The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1990-06-05 CC Packet AGENDA STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL June 5, 1990 e REGULAR MEETING RECESSED MEETING 4:30 P.M. 7:00 P.M. 4:30 P.M. AGENDA STAFF REPORTS 1. Finance Director 4. Comm. Dev. Director 7. Fire Chief 2. Public Safety 5. Parks & Recreation 8. City Attorney 3. Public Works Dir. 6. Consulting Engineer 9. City Clerk 10. City Coordinator 7:00 P.M. AGENDA CALL TO ORDER INVOCATION ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Special Meeting - May 8, 1990. Regular Meeting - May 15, 1990. SPECIAL BUSINESS 1. Oak Glen Committee Report & Recommendation. 2. Informational Hearing on First Phase of Downtown Capital Facilities Project Feasibility Study. . INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS AND COMMENDATIONS PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. This lS the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider the request for a minor subdivision of a 32,005 sq. ft. lot (Lots 7, 2 and 3, Peterson's Addition) into two lots of 10,000 sq. -ft. (Lot 7) and 22,005 sq. ft. (Lots 2 & 3) at 1911 West Pine Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District, Case No. SUB/90-22. Dorothy Gerson, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mailed to affected property owners. 2. This is the day and time for tile Public Hearing to consider a Major Subdivision of three lots consisting of 21,750, 21,750, and 43,500 sq. ft. into four lots, all of which will consist of 21,750 sq. ft. on Poplar St. between North Fifth St. and North Everett St. in the RA, Single Family Residential Dist., Case No. SUB/90-23. Larry Dauffenbach, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mailed to affected property owners. 3. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Special Use Permit to construct a 31,086 sq. ft. Auto Service & Retail Service Mallon the Northeast corner of Tuenge Dr. and 60th St. No. in the IP-C Industrial Park-Commercial Dist. Case No. SUP/90-24. Marco Construction, Applicant. d Notice of the,hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 an coples were mal led to affected property owners. 1 e 4. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Special Use Permit to conduct a five-bedroom Bed and Breakfast establishment at 319 West Pine St. in the RCM, Multi-Family Residential Dist., Case No. SUP/90-25. Bruce and Vikki Brillhart, Applicants. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mailed to affected property owners. 5. This is the day and time for tile Public Hearing to consider a Special Use Permit to conduct a temporary food vending business out of a popcorn wagon East of the Commander Elevator on private property along Nelson Street in the CBD, Central Business District, Case No. SUP/90-26. Kenneth Duneman, Appl icant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mai 1 ed to affected property owners. 6. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider the annexation of approximately 88.5 acres of land located north of Orleans St. between Greeley St. & Washington Ave., currently in Stillwater Township, Case No. ANNEX/90-1. Jeffrey D. Benson, representing the Gilbert Benson Estate & Steve C. Fiterman, Ground Properties, Petitioners. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mailed to affected property owners. 7. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider the Comprehensive Plan review by adding 88.5 acres of land, located north of Orleans St. between Greeley St. and Washington Ave., to the Comprehensive Plan Boundary and designate such land Single-Family Residential, Case No. CPA/90-1. Ground Development, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mailed to affected property owners. 8. This is the day and time for the Public Hearing to consider a Zoning Ordinance Map Amendment designating 88.5 acres of land RA, Single-Family Residential, located north of Orleans St. between Greeley St. & Washington Ave., Case No. ZAM/90-1. Ground Development, Applicant. Notice of the hearing was published in The Courier on May 24, 1990 and copies were mailed to affected property owners. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Update regarding discussion with National Guard regarding new Stillwater Armory and report on available Army sites. 2. Resolution & Comments regarding Draft Environmental Impact Statement for new Interstate Bridge. 3. Final approval for resubdivision of two lots at 412-418 W. Wilkins, Case No. SUB/89-48, Stanley McDonald, Applicant. 4. Resolution stating City of Stillwater's intent to continue to work with and support SAEDC as the Star City Commission on First Year Work Plan. 5. Possible second reading of Ordinance regarding the possession and Discharge of Weapons. e NEW BUSINESS 1. Proposed Nursing Home Facilities Revenue Bonds (The Long Term Care Foundation) . 2. Letter of support for Regional Transit Component to Comprehensive Plan to Regional Transit Board. 2 e 3. Review and response to Minn. DNR letter regarding Lily Lake Cooperative Agreement for construction of Launch Ramp. 4. Turnback Agreement with Washington Co. for Fourth Ave. So. from E. Orleans St. to Burlington St.; and Burlington St. from Fourth Ave. So. to So. Thi rd St. 5. Request for Variance for swimming pool located in front yard of residence at 115 No. Harriet St., Case No. V/90-31, James & Susan Lund, Applicants. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS & DELEGATIONS (continued) CONSENT AGENDA 1. Resolution Directing Payment of Bills (Resolution No. 8286). 2. Applications (list to be supplied at meeting) 3. United Way Banner Request for Main St. from August 26 - Nov. l. 4. Stillwater Chamber of Commerce request to hang banner for Lumberjack Days on Main St. from July 9 - July 30, 1990. 5. Ratification of Council Poll of May 22, 1990 regarding addition of three Benson Planning Cases to Public Hearing Agenda of June 5, 1990. 6. Set public hearing date of June 19, 1990 for transfer of liquor license for Cat Ballou's to Debra Van Dellen & Lori Thonnes. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS STAFF REPORTS (continued) COMMUNICATIONS/FYI 1. Bob Brackey - Concern regarding dilapidated house on Highway 36 adjacent to Zantigo Restaurant. 2. Invitation to join Suburban Rate Authority. 3. Metro Waste Commission - Budget Breakfast Meetings. 4. Metro Waste Commission - Informational meetings regarding Infiltration/Inflow. 5. Metro Waste Commission - Stillwater Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion QUESTIONS/COMMENTS FROM NEWS MEDIA ADJOURNMENT e 3 DEPARTMENT STAFF REQUEST ITEM POLICE MEETING DATE June 5th, 1990 e DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST (Briefly outline what the request is) Rear radar antenna. We have 1 squad car without a rear antenna due to the radar --------------------------------------------------------------------- being the oldest one we have. When we trade off this radar unit, the rear antenna --------------------------------------------------------------------- will be kept and used with the new one so this is not a lost expenditure. --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- FINANCIAL IMPACT (Briefly outline associated with this request and needed to fund the request) $410.00 which we have in the budget and will get back easily in fine monies for the costs, the proposed if any, that are source of the funds --------------------------------------------------------------------- speeding tags that are written~ --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ATTACHED YES NO x ALL COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS ~~~I 8E SU8MITTED TO THE CITY CLERK A MINIMUM OF FIVE WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING IN ORDER TO BE PLACED IN THE COUNCIL MATERIAL PACKET. SU8MITTED BY -_:~~~~~~~~------------ o DATE May 31, 1990 e e e COUNCIL REQUEST ITEM DEPARTMENT Pevtk4 MEETING DATE __~~J~_l~~~__ ----------------------------- DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST (Briefly outline what the request is) --~~~~-~~~_31_~~~~_~*P~~1~~____________________________________~__ 2)aMe.l. Lede-t f)ont1A.o#1. -H97 Lake [.lm.o five. N. - lake [Uo f1-i..nn.. -------------------------------------------------~------------------- _~~~_~~_~~~~~_~~~~:Jl~~-i..~~_~~~_~~!J~~_______~~~~~~~~--_________ --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- FINANCIAL IMPACT (Briefly outline associated. with this request and needed to fund the request) the costs, if any, that are the proposed source of the funds --------~~~-~~~-~~~~~:~!_~~~~~~--------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- -~------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- AD~ITIONAL INFORMATION ATTACHED YES NO _~.J ALL CO~NC!L REQUEST ITEMS ~~~I BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK A MINIMUM OF FIVE WORKING DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED CCUNCIL M~TING IN ORDER TO BE PLACED IN THE COUNCIL MATERIAL PACKET. SUBMITTED BY DATE -------------------------------- e e ~ ~ ,Lp- fl-~ ~ ? ~ 1J..b~~ (j;:J a~7 I";> _ _ ,fi) . ";}..e.,,-,,-, L.? A ~, . ~ -<-' ~ lAALY' ' ; ilKYater ~ ~ -------~ ~ THE 8 I fI T H ~ LAC E 0 F .M INN E SOT A J APPLICATION TO CONSUME Applicant Information Name of- organization Ua~e4 weddi~ pa4~~ ------------------------------------------------- APD I i cant N"",le (Fu 11 ) ___!2::.~~~~)!::'i~~___________________________________ Stt-eet Addr-ess lo>o>-/onh $~. N. Birth Date City__~~~~~~~L~~~~____ Minn. >>082 St ate Zip H,:,me Phone_!.!~:<!..8!!________ W,:n-k Phone Facility Information Park or facility to be used__E~~~_~_e~~_______________ Date to be used_g~~_~_iQ~~___ Time t.;:, be used__6-=.?.=.!~J?~(!~_________ N'.lr,;ber- of' per-s.:,ns ex pect ed_____~~.9~_!~_________________ Purpose(s.:,ftball game, wedding, etc. )__f~--E-"=--i:!J.!:_'31.~~_'!!.~!!-i!Yt._~~~'!Y__ Type of activity(fund r'aiser-, dancing, ,befo-te t-t.ip on flnd<.an.o. muslc, etc.) __________'________ Check Appropriate Information -------- Beer to Cl:,r,s l~lme -------- Beer' to Sell & COY"lsume XXX Wine ~ - COnSIJrl1e -------- l,. I_I ________Liquor to Consume ______~_Liquor to Sell & Consume Wine to Sell & Consume Securi t Y I nformat ion ( I ",t er-na 1 Use On 1 y) P,:,l ice Officer' Req'.lir'ed by City? _______Yes. _XKK___No. Officer Rate of Pay $ Mail License To: (If different than applicant) CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e '.... THE APPLICATION TO CONSUME Applicant Information Name of ot'gani zat ion St-iUwcvtu [lk.4. Clu.b ------------------------------------------------- Apclicant NameCFull) PhU [a4wood St t'eet Addt'ess______2J.3::f.:...!13--t.!:!:~_~~_________ B i t't h Dat e____________ City_~~~~~~~___________ S tat e (1-iYU'f.. Zip__~~oy~_______ Home Phor,e Wod{ Phone t./.1Q- >276 Facility Information Pad.( m' faci 1 i ty to be used_Ei'!..~e::_e.~.!:-.________________ Date to be used_[!!:!!J:..~IJ-z_~<::R~J..1._IQQOrime to be used___:!..:..l!..f!..-_c!:-!!.~~_______ Nunibet' of pet'sons ex pect ed_____j"J____'________________.__ PI_lrpose (soft ball game, weddi ng, et c. ) ____J!....-i:...c_ni:~____________________ Type of activityCfund raiser, dancing, music, etc. ) Check Appropriate Information XXX Beer to Consume ________Liquor to Consume Beer to Sell & Consume ________Liquor to Sell & Consume Wine Wine t .:. Se 1 1 & Co:.nsurne .... - l.. I_I C,:,nsur'le Security InformationClntet'nal Use Only) P.=.lice Officet' Requit'ed by City?_______Yes._KKK___No:,. Officer Rate of Pay S Mail License To: (If different than applicant) e CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e e .... -.. QtHlyv~te~ . THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA i) Pell.t1I.U t.O .U4e p,(,oneell. Pcuk pe~~~o~ ,(,4 hell.eb~ ~ant.ed t.O t.he pa4t.~(4) n4*ed below: [lk'4.lod'fe no. /79, St.Ul wat.eIl. , (1,(,~n. 'D U/t.,(,Yl.'f t.he ho vUd. 0 t: 4:00-c-L04'('YUf o~ t.he da~ ot: R~./8 & Sept.. 8, /990 t.o U4e ~.i.otteell. PM-k, -inc.l.u.d,(,YUf e"c-LU4,(,ue U4e ot t.he p'('CnA.-C 4heUeIl.4, to/r. t.he pU/t.po4e ot: CO/r.~ teed - .deak t/r.~ 'Jh.i..4 pe/f.lll.U doe4 not. ,(,~clu.de t.he COYf,d.UJII.pUO~ ot alchohol.i..c beUeA.atfe4, to/r. wlU.ch a 4epM-at.e pe/r.II/,.U f/r.oll/,. t.he C -U.q CO~/1.CU U /r.etf"-.ued'. 'Jh-iA. pe/t.ll/,.U doe4 ~ot. ~an;t t.he p~ee e"c-Lu.4-i..ue U4e of t.he ent.Vt..e pM-k. P'('CnA.-Cke/f.4 nc.a~ U4e t.able4 o~e t.he 4helZeIl.4. ~ ~.(fl~ 9-oe..L R. I!lekUJII. S~pt.. pa/C.4 (6/214 J9-4)6/ CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e e ...~. , THE APPLICATION TO CONSUME Applicant Information Name .:' f Ctt" 9 a 1'1 i 2: at i on__~~~~~J~~'L~!~~~':._____________________________ Aop 1 i cant Nar,le (FIJll i __2!!:'!::.t!:.t!:.~:!!:!:!!:.~':.e.!___________________________________ St t"eet Addt"ess 11/0-5. 1-td 5.t. Bit"th Date CitY_~~~3~~~___________ State M-i..nn. Zip _!~~~~_______ Home Phor,e 779-2777 Wot"k Phone Facility Information Pat"k ':1]'" faci 1 i ty to be ,.lsed___J!_.i:..o~!!:.'!:..~~.!:-______________ Date to be used_~!:H__/_L.!.'i?..f!..___ Time to be used 1/:10-6:00 P.fI1. Nunibet" of pet"~ons ex pect ed_______!.E__.__~_______________' P ut"pose (soft ba 11 game, wedd i ng, et c. ) ________..e!:=~~_________________ Type of activity(fund raiser, dancing, music, etc. ) Check Appropriate Information xx X Beer to Consume ________Liquor to Consume Beer to Sell & Consume ________Liquor to Sell & Consume Wi rle t ':. C,:.nsume Wine to Sell & Consume Security Information<Intet"nal Use Drily) Po lice Off i cet" Req ui t"ed by Ci t y? _______ Yes. _JKK___N.:.. Officer Rate of Pay $ Mail License To: (If different than applicant) CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e e tft., .. ~iltyv~te~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA i') PeAAU .to -U4e p-ioneeA. PQ,lt.k P~~~o~ -i~ he~eb~ ~an.ted .to .the p~~{~) naMed below: ~ea~ne l~ebkeA., 1110-5. 14.t 5.t, 5.t-i.llwa.te~ 'fj wt--intf .the ho u./r.~ 0 f: /1:10-6:00 P.f'1. o~ .the da~ of: ~dLf I, 1990 .to U4e ~-i.oneeA. pa.t.k, -iAcLud-i..YUf eK.UU4-ilJe U4e of .the p-icn-i.c ~heLteA.~, fo~.the pwt-po~e of: p-icn-i.e 9h.i..~ pe-'U1tU doe~ no.t -incLude .the COn4UJ1tp:Uo~ of aJ...chohoLi..t:. belJeA.atfe~, fo~ wlU.ch a ~epa/t.a.te pe~IIf,U f~ot1l. .the C aq Co~nc.u. .iA. ~eq.u..ued. 9h.iA. pe4/ll.U doe~ no.t ~an.t .the p~ee e"clU4.i.lJe U4e of .the en.t.iA.e. pa/t.k. P-icn-i.ckvc.~ Mal{ U4e .table4 ou-t.4-i.de. .the ~heLteA.~. ~02.63~ ~o e.l. R. I! lekW/f. 5~p.t. pQ,lt.k~ { 6/2fl/.19-l/.S6/ CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 // / . 4t STAFF REQUEST ITEM DEPARTMENT _Z71f1f.!S:~___~~~______ MEETING DATE DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST (8riefly outline what the request is) __~LL,q_6-'::.'l'!.!!ln'li_~-HH,=-._i:LI;;!4-_!df:E:!?_______~~:...SY~.1 ~'.. ~ M # ~~if ___i~.s.Lto-L-L:.E..6-i2.s;1..!JP~___-_-h~l:1~--_LLL~~IU-__-_-6=:-~---- ____________________________~t1~52~__~_~J_9____________~:~---- ______________________________~_j(_~_Ql__~El~~~dt~------_~~~:____ ~ N. '- " .'-- 6t:) ..e- . '\ c.~' .-~ ____________________________J. Llli__~__ _jC~_~~~_6-------~-------- _________~_L2~~~____________~~~~~__I1tlfrl~~____________~~~_____ ____________________________~~_~~_Q_~~L~t?J_~_e~______~~::____ ____________________________~l!_~~~~~_i111:I~j~_______~_~_____ . ~ .-- {/V .- - .ir. ;..,-.i- C/' '. S'- _____----------------------~~---~-8~~----J __~L~________________ Ii '. 0-0 __~~Qi~-~s:-~~-~~-------~~~L~--~1i~~L12-----------~-===---- --------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- FINANCIAL IMPACT (Briefly outline associated with this request and needed to fund the request) the costs, if any, that are the proposed source of the funds u " ^ (:.... 9'.1--t' f'.. _______l~~~-~L~------------------------------------------------- .- --------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------~--------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ATTACHED YES NO 25_ ALL COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS ~~~I BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK A MINIMUM OF FIVE .~KING DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL J'rlEt::TING IN/..DRDER ~BE1PLACED IN THE COUNCIL MA~RIAL ,PACKET. SUBMITTED BY ,~~~~~LL~~~________ DATE ~~~J.:~_-__ e e Memo to: Mayor and Council From: City Coordinator Re: 4th of July Fireworks Date: May 31, 1990 The Freight House is once again paying for the fireworks disolay for the Fc.urth clf July. The City is beil'H~ asked to obtai!'"1 a permit frcllll St. Joe Townshio, purchase insurance for the fireworks (at a cost of $500). ana arovide fire suoDressio~ service at the disolay site at Kc,lli~er ~ia~k. As VOlt know the Citv has do~e ti,is for the cast ~-~ Years. If the Council agrees you should authorize the purchase of Insurance. direct the Fire Chief to obtain the necEssary oermits as well as to provide fire suppression ecuicment and manpower for the fireworks dis- play. ;?