypass during the interchange re- construction project. The City of Stillwater has approached Mn /DOT with a development proposal in the same quadrant of the interchange. The local proposal is a Target and Cub Foods store. Construction is scheduled to begin the summer of 1994 and will include the construction of new local streets. Since the Mn /DOT proposed frontage road will be incorporated into the development, we have investigated the possibility of providing construction funding for the frontage road to insure that the City of Stillwater incorporates Mn /DOT's needs into their project. In order for Mn /DOT to provide construction funding for the frontage road the following conditions must be met: 1. The City will provide a roadway at least as wide as the one proposed by Mn /DOT. 2. The City will provide all the right -of -way necessary for construction. 3. The City will accept the turnback of the frontage road, Including all maintenance. 4. The City will design the roadway. CONTINUED See Next Page Reply to Telephone No. 10:55 No .008 P.01 MA/ i7o fl Fa-19nf4ZvL' Roseville 582 - 1294 Mr. Steve Russel Community Development Director City of Stillwater RE: Advance Funding Proposal for Frontage Road Construction SP 8204-37 5. The City recognizes that the frontage road will be used as a detour during the reconstruction of the TH 5 and TH 36 interchange. (Now scheduled for a November 1997 letting.) 6. Mn /DOT will enter into a "lumpsum pay - back" with the City of Stillwater for $500,000. This was estimated using Mn/DOT's Cost Participation Guidelines: This dollar amount is fixed and Mn /DOT will not vary this amount regardless of the actual costs Incurred by the City. 7. Mn /DOT is proposing to reimburse the City in July 1996 since that would have been the expected completion date of the frontage road if Mn /DOT was to have constructed it as originally planned. We will confirm this date with you in early August, after Mn /DOT makes the final program adjustments that were necessary due to funding constraints, 8. The stormwater pond in the NE quadrant must be oversized to adequately handle the Mn /DOT drainage proposed to enter the pond from the future TH 36 improvements. 9. Mn /DOT may have other concerns regarding this project, that may be raised during review of the EAW, especially with regard to the operation of the Intersection of Washington Avenue and TH 36. There may be additional traffic improvements necessary at this intersection to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development. Mn /DOT, the City of Stillwater and the developer will work together to solve any remaining traffic concerns. Please review these conditions and call or write with any questions you have. If the City is agreeable to this, then a "Re oiution" should be passed to request that Mn /DOT participate as documented in this letter. Sincerely, Mark D. Benson Pre - Design Enolneer I4O . JUc, . UL CC: Dick Elasky Roseville J!m Pavlch Roseville Ada.! tar! Roseville Al Sch.nkelberg CO 807 Bob Hofstad CO 807 Maio tunceford Roseville Ruth Ann Sobnosky Roseville Don* Helkes Roseville Greg Coughlin Roseville July 16, 1993 Page 2 of 2 • • • CASE NO. PUD/93 -23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. All comments from the City Engineer shall be incorporated into the final plans for the site. 2. All comments regarding the road system from MnDOT and Washington County shall be incorporated into the final street design. 3. The park dedication requirements shall be met by land dedication. on enta visi• a 5. Design criteria, including building, sign and landscape standards shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the city Design Review Committee before final PUD approval. 6. A Wetlands Alteration permit shall be obtained before a grading permit or building permit are issued. 7. The conditions of approval from the Design Review Committee shall be incorporated into the final building plans. • 8. The entry to the site off County Road #5 shall be landscaped along the edge in a manner consistent with project landscaping. 9 x ^ Street trees so 1-1- �,� pl aii &e — between Curve Crest and the property boundary to the north along County Road #5. 4000 te;d1, teosh. 10. Final PUD approval shall be required for the development of all outlots. 6/4A1AadVvre741 11. Sidewalk shall be constructed alongjNeal Curve Crest providing access to Orleans and County Road #5. I N "8 12. The holding pond shall be landscaped with development of Outlot "B ". 13. Final design of the monument sign and area landscaping shall be approved by the Community Development Director. 14. The grading /drainage plan shall be reviewed by the Brown's Creek Watershed District. 15. The City of Stillwater, MnDOT, and the developer will work together to solve traffice impacts caused by the project at Washington Avenue and the Frontage Road. 16. The stormwater pond in the q a So l drant of the site shall be sized to adequately handle MnDOT drainage proposed to enter the pond from future Highway 36 improvements. 3 eO• • • THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: JULY 16, 1993 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR EIGHT LOT SUBDIVISION FOR STILLWATER MARKET PLAN DEVELOPMENT - The request is to subdivide a 67.84 acre site into eight lots ranging in size form 11.19 acres to 7.05 acres. Lots 1, 2, and 3 are where the proposed 27.5 acre Target /Supervalu project is located. The remainder of the outlots B, C and D are not proposed for future development. Outlot A contains a detention pond and Outlot E, 7.2 acres, is being dedicated in part along with the city purchase of 3.6 acres for a community facility. Rights -of -ways for project associated roads are shown on the plat. The proposed plat has been reviewed by MnDOT, Washington County Public Works and the City Engineer. Comments from those agencies area attached and will be incorporated when necessary in the final plat. The City Traffic Engineer has concerns regarding the alignment of Curve Crest Boulevard and right -of -way width. The concerns will be addressed more specifically in the preparation of final plans for improvements and development. It may make sense to coordinate access to Outlot D and E (community facility) at one location on the north side of Curve Crest, depending on use. This can be determined before final road improvement plans are drawn. A letter has been received from Dave Swanson suggesting a name other than Neal Avenue for the north /south street. This is a good comment and another name compatible with the county /city street naming system will be used. The Planning Commission reviewed the subdivision request at their meeting of June 14, 1993 and recommended it for approval as consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan, Stillwater West Business Park Plan and zoning requirements with the following conditions of approval: CONDITION OF APPROVAL: 1: Comments trom MnDOT, Washington County Public Works and the City Engineer regarding right -of -ways widths and easements shall be incorporated in the final plat. ATTACHMENT: • Preliminary Subdivision. Comments from MnDOT, Washington County, SEH, and Dave Swanson. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612- 439 -6121 • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. SUB/93 -24 Planning Commission Meeting: June 14, 1993 Project Location: Northeast corner of County Road #5 and Highway 36. Comprehensive Plan District: Commercial Zoning District: Business Park Commercial and Business Park Office Applicant's Name: Target and Super Valu Type of Application: Subdivision. Project Description: Subdivision of a 67.84 acre site into nine lots including easements for Neal Avenue /Frontage Road, North Neal Avenue and Curve Crest Blvd. Discussion: The request is to subdivide the 67.84 acre site into nine lots. The lots meet the lot size requirements of the district and are consistent with the Planned Unit Development request (PUD/93 -23). Recommendation: Approval. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Any utility drainage or road easement required by review agencies shall be provided on the final plan. Attachment: Preliminary Plat. C, fie- 474 4 v ` 3 Imam 1 ° ft E.utl I 'TTRGET" it 0 TA R GET I r ii J! J s! FF till _ st Z I 1 ll _ _ E ct it c 4 s1 x ti 11 WINE 4 i t?. 1 I:• • ... I1I a O . • • ij 0'2T'I Z∎Ms i• ,,== =111==:44= i it Rllt) ...... ,: I !t • • ATTACHMENT: Suddivision. • COMMENTS: J1frater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA FROM: Steve Russell, Planning Department DATE: April 19, 1993 SUBJECT: Review of major projects. TO: SUBDIVISION PLAT REVIEW AGENCIES: Mark Benson - MnDOT Jack Takemoto, Chairman, Stillwater Township Tim Fredbo - Washington County Soil & Water Conservation Dan Parker - Independent School District #834 Don Wisniewski - Washington County Public Works Please submit any comments you may have on the above application within thirty (30) days of receipt to the Stillwater Planning Department. For additional information, please contact me at 439 -6121. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612 - 439 -6121 Printed on Recycled Paper June 29, 1993 Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Target /SuperValu Layout and Plat County Right -of -Way Needs Dear Steve: WASHINGTON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT PARKS • HIGHWAYS • FACILITIES 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH • STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 -9573 612 - 430 -4300 Facsimile Machine 612 - 430 -4350 We have received and reviewe J the latest proposed Target / SuperValu layout and proposed plat. We offer the following commeitits in regards to our right -of -way needs for County State Aid Highway 5 (CSAH 5) in this ar a. We request an extra 10 feet of right -of -way from the centerline of CSAH 5, in addition to the 60 feet as shown on the plat. The additional right -of -way will allow a 3 -5 foot buffer space between the proposed walkway and the roadway as well as provide space for traffic signal hardware, street lights, and overhead power lines. We also request additional righ -of -way in the northeast and southeast corners of the intersection of CSAH 5 and Curve Crest B ulevard to locate traffic signal equipment. Attached is a drawing detailing additional right -of -war needed. In addition to the above descrilped permanent needs, we may require temporary slope easements to be used during the construction phase. These have not been identified at this time. We ask that provisions be made for granting these easements during the platting /developer agreement process. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed plat and work with us to meet the needs of the proposed County project. Please feel free to contact Jim Hanson, Transportation Engineer, at this office if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, onald J. Theisen Deputy Director, Technical and Administrative Services cc: Mr. Glen Schreiner, SE+-I EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION Donald C. Wisniewski, P.E. Director Public Works /County Engineer John P. Perkovich, Deputy Director Operations Division Donald J. Theisen, P.E., Deputy Director Technical & Administrative Division Richard D. Herold, P.E. Design /Construction Engineer James D. Hanson, P.E. Transportation Engineer Edward Kepler, Facilities Operations Manager * q,o vep )C I o_' '1 ° o 1 m , AREA in 00 m 0 : E D A uu, mZ Ca p R m D r 4 M re ■ 15 15 c li CAA - )C 417.99 .24 e O ce 'o O a, o; Field entrance and culvert- c s o , 1 o ` er � o , )o 6 �� ' 9Os) .-Q 'q C, ''' y .125 AC RES .L=3'18'50" R= 1920.00 L= 111.05 &o \/ 4 C . cal rWest line of SW 1/4, Sec o (0 I • Ciy • • n 32, Twp 30N, Rng 20W ' ce /)e{„,. , 0,,, 4. ,.„,? e ivioz., Off C6 e�t St, / ... . eas Aos (Ye e / � / c J 9e A c ^ -, / o/ & �C `3R e o' . i, � D 4 . ° '6 ti to �� I� Q w s ,' t,' 2 2 0 03 . 4 �6 . R ` 29n 9 o* A A. 29 7 / c N co/. July 14, 1993 Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 -4898 Dear Mr. Russell: 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 200 SEH CENTER, ST. PAUL, MN 55110 612 490 -2000 800 325 -2055 ARCHITECTURE • ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL TRANSPORTATION RE: City of Stillwater City Engineer Planning Case No. TIF93 -1 Target Site SEH File No. A- STILL2280.00 As you requested, we have reviewed the preliminary plans submitted by Target, Inc. for the proposed site adjacent to County State Aid Highway No. 5 (CSAH), Trunk Highway 36. The plans consist of grading and utility and street construction for the area south of Curve Crest Boulevard containing Lots No. 1, 2, 3 and Outlot A and B. We find the preliminary plans to generally conform with the City standards and requirements except for the following: 1. Silt fence is not shown n the grading plan. A silt fence should be installed in a north /south direction or the easterly side of Neal Avenue across Lots 1, 2 and 3 and /or on the westerly side of Outlot B adjacent to the detention area; depending upon any staging that may be utilized in the construction of this project. 2. The NRP should be checked for the inlets to the detention area, that is, the velocity of the particles across the basin to the Outlet structures. This may require construction of Deltas at the inlet flared -in sections. 3. The detention basin area should be reviewed by SEH to determine if the capacity is adequate depending upon the configuration of runoff to the basin. 4. Neal Avenue north of Curve Crest (between West Orleans Street and Curve Crest Boulevard) should be constructed as a part of the public improvements for this project. This will provide trunk sanitary sewer and watermain looping can be completed to serve the residential and commercial area north of Orleans Street. Presently, this area is served by sanitary sewer through a temporary lift station, which discharges into the sanitary sewer on Washington Avenue. Since the Highlands of Stillwater are becoming close to full development, the capacity in the sanitary sewer on Washington Avenue will be required without the Cottages of Stillwater area discharging to the system. We also recommend that a street be constructed on Neal Avenue north of Curve Crest to accommodate traffic flows to the proposed Target site. SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC. MINNEAPOLIS, MN ST CLOUD, MN CHIPPEWA FALLS, WI MADISON, WI • • • Mr. Steve Russell • July 14, 1993 Page 2 5. The desiltation /detention basin needs to be constructed between Neal Avenue N. and County State Aid Highway No. 5 near Curve Crest Boulevard to accommodate the storm water discharge from the area north of Curve Crest Boulevard. The outflow for this detention basin should be directed towards the larger detention area to be constructed on Outlot A. 6. The preliminary grades on the grading plan appear to meet City standards. 7. A 16" watermain will be installed across County Road 5 as a part of the public improvements and not an 8" watermain as indicated on the preliminary plans. 8. A 12" watermain will be constructed north on Neal Avenue and not a 16" watermain as indicated on the preliminary plans. In accordance with City requirements, we have calculated the dollar amount for erosion control on the project should the project not be completed. Erosion control includes seeding, mulching, disc anchoring, bale checks and silt fence. We have also separated the erosion control into two segments: Segment No. 1 includes the area between Curve Crest Boulevard, Trunk Highway 36 and County State Aid Highway 5, and Segment Number 2 includes the area between Curve Crest Boulevard, West Orleans Street and County State • Aid Highway 5. The estimated cost for erosion control for Segment No. 1 is $52,000, and the estimated cost for erosion control for Segment No. 2 is $31,380. Since this project will be assessed, a Feasibility Study will be required for the City Council to consider. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, • REM/ kam c: Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator Diane Deblon, Finance Director David Junker, Public Works Director Dennis McKean, Secretary, Board of Water Commissioners Richard E. Moore, P.E. City Engineer 0\ NNESO T4 o ti a ° Metropolitan District a Transportation Building 4. � Q St. Paul, Minnesota 55155 � OF T RP Oakdale Office, 3485 Hadley Avenue North, Oakdale, Minnesota 55128 Golden Valley Office, 2055 North Lilac Drive, Golden Valley, Minnesota 55422 Oakdale Office Reply to 779 -1291 Telephone No. May 25, 1993 Steve Russell Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 -4898 Dear Steve Russell: Minnesota Department of Transportation SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat Review Proposed Target Stillwater Northeast Quadrant of CSAH 5 and TH 36 Stillwater, Washington County CS 8214 The Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn /DOT) has reviewed the Proposed Target Stillwater preliminary plat in compliance with Minnesota Statute 505.03, subd. 2, Plats. We are awaiting the completion of a traffic study and further discussion with the city, county and developer to determine the feasiblilty of the proposed alignment of the TH 36 north frontage road. Until the alignment is agreed upon we are unable to effectively review the proposed plat. Mark Benson, project manager for the TH 36 projects will continue to coordinate the alignment negotiations. We expect that the traffic and other issues concerning the development proposal will be resolved through those negotiations. In addition to review and approvals necessary for construction of the frontage road the following are general comments that will likely apply to any proposed development at this site. 1. Mn /DOT will need to review grading and drainage plans for the development prior to construction. An Fnttal (7nnnrtnnifv Fmnlnvnr • Steve Russell May 25, 1993 Page two 2. Entrances to the frontage road or any road under Mn /DOT jurisdiction will require entrance permits. 3. Any miscellaneous work placement of utilities on Mn /DOT right of way will require permits. 4. No direct access to TH 36 may be permitted. If you have any questions regarding this review please call. Sincerely, • i Cyrus Knutson Transportation Planner • June 17, 1993 Ann Terwedo Steve Russell City of Stillwater STIL DAVID SWANSON 14 B I RCHWOOD DR N WATER MN 55082 -4607 After listening to the plans regarding the Target /CUB project the name of a new street stuck in my mind (small as it is). NEAL AVE. My thoughts on this are: 1) Neal Avenue is a name that is associated with the County Numbering System, not Stillwater. 2) IF Neal Avenue is used as a street name which numbering system will you be using? Stillwater's or Washington County? a) Using Stilllwater's numbering system will require you to use Neal Ave S and about an 1800 range of numbers. This could be very confusing for an "Out of Towner" trying to locate an address when they would assume a 69:00 N number range. b) Using Washington County's numbering system would have the opposite effect by having a 6400 N series of numbers in a 1800 S range of Stillwater numbers. There was a fair amount of confusion when the Eagle Ridge development abutted Neal Ave N. Personally I think the way Orleans St and 65th St N are numbered and named would have been the way to handle that portion of Neal Avenue but anyway. Actually the new street lines up more with Newgate Ave N. than Neal Ave N. if my county map is correct. anks For "listenin David Swanson, "Concerned Citizen" to me, • z (.) 0) - q- 1 0 0 -I • -rs 4 0 22 0 fl 2 en —a xl i C 0 EJ 0 0 co .4 0 RETAIL 12,500 SF. 6 ) L. • . 11:: I II tl 11,1 1j1 tP i : • : : • :1 : : r bm P 333 coo oxi On 0' cn r e 'n • I -I - A mums JD Venn PRELIMINARY 922 Ma* STILLWATER Molina 119. LIGHTING I :7671FAT:TE 1 liRUE 5930 TARGET 8/8 PLAN 9611001911111 MX (912) "3-G72 kw (OM 11.13-1153 1 • • • • 11 heater THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE JULY 16, 1993 SUBJECT STILLWATER MARKET PLACE AGENDA ITEMS There are five items on the Council agenda that relate to the Stillwater Market Place development request. The items are listed below. They should be considered in the order they are listed. 1. Environmental review of Stillwater Market Place project. 2. Public utility cost allocation for Stillwater Market Place project. 3. Planned Unit Development request for 67.84 acre development (Case No. PUD/93 -23). 4. Eight lot subdivision request for Stillwater Market Place project. (Case No. SUB/93 -23). 5. Developers request for public utility feasibility study. If all items are approved as recommended by Staff, a development agreement between the developer and the city will be prepared for Council approval at a future meeting. Also, the City Engineer will be directed to prepare a feasibility study for public improvements. As a result of the feasibility work and final cost sharing with MnDOT for the Frontage Road construction, more specific costs will be developed. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439 -6121 • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. PUD/93 -23 Planning Commission Meeting: June 14, 1993 Project Location: Northeast corner of Highway 36 and County Road #5 Comprehensive Plan District: Commercial Zoning District: Business Park Commercial & Business Park Office Applicant's Name: Target and Super Valu Type of Application: Planned Unit Development, PUD Project Description: The application is for concept approval for a 67.84 acre commercial development and final PUD approval for 27.52 portion of the PUD. Discussion: The request is to construct a 256,000 square foot community retail center on a 67.84 acre parcel. A related application requests subdivision approval of the site into eight lots (SUB/93 -24). The application includes site plan, preliminary grading /drainage plan, certificate of survey, subdivision, utility plan, landscape lighting plans and building elevations. • The site is zoned Business Park Commercial, BP -C, and Business Park Office, BP -0. (See Stillwater zoning Map No. 1.) The West Business Park Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, provides City direction for the development of the site. The plan designates the site retail commercial and office and prescribes development standards for new development. Special site (No. 1 and 2) development criteria are included in the Business Park Plan are for this site. The criteria calls for a coordinated project on the entire site, 1 and 2, area through a planned unit development permit. The building design, materials, landscape plan, street plan, and parking should be coordinated to achieve maximum community benefit. Development criteria for site No. 2 states "No signage shall be directed to County Road #5 and special landscaping and setbacks required along County Road #5, an entrance to Stillwater ". (See attached special site 1 and 2 map and development criteria.) The proposal does have a monument sign directed to County Road #5 and no special landscaping is provided along that road. The project meets the zoning use requirements for the site. All development setbacks, lot coverage, and parking requirements are met or exceeded. The project design has been reviewed by the City Design Review Committee (June 7, 1993) and the results of their review are included in the attached memo and recommended conditions of approval. The proposed road system is consistent with City, Washington County, Stillwater Township and MnDOT plans for improvement in the area. The drainage 1 and grading plan uses much of the previous grading that has been done on the site and incorporates it unto the current project. The existing detention pond will have to be expanded to accommodate future runoff from State Highway 36. An additional detention atea may be necessary north of new Curve Crest Blvd. to handle runoff from the development north of Curve Crest. These plans have been reviewed with the Washington County Soils and Conservation District. The applicant will be required to dedicate 3.6 acres of land for park dedication. The city is interested in purchasing the 3.6 remainder of the site to add to the armory site just west of the project for a community facility. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet has previously prepared for the old Woodland Lakes Development. That review determined that a negative declaration could be issued. The current project is smaller than the previous project and at this time the EAW is being reviewed for application to this project. A Wetland Alteration Permit will be needed to expand the detention pond before building or grading permits can be issued. That review and approval will come when the final plans are prepared. The request is for PUD (Concept Approval of the entire 67.84 acre project and final approval for the proposed commercial center. Recommendation: Approval as conditioned. Findings: The project is consistent with the Stillwater West Stillwater Business Park Plan, an element of the Comprehensive Plan, and zoning requirements. Attachments: Application /plan Memo from Design Review Committee. Planning Commission Action: Approval with conditions. 2 • • • CASE NO. PUD/93 -23 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. All comments from the City Engineer shall be incorporated into the final plans for the site. 2. All comments regarding the road system from MnDOT and Washington County shall be incorporated into the final street design. 3. The park dedication requirements shall be met by land dedication. 4. A final environmental review shall be completed before final Council PUD and subdivision approval. 5. Design criteria, including building, sign and landscape standards shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the city Design Review Committee before final PUD approval. 6. A Wetlands Alteration permit shall be obtained before a grading permit or building permit are issued. 7. The conditions of approval from the Design Review Committee shall be incorporated into the final building plans. • 8. The entry to the site off County Road #5 shall be landscaped along the edge in a manner consistent with project landscaping. 9. Street trees shall be planted between Curve Crest and the property boundary to the north along County Road #5. 10. Final PUD approval shall be required for the development of all outlots. 11. Sidewalk shall be constructed along Neal and Curve Crest providing access to Orleans and County Road #5. 12. The holding pond shall be landscaped with development of Outlot "B ". 13. Final design of the monument sign and area landscaping shall be approved by the Community Development Director. 14. The grading /drainage plan shall be reviewed by the Brown's Creek Watershed District. 15. The City of Stillwater, MnDOT, and the developer will work together to solve traffice impacts caused by the project at Washington Avenue and the Frontage Road. 16. The stormwater pond in the northeast quadrant of the site shall be sized to adequately handle MnDOT drainage proposed to enter the pond from future Highway 36 improvements. 3 • • DESIGN REVIEW CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. PUD/83 -23 1. The pylon sign along Highway 36 shall be 36 feet in height with a sign face of 288 square feet. 2. The free - standing sign on County Road #5 shall be a maximum height of ten feet with the sign face in proportion with the height of the sign. The materials of the sign shall be compatible with the pylon sign and other signage on the site. 3. An in- ground sprinkler system shall be installed around the north, west and south perimeter of the site. 4. The following design guidelines shall be established for Outlot B. A. Buildings shall be constructed of a reddish rock -face brown block. B. Signage for this area shall consist of either (a) building signage as regulated by the Sign Ordinance, Subd. 22.10 or (b) monument signage not to exceed six feet in height. The face of the signage shall not exceed 30 square feet. The materials shall be compatible with the Target /CUB Foods and the Stillwater Marketplace signage. C. The location and varieties of the landscaping shall be compatible with the Target /CUB Foods Center landscaping. 5. A lighting plan shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee This plan shall consist of lighting style and intensity of lighting throughout the site and location of light standards. a _GI CO 1 N h �i I 1• z • I.�c! • En-111S\ :H tOOVO EA$t 8T :9£ 1SP p.m un myl • • PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. DR/93 -16 Project Location: Northeast corner of Highway 36 and County Road #5. Comprehensive Plan District: Business Park Commercial Zoning District: BP -C Applicant's Name: RLK Associates Type of Application: Design Permit Project Description: Design Review for a Target /Cub Foods Retail Center on the northeast corner of Highway 36 and County Road #5. Discussion: The request is to construct an 247,380 square foot retail center to include Cub Foods, Target and two or more smaller retail stores. The site is visible from Highway 36 and County Road #5. The building will be located along the east boundary of the property facing west. As part of the project, Curve Crest Avenue will be extended to the west to connect with County Road #5. Neal Avenue will also be extended to the south and link with the Frontage Road to provide access to the site. The building will be constructed of a rock face, reddish brown masonry block. Accent materials will include a charcoal grey block to be located at the base of the building and bands of burnished buff and a warm grey throughout the front and side facades. Columns will be accent architectural features throughout three sides of the building. Signage proposed for the project includes two pylon signs (internally illuminated) to be located on the southeast corner of County Road #5 and Curve Crest Boulevard and another located at the Frontage Road. The proposed 36 foot height of these signs are 11 feet higher than the maximum allowed by the Sign Ordinance which is 25 feet. The size of the pylons also exceed the size allowable in the Sign Ordinance. The proposal calls for the signage to be 288 square feet. The maximum allowable is 120 square feet. The wall signs for the center include a Target /Pharmacy sign (red) and a Cub Foods /24 Hour Savings /Pharmacy (orange /red) sign. These signs are individual box letters. The small retail outlets do not have signage size identified. The total signage for Target is 256.5 square feet, which is appropriate. The total Cub Foods signage is 705.4 square feet. The total signage allowable is 400 square feet (one square foot for each square foot of frontage). This sign is 305 square feet more than what is allowable. The landscape plan includes varieties of blooming trees, evergreens, and shrubs which will provide a wide range of color. A formal landscaped drive • centers the building and will provide a focal point. Planters will also be located in front of the center. All trash receptacles and recycling refuse will be located inside the rear of the center. 1 "Minimum rements for lot area, width, frontage, height, yards, ground floor area for BP -I, BP- I SYMBOL p BP -I BP -C BP -0 1 SPECIAL SITES SETBACK ABUTTING FROM RESIDENTIAL 'MAXIMUM USE PUBLIC SIDEYARD DISTRI REAR YARD HEIGHT LOT DISTRICT LOT AREA LOT WID`I' TREET SETBACK (A ) SETBACK LIMITATIONS (COVERAGE) 4441114-- N. 1 ACRE 200 FEET 40 FEET :. 75 FEET 30 FEET 40 FEET 60% 1/2 ACRE 100 FEET 0 FEET 20 FEET 75 FEE 30 FEET 40 FEET 60% 1 ACRE - 00 FEET 40 FEET 20 FEET 75 FEET 30 FEET 40 FEET 60% Four special sites present special opportunities for new development because- of size, single ownership or ' location. See Special Sites Maps 8, 9 and 10. Site 01 and 42 are commercial sites located at the corner of County Road 5 and Highway 36. Special Site 01, a 36 acre site, is bounded by County Road to the west, Curve Crest Boulevard to the north, undeveloped land off of Washington Street to the east, and the Frontage Road to the south. The site is a part of the old Woodland Lakes project. It has been graded for drainage and road improvements. This site represents the best location in the Plan Area for a commercial center. The Land Use Plan designates this site Business Park - Commercial (BP -C). The commercial designation allows a range of retail and office uses. A Planned Unit Development permit is required for this site to coordinate access, uses and project design. It is the intent of the Planned Unit Development approach to have an overall plan for the site before any development occurs. Through the PUD process, a coordinated landscape plan, site design, access, landscaping, signage and parking program plan can be achieved and the development opportunity is maximized. 