/A e e It RESOLUTION NO. AMENDING THE 1990 BUDGET Whereas, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has previously adopted the 1990 Budget for the General Fund; and Whereas, the State of Minnesota has passed a bill cutting the amount of 1990 local government aid by approximately $64,822; and Whereas, it is the desire of the City Council of the City of Stillwater to maintain a balanced budget for the General fund. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota that the following amendments be made to the 1990 General Fund Budget: Expenditures Description $(20,000) $(30,408) $(50,408) Contractual Snow Removal Administrative Assistant Total Revenues $(64,822) L.G.A. Adopted by Council this day of , 1990. Mayor: Attest: City Clerk . ':~ e Memo to: Mayor and Council From: City Coordinator Re: Contracting for part time help Date: May 31,1990 Choc and I have beerl corltacted by Dermy Meyers whc< is irlvc.lved with arl orpanization called Rivertown Ministries CRM). This orqanization works with individuals who are serving sentences fCtr various cri~es and RM tries to prc(vide the individual with meaninqful wor!{ opportunities i~ c~der to gain work experience and to earn some extra money. The indivi- uals who are selected for the program are not considered a risk to the community and are serving sentences for non-violent crimes. RM contracts \o'lith a City or clther c,..'ga,l'"lizatic.l'"'s arid the mClrley goes to RI>1 dii"ectly arid RM then pays the individual. RM would like to receive 56.00 per hour for al'"l'! il'"ldividual that per'for"ms \o'lclrk fc,r the City. This wOl.lld be the e.rlly cost tel the City as RM would be r'esDc<l"lsi ble fOr' benefits arid al'"IY work ..'elated il'"lsl.l"ra'(lce (we presel'"ltly pay Cllxr seascmal Public Works/Par-ok help 56.00 per hour plus Pera/Fica and related insurance costs). 1'(1 tal ki rig to CMclc the'r'e appears tel be at least C<l"le pr'oject that we would be able to use some extra help this summer. The Hazel Steet ravine h'as beel'"l ar, eyesor'e fCrr several years '(ICIW arid il'"l fact Washil'"lqte'l'"1 CCIUl'"lty Public Health Dept. has been asking the City (for some time now) to clean up the ravine. Choc has also been talking to the Minnesota Transp- c<'rtatic<l'"1 Se<ciety tc. obtairl a rail flat car tc< help remove arid transport the debri from the ravine. There is also the possibility of using RM on other projects such as repair/replacement of sidewalks that a~e adjacent to City owned property. Obviously this would only be done if the worker(s possessed the necessary skills. In reviewing the Public Works budget there appears to be at least $10,000 available for temporary or part time help in addition to the help we have already employed. Although I do not believe that we would experld this amc'Lmt c<f mcmey c<rl a cC'Yltract with RM I thirlk there cCluld be a benefit to the City in spending some of the money. The work could be harldled on a prject by project basis which we.uld allow us to evaluate there work. I would recommend that you allow Choc to contract with RM for the Hazel Street project and other projects to be reviewed and approved by you in the future and that the cost for these projects (and other temporary help) not exceed the budget for part-time help. ~~ e STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL trlEET I NG e SPECIAL MEETING: May 8, 1990 7:00 P. M. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Abrahamson. PRESENT: Councilmembers Bodlovick, Opheim, Kimble, Farl"~ell Mayor Abrahamson ABSENT: NCIYle .ALSO PRESENT: City Coordinator Kriesel, City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Russell Recording Secretary Mawhorter PRESS: Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette Sharon Baker, Stillwater Courier B~~!~~_gE_gg~~~~I~_g~_~~~_~B!Q~~ Discussion followed on the new bridge and City Council representation at the Public Hearing for the Stillwater-Houlton River Crossing. Councilmember Opheim and Councilmember Kimble were directed to attend the hearing and present Council views. Councilmember Opheim was also directed to present information to the public on the various alternative locations, elevations, grading, access, and environmental impacts. A statement will be prepared by the City of Stillwater, with a follow-up by written comments, and a resolution, reserving detailed comments for a written comment period. Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to send out a formal press release containing the City's policy regarding the need for and desired location of the new bridge. (All iYI favol"~.) ~e~g!8b_8~~~~~~~~I_egb!gy City Coordinator Kriesel presented the Special Assessment Policy Considerations to Councilmembers for discussion. Mr. Kriesel's discussion estimated the impact that the $45 a front foot assessment for street reconstruction would have on property taxes. The tax levy could run as high as $1,543,780 per yeal"~. It The City of Stillwater would have to levy in order to repay the Debt Service. The policy presented by Mr. Kriesel shall be consistently applied to all street reconstruction projects. Stillwater City Council Me ting Special Meet irlg Page 2 Members agreed to r view the information and requested further information in orde~ to determine the level of street improvements needed along with the level of maintenance necessary to preser e the existing streets. Members will also s to be completed pav at a later date to improvements and as udy the information contained in the soon ment management study and have a workshop onsider all factors related to street essmerlt s. ~~b~~BBY~E~~B~~B~~_8~Q_~Ib 18~_EIB~~I_e~~bI~_~~8BI~8_Q8I~,b~I_g~1 No action was taken on the possible date for continuation of the Public Hearing or L.I. 254, Mulberry, Sherburne and William Streets. Th"s will be reviewed after the workshop on assessments for str et improvement projects. ~8bQ_~88b~_~8I~B_E~I_E~Q~ Motion by Councilmember Bo lovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell, to approve the Bald Eagle ater Ski Show on July 28, 1990 (Lumberjack Days). (All irl favc,r.) QI~~B_~~EI~~EE Councilmember Bodlo ick discussed a request from Barb O'Neil, Oak Park City Counc" I, for Stillwater City Council representation at a meeting with Washington County and Oak Park Heights regard"ng new County facilities on May 17, 1990 at 6:00 p.m. Discus ion followed and members agreed Community Development Directo Russell would attend the meeting. City Administrator flight to Albert Le May 22, 1990. 8QJ:Q~B~~~~I riesel reminded members of the helicopter to visit a new armory, scheduled for Motion by Councilmember Bo lovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell, to adjc1urrl the meetirlg at 7:15 p.m. (All irl favc'r.) -------------------------- C i t Y C I el"~ k ------------------------------ Maycll"~ e e e' e ~ REGULAR MEETING STILLWATER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES May 15, 1990 7: 00 P. M. The Meeting was called to order by Mayor Abrahamson. Present: Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Kimble, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Absent: None Also Present: City Coordinator Kriesel City Attorney Magnuson Finance Director Deblon Consulting Engineer Moore Comm. Dev. Director Russell Parks Director Blekum Public Works Director Junker Public Safety Director Mawhorter City Clerk Johnson Press: Julie Kink, The Courier Mike Marsnik, Stillwater Gazette Others: Stella Casanova, Emery Barrette, Denny Sullivan, R. Cummings, Ken Duneman, Gene Hennig. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - Motion by Councilmember Opheim, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of April 30, 1990 and the Regular and Recessed Meetings of May 1, 1990. (All in favor). STAFF REPORTS 1. Parks Director - Permits to Consume Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to approve the Permit to Consume for the Hage party at Pioneer Park on May 19, 1990. (All in favor). Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to approve the Permit to Consume for the Downtown Council (Taste of the Valley) on June 9 and 10, 1990 in Lowell Park. (All in favor). . Motion by Councilmember Farrell, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to approve the Permit to Consume for the Gerald Johnson picnic at Pioneer Park on June 17, 1990. (All in favor). 1 Stillwater City Council Mi utes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 'e Motion by Councilmember Bo lovick, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to approve the Permit to Consume for he Aronson family picnic at Pioneer Park on August 11, 1990. (All in favor). Motion by Councilmember Fa rell, seconded by Council member Opheim to approve the Permit to Consume for he Mozey wedding party at Pioneer Park on Sept. 1, 1990. (All in favor). 2. Finance Director - Fire Relief Ass'n. Inv stments Motion y Counc1lmem er Bo OV1C , seconded by Councilmember Opheim to notify the Fire Relief Ass'n. tha Council possibly may not approve their funding request in the future if f nds are not wisely invested. (Ayes - 4; Nays - 0; Abstain - 1, Councilmember Kimble). 3. Farrell to approve for the Public Works 4. report. 5. Public Safety Director - August Concerts 1n Low r. Maw orter presente stating concerns regarding Police protection for the Aug st concerts in the park, for which funds have not been provided in the b dget. Councilmember Opheim will meet with Mr. Mawhorter to work out policy regarding this situation. U date on Downtown Par ing - Han 1cappe Par 1ng Motion by Councilmember Bo lovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to adopt the appropriate resolution allowing handicapped identified vehicles to park for any duration of time in any 1 imi ted time zone area in the downtown with the exception of employee permit zones. (Resolution No. 8283) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Kimble, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 2 e ec Stillwater City Council Minutes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 Council discussed the request of the Parking Task Force to extend Permit Parking to Saturdays and the decision was to continue as is (Monday through Friday) because valuable parking space will be lost. . Persons living in the Downtown Area have complained regarding the parking situation. They will be advised to purchase a permit and park in Permit Parking areas. Council advised that persons may purchase a permit for more than one month but not beyond December 31, 1990. Council discussed the number of permits which shall be sold and decided to sell as many as requested and to monitor permit vs. non-permit parking availability. Business persons on the north end of town stated they have been left out of the parking plan. This will be monitored for further action. Councilmember Bodlovick expressed concern regarding a tree which is decreasing visibility at the intersection of Pine St. and County Road 5. This will be reviewed for possible action. Request to film Commercial in Downtown Council discussed the request of Departure Films to film a commercial on Chestnut St. in the Downtown Area. Council decision is to deny the request because of an unreasonable demand on traffic control and it will not be of benefit to the City. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Update on Oak Glen. Council presented a statement from the Oak Glen Negotia~ing Committee which included a history of the formation of the committee, identification of various concerns for developing a proposal (interests of the City, i.e. payment of delinquent taxes, development of a future plan for development; and concerns of various debtors and neighbors.) They also stated the Committee is very close to recommending a solution for the problem and hope to present this proposal at the June 5, 1990 Council Meeting. A letter was received from Gene Hennig, Attorney for the Oak Glen Homeowners Ass'n., requesting to meet with the Negotiating Committee. Council advised the Homeowner's Ass'n. that a meeting will not be held at this time because it might jeopardize the process of negotiation. Emery Barrette, Chairman of the committee representing the Homeowners, introduced Mr. Hennig, who stated the concerns of the Homeowner's Ass'n. and again requested a meeting with the Committee. Council advised these e 3 ~ Stillwater City Council inutes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 e concerns have been p esented previously and again stated they are close to presenting a proposa and will probably do so on June 5. 2. Director Russell presented the proposal of Cub Foods ir parking area in the Downtown which would help to se times at an approximate fee of $3,000 per year. cost could be deferred by special events in Lowell es. Motion by Councilmember arrell, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to approve the agreement with Cub F ods for use of the Cub employee parking lot during non-use times for $3,000 maximum, per year. (All in favor). 3. Motion by Councilmember arrell, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to approve the On-site Sewe Permit for single Family residence for Browns Creek Heights Addition, 2008 H zel Ct., Block 1, Lot 8, Craig and Sharon Locey, Applicants, including th three conditions, i.e. maximum of three bedrooms, final plans to be review d by the Building Dept. and denial of the variance for alternative well sys em. (All in favor). Discussion followed regarding the extension of a arainage pipe which can be constructed if it does not occur on the City easement. 4. Possible second reading of Ordinan~e amending the Precinct boundaries to lnc ude annexe pro rtles. Motion y Councllmember arrell, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to have a second reading and enactnent of an Ordinance adding annexed property to Election Precincts withi the City of Stillwater. (Ordinance No. 725) Ayes - Councilmembers Bo lovick, Farrell, Kimble, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 5. Re ort and Recommen ation of Downtown Plan Action Committee regardin Downtown Ca ltal Facllltles Program. Comm. Dev. Dlrector Russe presented a report on recommendation for approval of the Downtown Capital Facilities Program and stated that an 4 e e Stillwater City Council Minutes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 informational hearing will be held on June 5, 1990 regarding the Program, with the possibility of setting an Improvement Hearing for June 26 for reconstruction of streets and utilities. 6. Acceptance of Proposal to install and approval of Agreement to Pay for sewer line at 2600 Wildpines Lane. Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Kimble to approve the agreement between Vern Hill, Wildpines Lane, and the City of Stillwater regarding the construction of a sewer service. (All in favor). INDIVIDUAL AND DELEGATIONS (Continued) 1. Ken Duneman - Request for Temporary Special Use Permit, Popcorn Wagon. Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to approve a temporary permit for Ken Duneman to operate a vending business from a popcorn wagon east of the Commander Elevator, subject to conditions, until the public hearing on June 5, 1990. (All in favor). Council recessed for ten minutes and reconvened at 8:48 P.M. NEW BUSINESS 1. Possible Bid Award for Mechanical Maintenance for City Hall and Library buildings. Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to adopt the appropriate resolution approving the bid award for Mechanical Maintenance for City Hall and Library buildings for Equipment Supply, Inc. (Resolution No. 8284) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Kimble, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 2. Possible first reading of Ordinance regulating the possession, discharge & sale of weapons. City Attorney Magnuson explained the background on this proposed ordinance. Council discussed the elimination pf the words "and sale" from the title since it is listed as an exception. Motion by Councilmember Kimble, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to have a first reading of an ordinance, by title, regulating the possession and discharge of weapons. (All in favor). 3. Review & possible approval of "Request for Banner & Waiver" and "Authorization & Release" forms relating to banners being hung in Downtown a rea. Council discussed the forms and dropped the word "waiver" since that portion has been dropped from the form. e 5 Stillwater City Council Mi utes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 e Motion by Councilmember Bo lovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to approve IIRequest for Banne II and IIAuthorization & Releasell forms as drafted by the City"Attorney. (All i "favor). CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilmember Bo lovick, seconded by Councilmember Farrell to approve the Consent Agenda of May 15, 1990 including the following: (All in favor) . 