18 1 1 1 ;19 • to`O2 jj located just north of Curve Crest Boulevard part of County Road 5. This site was also a part of the Woodland Lakesdevelopment. A PUD plan is also required for this site, perhaps coordinated with Site 1. The design of this site >and Sts appearance from County Road 5 is of Y particular importance. As with Site #1, coordinated architecture, landscaping, : signage; parking and access shall be required. No signage shall be directed to County Road 5 and Special landscaping and setbacks are required for this Stillwater entrance along County Road 5. Bite43 Benson Fa to the Pine Tree Tail r The Benson Farm is designated single family and mu amily in the land use plan. The area adjacent ential area and around Lily Lake is desi single family and the south portion of the site . located along extended Wes ans multifamily residential. k: southeast of the site. ghborhood sized park, 5-10 acres, is located in the 111 to the Benson Farm are 11 not be provided from Pine Tree Trail. The Benson i'.!:_au is not currently in the City of Stil . plan showing land use, residential densiti When the ar is ready to develop, a conceptional Planned Unit Development to the City with a request for annexation. , park lands, road system and open space area should be presented 464 buffer 11 Comprehensive Plan Amendment and MUSA line ext . e plan meets with City approval the required annexation request, ! Board. can be processed with the Metropolitan Council and State Municipal 11 Site #4 - Industrial Sites. These expansion. This can be done witl should be protec to make sure they are available for future industrial division regulations and I use controls, City acquisition of sites or incentive for industrial development. • .strial lands next to the Benson Fa sidential area should have special setbacks and landscaping to minimize the impact on the residential area. • • THE B I R T H P L A C E O F M I N N E S O T A TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE DATE: JUNE 10, 1993 5u19 _ 2� SUBJECT: TARGET /CUB FOODS RETAIL CENTER - CASE NO. 9 /93 -23 The Design Review Committee reviewed the Target /CUB Retail Center (Stillwater Marketplace) at their regular meeting of June 7, 1993. The attached Staff report gives an overview of the project along with a list of conditions. The Design Review Committee agreed two plyon signs on Highway 36 and County Road #5 was excessive. The building signage alone will indicate the business as viewed from County Road #5. This signage also exceeds the total building signage allowable. The Committee and the Developer agreed the pylon sign on County Road #5 be lowered to a monument sign not to exceed ten feet in height. The Design Review Conditions of Approval are attached. Let CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612 - 439 -6121 1 Oar E l \c -44 -46(•4 4 414i jo rra l irail ie v — PROPOSED ZONING • n"ILSICF. & • [D. I.rIr ' h • :: • / - �X -"*". I .I .I. . E...._. Zoning ClassiTication RA- Single Family RB- Multiple Family BP -8 Office LJX C� O�rvr II _ .. • 1111 - BP -I Industrial -1' 4 ! ,1 1 1 4 I ' ' L:- 7 :r 1. -1 ..... L F • = h 1> r ;✓ [FILE NCO M APS .Parks /ORen space ... 1 1 1 1 1 - 74 • z 9 • fET PAIIK - 12 CCRIVRATE L Mil T S • 11 L_A NORTH WOODLAND LAKES 1 & 2 z wILDPINES LN. SPECIAL SITE #1 CORPOR4TE -11111411.11111 Malismaiiiragage 1 w ORLEANS SI O11.01 FA 1 ConvE CR-T nly0 — — — — 44 • TOwE on. •4/• 4 2 PARCEL 2 a • w PAR Cl • • 1 1 1 22242222 s I /11 ( 1 1 1 ;I o i s- `1� • • \\ • Ji, ArlAWWWWirla 7 ■ 1 �kH+t4ftt11 PRELIMINARY II STILLWATER O TARGET SITE PLAN TARGET • 0 1 n 1 1 f1n1111 11111111111111111 ow. so... sr III III s i 1 a t a WHIM" 1 ¢g »ve»s a E aft m o f a i� s�6sea.fis � 0 Sit 1.1.. om 35X •MOCN11N LM (S 2 ) 1135 -CS im: 1612) U -115] V ) Y L -•1 1 1 • ■ 1 I' EXISTING I STILLWATER 1 O TARGET CONDITIONS TARGET 1lt • STILLWATER INDUSTRIAL v KERN —PAULY ADDITION PARK Tibrwl.. r war . an STILLWATER INDUSTRIAL PARK as re.w..t On) *31- 0972 ,s 012) 1133-1193 NEWSOM • G M WL .WI 7al • 144.40« • 44 ••m a n 044 Nee •a / . 1 57 Vi 4.01 'SW i/ 4 ■40 .w ••••• A.* __ 4 - •1•4 x a l /4, k 13 era 14303 e 3a. font 3/ M 203. •w w. • 414 44 140 1530319103 09 6 4 V nw• 01 14 •.. '0 4 //4. n 21. *00 01 M 40 •• m• x� M1ya.w.1r 401/• • - T Ta :. 44� 40 Iq 1 14 : 4 fl• w a. SIw4 .4444 tow w 430 ewn Bees 00 11 200.. 273 to1 41.1 314 -aa3 -. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY FOR TARGET STORES ALTA /ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY N. w•^4 r 20 4 N S('31'32' w 11111215$21 rB O tlV • �d) / N I , c. WO Moo (dsat4 .q 14 4 4 el 20) • 7.334 1941 • a a /- CSAO ho 5 • 3520 Oa. •/- 14nt 1.14••71..30.0 701 woe 1/- 440 103 1.4.9 Rohl a 101 20 • 60474 ewes •/- - II L r .. •.. h S U0 74I S 4000 L • ON 1 ra N P ♦ : 4404 1 Cj , �'• 4 i lr • 4 4047 '•1.T•t•1 440 • 7 M acne •/- West 09 30 .40 *v.4 • 070 ease 3/- N4 Area • 771 ewes •/- 9.° It � C 1 4 Ir 4 • V 11..20 1.0. x41 3* 140 Ns, 1M0 1+4 40 i « 11214 .3 f,..• .w w. 44,4 .r• ... 3 (Ofd Trunk H ighway No. 212) (also known as 60th Street No.) s.. ••• *•1. •• .4 10 1/4. 144 30 4 32 te. 3O1 ifs" 9 I.4410 ALTA SURVEY ST TARGARG ET TER ()TARGET M IMO .. who door ads S �F SZtk-OW PIER 1Vki• �TX4.4 4'7444 r*1•••• ' - w 1 , 301 00.4111. 14Pot •...44 620 8 3 .!401.14 ear 01101 12404044 .•WIds401.4a j • I f 4 Cur. Crest Blvd. (64rd St. No.) 1 I - ,-fop r 4114• `Rood West a 3 s ••• I/4 maw so 11.32. 1 00 W. 41 333. • •••401 1•.47 4000144 .N.4 • I/O .20•4••.•11 40 4313 .n 44444 0.4* .3 tin« 14 of io +a m..... is ..• .u• 5••••• • • an w • •••.I 411000 4 m n. »se •x30• ••∎ • .1144 .4n .e a•4 . et• 1/1 mat non I 1 UN IN GRAPHIC SCALE 1a9.1 1 O0.nl.len .4 31.4 hoer., 1 20 1 . 4 . a . 0 tam. 4* es Counts 4ea*na• •114.. t.. 1979 014.11..,40,1 0 0•433 1/e ,01* wan .an r cap . 431,440 lit 5 1 114 1WW . 1 .9 .440.014301.. • Denotes I/2 not .•n ma•••••l load maltee - II L 123t a.*20 33•134 nes. ana .40 'a 0•1•44•• Yee 0e4n3401* a 439 *Grew. 1. LEGEND • *0 1•••• WNW. *1 smn>" • war 1 40 , 4. O •314 Goo no. • I 44•44 Nome ate C•M Sew, O New .40• 0444 I.4 740es ••• 40*• G..13 for Lon L..• f•••• Own* New • 040( a- AREA MAP TO 15042 41014 121115 M WW1 4I TRH 1W0 2U3 AM Ise 70YL1 el 000111 11 14110 104 1.0 *3 4LOMIC1 200 %M•M 110130101 4341! 3*14300n 501 40144100» 1301 7111.1 9/111011,. 30344.1 0134161110 101 009210 09 4011 4 480 11 INC Rltf 0. *4441 40133011 31 4 0143 4 t0017 4 4144 IMMO. NO 101(315 1106 1, L• 32, 4, 1, 4, 11, 12. 1 44 IS 11100. 21 1 . 134+03 4 30/4 440101/10 00. 144 agar !7 432 0143411 0461014 11.20/ 5 4 103{7 10115104-74 En (017) 9.13-01113 017 No ( *la) 11,11-1153 613 R • 5 - 13 6.40Mw.1M MORN. DATE OF ISSUE - JUNE 27. 1991 4013500 SEPTEl40E0 S, 1991 4r135ED OCTOBER 4 1991 REVISED 410150* 17.1993 IONS 444144 awn 4 sow 1 M . /•. tr 37. ,y 2e. a.. Zee by • 7 33•w ._.j..; ; -02. -& •• r 1/A b4 32. t•• 2•. M 2r PROPOSED TARGET STILLWATER - -5 es7•29 E-1004 «. r k 2es23 9r•. 432rhewta Llrnw No. 20261 r e'st PRELIMINARY 1 STILLWATER I TARGET 4 PLAT TARGET ••..1 M •.e. • L. ,nor• tor r R 7 +n r •••rh d •.!•TJI • : OM ma ke r rim .ayn.r Slyer •s Oa r fi r •nee• ;� m rA� 4 M.e� i '•• M max n T, ...h. I IighyNo 33 (Oka Trunk HI sway No. 212) -• ere saw..., ae�a mr r I 3Trsl .r gi •we. (also know% as 60th Street No.) ••.4 > \ N 997r3t• • OISCR►lION (P.n,24 N by Olnt) That part N the Ranson Canter of Section 37. Tranship 30 North. Range 20 West. Washington County. Minesota demised ta blowy Conn.eneap al the Northwest comer of sold Southwest Quarter. theme Sara M degrees 26 minutes 29 wand. test rang rented to t1• than2ptr County Coord0ot. Salem. South Zone. none the North the of .old Southwest Quarter • distance of 100409 Ml to She center 9 . of 5(9.etr 9WMd, es presently bared and the point of beginning: thence continue South 99 apnoea 29 minutes 29 second. Com nap said North Tine 7099 Ml to the 3.09320.40043 right- of -.a, sib of sold Stiwatr 9ainrq thence Sate 32 thane. 49 minutes 23 ...dm test cop sad Soul4.atny tight fm 361 73 feet to the Southwest corner of the tract descried Y. Document No. 412693 rearms and on M in the office of the County Recorder. 9a0a9ln County. Minnesota Lane South 55 degree. 42 minutes 37 seconds East rang the Rainwater., One of .ale tract 323.34 test to the Swnno.l carnet of said tract. thane 50593 69 dgr••• 35 mi a. 02 swan East 60.00 tea: thence South M ayw2 37 ..n ea ...nut. 19 .earns Eat 690.26 feet to a point an the west line of 934 plat of STILLWI R 947tl57141 PARK as receded and on a• in said office of the County Recorder. also being the test line el the 2..0 99000 Net of old Southwest Quarter a maoared et right ape to the Eat line of said Southeast Quarter. said paint Men be09 the Seuthw.t honer el OUTLOT A. .old S1ILLNA0ER 1143/5/4A1 PINK. thence South 00 agrees 56 minutes 10 seconds Eat Nang said that line 1631.07 feet le the South In. el said Southwest Water; thnce North g9 degrees 30 lamas 32 wends Mgt Nang said South INN 166539 feet to the Southwest came 09 fait Southwest Ourir. thence North 00 degree. 50 mart& 10 wands West song the west IM N oast S05th.est Ourter a distance of 1159.61 test to held antra IM N St9Mr 9eub•rd as presage. tn...de4 l.. Mat 34 threes 17 meet& 23 .311.04. Eat along said center fib 652.00 Net; thence Nrthwtaly Mang meld eater kw and a tangential curve. sonata to the Nrthhm'. hewing a mag a el 11459 16 Net and • centred angle N 01 de re. 28 marl. 00 *aortae. a distance of 203 33 Mt; thence North 32 agrees 49 minutes 23 wend. Eat along tangent and Mang aid aria Nn. 627.71 Mt la the point of beginning 1 hereby certify that Um Neal .as prepared by me at Nn4.r my anal sop.nli•n and that 1 am o duly Rg4tred Land Surveyor .older the N.e el the Note of Minnow!. Ogled thin 12th sky of Apt. 1993 E G A N. r I E L 0 • N O th A K. I N C. Realm OM TO der el My. (NS. ouno tor • •�'& »1 1KrE OAtlanl 6 BOULEVARD 6 '♦ ;1 44 3 9tr 4 I FS E a a : 2 •v• • Wale • r. soot ow Mw 1 /4 Ns rih Swine Ne- r'J MP_ • •r`Y .a i _, o Nan to . [Li l Y:e:d:1- `. ..Nrta•r 961m► .r NEm 4. n eYw•.w atne ovate U &Ids n0YlwM M ILL ( • x - - S•1411 + i •thl. •O1e*a ANC _ 1 cury Mimi Bald. d St No.) Towir Ora t ••= (62nd St. No.) & wh ma ea r rim a � a • ..I o ♦wW. rontoo& Road West eth _ w•A. a 1. I i brim I/O gamy 4 ra h 2a, e•• 2a' N01Ck 1. The 3NMatbn el We •es•y eaten b MW n IM earth IM of the 5wtnw•t (Warta, of Section 32. which 0 ae8ened w New • ber09 of Math M degree. 36 abate, 32 wand. tool 2. fading ..014th maces had underground .000 re. shown heath ore bathed either Physically. Ina adding .acrd. •4942 n•6es1. N us. or by resident 1w14nr, Oth•r uakR_ old genie. may U. pearl VMRUUeh end Neaten .4.a utR10e and arises Waal M obtained from the wear. .4 931 r.9ec11.N Okla 94.r to rh7 Neawtbn. 3. Nrthrn States Pow Company cur..8y held. a balsa Namara for pr.ninee oar tine entire swayed property . Reamed by dearrnents had in the office of the 8on0gtr Coo ty R.cordr at page 14. teat 170 of Owes and page 552, Man 216 of Deeds 4. AR minces ond mind rights haw been re4ra4 by the Slat. of 0Mnp.te per Document Na 472799. Me of the pesh09tn Canty Recorder. C l The Bray deco not purport le show es Yhhpraoerne is to the property dser400 here.. l federal Emr9.n.y Management Agway Metres,% Flood bera4. Program flood neuranc. Rate Mop kw the CR, of 3(8.2 er Community Pond Winton 275249 0005 C dined Entry I. 1984 depicts the arve3 4 property to be baled in 'Zone C.' Wish b on r. 24 animal Reeding. 7. Adjoining land ownership Oman N Washington Canty We node es of ant 25. 1991. l Survey end eaten n MMnal. Man arson war ableined from • survey dated Man 17. 1993 97 NM Ne. l Ara of the property Harding highway end anal r1011- 01-aye 1 72.77 area 10. Ara of to party Wee hips., and .eat rpm -e2 -way le 6651 ewe. - 11. Prepaid let end West design wed 48.4.ed by RU( Aesocbt•4 80/23514 40nwot•. •23 I I N** MheIM M 55 W AY06N799 "WC (uo M I : see pat) es sn a GRAPHIC SCALE LEGEND 0.• f... r...e•.. v ... ra.• Orr Wt. Case fteel Peeer Nee w Mole few SURVEYOR ENGINEER 0EYELOPE < fan., the EGAN, FIELD dE NOWAK INC. SURVEYORS Vellweette Sao bar ammo Owe* •ewer VICINITY MAP • MUM TARGET 33 SOUTH 670 STREET PO. 603 (392 TELEPHONE (6(12)370 6073 EC" HEL0 •1 N04AK. INC. 7415 NA77ATA SOL/LEVAR) NRRtEAPQJS. RN 55428 11EEPNOr9 (642)344 -6637 RLit A5500A0ES. LTD 922 MAIN STREET NOPKNS. 101 55343 TE2EP00NE (612)933 -0972 7415 9ATLAIA 80ULEVARO MINNEA OAS. MIN 55426 (912) 544 -6637 4 entrance ante 1 �\ ii:i�i iii �•�• n,� - — • ! N �iI111 dm, ri Y' f 00I I • X S n X 1 x / �tJ X lq's g C 1 11 11120 fit if CI! !! c=0:101 PRELIMINARY STILLWATER 0 TARGET GRADING PLAN TARGET 1 • D :::::::::= b Y .+: Y• � -- - - --1- :" �---_ ` f I I • f tu I 3 111 y t1 1 il ' s 1i0 I I ' 1 I -1 5 1 } it lb _ �.. _ __ _. _.. ,y t ie 1j ;II ( 7 < 1 / I r = ti i i I, I m 1► 1,= 122 149* .911i99. 99. 15993 put cu-an l.: (112) *31 -1113 AP" ! • o 8 al 0 P 8 8 8 NEAL AVENUE - — 571 T m ▪ / m xo rh cn 0 apt 1 114 A 1. 82 CT 1 fr :711 I 11 - - ZEti g 11 PRELIMINARY I I UTILITY PLAN STILLWATER I I TARGET 0 TARGET W1'0 J (=f3 cID L. 8 • r o.ip g •4 : RETAL 1 4 A s FFE,4131.50 11 1 t '4 1: P i, : I; ,--- A ti '4•Iiil 1p,s r 1 "AA i 88 I 5 ) 8 1 I $ md. mil, to Si Os . npoilip..174/ ..... ex/ 1111 a • •■ uplowl Moire mar SON, • b. 110 • Samia I& IA 8 A A cD 8 7,1 A 1 A . 1 (4121 1113- - 0: 101 tr E..915.011 14 DIP • 8 ep 4 • RENSIC•6 r -410 9 A 1 - : • a - oi 1-.3 .p. I ".". 3110 T • • 0.40* 1 1 , - 2 t,- Er Die 1 qi I I 1 • Va t'4 , f , ., l iti 11, : i 9. Pi zsAl Lst 1 1 ,M2 , I 59 i r 1 .... !In it g z12g 11 i 1 I s $ t $ 5 1 1p 0 1 1M MAW „.. • 0 ° T 8 O XI o $ z co - . a c • 0 0 r • • gi i t 0 0 0 m 0 1L 1a i 1 ,�R f t �11 ! i EIS 1 , Will 6 Ia1 . 1i 1� ilji p!_ ' 11,11 ' mi 0111 i 010 i!i Il i l ill , I ,.' 191i1 ,j .I J l oh I pii 111 1° '1 r 11 ! 1! Iiiiii,,i ii t I i i ; i! p i t 1 ei , % - ..I 1 I :5 1 1 ;110 fl t t 1 ,1 ; 1 1 ; ' 1 1 � i id hill n 'Immo qiiriri 111 111i i =� ‚iI _, d Iq HI 1 IIII 1 i� R p 1 0 . 1S I . to 1 1 u t 922 Mar.* I PRELIMINARY : . " 2 - --r I [RIK LANDSCAPE STILLWAT ()TARGET -0 ` "`� "�" J 96.343 TARGET �° �� �' °°t PLAN ' "'r `m won) w -1193 u�y ' • I lig 43 ) 44 IIIII it ;1111 ' 1 1(11 i I1 • Target Stores 33 South Sixth Street P.O. Box 1392 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 -1392 Telex No. 205812 July 15, 1993 Mr. Steve Russell Community Development Director 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: PREPARATION OF ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY REPORT Mr. Russell: We, the developers of the Stillwater Market Place retail project and Target acting as the representative of the property owner, request that an Engineering Feasilibity Study be prepared on the proposed improvements contained in the July 13, 1993 preliminary plan submittal. The feasibility of the improvements including the preliminary design and estimated cost should be reported to the City Council at the earliest opportunity by the City's design engineer. It is understood that the costs associated with the development of the feasilibity report will be addressed to the development on the same basis as the derivation of Table 1 (see attachment). The goal of the developers is to achieve the earliest possible, store opening on the Target and SUPER VALU site. It is expected that site grading will commence in the Fall of 1993. Therefore, your expediency to this request is anticipated and appreciated. To promote a cost sharing, public - private partnership, to the fullest degree, we are asking the City to facilitate a process whereby the developer is allowed to complete the final engineering design, plans, specifications and bid documents for the public infrastructure, under the