1. Directing Payment of Bllls (Resolution No. 8282). Ayes - Councllmem ers Bo V1C; arre , Klmble, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson. Nays - None 2. The following Contract r's Licenses. The Glertsen Co. Genera Contractor New 14105 13th Ave. No. Plymouth, Mn. 55441 David Lee Hendrickson 5969 Stagecoach Trail Stillwater, Mn. 55082 General Contractor New Horak, Inc. 244 So. 4th St. Bayport, Mn. 55003 Bldg. Demolition Tree Trimmers Renewal Chris Peters Construction 2629 Greenmeadow Ct. Stillwater, Mn. 55082 General Contractor New St. Croix Valley Improve. o. P.O. Box 201 Stillwater, Mn. 55082 General Contractor Renewal Bill Wolfe Excavating, Inc Excavators New 15567 Jeffrey Ave. No. Hugo, Mn. 55038 3. Set Public Hearing Dat of June 5, 1990 for the following Planning Cases: a. CASE NO. SUB/90-22 A minor subdivision of a 32,005 square foot lot (Lots 7, 4 and 5, P terson's Addition) into two lots of 10,000 square feet (Lot 7) and 22 005 square feet (Lots 2 and 3) at 1911 West Pine Street in the RA, S ngle Family Residential District. Dorothy Gerson, Applicant. b. CASE NO. SUB/90-23 A major subdivision of three lots consisting of 21,750, 21,750, and 43,500 square feet into four lots, all of which will consist of 21, 50 square feet on Poplar Street between North Fifth 6 e e Stillwater City Council Minutes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 Street and North Everett Street in the RA, Single Family Residential District. Larry Dauffenbach, Applicant. c. CASE NO. SUP/90-24 - A Special Use Permit to construct a 31,086 square foot Auto Service and Retail Service Mallon the Northeast corner of Tuenge Drive and 60th Street North in the IP-C Industrial Park-Commercial District. Marco Construction, Applicant. d. CASE NO. SUP/90-25 - A Special Use Permit to conduct a five bedroom Bed and Breakfast establishment at 319 West Pine Street in the RCM, Multi-Family Residential District. Bruce and Vikki Brillhart, Applicants. e. CASE NO. SUP/90-26 - A Special Use Permit to conduct a temporary food vending business out of a popcorn wagon East of the Commander Elevator on private property along Nelson Street in the CBD, Central Business District. Kenneth Duneman, Applicant. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS Discussion of Street Vacation approved for Jerry Cadwell/John Doyle and Pedestrian Easement Council received a petition from the residents in the area of South Grove St. regarding a request for a sidewalk on Pine St. because of elimination of an easement for children to walk to Lily Lake School. The resident granted the vacation of the street will be contacted to discuss passage to Lily Lake School in the area of the previ ous easement. Council Discussion of Various Items Council discussed the request o"f the St. Croix Valley Rowing Club for use of Kolliner Park. The Club will be responsible for securing all permits, (from St. Joseph's Township, etc.) Discussion also involved Legislative action regarding campaign lawn signs, and recent cuts in local government aids. STAFF REPORTS (Continued) City Coordinator Mr. Kriesel updated Council on the cuts in Local Government Aid which will amount to $64,000 for 1990 and approximately $68,000 in 1991 and the appropriate reductions will be made (possibly from Public Works and Administration). This will be reviewed during the budget process. City C 1 e rk - Certification of Changes made by Board of Review Motion by Councilmember Bodlovick, seconded by Councilmember Opheim to adopt the appropriate resolution accepting changes correcting the assessment of certain real estate as recommended by the Board of Review. (Resolution No. 8285) Ayes - Councilmembers Bodlovick, Farrell, Kimble, Opheim and Mayor Abrahamson Nays - None e 7 Stillwater City Council inutes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 e Ci ty Attorney - Kro stad Develo ment Agreement Motion y Councllmember arrell, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to approve the Development greement between the City of Stillwater and James and Elaine Krogstad for cons ruction of public improvements. (All in favor). Meeting with Maxine enson regarding Annexation Motion y Counc1lmern er 0 oV1ck, secon e by Councilmember Kimble to approve Staff, acting as represe tatives of Council, to meet with Maxine Benson regarding annexation of he Benson property. (All in favor). City Engineer Cotta es of Stillwat r, Phase III, L.I. 256 - Alignment of Sewer Line Mr. Moore up ate Co nC1 on the construct10n 0 the temporary 1ft station. The City h d been granted an easement across several parcels for construction of a gr vity sewer. Heritage Development presented a plan that requested a cha ge from the original alignment. Since then, Heritage is no longer the dev loper. Mr. Moore asked for Council direction on the alignment of the sew r line. Motion by Councilmember imble, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick authorizing the City Eng.neer to draft a change order regarding the alignment of the sanitary sewer for Cottages of Stillwater, Phase III, L.I. 256 to the original plan. (All in favor). City Attorney - Possible Meeting wi h County and Oak Park Heights Staff regardin Courthouse Ex anS10n Motion y Counc1lmember pheim, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to authorize the City Attorney and Community Development Director to meet with the Washington County Board of Commissioners and Oak Park Heights Staff to resolve problems regarding County Courthouse expansion. (All in favor). COMMUNICATIONS/REQUESTS 1. Re ort from Washin on County regardin increase in ti ing fees. No act10n ta en. 2. ters or 8 e e" e . Stillwater City Council Minutes Regular Meeting May 15, 1990 3. Letter from Ernst & Young regarding changes to Minnesota Local Government Pay Equi ty Law. This was for informational purposes only. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Farrell, seconded by Councilmember Bodlovick to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 P.M. (All in favor). MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK Resolutions: No. 8282 - Directing Payment of Bills. No. 8283 - Authorizing Handicapped Parking in Time Limited Zones. No. 8284 - Award of Bid for Mechanical Maintenance for City Hall/Library Bldgs. No. 8285 - Accepting changes as recommended by Board of Review. Ordinances: No. 725 - Extending Precinct Boundaries to include annexed properties. 9 e Report and Recommendations of Oak Glen Negotiating Committee To: Mayor and City Council Date: June 5, 1990 For the last two and one-half months the Negotiating Committee has engaged, either directly or through its representatives, in the following activities: (a) collection of additional information concerning the Oak Glen Development and financial matters relating thereto; (b) discussions and negotiations with the Oak Glen Development Company (the Developer); (c) discussions with various other Developer creditors, including the first and second mortgage holders; (d) discussions with various real estate developers who have expressed an interest in purchasing all or part of the remaining property of the Oak Glen Development; and (e) collection of additional information and discussions relating to the Oak Glen Golf Course. Based upon these activities the Negotiation Committee has reached the conclusion that the purchase of the Oak Glen golf course by the City at a price in the $4.5 to $4.75 million range would be financially feasible and beneficial to the City, but an agreement to purchase the golf course for this price through negotiation is not feasible. As an alternative to the purchase of the golf course by the City and the sale of the residential real estate to one or more other developers at "wholesale" or "block" prices, the Developer submitted to the Negotiation Committee an alternate proposal described in the attached Memorandum dated May 14, 1990 (the Developer's Proposal). The Negotiating Committee has reviewed the Developer's Proposal and the actions that would have to be taken or permitted by the, City and others for the Developer to implement it, and has requested that the Developer, together with City consultants, meet with and attempt to obtain from other parties necessarily involved, their agreement to do what would be required of them to permit the Developer to proceed. Much of this work has been done, although some more work will have to be done to proceed with implementation of the Developer's Proposal. A discussion of the most important elements of the Developer's proposal follows: A. Sale of Townhome Lots. A Purchase Agreement has been entered into between the Developer and Bruggeman Construction Co. for the sale of 67 of the remaining 70 townhome lots. The parties would like to close this sale following the June 19 Council meeting. Items to be accomplished or agreed to prior to or at closing are: e (1) Approval of replat of area to be purchased (or that part of it on which building will commence). Work is proceeding to get necessary Planning Commission and Council land use, utility, building permit and other similar type approvals. The Planning Commission meets June 11. (2) Release of first and second mortgages. e (3) Payment of delinquent taxes and special assessments on 16 lot area on which townhome model will be built and which will be built out and sold first. Future special assessment installments would be due on sale. (4) The City would waive any requirement that delinquent taxes and special assessments on the other 51 lots would have to be paid at closing, but has advised Bruggeman that state property laws may require payment to avoid loss of right of redemption in 1992. In return Bruggeman Construction Co. and Homer Bruggeman would enter into agreements guarantying payment of all taxes and special assessments by specified dates or upon the occurrence of specified events. The Developer, but not necessarily the individual guarantors, would be released from its promise to pay these taxes and special assessments. (5) Mr. Bruggeman estimates that his investment in the project through September 15 will be $250,000 (land, utility adjustments, planning, construction of sales model and delinquent taxes and assessments) (6) Moneys received by the Developer ($47,000) from the sale would be paid to the IDB bond trustee. (7) The other 3 townhome lots would be retained and developed by the Developer or sold to another developer. B. Sale of Single Family Lots (Brown's Creed). A new Purchase Agreement has been entered into between the Developer and u.S. Home Corporation for the sale of not less than 110 nor more than 119 single family lots in the Brown's Creek Area of Oak Glen. There are presently 118 lots left which are not sold subject to a purchase agreement, and the Developer is free to sell up to 8 more in the open market prior to the closing. Items to be accomplished or agreed to prior to or at closing are: (1) Approval by home office and financing source which could take up to 10 days. (2) Release of first and second mortgages. (3) The construction of the Neal Avenue extension on an acceptable schedule. See City Engineer and County letters attached which provide an acceptable schedule. U.S. Homes does not want to be specially assessed for McKusik Road or Neal Avenue and they have been told that under the City's normal assessment pOlicies the City does not expect to assess them. The southerly portion of Neal Avenue now in existence was built and paid for by the Developer. e (4) All delinquent taxes and special assessments and all remaining special assessments on these lots will be paid at closing by u.S. Homes (approximately $1,765,000 special assessments, plus $50,000 in City taxes). e C. Release of Mortgages. (1) First Mortgage. The IDB bond trustee is willing its release of its first mortgage on the lots to be sold to Bruggeman Construction and u.s. Homes, and to defer foreclosure of its mortgage on the balance of the lots and the golf course, as outlined in the enclosed letter from Best & Flanagan. The Developer does not have moneys needed to pay the taxes due on the golf course through 1990, and it has been suggested by Best & Flanagan that a promise by the City to advance funds for this purpose ($175,000 plus $78,000) if necessary, upon the closing of hQth lot sales, would suffice. The City, if necessary, would advance the funds to the IDB bond trustee who would use them to pay taxes due and past due on the golf course. This amount would be added to the first mortgage and repaid to the City with interest upon foreclosure, after payment of other amounts due on the first mortgage. Currently $3,000,000 of principal is due, but interest and fees have been paid and are expected to continue to be paid. Of course, if both lot sales close the City will receive the better part of $1,900,000 in special assessments and taxes. Further, if the golf course refinancing can be completed at or prior to the U.S. Homes lot sale, the City will not have to provide funds for this purpose. (2) Second Mortgage. The holders of the second mortgage of $1,650,000 which has been negotiated down to $650,000 have agreed to release their lien on the lots to be sold to Bruggeman Construction and U.S. Homes on the basis of the enclosed letter from Quentin Heimerman. D. Refinancing of Golf Course. The Developer proposes to refinance the golf course with $3,250,000 taxable, first mortgage IDB refunding bonds issued by the City, or with private mortgage financing. In either event, no City money or credit pledge would be involved. We have received commitment letters from Bank One Leasing Corporation expressing their willingness to do the refinancing, but this commitment is subject to home office credit review. To insure that the refinancing is done on a timely basis and at a competitive rate the Developer is also discussing it with another financing source which has also expressed considerable interest. In order for the refinancing to occur the delinquent and current taxes on the golf course would have to be paid in full, thus removing the City's obligation to pay the taxes if accepted as outlined above or, if already paid, resulting in reimbursement to the City. e Discussions with financing sources indicate that the refinancing can be done, debt schedules prepared using a taxable rate of interest and previous golf course studies and revenue projections also indicate that it can be done. . Committee Recommendations Based upon the information collected and the discussions held by the Negotiating Committee, the written commitments secured by the Developer, and commitments made by others which will be reduced to writing before the transactions described above can or will proceed, the Negotiating Committee recommends that the City Council approve in principle the Developer's proposal and authorize its implementation. The. adoption of the enclosed resolution would accomplish this. In summary, this would commit the City to the following: A. Bruggeman Construction Company Lot Sale. Expeditious handling of all platting, utility, construction permit and other similar matters, waiver of the City's right to collect all special assessments on sale to Bruggeman, acceptance of Bruggeman guarantees, and negotiations with Developer on release of certain guarantees. B. u.S. Homes Lot Sale. Cooperation with Washington County in McKusick Road and Neal Avenue projects so as to insure completion in 1992, and providing funding for City's share of these projects without specially assessing Brown's Creek Area of Oak Glen. C. First Mortgage Release. The City would agree to provide funds to pay all 1990 and prior year's taxes on the golf course only, upon closing of both lot sales described above. These funds plus interest would be subject to repayment with interest upon foreclosure of the first mortgage (after first mortgagee's debt) and out of refinancing if done after u.s. Homes lot sale closes. D. IDB Bond Refinancing. The City would asist the Developer in refunding its outstanding $3,000,000 of IDB bonds. The City would act as a conduit only. No City taxes or credit pledge would be involved. e e r illwater '~ --~ -- -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DATE: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JUNE 1, 1990 SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN CAPITAL FACILITIES PROJECT. BACKGROUND: The purpose for this meeting is to receive the Downtown Plan Implementation Committee recommendation on the Downtown Capital Facilities Program, to provide the opportunity for additional public comment and to approve the project feasibility study for Phase I improvements and set it for public hearing June 26 (special meeting). . Since the Council workshop with the Downtown Plan Implementation Committee March 22, the Committee has presented the Downtown Improvement Program at six meetings to over 150 interested property owners, business owners and residents. Based on the Committee input from the meetings, some changes have been made in the Improvement Program as outlined in the attached memo from the Downtown Plan Action Committee (May 9, 1990). The memo includes a summary of the comments received at the meetings and new improvement phasing. The Feasibil ity Study for Downtown improvements will be presented by SEH at meeting time. With Council approval of the Feasibility Study, a special Council meeting can be scheduled for June 26, 1990. This meeting is the required Public Improvement Hearing under Section 429. For this meeting, all affected Downtown property owners will be ~rovided with preliminary assessment information. RECOMMENDATION: Consideration and approval of Downtown Plan Action Committee recommendations on Capital Facilities Program, approval of Phase I Feasibility Study for Downtown Improvement and set June 26, 1990 as date for Public Improvement Hearing. (Resolution) e CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 MARK DESCH PO BOX 82 STILL WATER, MN 55082 Office - (612) 439-7098 Home - (612) 439-9479 e May 30, 1990 Mayer and City Council City of Stillwater 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Re: Downtown Plan Phase I Dear Mayor and City Council: The Downtown Plan Action Committee has recently held a public meeting to explain the Downtown Capital Facilities Program for improving the Down- town area. The plan submitted is divided into six phases with implementation starting in the summer of 1991. Phase I includes necessary improvements to the infrastructure and public utilities, primarily south of Mulberry Street. Phase II includes improvements to lighting and sidewalks on North Main. The proposed plan indicates that the primary method of financing for Phase I, be an assesment to all property owners in the Downtown District based on a square footage basis. The cost is approximately 85 cents per square foot. This basis puts a large assessment on those properties that provide on sight parking. These properties are primarily on North Main .Street. As a compromise to the proposed plan, I would suggest that Phase I and Phase II be combined. Also, since the project includes putting in new sidewalks, the removal of overhead powerlines first would be more cost effective if done now versus sometime in the future. By removing the overhead power lines it will greatly improve the North Main appearance and allow the development that is occurring on North Main to progress without the nuisance of antiquated utilities. It is my hope that the council will give consideration to this request when making a decision on the Downtown Plan. Sincerely, ~U~ p1 Mark Desch ~ e Street TO: r illwater ~ ----~ ~ -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL e FROM: DOWNTOWN PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE DATE: MAY 9, 1990 SUBJECT: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF DOWNTOWN CAPITAL FACILITIES PROGRAM. BACKGROUND: On March 22nd the City Council and Downtown Plan Action Committee held a workshop on the Downtown Capital Facility Program. At that meeting, the City Council reviewed and commented on the Capital Facilities Program, approved the the Capital Facilities Program for presentation by the Downtown Plan Action Committee to the community, directed that an area assessment approach be used to develop property assessments and set June 5, 1990 as the public hearing, date on the Downtown Capital Facilities Program Feasibility Report. Since the workshop, the Downtown Improvement Program has been presented to the Chamber of Commerce/Downtown Business Association Workshop on April 5th, Lions Club April 24th, Planning Commission April 9th, Heritage Preservation Commission April 16th and on April 24th a public hearing was held by the Downtown Plan Action Committee. The Public Hearing meeting notice was published in the paper and all Downtown property owners received notice. From the five meetings, a total of 150 residents and business property owners were presented the program. A summary of comments received at the meeting is listed below. MEET! NGS : e April 5 - Chamber of Commerce/Downtown Business Association Comments received: - When will construction occur? - How will the street construction affect business? - Concern for the area/square foot approach. - Cost impact on large property owners (Maple Island, Cub Foods, Desch Property). . April 9 - Planning Commission - Recommended approval of Capital Facilities Program. April 16 - Heritage Preservation Commission - Recommended approval to the City Council. April 24 - Public Meeting - City Hall Comments received: - Should there be underground utilities on all Downtown streets when they are torn up? - In particular, overhead utilities along Main Street from Mulberry to Elm should be undergrounded. - The United Building Center lot should be considered for the parking structure because it is more convenient to Main Street. - Concern for area assessment approach on large property owners. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 1 - Businesses t at provide parking area being penalized because they have more ar a to assess. - North Main S reet improvements should be constructed with new ~ development. - Drainage imp ct on Zephyr site from Elm Street. - Feasibility f closing Nelson access for pedestrian pathway. should be a art of Phase I and not a separate Phase II. - A pedestrian crossing at Chestnut and Water Streets should be provided in he improvement plan to make it more convenient to move north a d south along Water Street. - North Main S reet overhead utility lines should be underground in Phase I. - What are Cit residents paying for the Downtown improvements? - Concern for combined driveway access to Village Shop and restaurants. - General City taxpayers benefit from Downtown improvement and should pay a share of the costs. April 4, 1990 - Lion Club Comments/Question : - How will the plan affect existing business Downtown? - When will co struction begin? - Why aren't all utilities undergrounded? We should do so now. - Are State fu ds available to help with improvements in Lowell Park? A good representation fr m Downtown property/business owners attended the meetings and commented 0 the Capital Facilities Program. In response to the pub1i comments, the Downtown Plan Action Committee are recommending some additi ns to the improvement program and changes to phasing. CAPITAL FACILITIES PROGR M CHANGES: UNDERGROUND UTILITIES Several North Main Stree property owners strongly recommended that overhead utilities between Mu1ber y and Elm Street be placed undergrounded during the first phase improvements. They pointed out that new development is occurring along North Main {office building, train depot} and that as a part of street improvements, overhead u i1ities should be undergrounded. They n~ntioned TIF funds from North Main St eet new development could be used to pay the extra cost. The original plans inc1u ed undergrounding utilities along Water Street from Nelson to Chestnut. It i recommended that, as a part of first phase improvements, undergroun ing be continued along Water to Myrtle, and along Main Street from Mu1berr to Elm Street. It is estimated that the addition would add $300,000 to $3 0,000 to the project. RECOMMENDATION: That utilities along Water Street from Chestnut to t1Yrt1e and North Main Street betwee MUlberry and Elm be undergrounded as part of first phase improvements. WATER STREET PEDESTRIAN AY Property owners a ong Wa er Street reviewed the pedestrian walkway plan and ~ thought it would be a go d improvement for the area. The walkway design has been changed to provide irect driveway access from Water Street to the rear of the McGarry Building. When the construction plans for the walkway are 2 prepared they will have to be reviewed with individual property owners to make sure rear loading areas work. e RECOMMENDATION: Extend parking area driveway directly to Water Street by removing a portion of pedestrian accessway. PHASING OF IMPROVEMENTS The Capital Facilities Program presented at the March workshop contained six phases. Phase I, Existing Infrastructure, Phase II, Entry lmprovements and North Main, Phase III, Lowell Park South, Phase IV, Lowell Park North, Phase V, Plazas, Phase VI, Parking ramp. Based on comments received regarding the length of time to complete the Downtown improvements and updated TIF revenue projects. The Downtown Plan Action Committee recommends combining the six phases into three phases. New Phase I (Infrastructure North and South Main) would replace old Phase I and II. New Phase II (Lowell Park North and South) combines old Phase III, IV and V. The parking ramp would be Phase III. In terms of scheduling improvements, the Committee recommends Phase I improvements for 1991 and Phase II and III for 1992 if the funds are available. RECOMMENDATION: Combine old Phase I and II as new Phase I, old Phase III, IV and V as new Phase II, and Phase III parking structure. FINANCING The Committee recommends assessing 75% of the assessable costs ($1,921,389) to benefiting property owners on an area basis. This results in a cost of approximately 85~ per square foot-or-land in the improvement district. The assessable cost paid for by Downtown property owners represents 18% of the total Downtown Improvement Program costs. It is recommended that TIF bonds for $2.0 to 2.5 million be sold to finance the non-assessable cost. This amount is currently supported by TIF revenues. 1990 IMPROVEMENTS To begin implementing the Downtown Plan, the Downtown Plan Action Committee recommends that the City proceed with the following projects this year. 1. Make Mulberry Street water main improvements as required by the office building currently being construction. ($10,000) 2. Purchase Mulberry Point from the railroad for an extension of Lowell Park (estimated $150,000). 3. Remove the house from parking site located at corner of Second Street and Mulberry and minimally improve the site for parking ($10,000). 4. Remove MnDOT building and clear site for parking ($15,000). 5. Sponsor, along with Downtown Business Groups, a competition for new Downtown signage (new signage to be constructed as Phase I improvement). e PARKING IMPROVEMENTS To address the parking supply problem it is suggested the City form a Parking Improvement District be formed to provide a method for benefiting property owners to pay for new parking lot improvements (MnDOT, Lind, Lowell Inn, Desch). Using this approach, City lots could be.improved and needed spaces added to the supply as a part of 1991, Phase I construction. 3 SCHEDULING A public hearing is scheduled for the Council meeting of June 5th on the Downtown Capital Facili ies Program. At that meeting, the Feasibility Study can be modified and app oved and a public improvement hearing set for June 26th (special meeting). COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED: No action required. e This report and recommendation of the Downtown Plan Action Committee can be considered at the Council hearing June 5th on the Downtown Capital Facilities Program. ATTACHMENTS It 4 -'.1. . · .. :~. \:/ .. ~:.;i :J' :~. '. h :'oJ :/ ., " j ., :J -.... ~...- STlLLIIATER, MIIIIIESOTA STlLLIIATER DO\INTO\III PI/ASIIIG SEI/ FILE NO. 89255 PHASE I . EXISTIIIG IIIFRASTRUCTURE STREETS STORM SEIlER IIATERMAIII SAIIITARY SEilER LIGHTING (ASSESS 15X) ...) ~ (IIEST OF MAIN) :lJ":jI' (SOOTH OF IIELSOII TO MULBERRY) ~T.V. SEllERS AND fLOOD PROOF REVIEII q STREETSCAPE PARKIIIG LOTS (PARKING DISTRICT) \. < \ . PI!ASE II . EIITRY IMPROVEMEIITS AIID 1I0RTI! MAIN 1I0RTH MAIN STREETSCAPE HORTH MAIN LIGI!TI>>G (ASSESSED; 15X) IIARDEN'S HOOSE IIALL ENTRY SIGN RR TREATMENT SIGNAGE LANDSCAPING BLUfF AREA LANDSCAPING e ......,.. _ _...h......._....._._... OO\lNTO\III PLAN 15-Har-90 . ~l! !/1 RECOIISTRUCT STREETS, PATCn UTILITY TRENCnES, OVERLAY, IIEII CURBS & GUTTERS, DECORATIVE IIAU:S. CONSTRUCT IIEII STORM,SEIIER MAIllS AIID STUDS fOR CLEAR IIATER, AND PROVIDE STUDS fROH EXISTIIIG MAillS REPLACE OLD IIATERHAIIIS, REPLACE GATE VALVES, AIID REPLACE liON COPPER SERVICES. REHAB ALL HANHOLES, CONSTRUCT IIEII MAllnOLES, REPLACE CRACKED AND COLLAPSED PIPE. fOR CLEAR \lATER COIINECTIONS. CONSTRUCT ROADIIAY AIID DECORATIVE L1GnTING. CONSTRUCT ROADIIAY AND DECORATIVE LIGHTING. TELEVISE SANITARY SEllERS TO DETERMINE IIEED fOR REPAIRS/REPLACEMENT AND REVIEII fLOOD PROOFING. LANDSCAPE TREES AND TREE GRATES ON SIDE STREETS. INSTALL COI/CRETE CURB & GUTTERS, OVERLAY AND INSTALL DECORATIVE L1G/ITS. ; ;. CONSTRUCT CONCRETE IIALK, SHRUBS, ORNAMEIITAL.TREES, AND SOODIIIG ALOIIG EAST SIDE NORTH OF MULBERRY. COIISTRUCT ROADIIAY AND DECORATIVE LIGHTIIIG NORT" Of MULBERRY. REPLACE EXISTING RETAINING IIALL ALOIIG IIARDEII 1!00SE SIDEIIALK. CONSTRUCT 6 X 10 ENTRY SIGN AT NORTI! AND SOOTH ENDS OF CITY. LANDSCAPE AREA ALONG \lEST SIDE OF RAILROAD TRACKS FROH BOAT PLAZA TO MULBERRY POINT INCLUDING RR CROSSINGS LA'/DSCAPE ARoo/lD ENTRY SIGNS. LANDSCAPE BLUFF AREA SooTI! OF CITY IIITI! ORNAMEIlTAL TREES, SIIRUBS, AIID ACCEIIT LIGHTING. e . !! ;." l'.~ . .:i"! tf' .- -- ..,.. D~NT~N PLAN 15-Hor-90 : STllLUATER, HINNESOTA ; STILLUATER D~NT~N PHASING . SEll filE NO. 89255 : I PHASE II r . L~.Ell PARK SOUTII C":~::l PARK (S0011l, ~.. u.t-LEVEE UALL (SOUTH) ~I'M" BOAT PLAZA ~ BRICK ALLEY PEDESTRAIN RAMP LAlIDSCAPING, DECORATIVE LIGHTING AND UALKS fR~ NELSON STREET TO CIIESTNUT. RECONSTRUCT EXISTING lEVEE UALL SOUTH OF CHESNUT AND CONSTRUCT EXTENSION TO BOAT PLAZA lANDSCAPING, RETAINING .UAllS, DECORATIVE UALKS AND UROUGIIT IRON FENCING AT BAOT lANDING. CONSTRUCT ACCESS FR~ BOATING PLAZA UITII RETAINING UALLS, DECORATIVE UALKS, AND LANDSCAPING. , ~~~~~.~V . L~Ell PARK NORTII L~ELL PARK (NORTII) LANDSCAPING, DECORATIVE lIGIIT ING AND UALKS FR~ CHESTNUT TO MULBERRY POINT. LEVEE UALL (NORTH) RECONSTRUCT EXISTlNO LEVEE UALL NORTH OF CIIESNUT AIID CONSTRUCT EXTENSION TO coMMERCIAL STREET EXTENDED. MULBERRY POINT LANDSCAPING, DECORATIVE UALKS, BENCHES AND DECORATIVE LIGIITlNG OF PENINSULA AREA NORTH OF L~ELL PARK. UATER STREET (MYRTLE TO C~HERC!AL) CONSTRUCT COt/CRETE CURBS A'ID GUTTERS AND SIOE~ALKS ALONG EXISTING STREET. WATER STREET (COMMERCIAL TO MULBERRY) RECONSTRUCT EXISTING STREET WITH CONCRETE CURDS AND GUTTERS AND SIOEUALKS. MULBERRY STREET (WATER TO MULBERRY PT.)RECONSTRUCT EXISTING STREET WITH CONCRETE CURBS AND GUTTERS AND SIDEUAlKS. MULBERRY STREET ( 2ND TO HAIN) RECONSTRUCT EXISTING STREET WITII COHCRETE CURBS AND GUTTERS AND SIOEUALKS. lIGHTING ( ASSESSED 15X) (~ATER . HYRTlE TO HULBERRY) CONSTRUCT ROAD\lM AND DECORATIVE LIGHTING. (HULBERRY .,2NO TO MAIN) CONSTRUct ROAD\lAY ANO DECORATIVE UGIITIHG. (MULBERRY. MAIN TO \lATER) COIISTRUCT ROAO~AY AND OECORATIVE UGIITlHG. (MULBERRY . ~ATER TO POIHl) CONSIRUCT ROADUAY AND DECORATIVE UGIITING.. STREET SCAPIHG (MULBERRY. 2ND TO HAIN)LANDSCAPE TREES AND TREE GRATES ON SIDE STREETS. (HULBERRY - MAIN TO POINLANDSCAPE TREES AND TREE GRATES ON SIDE STREETS. PARKING LOT. MULBERRY POINT CONSTRUCT PARKING LOT WITII AGG. BASE, CU.RB & GUTTER, BITUMINOUS SURfACE, lIGIITlNG AND STRIPING. e I . 1:~::~\; ; ....... .u .;.- ...., D~NT~N PLAN 15-Mar-90 .". . STILL~^TER, MINNESOTA ,', STILL~ATER D~NTO'HN PHASING SEH fiLE NO. 89255 PIIASE V . PLAZAS OVERLOOK PLAZA . ..AJJPIONEER PARK PLAZA '~-/MILL PLAZA ~ HISTORIC PLAZA . COMMERCIAL PLAZA MARillA PLAZA NO DESIGN AT TillS TIME. NO DESIGN AT TillS TIME. NO DESIGN AT TillS TIM~. NO DESIGN AT TillS TIME. NO DESIGN AT THIS TIME. NO DESIGN AT TillS TIME. PHASE VI - PARKING RAMP J~ARKING RAMP ~GRAND GARAGE PED. ~~ ~AY CONSTRUCT PARKING RAMP AT SECOND AND OLIVE. COIISIRUCT ACCESS FROM.PARKING GARAGE TO MAIN STREET. e e STILLWAT~NNESOTA STILLWATER DOWNTOWN PHASING HEH FILE NO. 89255 NOH ASSESSABLE ASSESSABLE TOTAL IV utl fl MA,0,'t ~ e /n~..,Il-df/Z1/7) PHASE I STREETS 480,850 (10) 1,431,055 1,911,905 STURIl SEWER 0 4013,520 4013,520 WATERIlAIN 0 1137,250 1137,250 SANITARY SEWER 0 5136,450 5136,450 LIGHTING (ASSESS IS~) (WEST OF /lAIN) 200,635 35,410 236,045 (SOUTH OF NELSON TO /'IULBERRY> (J) 492,225 B6,865 579,090 LV. SEllERS AND FLOOO PROOF REVIEW 0 13,300 13,300 STREETSCAPE 114,345 0 114,345 PARKING LOTS (PARKING OISTRIen 264,5BO 0 264,580 NORTH MAIN STREETSCAPE 59,400 0 59,400 NORTH HAIN LIGHTING (ASSESSED @ 1m 186,810 32,970 219,780 WARDEN '8 HOUSE WALL 18,750 0 18,750 EHTRY SIGH "". (2) 14,850 0 14,850 ".'-. RR TREAT/'lEHT (3) 18"1,3135 0 1137,385 SIGHAGE LANOSCAPING (4) 32,320 I) 32,320 BLUFF AREA LANDSCAPING (5) 49,855 0 49,855 POWER DISTRIBUT.lOH'. . . 255,000 ' 0 255,000 ---...-------- -----_.~----- ------------ . . ------------ ------------ ------------ TOTAL: $2,357,005 $2,781,820 $5,138,825 PHASE II (8) ________... I LOWELL PARK (SOUTH) 265,485 0 265,485 LEVEE WALL (SOUTH) 480,000 0 480,000 BOAT PLAZA (6) 329,900 0 329,900 BRICK ALLEY PEOESTRAIN RAI1P (7) 77 ,125 0 77,125 LOWELL PARK (NORTH) 366,9B5 0 366,985 LEVEE WALL (NORTH) 480,000 0 4BO,OOO KULBERRY POINT 429,430 0 429,430 WATER STREET (MYRTLE TO COMItERCIAU 3,565 (11) 11 ,805 15,370 WATER STREET (COIlMERCIAL TO MULBERRY> 7,130 (11) 75,395 82,525 MUL8ERRY STREEJ (WATER TO MULBERRY m B,640 63,010 71,650 MULBERRY STREET ( 2ND TO MAIN) 5,715 82,060 87,775 LIGHTING (ASSESS 15%) 0 (WATER - IlYRTLE TO IlULBERRY) 77,220 13,630 90;850 (MULBERRY - 2ND TO /lAIN) 37 ,295 6,580 43, B75 (MULBERRY - HAIN TO WATER) 16,870 2,975 19,845 . (MULBERRY - WATER TO POIND 37,295 6,580 4-3;875 STREETSCAPE ( MULBERRY - 2NO TO MAIN) 10,395 0 10,395 (MULBERRY - IIAIN TO POIND 8,910 0 8,910 PARKING LOTS -MULBERRY POINT 268,650 0 26B,650 OVERLOOK PLAZA i14,900 0 114,900 PIONEER PARK PLAZA 99, BOO 0 99,800 HILL RAZA 162,300 0 162,300 HISTORIC PLAZA 104,600 0 104,600 COMMERC I AL PLAZA ,71,300 0 71 ,300 MARINA PLAZA 110,900 0 110,900 ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ TOTAL: $3,574,410 $262,035 $3,836,446 e OGWHTOYN PLAN PHASING SUMMARY 01-Jurr-60 STILLWATER, IIINNESOTA STILLWATER DD~tHOldfl PHASING SEH FILE NO. 89255 NON ASSESSABLE ASSESS+\BLE TOTAL PHASE III - PARKING RAMP PARKING RAMP GRANO GARAGE PED. \lAY'. 