auspices of the City of Stillwater and in accordance with the City's design standards. With-the magnitude of construction that is expected from this development project, the cost savings using this approach could be substantial. A Division of the Dayton Hudson Corporation Printed on recycled paper. Mr. Steve Russell Page Two July 15, 1993 Stillwater, Minnesota Thank you for your prompt reply and assistance on this request. - Target's Authoti-r6a Representative SUPER VALU's Authorized Representative Date • • • • • Sanitary Sewer Water Main Drainage Drainage Improvements ESTIMATED COST APPORTIONMENT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES AND PARK LAND PURCHASE PROPOSED TARGET /SUPER VALU STILLWA'TER MARKET PLACE PROJECT Target /Super Valu Site 43,162.16 251,466.00 57,913.55 Under CASH 5(2) 62,000.00 Streets 81,102.85(1) Lighting 21,250.88 Signals 78,749.83 Trunk Sanitary Sewer 111,981.70 County Road 5 Improvement(3) 6,000.00 Park Land Sale /Purchase(4) (103,624.00) Total 713,626.97 Neal Ave North 67,400.11 15,522.48 34,344.00 102,146.41 5,695.72 30,014.27 14,000.00 269,122.99 Tower Drive 6,572.77 38,293.51 8,819.12 58,034.64 3,236.10 City & Others 38,575.00 193,483.94 233,656.00 863,511.16(1) 3,260.00 191,250.00 291,949.03 103,624.00 114,956.14 1,919,309.13 Table 1 Total 49,734.93 395,734.62 275,739.09 330,000.00 1,104,795.06 33,442.70 269,999.83 433,945.00 20,000.00 103,624.00 3,017,015.23 General Notes regarding the cost estimates in Table 1: (1) MnDOT assistance of $300,000 added to City column. (2) Costs are assessed by net drainage area. The project and cost estimates need further review during the feasibility study. (3) Adjacent sites to be assessed for an 8 -foot wide bituminous trail. (4) City has agreed to purchase approximately 3.6 acres of park land from Outlot E ($103,624) from the developer. Additionally, the City will pay for a proportionate cost on an area drained basis of stormwater ponding costs if constructed north of Curve Crest Blvd. (5) It is understood that the costs in Table 1 are estimated and will be recalculated upon the receipt of actual bids based upon the detailed design plans. Formulas used to arrive at the estimated costs shown in Table 1 will be used to calculate the final costs for the specific property assessments. • • • ESTIMATED COST APPORTIONMENT OF THE PUBLIC UTILITIES AND PARK LAND PURCHASE PROPOSED TARGET /SUPER VALU STILLWATER MARKET PLACE PROJECT Target /Super Valu Neal Ave Site North Sanitary Sewer 43,162.16 Water Main 251,466.00 Drainage 57,913.55 Drainage Improvements Under CASH 5(2) 62,000.00 Streets 81,102.85(1) Lighting 21,250.88 Signals 78,749.83 Trunk Sanitary Sewer 111,981.70 County Road 5 Improvement(3) 6,000.00 Total Utility Costs Parkland Sale /Purchase (5) 713,626.97 (103,624.00) Total Land and Utilities (Net Cost) 610,002.97 67,400.11 15,522.48 34,344.00 102,146.41 5,695.72 30,014.27 14,000.00 269,122.99 General Notes regarding the cost estimates in Table 1: Tower Drive 6,572.77 38,293.51 8,819.12 58,034.64 3,236.10 114,956.14 City & Others 38,575.00 193,483.94 103,624.00 1,919,309.13 Table 1 Total 49,734.93 395,734.62 275,739.09 233,656.00 330,000.00 863,511.16(1) 1,104,795.06 3,260.00 33,442.70 191,250.00 269,999.83 291,949.03 433,945.00 20,000.00 1,815,685.13 2,913,391.23 MnDOT assistance of $300,000 added to City column. Costs are assessed by net drainage area. The project and cost estimates need further review during the feasibility study. Adjacent sites to be assessed for an 8 -foot wide bituminous trail. City has agreed to purchase approximately 3.6 acres of park land from Outlot E ($103,624) from the developer. Additionally, the City will pay for a proportionate cost on an area drained basis of stormwater ponding costs if constructed north of Curve Crest Blvd. It is understood that the costs in Table 1 are estimated and will be recalculated upon the receipt of actual bids based upon the detailed design plans. Formulas used to arrive at the estimated costs shown in Table 1 will be used to calculate the final costs for the specific property assessments. • • July 16, 1993 Stillwater City Council Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator Dave Magneson, City Attorney Park Board 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Mn. 55082 Mr. Kriesel, Mr. Magneson, and Council and Park Board, I have a few questions that need to be answered by the council and city attorney. 1. In 1981, I was told by the park department that the park property along Long Lake, was deeded to be wild. This was again affirmed a few years ago when I inquired about a realtor assisting in cutting trees down on park property to improve the property value of a house he wanted to list. What is the deeded status of this property ? , What is the legal ramification of not following the deed and allowing removal of trees and shrubs if such a covenant exists ?? 2. A dock was allowed on park property. Is a written permit required each year with specific requirements on how big, where it is located, when it is to be installed and removed, inspected by the city building inspector, insurance or bond written for public safety, railings required as per other public city docks, and public hearing issued prior to issuance of permit? Since the owner has declared that anyone can use it, I assume that the city is liable for any child who, in a secluded location without safety features, falls off and drowns. • 3. Allowing a property owner to clear park property of trees and put up a dock without paying for lake shore waterfront seems like discrimination to other Stillwater property owners who would like to put up their own dock and boat on public property and are not allowed to do so. The park department appears to not enforce any rules. • Is the council now saying that the other property owners along the park property can now use the public land as their property and clear the trees and erect docks at will? Will they start paying taxes on that land? Who is responsible for removal of the debris? Stacked up limbs create a fire hazard. Please let me know if it is OK. I will put up a dock next to the gazebo on park property along with most of the rest of the people who currently have to pay for docks at Stillwater's marina's. 4. There is a Stillwater ordinance that states that motorized vehicles are not allowed on park property. Yet people continue to take their snowmobiles through the park property to get to the lake. Signs designating the park locations and stating no motorized vehicles are being destroyed. It appears that whomsoever is in charge of enforcement of City ordinances needs a new job or an awakening of requirements of enforcing of laws. The excuse that they did not know does not apply here. 5. There was a reference to water quality and presence of boats to improve water quality at the last council meeting. The DNR will not support your theories. In fact, they will point out that it is fertilizer that has caused all the area lakes to get weedy and bloom. Oxygen from boats would help if they ran all winter and continuously. However, then the residual hydrocarbons from the fuel would kill the weeds and fish. • If oxygen is your desire, an aerator would be much more beneficial. • If you wanted to improve water quality I would suaaest an ordinance restriotina Chemlawn and EverGreen from apnlvina fertilizer within 24 hrs. of proiected thunderstorms. My neighbor was told by one of them last fall, after I clued him to the fact that the runoff went straight into the lake, that they had a plastisizer in the liquid to make it stick to the grass. Well these companies ought to join Dr. Bill Lown and his waterproofing company in the same institution. The Peterson's on the north side of Long Lake have done water tests for the DNR. They told me that they have been concerned about the consistent reduction of water quality on Long Lake. It was very clear on the north end a number of years ago and has gotten worse every year. Now you can not see bottom at 2 feet. 6. The past two years, we have had boats cruising the