2,052,()I)O 0 2,052,000 157,300 0 157,300 ----------- ----------- ------------ ------------ ------------ --....--------- TOTAL: $2,209,300 $0 $2,209,300 TOTAL ALL PHASES S8,140,715 NOTES: ADO IT Il1NS TO PHASE I ANO II FROIt OR I G IHAL FI NANCE PLAN $3,043,855 $11, 18~,570 m (2) (3) (4) (5) $79,900 14,850 136,7b1J 32,320 49, a5S $14,100 o o o o $94 ,000 14,850 136,760 32,320 49,855 $313,6135 $14,100 $327; 785 (6) tlEt.: 1TE11 (7) NEll ITEM (8) INTERCHANGEABLE \lITH PHASE IV OEPEN01NG ON FIflANCING (9) INTERCHANGEABLE WITH PHASE III DEPENDING ON FINANCING (0) INCLUOES: DECORATIVE WALK, ELEVATED WALK ON WATER STREET ANO TRASH EflCLOUSURES (11) INCLUDES: DECORATIVE \lAlK e ,<,tti_~~.:.J!.,':' :....,.,'ij~':r,;.;;; ,~~.{....:.,;.~~. . ~. ..~"~~"~;~~93;;':[;:.~;':"~::'~ . '-. . '~>':"_'-..':~~.>="~ . .... '.. - ........ . .,..... .0..<1- .~. .:.. -:~; . ": ;-. ~:;" :..~~:~:i'.~"3~;-:":'.' ... -~..' "" .. . . '. -. '" ....;. .. -. . $16,734.90 19,500 S9. FT. $1,730.13 2,016 SQ. FT. . . $9,654.75 11,250 SQ. FT. $2,265.65 . 2,640 SQ. FT. . $5,046.22 5.880 SQ. FT. ---set PROPOSED ASSESSMENT BY SQ. FT. ENCINEERS. ARCHITECTS. PlANNff,RS -.,. e . .. .. ._ '.._~:':-~'. t-.t..;__ .". . _.... ...~ ........ .__ to '.~ fH .....&.... .. n FILE NO. DRG. NO e ....... .. ~ e e . '''-''~.;:. :..~~J.'.~ '.:~.~.:., :,:':t... -, - ... -~-:~. "":,........... ". . .:..~::.::... STILLWATER, MINNESOTA CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT Assessment by square.foot. TOTAL ASSESSABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE TOTAL ASSESSABLE AMOUNT $1,921,389.00 2,238,730 FT = $0.8582/SQ. FT. T ... 2,238,730 FT. $1,921,3~9.00 f.. ~4 ,. STillWATER CENTRAL BUSINESS MOCK ASSESMENT 04-Jun-90 lOT WATER TOTAL SQ. FOOTAGE SERVICE ASSESMENT SEC.T.R PARCEll lOT IBlOCKI OWNER I ADRESS I CITY I ST I ZIP I I PER EACH I $0.85/SF ...............---.---...-. -.----- ----- -----........--....-..-...... .-..-...-.-.---..-.........-.-1-...-.-..-- __e. ---..-1----.-.----. ...........- ..-----..-.... 1 128.30'201 9028 . 0020 2 128'30-201 9028 . 0050 3 128.30.201 9028 - 0150 4 128.30'201 9337 . 2000 5 128'30-201 9337 . 2025 6 128.30.201 9337 . 2050 7 128.30.201 9337 . 2075 8 128.30.201 9337 . 2100 9 128.30.201 9337 . 2125 10 128.30-201 9337 . 2150 11 128.30.201 9337 . 2175 12 128.30.201 9337 - 2200 13 128.30.201 9337 - 2225 14 128-30-20110690 . 2050 15 128-30'20110690 . 2150 16 128-30-20110690 - 2160 17 128-30.20110690 - 3750 18 128-30'20110690 . 3800 19 128.30'20110690 . 3900 20 128.30.20110690 - 3960 21 128-30.20110690 . 4050 22 128-30-20110690 . 6950 23 128.30'20110690 . 7000 24 128-30'20110690 - 7050 25 128-30-20110690 - 7100 26 128'30.20110690 - 7350 27 128-30-20110690 - 7400 28 128.30.20110690 . 7550 29 128-30-20110691 - 2150 30 128-30-20110691 . 2240 31 128-30-20110691 - 2300 32 128-30'20110691 - 2330 33 128-30.20110691 . 2360 e 4 5 1,2,3 6 6 6 3,4 5 6 7 6,7,8 NAUSTDAl OSCAR & DONNA M MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC 23 STEEPLE TOWNE INC. 23 NELSON RICHARD EDWARD 23 HERR WAYNE J & DEANNA M 23 STEEPLE TOWNE INC. 23 BUSHWAY DEBRA J 23 STEEPLE TOWNE INC. 23 STEEPLE TOWNE INC. 23 HAHN MARY A 23 WASHINGTON FEDERAL SAVINGS 23 GOZZI SONORA 10 OESCH MARK l & GLORIA M 10 NAUSTDAl OSCAR & DONNA M 1 WASH CO HISTORICAL SOCIETY 9 HOHLT DESSA & TRENDA 9 FRASER CAROLINE l 9 AMREIN llNDA RAE 9 EICHACKER CHARLES R & JOANN 10 ABS CO 17 OESCH MARK l & GLORIA M 17 OLSON DEllAINA 17 OLSON DEllAINA 17 PARKHURST JAMES R & DAVID S 17 BEllDEAU EDNA E 17 BEllDEAU MilTON H & EDNA E 17 OLSON WilliAM JR & DEllAINA 18 PALMER ARTHUR V & MAUREEN 0 18 GARDNER DAVID G & MARY P 18 DAVIS NORMAN M & JEAN B 18 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY 18 JUNKER JAMES l & DEBORAH G 1 SHANNON OR I HASTINGS MN 219 N MAIN ST ISTlllWATER MN 219 N MAIN ST ISTlllWATER MN 100 SO. 3RD. ST. 1 STillWATER MN 140 SO. 3RD. ST. ISTlllWATER MN 108 SO. 3RD. ST. ISTlllWATER MN 100 SO. 3RD. ST. ISTlllWATER MN 116 SO. 3RD. ST. ISTlllWATER MN 100 SO. 3RD. ST. ISTlllWATER MN 100 SO. 3RD. ST. I STillWATER MN 110 SO. 3RD. ST. ISTlllWATER MN 200 E. CHESTNUT ST. ISTlllWATER MN 402 SO. MAIN ISTlllWATER MN 09985 ARCOLA CT ISTlllWATER MN 18520 6TH. AVE. 1 PLYMOUTH MN 602 N MAIN ST I STillWATER MN 520 NO. MAIN ST. I STillWATER MN 512 N MAIN ST ISTlllWATER MN 307 E lAUREL ST ISTlllWATER MN 16788 2ND ST SO I lAKElAND MN 126 N MAIN ISTlllWATER MN 09985 ARCOLA CT 1 STillWATER MN P.O. BOX 230 I STillWATER MN P.O. BOX 230 I STillWATER MN 815 NIGHTINGALE BLVD. I STillWATER MN 422 WEST ELM ST. I STillWATER MN 304 NO. MAIN ST. I STillWATER MN P.O. BOX 230 ISTlllWATER MN C/O LOWELL INN-102 N 2ND ST ISTlllWATER MN 00548 MINNESOTA ST I BAYPORT MN 6216 lOOKOUT TR ISTlllWATER MN 50 W KEllOGG BLVD I ST PAUL I MN 212 COMMERCIAL ST ISTlllWATER 1 MN 550331 121,310.0 550821 130,910.0 550821 217,290.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 1,305.0 550821 41,520.0 554471 154,290.0 550821 29,460.0 550821 9,320.0 550821 29,410.0 550821 3,780.0 550431 7,365.0 550821 88,950.0 550821 5,550.0 550821 5,000.0 550821 5,000.0 550821 91,400.0 550821 175.0 550821 1,425.0 550821 5,000.0 550821 12,500.0 550031 5,075.0 550821 3,200.0 551641 7934.4 550821 4,029.0 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $103,113.50 $111,273.50 $184,696.50 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $1,109.25 $35,292.00 $131,146.50 $25,041.00 $7,922.00 $24,998.50 $3,213.00 $6,260.25 $75,607.50 $4,717.50 $4,250.00 $4,250.00 $77,690.00 $148.75 $1,211.25 $4,250.00 $10,625.00 $4,313.75 $2,720.00 $6,744.27 $3,424.65 e STILLWATER CENTRAL BUSINESS MOCK ASSESMENT 04-Jun-90 LOT WATER TOTAL SQ. FOOTAGE SERVICE ASSESMENT SEC-T-R PARCELl LOT I BLOCK I OWNER I ADRESS 1 CITY 1 ST I ZIP 1 I PER EACH I SO.85/SF I -~------------------------- ------- -----1-----------------------------1------------------------------1----------- ---- ------1------------ ------------ --------------1 34 128-30-20110691 - 2390 6,8 18 I POWELL WILLIAM H I 2648 FAIRLAWN DR. I STILLWATER MN 550821 8,500.0 S1,166.59 S7,225.00 I 35 128-30-20110691 - 2420 6,8 18 1 WEST PUBLISHING COMPANY I 50 W KELLOGG BLVD 1 ST PAUL MN 551641 3,925.0 S3,336.22 I 36 128-30-20110691 - 2450 8 18 I MADSEN JENS C I 1515 LAKE AVE I LUCK WI 548531 2,850.0 $2,422.50 I 37 128-30-20110691 - 2510 8 18 I MALON DONALD 1 204 N MAIN I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 3,948.0 S1,166.59 S3,355.80 38 128-30-20110691 - 2540 8 18 I MALON DONALO I 204 N MAIN I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 2,016.0 S1,713.60 39 128-30-20110691 - 2570 8 18 1 STEFAN LEVERNE 0 & SHARON A I 717 6TH AVE SO I STILLWATER MN 550821 1,932.0 S1,166.59 S1,642.20 40 128-30-20110691 - 2600 8 18 1 STEFAN LEVERNE 0 & SHARON A 1 717 6TH AVE SO I STILLWATER MN 550821 1,779.2 S1,512.32 41 128-30-20110691 - 2660 8 18 I SICARD DALE I P.O. BOX 163A I SOMERSET WI 540251 4,515.8 $3,838.46 42 128-30-20110691 - 2720 3 - 6 18 ISTANDEFER MANES E & CARLSON 0 232 N MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 11,430.0 S1,166.59 $9,715.50 43 128-30-20110691 - 2750 8 18 I FAZENDIN JOHN R ETAL 242 N MAIN ST I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 9,000.0 S7,650.00 44 128-30-20110691 - 2752 1 18 I ROLLIE DIANE 11070 MAYFIELD AVE N I STILLWATER MN 550821 9,000.0 S1,166.59 S7,650.00 45 128-30-20110691 - 2780 18 IANDERSON JAMES J & KATHERINE SUNIo'OOO BOX 151 1 MARINE MN 550471 14,000.0 S11,900.00 46 128-30-20110691 - 2810 18 I DOYLE MELVIN J 10625 34TH AVE N I PLYMooTH MN 554411 19,500.0 S1,166.59 S16,575.00 47 128-30-20110691 - 2840 18 I CITY OF STILLWATER 216 N 4TH ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 1,000.0 S850.00 48 128-30-20110691 - 2900 8 18 I VAN MEIER KATHERINE 226 E MYRTLE ST I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 5,000.0 $4,250.00 49 128-30-20110691 - 2930 8 18 1 RANUM RUTH C 317 BIRCHIo'OOO DR N I STILLWATER MN 550821 6,300.0 S1,166.59 S5,355.00 50 128-30-20110691 - 2990 18 ANDERSON RICHARD & DON PARTN 1401 NIGHTINGALE BLVD-BOX 1461STILLWATER MN 550821 2,142.0 S1,166.59 I S1,820.70 51 128-30-20110691 - 3020 8 18 MADSEN JENS C & SANDRA J 114 NO. MAIN ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 2,142.0 $1,166.59 $1,820.70 52 128-30-20110691 - 3080 8 18 JONES DAVID E 13241 NO. 30TH. ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 1,680.0 S1,428.00 53 128-30-20110691 - 3110 8 18 MELTON JAMES E & JOYCE A 06431 KEATS AVE 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 1,596.0 $1,356.60 54 128-30-20110691 - 3140 8 18 SCHNEIDER RICHARD L 6 N LAKESIDE DR 1 BAYPORT MN 550031 1,596.0 S1,166.59 $1,356.60 I 55 128-30-20110691 - 3170 8 18 OGREN JOHN K P.O. BOX 542 I STILLWATER MN 550821 6,600.0 $5,610.00 56 128-30-20110691 - 3230 18 OGREN JOHN K P.O. BOX 542 I STILLWATER MN 550821 7,440.0 $6,324.00 57 128-30-20110691 - 3350 8 18 MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC 219 N MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 2,524.0 $2,145.40 58 128-30-20110691 - 3380 8 18 MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC 219 N MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 3,800.0 S3,230.00 59 128-30-20110691 - 3410 8 18 MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC 219 N MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 11,760.0 S9,996.00 60 128-30-20110691 - 3440 8 18 MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC 219 N MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 11,176.0 $9,499.60 61 128-30-20110691 - 3470 8 18 MAPLE ISLAND FARM INC 219 N MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 11,821.0 $10,047.85 62 128-30-20110691 - 3500 18 GLACIER PARK COMPANY 1011 WESTERN AVE-SUITE 700 I SEATTLE WA 981041 10,210.0 S8,678.50 63 128-30-20110691 - 3540 1,2,3 19 ISTILLWATER HooSING ASSOCIATE 3140 HARBOR LANE I PLYMOOTH MN 554411 24,600.0 S20,910.00 64 128-30-20110691 - 3560 4 19 ISTILLWATER HooSING ASSOCIATE 3140 HARBOR LANE I PLYMOOTH MN 554411 7,500.0 $6,375.00 65 128-30-20110691 - 3590 5,6 19 ISTILLWATER HooSING ASSOCIATE 3140 HARBOR LANE I PLYMooTH MN 554411 2,500.0 S2,125.00 66 128-30-20110691 - 3620 5 19 ISTILLWATER HooSING ASSOCIATE 3140 HARBOR LANE 1 PLYMooTH MN 554411 6,250.0 S5,312.50 e e STILLWATER CENTRAL BUSINESS MOCK ASSESMENT 04-Jun-90 LOT WATER TOTAL SQ. FOOTAGE SERVICE ASSESMENT SEC-T-R PARCELl LOT IBLOCKI OWNER 1 ADRESS I CITY I ST I ZIP I I PER EACH 1 $0.85/SF I -.---...-..-...-...........1-------1---.-1---.-------...-..-........... ...-..-..-.-..---.-.-------.--1-.........-1-... ......1-.........-. -...--.-..-. ..........----1 67 28-30-20 10691 - 3650 6 19 ISTILLWATER HOUSING ASSOCIATE 3140 HARBOR LANE 1 PLYMOUTH I MN 554411 1,500.0 $1,275.00 1 68 128.30-20110691 . 3740 9 19 ISEMPER LOWELL ASSOCIATES LTD 81 S NINTH ST'SUITE 410 IMINNEAPOLlS I MN 554021 6,600.0 $5,610.00 I 69 128-30-20110691 . 3770 10 19 ISEMPER LOWELL ASSOCIATES LTD 81 S NINTH ST'SUITE 410 IMINNEAPOLISI MN 554021 7,500.0 $6,375.00 I 70 128-30-20110691 - 3800 11-13 19 SEMPER LOWELL ASSOCIATES LTD 81 S NINTH ST'SUITE 410 IMINNEAPOLlS MN 554021 22,500.0 $1,166.59 $19,125.00 1 71 128-30-20110691 - 4910 2 23 NELSON RICHARD E 14979 OLD GUS LANDER TRAIL No.1 MARINE MN 550471 3,600.0 $3,060.00 I 72 128-30-20110691 . 4970 3,4 23 DEL'S LAWN AND LOG 2349 DRIFTWOOD LN I STILLWATER MN 550821 12,000.0 $10,200.00 I 73 128-30-20110691 - 5000 5 23 KILTY RICHARD S 224 WILDWOOD LANE I NAPLES FL 339421 7,500.0 $6,375.00 74 128.30-20110691 . 5150 1 24 STILLWATER GAZETTE INC 102 2ND ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 7,500.0 $6,375.00 75 128-30-20110691 . 5180 2 24 STILLWATER GAZETTE INC 102 2ND ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 7,500.0 $6,375 .00 76 128-30-20110691 - 5210 3 24 KIMMEL HAROLD 0 & HOLSTEN R 124 S 2ND ST I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 3,750.0 $3,187.50 77 128-30-20110691 . 5240 3 24 KIMMEL HAROLD 0 & HOLSTEN R 124 S 2ND ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 3,750.0 $3,187.50 78 128-30-20110691 - 5270 4 24 KIMMEL HAROLD 0 & HOLSTEN R 124 S 2ND ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 7,500.0 $6,375.00 79 128.30.20110691 . 5300 5 24 WATER MUSIC ENTERPRISES 116 E CHESTNUT ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 2,250.0 $1,912.50 80 128.30-20110691 . 5330 5 24 WOHLERS WAYNE G & KRAFT L 118 E CHESTNUT ST I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 4,000.0 $1,166.59 $3,400.00 81 128-30-20110691 . 5360 6,7,8 24 SCHNOECKEL ROY L & BETTY M 10997 32ND ST N I LAKE ELMO MN 550421 7,750.0 $6,587.50 82 128-30-20110691 - 5390 6,7,8 24 ADAMS W MICHAEL 106 E CHESTNUT ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 15,000.0 $12,750.00 83 128.30.20110691 . 5420 8,9 24 ADAMS W MICHAEL 109 E MRYTLE I STILLWATER MN 550821 2,700.0 $2,295.00 84 128-30-20110691 - 5450 10 24 ADAMS W MICHAel 109 E MRYTLE ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 2,300.0 $1,955.00 85 128.30.20110691 - 5480 9,10 24 ADAMS W MICHAEL 109 E MRYTLE I STILLWATER MN 550821 5,000.0 $4,250.00 86 128.30.20110691 . 5510 9,10 24 STILLWATER POST NO 48 101 3RO ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 5,000.0 $4,250.00 87 128.30-20110691 . 5540 1,2,3 25 IWASHINGTON FEDERAL SAVING BK 200 E CHESTNUT ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 28,884.0 $24,551.40 88 128-30-20110691 - 5660 1 26 1 KIRCHER A R P.O. BOX 165 I STILLWATER MN 550821 5,488.0 $4,664.80 89 128-30.20110691 . 5690 1 26 I KEMPER FREDRICK L 1386 HILLTOP RIDGE I HOULTON WS 540821 1,568.0 1166.59 $1,332.80 90 128-30-20110691 . 5720 2 26 1 MORRILL DALE L & MARGARETJ P.O. BOX 276 I OSCEOLA WS 540201 7,200.0 $6,120.00 91 128-30-20110691 - 5750 3,4 26 1 FRYE ADELIA H 12055 ARINS WAY ILlRIE OAKS TX I 14,400.0 $1,166.59 $12,240.00 92 \28.30-20110691 . 5780 5 26 1 ST CROIX DRUG CO 00132 MAIN ST I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 5,150.0 $1,166.59 $4,377 .50 I 93 128-30-20110691 . 5810 5 26 I PEDER GAALAAS INC 224 E CHESTNUT I STI LLWATER MN 550821 2,050.0 I $1,742.50 I 94 128-30-20110691 - 5840 1 27 ICOSMOPOLITAN STATE BANK STIL 101 S MAIN ST I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 5,880.0 1 $4,998.00 I 95 128.30-20110691 - 5870 2 27 ICOSMOPOLITAN STATE BANK STIL 101 S MAIN ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 6,000.0 1 $5,100.00 I 96 128-30-20110691 . 5900 3,4 27 I ST. JOHNS HOME CORP. 113 SO. MAIN ST. I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 9,000.0 $1,166.59 1 $7,650.00 I 97 128.30.20110691 . 5930 4 27 I THOMPSON BROOKS M 1414 N 1ST ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 3,000.0 $1,166.59 1 $2,550.00 I 98 128-30.20110691 - 5970 4,5 27 I N P RY CO. P.O. DRAWER 1267 IBONCA CITY OK 746011 24,300.0 I $20,655.00 I 99 128-30-20110691 . 5990 5 27 I HUDSON THOMAS M & ELEANOR 00323 HOLCOMBE ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 1,025.0 $1,166.59 I $871.25 I e e STILLWATER CENTRAL BUSINESS MOCK ASSESMENT 04- Jun-90 LOT WATER TOTAL SQ. FOOTAGE SERVICE ASSESMENT SEC.T-R PARCELl LOT IBLOCKI OWNER 1 ADRESS I CITY 1 ST 1 ZIP I 1 PER EACH 1 SO.85/SF I ----.----------.-.--------- -------1-----1--..-.-..-...-.-..----------- ---..-.-..-.-..---.----.-.-..-1-----.-...-1..-- .--..-1--..------.. ..--------.. .....------..-1 100 128.30.20110691 - 6020 5 1 27 1 SCHLEY EMMA LOW 3675 HIGHLAND AVE #210 1 ST PAUL 1 MN 551101 975.0 S1,166.59 $828.75 I 101 128.30.20110691 - 6050 5 1 27 I HUDSON THOMAS M & ELEANOR 00323 HOLCOMBE ST ISTlLLWATER I MN 550821 2,000.0 S1,700.00 I 102 128-30-20110691 . 6080 5 1 27 I LARSON W D 10700 LYNDALE AVE S IBLOOMINGON 1 MN 554201 2,000.0 S1,700.00 1 103 128.30.20110692 . 2000 1 1 28 1 RUTMAN MAX 1035 NATHAN LN N IMINNEAPOLISI MN 554411 6,060.0 S1,166.59 S5,151.00 1 104 128.30.20110692 - 2050 1 1 28 1 LARSON W D 10700 LYNDALE AVE SO 1 BLOOMINGTON I MN 554201 5,885.0 S1,166.59 S5,002.25 1 105 128.30.20110692 - 2100 1 1 28 1 RUTMAN MAX 1035 NATHAN LN N IMINNEAPOLlS MN 554411 133.1 S113.13 1 106 128.30-20110692 - 2275 2 . 10 28 1 SABES ROBERT W 14091 STRONEGATE LN IMINNETONKA MN 553431 41,625.0 S35,381.25 1 107 128.30-20110692 . 2300 2 28 1 FIRST STILLWATER GROUP LMTD 1200 STORR'S POND RD BOX 400 1 WINONA MN 559871 2,904.0 S2,468.40 1 108 128-30-20110692 . 2350 2 28 IKLIEFEREN MARG A & SLACHTA R 223 S MAIN ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 3,600.0 S1,166.59 S3,060.00 1 109 128.30.20110692 - 2400 2 28 1 BRINE JOHN LAMONT 219 MAIN ST S I STILLWATER MN 550821 2,892.0 S2,458.20 110 128-30-20110692 . 2500 3 28 1 GFRERER DANIEL C & JULIE 10050 6nH LN 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 3,000.0 S2,550.00 111 128.30.20110692 - 2550 3 28 1 ESTATE OF ERNEST PEASLEE BOX 523 1 STI LLWA TER MN 550821 3,120.0 $2,652.00 112 128-30-20110692 . 2600 4 28 I ESTATE OF ERNEST PEASLEE BOX 523 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 3,360.0 $2,856.00 113 128.30.20110692 - 2650 4 28 1 PEASLEE JANE M & ERNEST M 1303 WEST WILLARD 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 3,000.0 $2,550.00 114 128.30.20110692 . 2700 5,6,7 28 IMCGARRY ROBERT W & GLENICE J 243 S MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 4,761.6 $4,047.36 115 128.30.20110692 - 2750 6,7,8 28 1 SIMONET FURN & CRP 301 S MAIN 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 10,680.0 $9,078.00 116 128-30-20110692 . 2800 8,9 28 1 SCBC PARTNERS 830 TWELVE OAK CENTER 1 WAYZATA MN 553911 7,320.0 $6,222.00 117 128-30-20110692 . 2850 9,10 28 I SIMONET FURN & CRP 301 S MAIN 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 5,880.0 S1,166.59 $4,998.00 118 128.30-20110692 . 2900 10 28 FARMERS UNION GRAIN TERMINAL 401 SO. MAIN ST. 1 STI LLWATER MN 550821 6,480.0 S5,508.00 119 128.30-20110692 . 3000 10,11 28 NEW STILLWATER PROJECT LTD 423 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 33,975.0 S1,166.59 S28,878.75 120 128.30-20110692 - 3050 10,11 28 NEW STILLWATER PROJECT LTD 423 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 7,650.0 $6,502.50 121 128.30-20110692 . 3100 10,11 28 LEASE COMMANDER MILLS 401 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 SO.OO 122 128.30.20110692 . 3170 1,10 28 N P RY CO P.O. DRAWER 1267 IBONCA CITY OK 746011 31,696.0 $26,941.60 123 128-30-20110692 - 3200 10,11 28 DOCK CAFE CORPORATION 423 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 23,115.0 $19,647.75 124 128-30.20110692 . 3220 10,11 28 NEW STILLWATER PROJECT LTD 423 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 10,695.0 $9,090.75 125 128.30.20110692 - 3270 11 28 CITY OF STILLWATER 216 N 4TH ST 1 STI LLWATER MN 550821 0.0 $0.00 126 128-30.20110692 - 3300 1 29 NYBERG CLARK R 510 QUARRY LANE ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 9,On.0 S7,711.20 I 127 128-30.20110692 - 3320 1 29 RIVARD ARLEN & JILL S 2127 PROVIDENCE CT IEAU CLAIRE WI 547031 1,680.0 S1,166.59 S1,428.00 I 128 128-30-20110692 - 3350 1 29 SHERBURNE DUANE E. & JEAN A 210 MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 2,640.0 S2,244.00 1 129 128-30.20110692 . 3450 2 29 MARTIN LARRY J 2661 ARCOLA LN 1 WAYZATA MN 553911 11,026.0 S1,166.59 S9,3n.10 1 130 128.30-20110692 - 3470 2,3 29 ANDERSON MARTIN D 224 S MAIN 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 1,934.0 S1,166.59 S1,643.90 1 131 128-30-20110692 . 3500 3 29 IALBRIGHT ROBERT L & SANDRA J 226 SOUTH MAIN ST I STILLWATER MN 550821 2,800.0 1 S2,380.00 I 132 128.30-20110692 - 3550 4 29 I HOOLEY WILIAM J & JOAN M 00707 PINE TREE TR ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 5,587.0 S1,166.59 1 $4,748.95 I e e -.. STILLWATER CENTRAL BUSINESS MOCK ASSESMENT 04-Jun-90 LOT WATER TOTAL SQ. FOOTAGE SERVICE ASSESMENT SEC.T-R PARCELl LOT I BLOCK 1 OWNER 1 ADRESS I CITY 1 ST 1 ZIP I 1 PER EACH 1 SO.85/SF ------------------.-----.-- -.....-1-.-.-1-........--.----------..-.-.-1----------.-...--.--.-----.---1--...-.-... ...-I.-....j.-.-..---... ....-------- ---..--...---- 133 128-30-20110692 . 3650 4,5 1 29 I TURNBLADH WILL C JR I 134 128-30-20110692 . 3700 6 1 29 I J L H INC I 135 128-30-20110692 - 3750 7 1 29 I PAUKERT-ANDERSON CAROL M 1 136 128-30-20110692 - 3800 7 I 29 1 PAUKERT.ANDERSON CAROL M 137 128-30-20110692 . 3850 7 I 29 ITUENGE RICHARD R & ELIZABETH 138 128-30-20110692 - 3900 7 1 29 ITUENGE RICHARD R & ELIZABETH 139 128-30-20110692 . 3950 7 1 29 1 L N CORP 140 128-30-20110692 - 4000 7 1 29 1 L N CORP 141 128.30-20110692 . 4050 7 1 29 I L N CORP 142 128-30.20110692 . 4100 8,9 I 29 I GRAND GARAGE OF STILLWATER 143 128-30-20110692 - 4125 8,9,251 29 1 GRAND GARAGE OF STILLWATER 144 128-30-20110692 . 4200 9,10 1 29 1 GOZZI SONORA 145 128-30-20110692 - 4250 23 1 29 1 GORDON SHERMAN & LUCILLE 146 128.30-20110692 . 4700 26 1 29 1 L N CORP 147 128-30-20110692 - 4750 26,27 1 29 1 L N CORP 148 128-30-20110692 . 4800 28 I 29 IMC GUIRE MICHAEL G & JULIANN 149 128-30-20110692 - 4850 29 1 29 IMC GUIRE MICHAEL G & JULIANN 150 128-30-20110692 - 4900 I 28,29 I 29 IFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STILL 151 128-30.20110692 . 4950 28 - 31 29 IFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STILL 152 128-30-20110692 - 5000 28 - 31 29 IFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STILL 153 128-30-20110692 . 5050 28 - 31 29 IFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STILL 154 128-30-20110692 - 5100 28 - 31 29 IFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STILL 155 128-30-20110692 . 5150 28 - 31 29 IFIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STILL 156 128-30-20110692 . 5200 23 1 29 1 GORDON SHERMAN & LUCILLE 157 128-30-20110692 - 5250 9,10 1 29 1 GOZZI SONORA 158 128-30-20110692 . 5300 9,10 1 29 1 GOZZI SONORA 159 128-30-20110693 . 2000 1,2 1 30 IBOURDAGHS JOHN J & COLLEEN M 160 128-30.20110693 . 2050 1,2,3 1 30 1 BOURDAGHS JOHN 161 128-30-20110693 - 2300 6-7,8 I 30 I EVINRUDE THOMAS A 162 128-30-20110693 - 2350 1,2 I 31 1 KILTY RICHARD S 163 128-30-20110693 . 2400 2,3 1 31 1 BAYPORT FOUNDATION 164 128-30-20110693 - 2450 5,5 1 31 1 CICERA WILLIAM A e 236 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 1 550821 5,040.0 302 S MAIN ST 1 STILLWATER MN 1 550821 3,600.0 828 COUNTY ROAD E 1 HUDSON WI 1 540161 3,503.0 828 COUNTY ROAD E I HUDSON WI I 540161 2,839.0 228 EVERETT ST. NO. ISTlLLWATER MN I 550821 2,367.0 228 EVERETT ST. NO. 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 1,609.0 1520 SHE LARD TOWER 1 MPLS MN 554261 1,475.0 1520 SHE LARD TOWER 1 MPLS MN 554261 1,822.0 1520 SHELARO TOWER 1 MPLS MN 554261 3,011.0 P.O. BOX 35092 1 EDINA MN 554351 31,010.0 P.O. BOX 35092 1 EDINA MN 554351 402 S MAIN ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 26,173.0 00112 W SCHOOL ST 1 STI LLWA TER MN 550821 29,645.0 1520 SHE LARD TOWER 1 MPLS MN 554261 3,314.0 1520 SHE LARD TOWER I MPLS MN 554261 3,638.0 RT 2 1 HUDSON WI 540161 1,870.0 RT 2 1 HUDSON WI 540161 4,022.0 213 E CHESTNUT ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 16,631.0 213 E CHESTNUT ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 2,688.0 213 E CHESTNUT ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 3,016.0 213 E CHESTNUT ST ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 3,000.0 I 213 E CHESTNUT ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 3,000.0 I 213 E CHESTNUT ST 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 5,000.0 I 00112 W SCHOOL ST 1 STI LLWATER MN 550821 5,124.5 I 402 S MAIN I STI LLWA TER MN 550821 1,696.0 1 402 S MAIN ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 6,060.0 1 10666 ST CROIX TR ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 4,554.0 1 121 E CHESTNUT 1 STILLWATER MN 550821 8,446.0 I 1853 M-28 EAST 1 MARQUETTE MI 498551 13,600.0 1 224 WILDWOOD LANE 1 NAPLES FL 339421 10,200.0 1 287 CENTRAL AVE. 1 BAYPORT MN 550031 45,000.0 1 114 WEST OLIVE ST. ISTlLLWATER MN 550821 4,024.0 1 Sl,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $1,166.59 $4,284.00 $3,060.00 $2,977.55 $2,413.15 $2,011.95 $1,367.65 $1,253.75 $1,548.70 $2,559.35 $26,358.50 $0.00 $22,247.05 $25,198.25 $2,816.90 $3,092.30 $1,589.50 $3,418.70 $14,136.35 $2,284.80 $2,563.60 $2,550.00 $2,550.00 $4,250.00 $4,355.83 $1,441.60 $5,151.00 $3,870.90 $7,179.10 Sll,560.00 $8,670.00 S38,250.00 $3,420.40 e .- < STILL~ATER CENTRAL BUSINESS MOCK ASSESMENT 04-Jun-90 LOT ~ATER TOTAL SQ. FOOTAGE SERVICE ASSESMENT SEC-T-R PARCELl LOT IBLOCKI OWNER 1 ADRESS 1 CITY 1 ST 1 ZIP 1 1 PER EACH I SO.85/SF I ---.....--.......-..--.-..-1-.....-1-----1-........--.......-.--.......1.........--.......----.....-.-1---.....---1-..-1-.-..-1--....---..-1----..------1--.--..----..-1 165 128-30.20110693 . 2475 1 4,5 I 31 1 HANSON DAVID F & VIVIAN M I 2660 FAIRLA~N DR ISTILL~ATER 1 MN 1 550821 6,400.0 1 1 S5,440.00 I 166 128-30-20\10693 . 2310 1 5 I 31 I RA~LINGS CHARLES F 1 1497 ~HITE BEAR AVE 1 ST PAUL I MN 1 551061 4,000.0 I I S3,400.00 1 167 128.30-20110693 . 3900 I 1,2,6 1 35 1 L N CORP 1 1520 SHELARO TOWER I MPLS 1 MN 1 554261 31,196.0 1 I S26,516.60 \ 168 128-30-20110693 - 3950 I 1,2,6 I 35 1 NORTH~ESTERN BELL TELEPHONE I %MGR.US ~EST COM-100 S 19TH 1 OMAHA 1 NE I 681021 14,486.0 I 1 S12,313.10 1 169 128-30.20110693 . 4000 I 3 I 35 I NORTH~ESTERN BELL TELEPHONE I %MGR-US ~EST COM-100 S 19TH 1 OMAHA I NE I 681021 7,072.0 I 1 S6,011.20 I 170 128-30.20110693 . 4200 1 6,7 I 35 1 L N CORP 1 1520 SHELARO TOWER I MPLS I MN 1 554261 32,545.0 1 I S27,663.25 I 171 128-30-20111022 . 2000 1 2 1 10 I LANGNESS ROBERT 0 & ANNA P I 2369 LINWOOD AVE I MAPLEWOOD 1 MN 1 551281 67,690.0 I S1,166.59 1 S57,536.50 I 172 128.30-20111022 . 2050 I 2 1 10 I DESCH MARK L & GLORIA M 1 9985 ARCOLA CT I STILL~ATERI MN 1 550821 1,840.0 I I S1,564.00 I 173 128.30-20111999 - 2100 1 1 27 1 SUPER VALUE STORES 1 BOX 990 CORP TAX OEPT IMINNEAPOLlsl MN 1 55440 13,893.0 1 S1,166.59 I S11,809.05 1 -.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.-------------.----------------------------- --------------- 2,155,766.6 S51,329.96 S1,832,401.64 COST PER SQUARE FOOT SO.85 PROJECT COST LESS ~ATER SERVo S2,620,945.00 TOTAL PROJECT COST INCL. ~ATER SERVo ASSESSMENT AMOUNT RECEIVED S2,672,274.96 S1,883,731.60 e e e DOWNTOWN PL.AN Cost Non-assessable Assessable Total Phase I $2,357,005 $2,781,820 $ 5,138,825 Phase II 3,574,410 262,035 3,836,445 Phase III 2,209,300 2,209,300 Total $8,140,715 $3,043,855 $11,184,570 Phase I Costs Construction Bond Issuance & Capitalized Interest Estimate $5,138,825 215,277 Total $5,354,102 Revenues 1. Special assessment to property owners (2,155,000 sq. ft. @ .85/ft.) $1,832,402* 2. State Funds MSA & MnDOT for storm sewer & street participation 534,120 3. Parking District 264,580 4. Infrastructure Reserve 123,000 5. TIF Bonds (Phase I) 2,600,000 Total Revenues $5,354,102 * NOTE: This is 60 percent (60%) of the assessable dollar cost. e . e e \ PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. SUB/90-22 Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 1990 Project Location: 1911 West Pine Street Comprehensive Plan District: Single Family Zoning District: RA Applicant1s Name: Dorothy Ger~9n Type of Application: Minor Subdivision PROJECT LOCATION: A minor subdivlsion of 32,005 square feet into two lots of 10,000 square feet and 22,005 square feet at 1911 West Pine Street. DISCUSSION: The request is to subdivide a large lot under one parcel number (previously three lots) into two lots. The site plan identifies Lot 7 as 1911 West Pine Street and Lots 2 and 3 facing South Oakes Streets. The applicant has stated she would like to sell the home at 1911 West Pine Street and retain lots 2 and 3 on West Oakes Street for sale at a later date. West Oak Street is not improved and no utilities are directly available to the site. The lots 2 and 3 portion of the existing lot meets the 20,000 lot requirements for an unsewered lot. Before Lots 2 and 3 could be developed, services would have to be provided to the site by the owner. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval. e e ~ April 12, 1990 MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL STILLWATER, MN. 55082 October, 1976 I purchased a home "at 1911 West Pine Street, namely Lot 7, Peterson's Addition, Parcel No. 10755-2300. On March 1981 I purchased two adjoining lots prior to their going tax forfeit which are Lots 2 and 3 Peterson's Addition (At that time they were indicated as Parcel No. 10755-2050 and Parcel No. 10755-2100). Following my retirement in 1983 I made application for the Minnesota Tax Credit and they would only allow this credit on Lot 7, so at the suggestion of Washington County they combined the three parcels under one property number, namely 10755-2300. I am proposing to sell Lot 7 where my home is located but I want to retain the adjoining two vacant lots for sale at a future date. In order to accomplish this I am informed that I must make application to split off these two lots. My request at this time is to split off these two lots as one parcel. AC }OO e Case Number $...r.!.(jj!lt2.::.d.. J.J ~f- Fee Paid ___3./2_________ Da~e Filed -'!Lf/.~Cl.----- 'PLANNING ADJ\AINISTRATIVE FOR^,\ 1911 West Pine St. Street Location of Property: -----~----------------------------------- Legal Description of Property: _.12!~_2-\...]_5!.Il.cLl_~~tEtrJ3.9E~~_4.dji!i~~__J19Z.~~-2300) I Dorothy R. Gerson Own e r: N a m e -- -- ---- ---- ---------.------------ -------------------- 712 West Oak St. . 439-4684 Address______________________________ Phone:_______________ A60licant (if other than oW]1er): Name _________________________________ a . Address______________________________ Phone:_______________ Type of Request:' ___ Rezoning ___ Special Usa Permit ___ Variance ___ Approval. or Preliminary Plat ___ Approval of ~inal. Plat _X Other _.l'~.?22;~~~~o_n_. .______ Description of Request: ___J..e~_~!:.~~c~~_~~.9___________________________:_ ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ S. . f A I' ~. _2d ~ L/ ~ . ) Ignature 0 pp leanl. .::.:.;;----- 0 ~'_--~:u.. Date of Public Hearing: _____________________________________~__..:.____ o NOTE: Sketch of proposed 'property and structure to be drawn )n hack oi this form or at. ~ched, showing the following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3. Dimensions of front and side set-backs. .t.';:.... ~ f)-~ '\ 99Q 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. t~.. ~~O ~ ........~ 5. Stree~ naw.es. . .. 0 eO ':;: ofS'fM..I..W~1f. 51 6. Locatlon ot ad)CiCent eXlstmg bUlIamgs. 0;:;:: err< .....1\J.'If"iE' -:;.,7 7. Other inionnation CiS may be requested. 9,~);:I1~. _,/0 v c-> _ )'.'->7" Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho 'Planning Commission on __~0.J'~L.(d~te) subiee7 to the following conditions: ____________________________________ e Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subiec to the .t. II' d'" a 0 oWing con lilons: ________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Comments: (Use. other side) ~' " , ~ \ \ .... .. \ \ \ "- v, ~ <::> <::> l.l\ ~ r-.. ..~ "'J ~\ 1\.\ '- 60 ,>u15/1fJ _2-7- sr/2$E.r WESr So. /00.00' ... '=> ~. ... :.~ .~ V\ ""i 7:1. 2 Z ' ~ dll...o.. '1:;.- -..p ..... 7.3.2.z' ~ 01'...0. ,f \ ... ... "- <::> ~ () <::> Q\ .... <::> ? <::> () " ~;) ..... ~ () () c. \ - I.... ..~~ "- \>., <::> .:~ . '\ () ~. () .~ ",..., \~ o ()u r.,' " . ~._, ~ '" ~ ). '" ~ ~ ~\~ \ \ \ \ .~ ..... .~ ~ \ \ "- tn --- () 9 ""i ~ <::> ~ \ ~ \ tt't \ <$> "\ ll.l> .... . ,,' -.# '\ 00.00 . -~ /10 .s-r;e.6er l) SO. OAK.ES srllE.&T \ .~- . - , PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW e CASE NO. SUB/90-23 Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 1990 Project Location: On Poplar Street between North Fifth Street and North Everett Street. Comprehensive Plan District: Single Family Zoning District: RA Applicant's Name: Larry Dauffenbach -'-... . Type of Application: Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A major subdivision of three lots consisting of 21,750, 21,750 and 43,500 square feet into four lots, all of which will consist of approximately 21,750 square feet. DISCUSSION: The request is to subdivide three lots into four lots as shown on the attached site plan. The three lots presently do no~ have City water or sewer connections due to the fact that there is no water or sewer extension to this area of North Stillwater. The City requires that in order to have on-site system, a lot must be 20,000 square feet. These 21,750 square foot lots meet this minimum requirement. The City Engineer reviewed the proposed subdivision with the applicant on May 3, 1990. It was concluded that no development should occur on the eastern edge of Lot 4 in order to allow the drainage ditch that is presently located on that lot from the drainage on the south side of Poplar Street could continue to traverse in the same location. It was also suggested that a swale be constructed closer to the edge of the Schell property so the drainage could be diverted away from their drainfield. Lot 3 should be graded as to drain across the northerly edge of Lot 4 in order to take advantage of the swale area. The City Engineer also suggests that drainage should be maintained between Lots 1 and 2 so that it would enter an existing storm water drainpipe behind Larry Dauffenbach's house. The applicant has submitted perk tests for each lot. They have been reviewed and determined to be adequate. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The Subdivider shall submit a drainage plan that shows how existing and increased runoff due to development can be accommodated without adversely affecting properties between the site and Willow Street (see attached SEH report). Drainage easements shall be provided as required. e e e RECOMMENDATION: Approval. FINDINGS: The proposed land division is consistent with the use and lot size require- ments of the Zoning Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. ATTACHMENTS: - Existing condition site plan. - Proposed subdivision. - Engineer's report. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approved as conditioned. !'.I\"" !vU , , Case Numbe~.tl/lj.tf.~.:dd. it & {j g;g Fee Paid ___~_ _________ ,,- Date filed - -1/1-0..----- e, PLANNING AD1\AINISTRATIVE FORlv\ Street Location of Property: ____~~~_~:.)!~_~:.:..!!2_~~r:~t_e!_~~~~___________ 1 D .. f P See Attached Sheet Lega aSCription 0 roperty: ________________________________________ Owne r: N a me _ _ .E.sta.t..~...Pj_.cat.Q..uj..!1~_~~l;.e-r~.2!l------ -------------------- Address___________~~--~-~------------ Phone:_______________ Applicant (if other than oWJ1er): Name ___L~J.I~_J_._.P~1!ff~ILbllEE_____________ 321 W. Hazel St. Stillwater Minn 439-8390 Address______________________________ Phone:_______________ Type of Request:' ___ Rezoning ___ Spacial Use Permit ___ Variance JQC_ Approval of Preliminary Plat ___ Approval of Final ~Ia~ , ~__ Other_________~_________ 'D . ....0 f Req es.... Minor subdivision of currently 3 lots 'into escrlpll n 0 u I. _____________~-:_----.,..---_:-------_:_------------- ___~j.2~~~w_iSh_~~~e~~_t~_W~_EEE1~~~!~_________________________________ ----~---------~------~::::~::~~-~~~~:::~~~~~~ Da"'le 01:1 Publ'IC Hearl.ng.. ' --------------------------------------------- NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn.on back oi this form or at.. tached, showing the following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3. Dimensions of iront and side set-backs. 4. Dimensions oi proposed structure. 5. Street names. 6. Location of adjacent existing buIldings. 7. Other information as may be requested. " '~\'2..3456? . , '~ -+ r9 ~.J hl.~'.Y 1990 . .~~ L~ PAID .:l - . ~3 CITY OF STUWA'Tlffi ':1 \{_:, .STlLLWATF-F;, '1 TO , fv1tHN. , c--',; ',('" ,.-- Approved ___ Denied __._ by tho .PI~nning Commission on _____.~_'-~,~~ (?ate) subiect to the ~ollowing conditions: ________~__________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subject to the - .t. II' d't' \ . .. 10 oWing con I Ions: ________________________________________________ l . --------------------------~-~---~-------------------------------- . Comments: (Use other side), " . . "'SeJ e ENGINEERS. ARCHITECTS. PLANNERS 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 5I PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612490-2000 May 8, 1990 RE: STILLWATER, MINNESOTA MINOR SUBDIVISION ON WEST POPLAR STREET PLANNING CASE REVIEW Mr. Steve Russell, Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. Russell: As you requested. we have reviewed the proposed lot split of three lots into four lots on West Poplar Street between North 5th Street and North Everett Street. Our review consisted of walking the site and adj oining properties with the applicant to review grading requirements and existing drainage and the effect of the proposed lot split and development on the existing drainage. It appears that minimal grading will be required as a part of the proposed development. There is a high point at approximately the center of the area to be developed. From this high point the flow on Poplar Street is easterly to an existing culvert near North 5th Street. The flow in the westerly direction on Poplar Street terminates at an existing low area on the lot line between the two proposed westerly lots to be developed. The flow at this low point is overland to an existing culvert in the back yard of property owned by the developer just north of proposed Lots 1 and 2. The property owner states that he has never experienced flooding in this existing culv~rt. This appears to be a 12" VCP which runs in a northeasterly direction across the access easement (Willow Street) to this property, which then outlets into an improved ditch thence northerly to Hazel Street and then overland into the ravine in Browns Creek. I have calculated the existing runoff for the existing condi tions, with limited development to be 2.85 cfs. We have calculated the additional runoff from two developed lots, that is two houses with a roof area estimated at 24 feet by 50 feet, and a paved driveway for each lot estimated at 30 feet by 12 feet, runoff to be 0.6 cfs for each house or a total of 1.2 cfs for both lots. We have calculated the total runoff at the culvert on e SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC ST PAUL, MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN e Mr. steve Russell May 8, 1990 Page #2 the parcel north of the proposed Lots 1 and 2 to be 4.1 cfs. We have calculated the capacity of the existing 12" VCP which crosses Willow street in approximately a northeasterly direction outletting into an improved ditch to be 10.7 cfs. We have calculated the_runoff from Lots 3 and 4 in the same manner with the same assumptions as the calculation for Lots 1 and 2. We have calculated the runoff from the golf course to be 5.5 cfs and with the addition of the improved lots for the roof area and driveway at 1.2 cfs total, the total runoff on the west side of North 5th street to North Willow street where it enters a cu1 vert and crosses under is 6.7 cfs. We have calculated the capacity of the culvert under West Willow street to be 17 cfs. The developer should maintain drainage between Lots 1 and 2 so that it would enter the existing 12" VCP behind the existing house north of Lots 1 and 2. The developer indicated that there had been no flooding problem with this culvert even in the spring when it could be frozen. If the easterly edge of Lot 4 adjacent to North 5th street were to remain relatively undeveloped, the drainage ditch that is presently located on that lot from the drainage on the south side of Poplar street could continue to traverse in the same location. However, once the drainage reaches the parcel north of Lot 4 which is noted on the developer's proposed subdivision map as property owned by Schell, a swale should be constructed closer to the easterly edge of the Schell property and diverted away from their drainfield. The swale would then be on the easterly edge of the drainfield and outlet into the 15" culvert crossing under Willow Street. The culvert crossing under Willow Street at this point needs to be cleaned out.' When the swale on the edge of the Schell property were excavated, a larger depression area could be provided at the inlet end of the culvert such that it would provide slight pooling effect and perhaps assist in keeping the culvert clean. Lot 3 would more than likely be graded to drain across the northerly edge of Lot 4 and take advantage of the above mentioned swale area. e All of the natural drainage appears to flow in a northerly direction from Poplar Street to the ravine in Browns Creek. It is not anticipated that four new homes constructed in the area will add appreciably to the runoff presently experienced in this area. Since the streets are not permanent streets constructed to City standards with concrete curb and gutter, and there is no storm sewer available, it is not practical at this time to require storm sewer construction more extensively than to retain e e Mr. Steve Russell May 8, 1990 Page #3 the overland flow status to the existing culverts. However, the developer should provide the City with a plan or sketch indicating how he would direct drainage across property which he does not own into existing cuI verts. The City may wish to consider some type of an easement agreement between the developer and other property owners affected by drainage. This type of an agreement could be prepared and signatures obtained by the developer holding the City harmless. If there are any other questions, please contact me. Richard E. Moore, P.E. City Engineer REM/cih cc: Nile Kriesel, City Coordinator BROWNS CREEK - ---- ~-~ j I ; ! I ~'_ ~___.-.-J ;---1 , r---- 1. , '.! r----- I i . "I ,-----.., I! : !: t ! ~--~ i 1--- L-.J ----- t-.-. ,-t--;;-=1..':-; j . i __! . i I . . -..- 1 ! I ._~ _. ---...t' ~ .. -~,;----....: __, I__"~ I --;---~-- ~ ; ~ i-~ r--- ~ ---.1 '--._~ . ~_.__.__.__ __ i ~.+- ~ " i . I · I / \--~ - t' 'I . ,t I - "1> "..-----., ..- . .. ~ -' ~ ~-~ 'l' I ~-~ i , ! ~ - - - ---. . I - .u._ ~ 1 I I I __~~ .~_~:-~.~.. > ~. ~_=~ -~ 1 ~ ~~.:t~- - ~_. -:r 1 -- - -- - ,"--.-- " .-'l, I . "T ' - : . ;---; ; I I == t ~tl---L! L-. 1 . ~.. I ,-1,- t ~n---= .,ta ' : !' t: , I' '", J __--;,,' __-.,' " i! ,)>-;>-.__.....t:. . __.____-._-~c-~ /- d PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT' ON POPLAR SliREET ./' PREPARED BY S. E. H. i /-1 .+-. ~. CITY ENGINEER':d. - /..-0 \. '--'- .j r--./ \ '" o..-~"- - I- OIl Z .. :; ~ <) z W ASPEN ST MAY 8th 1990 , .1~HlS[)fl .. ,~ .. ~ / , *' ---./ -" .~-~---- /~ i -:---- <t:' - l- V> ;;; z <i >- ~ ~ 0 Z .. 0 ,cr en z '" = 600' FILE 89114 CITY OF ST!LLWATER ",,=--' ""''''-'~.,......, J ) J i a: /. lLJ > a: , x I 0 " cr \ (.) r: , .. (/) r , E AL~5T E HAZEL 5T E WILlD'N ST E POPLAR ST E BALSAM ST E SPRUCE 51 E JUNIPER 57 E 5TCAMQRE 5T E 5T CRQ" AvE E 5T'LL>'fATEP Avt f. 'HiLt( IN 51' 9 E ASPE" 51 cPt.L S'. t \....t;l.: s' :. (~E.~"( e .. ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::r ~ e .- - :.. "-- ~.... .- -.... ,'- -~.__. -- ---.. Q) .~ ~ C/) ':)- ~ --~ .. L ~. - 0-" . - ..1_ ._............ " :::::. ' Q. .-- ... ... ~ " ') ~ -~ .. '" .04. f. Eo ~ '" - -- CII ') ~ +c d: J- VI 2 Q .3 :,..... +- ..L . q Q... o d:. 3 '> AtJ j . .- c\ j ~ l. 61 " ~ ..~ 3 ;:) '0 L1 J >- L.._ )- . -:,... -I 4. .. "' ~ ... }. a 0:. ~ ~ 2. IV. ~ ....,) , .__....., . ....:..1 ti". () .~_____.;._ ... v.'. .-.. ... ....-,--............... j( ....-- ........---- ..t't _._. h"'_ _._... .._.. __ ,..__~.., :! ...._+ .0..-'_;,. __,-,,__,~ \ ".-'-""" ...--..- :------:-,-1 i . .... ,." .-. .--.--.-') ___. ...._ ....... .__--.0_- , ! . ( -:_.._4.._.h....____.~ . '~ .:.._.~_..:"'_.....i '0 00... -..-...-.--~ '" ' -..-.- --.. ---.-'- ---.....; I h ....0. ."VI"'-- ....\, - .....-. ~ n:. ,-,--,-, :l\ .........:.0: 3 J~().~_._.. _.... -.- -. ._-- _._-..~~---....- .-'-- -. --_.'.-- ..--.-----... ... r 1'1/'" 1.......r .LON '.J ~ <;.,;l,'il"iJ :;::) ._'___ _.._____.._...______... ____e- N , .. .". -.. ..... . ... . ..--.. .-..-.-.......-. ...-...... _.._- ~ 0- .0 ~....---_.-.....-----:---_.._-_...--..._-- --, 5' -,~' ~ l/) - --. -.;.... --.-.-. ...V-. _....__; _._.__._ ~. ,,:y' ...-- ----....- O. u.___.._._.__.____ tr ~ ...-.---....-- -,-". , ~ ()- C) - ~- _.._- ------ ~ \J'- (1) ~ ......._.-.-.._.---.. - ~ . c:r- .--....... -0 tr itJn :9 .o(V r~.J"111 d Ai' fi "irr)() ,A~ ..,dflld e l ~ 1 -;'t:::l ~ v~ ,..~ ~ o 'e- 0- e . -~.. .., -- - , .~.. ~ ". -. ~ .-...::: .~ ~ ~ .c.r:J ....~~ ~ ....--.3.. o .- ..-.. '..,... ...-..-. ...,...---- .- .-... +- F .. ~ .----. ....- __..111 .. ~... ..._ .. .... .__~...__.--. ...._.a... ~_..._... __."... (:) .--~. .:..-. . "----' ...'-' -- . .- . - -_\11.- :.. ~ --~ --... . ''''3-'' 1 , "II ~ -~ .... \. tC ~2 . ~ -----. . ...---. --....-... . - ... ...-,.. -..-. P----.-- __ __ .. oj ..( ....- ... ~ ." 0( 0:- .i J 3'.l ()4 ~ c:I j-D .. +z .,.. "" L . ~ ~ ~ -( Q '['II"" 'Iff 10 (V ~ it l-.:. lL o ..... ~ ..J Q 1J) 1"-- '''} )- - - Cb M 1.:. k o ~ .,. .:~ vL... .~ ~ ..,Q <X. 11 Q --...- .: -.... --' I/) C'- '.II :r- . ~--..-- 4lI <II ~ ~ . ....... -- d. "'- o . .......... ... " -' .~ '1 s- () , Q 1_ CQ c\- Ll '" t1 :u. ~ ""- '" . ~~ 0 r::: ')- -.J C'\ l- I- 111 L&- a J -tt. .:;) ... ~ '" 4- ~ t' r ~ <;:) - - '"b --..l 3 '1 ~ j..t'7.40 (I _-=1 ' (\{ rd~-ryld ). { .jl d (lId S';!/I"',l e ~ e - f;--- ~.- J= .--. - - ~ ~---._- .._V) ~.- - -""'1 ---..-..-~.... ... .~..:-. ~-..f.A --- -~:.3 .~~~-- -~>-'- - ',; .3.-- ~_. ":'":"-':-- .---.---.:.--- -~-,._. ':--'O-_~_.. .~ c;J..5 N . r'~~ f '- - -..-.. ) J'- ..---'1. ~-- - - " '-6~ ;-- .~ ~. ....:- ---2--iJ\---- ;..... ----. ----:t \_."I~..-- .---. --CL~- . . Z ---~ --...1.-~.. . _._.~.. " , .., -- ~ ; ..----j .~.; ..,_. ._._~. ~ 'w_ _._--.~ ~ ,'-' .\:,,":l '"' II> ... . v......... ~ ~ '1--4 ~.~ U tt..-l \1"'.; . ,... ~-; ~ ... ---<.' .' .:! ~ -.;-; ___.__...____. ~'''-~'''~--l~ _.t ;i. a.. -r:-:-----:-.".~ .- II\~. .;....~~.!~ .________ _.L:"~~_~. V\. J' --~~ -:J-- ~.: _. .:l ~ ~ -~--!~: v, -_..~ _.- . -----1 J 11 --- . ~ --. ~.' . ..~i~~~' ..o-.Q a... ~ "\j WIV ('11 0 ( . 1 ---:-. ............. --1::\1-------- __.__._h._ .-....... _.___." ._.3 \::) .-------,--.....- .-- .. _...._-_._~-~.~..~.~-~~=-.,....__... ....---...... 1;),'''.. -Q.:;-...-.--.--- o -~--_..__..- -.--- -_." ..--- .-. ,-.---....-.--... -.-.--- ..) ~., ..,-- ,--- ~ . j. --- . -- . ---- .--.. .. -.-... - . '_n_' 1. )-- . . . ---_.~ _.--~._------ -_.' .-.---- - .. ------.. .-..-- --~ ~ .--...-.. " '-S ----- - -- ......T- ..:. . ._____. __ C -... -----.-.- ---.--- ~-::;::..._...._- -.--.-. ---- . __n__.__ .._----- - --_._~---'- .---. -- ------..t::l-... 2 ~ ..r'"" ._~.._- ~'-" .;. 01 ~~~~~. ~ ~=-.oo/ . ._'~ \-\- 0.'-- '~ Jr".on3 ... --- 3-.. o -- .3 . .N r~ ~ ..., c:J I -'1 -< . --1 00\, --~ c --. __.. ..___~...._...1 ...,__.____0_ I J'- . 'I ..... ______. _..J --.. ... . ~ -- ~"~~?i-- --j " ._---~ , L. -T'___. 1 .. , .~7JtI/~~ '7l1J~ ~ ~'1 It- - - -a: ~ . A?~ of; )1/)/- 7J,1t1-.4I ;v. i/v--;tu.ffW ~ k ~;~~~~~:Eh~' r ~~~~~~~~~ ~ j-;t;I.#- ~ ~AV.~ ~ ~ ~ Wo/ d<<P '1f r?~ fJI- -r~ ~ J- ~.~ ~ ~-T1~ "...J- 1J~~~~-4;~~~A ~ ~~1 ~~~...w. -d., 7/Jh.P9 ~~~~~rr~~ Q{J~I d~ m./~ ~tJ-~ tdt?-I?.r ~ 4td/.4; Wl;5"J1()?-~ J-~ 1; J 1/)(- 7J'.lftl.. p;f, rf)~ );lm.S5d1'P e I e e -, QBal~e~~ Ebe~ EQB Qa~EE~~~e~HLBQ~II~~B 9~~Ql~191Q~ 1~61 ~ ~IH 91 9Ilbb~eI~B ~~ The borders for the above property" are as follows: the East border is 5th St (an improved street), west border Everett st.. (plat.ted), south bcwder Poplar St. (an imp/""oved .;:.ti~eet), nort.h border abutts property owned by DAUFFENBACH on the west half and property awned by JANET SCHELL on the east half. At the approximate center of the area to be subdivided there is a high point. From that point drainage is to the east and to the west. The flaw to the west from the high paint runs to 16w area approximately midway between proposed lot.s 1 and -. From there the flaw is north to a culvert on the south side of the property at 311 W Willow St. The culvert takes the water under the property of 311 W Willow and Willow St. The flow is then overland north to another culvert which takes the water under Hazel 5t and into the Browns Creek Ravine. The proposal for the increased runoff due to the improvement of proposed lots 1 and 2 is to use the existing low area between lots 1 and 2 as a site for the improved ditch to carry drainage to the existing culverts. According to S.E.H. the existing culverts will acommodate the flow of 10.7 CFS. The current flow was estimated by S.E.H. at 4.2 CFS with increase due to improvement estimated at 1.2 CFS. The improvements to lots 1 and 2 will not increase the runoff beyond the capabilities of the existing culverts. The developers will provide th~ improved ditch in the area between lots 1 and 2. Proper drainage easements will also be provided to the City to insure this flow will not be obstructed in the future. The natural flow from propo~ed lots 3 and 4 is from the center high point to the east. The east side of proposed lot 4 has historically provided the drainage not only for the property proposed far development, but also for a portion of the St.i 11 ;Nater Counb-y Cl Lib gal f course. The f I ow runs from the golf course to a culvert under Poplar 8t and on to the east edge of proposed lot 4. The flow follows the natural low area of lot 4 and continues on to property awned by Janet Schell to a culvert under Willow St. The water exits the cul\/eri: on to 5th St for appro:d matel y 75 feet and then int~_"___""____ -an at her- eu Ivert- wh ic: h"c"al'-j'"Tes"-U';;le---fTow""Tn-t.-i:i-Brown-s.C"reeT::-- F:avine. The proposal for drainage of lots 3 and 4 is to retain the increased runoff caused by the developmen~ on the property. This will be done by leaving the eastern most area of lot 4 undevelop~d. This is the area which has historically been _ _~.___... __. __~ _~,__.__,_,__,,___~_,,_,,_____~____"b______.' used For drainage. Improvements will be made to this area to canfine the actual flowage to a ditch structure. Within the ditch will be several damlike structures. The purpose of th~se dams will be t hold the increased runoff an the developers property far absorption into the ground. The use af ~everal dams within the ditch will allow for greater surface area to be utilized for absorption. Any runoff from the developers prop8rty will not exceed current levels and will diverted to the eastern most area as practical as to have the least impact on other property owners. A further benefit of the proposal is all the runoff will be slowed down as it enters the property to the north of lot 4. This will decrease the potential for water damage to adjacent property ",,-nd promote f urthei~ di ~5si pati on of ~'\Iater t.hrouqh ab<50rpt ion. The current flow as e~timated by S.E.H. is 5.5 CFS. The increased flaw is again estimated at 1.2 CFS.. This makes the total flow of 6.7 CFS. The capacity of the 15 inch culvert at Willow St. is 17 C-S. The total flow without any improvements is clear y less than the capacity of the current so/stern. The current clan for aIding the increased runoff is proposed because a plan which "ncluded a swale on the Schell property to divert runoff to t e existing culvert was rejected by Schell. Therefore a Ian to maintain runoff at current levels or less is the only option available at this point. Again a drainage easenent will be provided to the City to insure proper drainag is maintained. The entire plan outIi the lan~ for drainage current conditions. development on neighb to the land will be d runoff to the drainag ed above uses the natural contours of with some improvements to enhance his will minimize the impact of the ring property owners. Any excayation .ne to utilize the above plan and divert areas described above. .