shorelines chasing nesting fowl. Boats cruising the lake at high speeds are raising high wakes during flooding conditions and causing breakup of docks and shoreline erosion. A DNR official suggested taking the offending boat owners to court stating the law that prevents boat owners from intentionally damaging property. I think considerate Stillwater neighbors have seen enough and would like the city to get into the act rather than dragging individuals to court when existing laws should cover the situation. It is time for either a motor size rule, speed rule, flood condition rule or all of the above. It should also be consistent with other lakes of this size in Stillwater. With the narrow regions with very defined points, it is not safe for swimmers or canoes when minors are allowed to cruise the shore lines at high speeds. These conditions have caused a problem the past couple of years and need the councils immediate attention before it gets worse. This lake is not a large round lake. • Please address these issues of laws, liabilities, and land use covenants. I feel that the council has an obligation to the parties that signed the petition to respond and not push their obligations off any longer. Please reply to these in written format. • • Sincerely, I g e /-S David G. Fabio 2946 Marine Circle Stillwater, MN 55082 • • • State of Minnesota Division of Emergency Management Federal Emergency Management Agency A DISASTER HAS BEEN DECLARED At the request of Governor Arne Carlson, President Clinton has amended the disaster declaration to include assistance to individuals, families and businesses within the counties of: Blue Earth, Brown, Carver, Chippewa, Cottonwood, Faribault, Goodhue, Jackson, Le Sueur, Lincoln, Lyon, Martin, McLeod, Murray, Nicollet, Nobles, Pipestone, Redwood, Renville, Rock, Scott, Sibley, Washington, Watonwan, and Yellow Medicine. You may be eligible for State of Minnesota, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other federal assistance if you suffered damage from the severe storms, flooding and tornados which have occurred since May 6. To apply for assistance visit the most convenient Disaster Application Center (DAC) in your area. A DAC has been established in your area and will be open at: Red Wing National Guard Armory 885 East 7th St. Marshall City Fire Hall 201 E. Saratoga St. Peter Regional Treatment Center Tomlinson Hall, 100 Freeman Dr. DACs will be open July- 15 - 17 from 10:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. Or, if you prefer registering by phone or didn't get to a DAC, you may apply for assistance by calling the: Toll-free Teleregistration 1 800 462 -9029 Between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. Telecommunications Device for the Deaf: 1 800 462 Before you register, have the following information ready: * Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying. * Your Social Security number. * A list of damages and losses you suffered. * Good directions to the property that was damaged. DISASTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM INFORMATION Tel on number 1 800 462 -9029 Information line 1 800 621 -3362 Various disaster assistance rograms are made available under Presidential disaster declarations. Detailed information on the following types of individual assistance programs is available by directly contacting the agency. 1. DISASTER HOUSIN ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: The Federal Emergency Management Agency ) may provide assistance for any individual or family whose home has been made unlivable as a result of the disaster. Assistance may be in the form of funds to obtain rental housing or to make emergency, essential repairs that are required to make the residence livable. 2. INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY GRANT PROGRAM: Grants of up to $11,900 may be available to meet disaster - related serious needs or necessary expenses which are not covered by other disaster assistance programs or insurance. The grant program is administered by the State of Minnesota. 3. HOMEJPERSONAL P2OPERTY DISASTER LOANS: Disaster loans through the Small Business Administtrraation (SBA) are available to homeowners and renters for restoring or replacing dt damaged real and personal property. The maximum real estate portion of t1 a loan is $100,000 and for personal property $20,000. 4. EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE:. Emergency food, clothing, shelter and medical assistance may be provi ed to individuals and families having such needs as a result of the disaster. Assis ce can be provided by the American Red Cross, the Salvation Army, church groups, and other voluntary organizations. 5. BUSINESS DISASTER LOANS:. Disaster loans through the Small Business Administration (SBA) are available to businesses to repair or replace destroyed or damaged business facilities, inventory, machinery, and equipment or to cover other disaster - related business losses. The maximum loan amount is $500,000. 6. FARM ASSISTANCE: The Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) may make emergency loans to farmers and ranchers (owners or tenants) who were operating and managing a farm or ranch at the time of the disaster. These loans are limited to the amount necessary to compensate for actual losses to essential property and/or production capacity. Further information is available from the FmHA office within each county. • July 16, 1993 Mr. David Junker City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. Junker: Sincerely, Laurie Maher 3018 Marine Circle Stillwater, MN 55082 I was directed to you from the street maintenance department when I telephoned today to complain about a certain city piece of machinery that creates a mess whenever it comes down my street - Marine Circle. I keep the gutter area in front of my lot clean and swept clear of gravel, dirt, and sand, which there are always large piles of after winter. Whatever piece of machinery it is that came down Marine Circle this morning,(and I would never call it a street sweeper) spewed stones, gravel, and sand all over my driveway (and everyone else's) and left piles of sand to clog up the gutters. This happens whenever this vehicle comes down our street. Now, I have no idea what this noisy machine is there to accomplish, but, please don't send it down Marine Circle again, or have one of your maintenance men walking behind it to sweep up the mess it makes! -n 0 m • ! : i EXISTING I STILLWATER 1 0 TARGET CONDITIONS TARGET l • . � 1.._ STILLWATER INDUSTRIAL r KERN -pgULY ADDITION PARK 0 A Q 0 0 2. A Q 11 RU( AMMAN* LTD • STILLWATER INDUSTRIAL PARK meow! om )11.f ��I 1113-011,1 �!1 1)1-11f 3 1� 11 • • X � \ti( I 1 MI 11 111-1 . 17411 (UI IIII (t l X19 1 11 II k PRELIMINARY BTILLWATER p T A R G E T GRADING PLAN TARGET • 4 IPN • 1 loieairo .w 1u 71177 -a b• ' • M. 17171 .?/ -tlfl / I ( i7J7 • m rn a 4 ,› • 1 1 1 7 1 r tg A a3I f 141 0 0 PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN r If DIP A 8TILLWATER TARGET 19 17Z • sg IA i� ;S�oFli g psgfga I;ti g s s ( s s s NEAL AVENUE II j 1*1*1.111 (IU �I • 11 I ‘ I I '1 I (HIIIIV 1 11 11 11 OTARGET =:' 1/1/11 • ss Ni 1 / " e, q RETAIL V; 1A FFE.03t10 m 10. P i r I" --1 I I ir j ;1 A tt F va 1 „ i 1 it Q E : op r e.,.. I ' -r r t ei•. .gt gni : i 1 Hi I I I I 1 ! I Il Ilq-7.1.17--V, w IR IS • IC e \ \\ SOIL LEGEND HYDROLOGIC GROUP •..3028 i 1055 `85 re - •498 449,E M • 5 39 342C '11538 120. 1559 858C 266 - 454C, 0 452 1538 498 - ANTIGO 120 -BRILL 1538 - SANTIAGO 264 - FREEON 302B - ROSHOLT 896C B B B C B R. 21 W. I R. 20 W. 266 266 342D 12295000FEET WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA — SHEET NUMBER 35 • � 449 s- 540 449153C ti 922 Moinstreet Hopkins, Mn. 55343 (612) 933 -0972 ASSOCIATES LTD. fox (612) 933 - 1153 SOIL LEGEND HYDROLOGIC GROUP 302C - ROSHOLT 3426 - KNGSLEY 342C - KNGSLEY 3678 - CANPIA 507 - POSKN 153C 266 3170 153E B B B B C (suns sheet 31) (Joins sheet 38) 858C SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE SURVEY MAP SITE BOUNDARY • sh FIGURE 7 O 0 N c c c c c C c C n