- ---,-_._--_._--~"._----- .---------.---' ---~_. --~_..._.--,_._._------- - ...__,_..__.__._~_~__..._v~...... . ...._ --...~ ~ ~ \, e e --- r ; t. .~ ~~~'!Isr .. " '. . .. -- .. . :.....,;... .< .:~ '\ . . f)U~ ~ . u _. . _._._ _ ...u_ _ -_ 1m. ---q- - -- --- - - - q ...... ,.,C., ___ ___, ___ __.. _ r.- -" .. .... j ~ ;j! , ....... i"- ~ . r . .. ...! -.I' . ... . .. .' J ... ... --I~I ~l -- 7;11 -':I~ . / , - - r-J , ; I I. . . -. ,. :r.-,..-.- t ~ ..-- L( 1 L o-r- -' - - " i ,12 '~ --~ --~-~' ~ -I I J I, j t " ' L ,. . II I I 1..-1 J rlJ J . J !~ r- 1 II I I,_! ' _L-t-+_~+tr n- ~-=::-r~ Iv.ttttt' i I I I I I.J~ ll1J .J1J I J__ :_~. i'.\ -.... , p~ p" t:'/ ., I' :;,U 1"(1 f3 I ... nrT' hlu-f. III J- . - . J I( oS' , f ;. --- .- -.-- _, 0-'_- _.. ...-t-. - .. - . _.. O. . . .. .. -.. ._, .. . , .--.-- ~2 . -. Jc.13 . . - - ._~ I I 1-1-1 I ,i - - I l I I I I l. I I I I I I I I I I j I lh'l\ ft \\14; lIP .- -. .. - I }- '.!A'I,l II!; I~t ~ir. I I I ' I .. I I - ~~ I I I ! ' I I " .( ! ~ .. . 1 '3 ! t . .. '1 t ~ '\ !\r, . If '5 )6 ll~ r , ..>> ~<< "Il, 1 ! ,.._ ., ..- "'.- ,. -- --- I.... .,- . ,,_., --:- --.- .- ._-- -- --- -- '--'''1'' _j~H ~'t.h/L~~ ~"",:S,~r __0.' _ _ ., i-:~ ~/I ~'~'I:'h * y -~l 't~.;' '-I "l ,.!: J .~' '~ f-- , ~ . i I""" ' . .. - i L( 1 ~ Lo-~ ~ r~'- -- .,- -- --- -'- - l Lei t r ., -- J-~ .. .. -I .. ,.... ~ I I ! , ~ I , , ,. ~ , [\ --\ r~ . t ' . """'ll' ---. j I I ~ \4. ")0 t.\~ 1- ~;1 I - -- --- -~- L......-.. .,-- - ,-,- ---1---- ---.--.. _...- .'_.- --. row j' PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW e CASE NO. SUP/90-24 Planning Commission Meeting: May 15, 1990 Project Location: Northeast corner Highway 36 Frontage Road and Tuenge Drive Comprehensive Plan District: Industrial Park Zoning District: IP-C Industrial Type of Application: Special Use Permit PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Special Use Permit for 31,086 square foot multi use auto service center and commercial retail uses. DISCUSSION: The application is for a two building auto service center. The site is located along the Highway 36 Frontage Road in the Brick Pond Special Plan Area. (See attached Land Use Map.) Building "A" contains 17,836 square feet and houses convenience stores on the North end "closest to the residential area. Building "B" has 13,250 square feet and contains auto service related uses. The building sits on a 3.32 acre site. The proposed development site is a part of a larger parcel of land that runs to the North to 61st Street (currently being constructed). A storm sewer easement divides the two portions of the lot. A minor land division spliting the lot is required as a condition of approval. Lands to the North and West are currently zoned R-B Residential. An Evergreen Tree vegetative buffer and six foot wooden fence is required to reduce the visual impact and soften the appearance of the commercial use from the residential area. e The building meets the setback, lot coverage and parking requirements with the exception of Building "A: II setback from Tuenge Drive. Thirty five feet is proposed, forty feet is required. The landscape plan shows street trees located along the Frontage Road and Tuenge Drive as required. Sod or seeding is provided in other perimeter landscaped areas. It is recommended to improve the appearance of the development, the landscape plan be modified to provide a 2 1/2 foot to 3 foot berm around the street sides of the site and all grassy areas be sodded or an irrigation system installed to ensure the growth of the seeded areas. Steeply sloped disturbed area located in the Northeast corner of the site should be sodded to control erosion. A guard rail shall be installed along the paved areas to protect cars from the steeply sloped area. A trash enclosure is provided at the Northeast corner of the site. This may be inconvenient for some businesses. A condition of approval requires that all trash receptacles shall be screened by a structure of similar rock face block materials as the building. No mechanical equipment is shown on the building elevations. All mechanical equipment shall be screened by approved landscaping or located so not to be conspicuous from public view. It is recommended additional landscaping be planted in front of the two buildings facing the Frontage Road. 1 e As required by City policy, all landscaping shall be installed, or if not practical, bonded for before building occupancy. The site plan shows storm water running off to the Northwest corner of this site. This can be accommodated by the existing storm sewer line that runs along the back of the property. The Fire Department requires two way access lanes to be 24 foot minimum. The travel lane in front of Building "B" shows a 20 foot travel lane and the driveway width next to the trash enclosure may not be 24 feet. No lighting plan was submitted with the application. A lighting plan is required that directs light down or toward the buildings and away from streets and residential areas. No elevations or sign plan is'prov"ided for Building "B". The elevations for Building "A" show the metal facia roof ending at the'North and South corners of the building. The West elevation which will not have the facia will be prominent from Tuenge Drive and vehicles traveling Eastbound on the Frontage Road. This side of the building is in effect, the front of the building and should be treated accordingly. The building facia should be continued around the entire building for Building "A" and "B" and additional building architectural detail added to that side of the building, possibly through use of color and/or block detailing. The Signage Plan is shown on the site plan and typical building elevations for Building "A". The Sign Ordinance allows one sign per business with a maximum sign area of one square foot of signage per building frontage. Because of the building design, it is recommended to allow one square foot per frontage of lease held space with a maximum of two foot letters. No signage is shown on the Tuenge Drive or the East side of Building "BII. A 192 square foot, free standing sign is located in a driveway landscaped median . The maximum permitted size for this tyoe if sign is 100 square feet. It is recommended that the free-standing sign be limited to 25 feet heighth similar to other signs in the area and be a center identification sign with no tenant advertising (one sign per tenant is permitted). The steel pipe base to the free-standing sign shall be clad with block to match the building material or redesigned in some way to complement the design of the building. The plans have been referred to the City Engineer for comments. Comments from those agencies should be contained in conditions of approval. RECOMMENDATION: Approval as conditioned. FINDINGS: As conditioned, the proposed use will not be lnJurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and will be in harmony with the general purpose of this Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. e 2 e CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. A Certificate of Survey shall be prepared by the developer and approved by the City before building permits are issued separating this site from the parcel to the North. 2. The landscape plan shall be modified to include: A. A six foot fence along the North property boundary; B. An Evergreen Tree screen planted (thirty foot on center) to visually screen the commercial area from the residential area. C. Grass 2.5 to 3 foot screening berm around the Frontage Road side and Tuenge Drive side of the site. D. Sod in all area 'Shown as grass. E. Shrubs on bushes planted in front of the buildings along the Frontage Road. F. All mechanical equipment shall be screened by a opaque structure or landscaping. G. All landscaping shall be installed before building occupancy. H. The landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy condition as shown on the final plans or this permit may be voided. 3. An auto guard rail shall be constructed along the curb in the Northeast area next to the steeply sloped site. 4. Building IIAII shall be setback 40 feet from the west property line along Tuenge Drive. 5. The trash enclosure shown on the plan shall be constructed of the same material as the wall of the building. 6. All trash receptacles shall be contained in the proposed structure located in the northeast corner of the site or concealed in the business building. There shall be no trash receptacles along Tuenge Drive to the rear of Building IIAII. 7. A lighting plan shall be submitted that shows fixture location, height and design. Lighting shall be directed at the building or down so the lens of the light is not visible from the public streets or residential areas. (No wall packs). 8. All two-way travel lanes shall have a clear width of 24 feet. 9. The building facia for both buildings shall be continued around the entire building and additional detailing added to the West elevation of Building IIAII along Tuenge Drive. e 10. The sign plan shall be modified in the following ways: A. Each lease held space shall have a wall sign with a maximum area of one square foot of signage per building frontage or lease held space. Maximum letter height shall be 24 inches. 3 e e B. There shall be no advertising signage on the West side of Building "A" or the East side of Building "BII. C. The free-standing sign shall have a maximum height of 25 feet and area of 100 square feet. The commercial center name only shall be placed on the sign. D. The six foot steel post shall be clad with material similar to the building materials or modified with a design complementary to the site. 11. Comments from the City Engineer are incorporated as conditions of project approval. 12. A driveway permit shall'-be obtained from MnDOT before building permits are issued. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval. AC loa e Case Number~J.f.'r;qa.=~'f Fee Paid __3_~.;_~___ Date Filed _~I-_;:_j_2g- .PLANNING ADlv\INISTRATIVE FOR^,\ Street Location or Property: ------------------------------------------ Legal Doscription or Property: __S.E.E...KC.XACHlill._________________________ Own e r: Na m e ____ _G.\!!2."hQ -~ g!"t.D~Sl3__.__________ ---------------------- Address____~~~~_~~_~~liE~i_jl~2_____ Phone:_2~2=~]~~______ Adoliccmt (ir other then oW]1er): Name __J:1~..r_c_o__c_Q.I:1.l:Ltx_\!g,t!Q!L___________ . . Address _2_2_l3__li:..._Ii~!!!].~_~.Y~..:._!1~2____ P hone: _~!~=2]1..:-..9..9_6_0__ Type or Request:' ___ Rezoning ___ Special Use Permit ___ Variance ___ Approval or Preliminary Plet ___ Approval of ~inaI. Plat _~_ Other __~Q.1iQ.!.!!Q!:TB>:J;._.Yl'~_.?ERMIT Description of Request: _~'!.~Q.}1~!!_i_.!Ll.r.::f_.Pi!'_t.F_i_c_~_________________:_ ------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------~1-----~-------------- S. . "A l' k (/~ J !1f~~ 19nature or pp leanl: ---:K.~----C1-L------~IJ- n Date or Public Hearing: _____________________________________:..__...:.____ NOTE; Sketch of proposed property and structure to be drawn In 'back o. '~nn or at- tached, showing the following: 2)\:\ '2. 4 56;> 1 North direction. c-..~ -+ & , . <\/ ,9\ 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. ~ MAY 1990 6\ 3. Dimensions of front and side set-backs. ~ PAID ---: 4. Dimensions of proposed structure. ~:~ CITYOFSTH..LWATER ;:::::~i 5. Street names. \';:~ STILLt4j:..TER. c::1 6. Location of adjo.cent existing buildings. ~~-, M1NN. c.:::-~- 7. Other iniormation as may be requested. ~0 ,0,\. ' "-f:../.J r;/. .-, , r, '\ L\ - .... v uu'<1l '"J Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho 'Planning Commission on ___________ (date) subiec-:- to the following conditions: ____________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ e Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subiec to the .c II' d'" ,0 oWing con lnons: ________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Comments: (Use' other side) "'''''.'1""'.' ,." f "j{' MED UM DENSIT I I 96 - 95033 I 2100 e 't,s,;.,\;;W ,. ..., INOEPENOENr SCHOOL olsrRlcr 531 ~. 622~~~033 ~ D D b CO ... 95033- 2210 IlL ~IIINDUSTRIAL PA ~lO 95033 j I- 96 - 95033 - 0:: 2200 I-l w 2150 (I) I- u..,<t o ~ >-l..J I- - - I- U( - 60th STREET T.H. 36 "=5&' e __M_ PJ/ HnW ......~....it1i.~. ~-- f'W:..nlllii "Uu-JJ~ li'l.-i " .. ,i~ """lIIoW ~~ '> ~ ; ", ~ b CD . 62- 09033 \ 235i-- I OEDi';A TED ~;"3 (I) I- :I: !:! w :I: '" 0: t. '" <( o _'''~' ""':.=:. ~',.:c"ll~r;~...t-: K COMME I I I 09033 23ss.tP~ 9J;S I D AUTO o - - - ZONING DISTRICTS ---. CITY LIMITS .-/ PROPOSED LAND USE STILLWATER MINNESo.TA DATE: 6-16-87 FILE: 87068 aNC....-s.~.~N.... e RIVER HEIGHTS AUTO HALL Stillwater, Minnesota / This development consists 0 f tenants associated wi th the automobile industry plus certain, high volume, drive in service establishments that cater to residential areas. Specialists in the automobile industry that usually frequent this type of development are: Tire sales and installation Tune up speciali~t~ Auto Body repair and painting Wholesale auto parts dealers Muffler and brake installation Radio sales and installation Upholstery repair Van conversions General mechanics and engine repair Parts overhaul The maximum number of employees for these types of operations are usually one person for each repair bay plus one for general office assistance. Auto parts sales is usually two to four employees including the delivery service. Auto body repair will usually use one employee for two or three work stations as the wait for parts to be delivered. Drive in generally service business consist of; Pizzerias Dry Cleaners Liquor stores for the residential community Two to four employees is normal for each business with parking required adjacent to the main entry. Pizzerias generally have their highest demand in the evenings after normal businesses have closed "and therefore do not hav!=! a high impact on the parking requirements for the mall as a whole. - ~ -~SEH A- ., ENCINEERS _ ARCHITECTS - PI.ANNERS /UA-- >-(J~%f 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, 5T. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612490-2000 May 15, 1990 RE: STILLWATER, MINNESOTA PLANNING CASE REVIEW RIVER HEIGHTS AUTO MALL PLANNING CASE SUP 90-24 Mr. Steve Russell, Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. Russell: We have reviewed the site and grading plans for the proposed River Heights Auto Mall to be located at the northwest quadrant of State Trunk Highway 36 north frontage road and Tuenge Drive. We find that the grading plan generally meets the requirements of Ci ty standards. We recommend that erosion control fencing be instailed around the site as shown on the enclosed drawings in red. We have estimated the cost for erosion control, which includes seeding the entire site, disc anchoring, fertilizer and silt fence, to be $7,620. The street grades used on Tuenge Drive are incorrect. Approx- imate centerline elevation at the driveway is 909.1 which will change the driveway grades onto Tuenge Drive. The correct vertical curve information is shown in red on the grading plan. The driveway location on Tuenge Drive will have to be moved north to miss the inplace Tuenge Drive catch basin (shown in red on the grading pI an) . The catch basins proposed on the dri veway , if needed with the revised street and driveway grades, should be moved behind the 5 foot concrete sidewalk shown. A copy of the drainage computations should be submitted along with pipe sizes and grades. - I am concerned about the 10 foot retaining wall at the northeast corner of the site. You may want to check the codes to see if the City requires a fence or plantings at the top. SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA FALLS, WISCONSIN e- e Mr. steve Russell May 15, 1990 Page #2 The site is served by an 8 inch sanitary sewer stub and 8 inch water stub at the northwest corner of the property. These stubs have adequate depth and size to serve the site. Driveway access off of the T.H. 36 frontage road will be controlled by Mn/DOT and a permit will be required. We are enclosing the print you transmitted to us for your files. If you have any questions, please call me. s~:et N- Barry C. Peters, P.E. BCP/cih Enclosure /' .j Vi ~:~~~~~ ' ~~~.. -~.. ' ~ "1-~~";'~ 1"' ~~:.~: r---... ~. . \) ::5 ~~ ~~ ~~ '-' .,-..:',.:-':..L.. . ...;.::"ii-.....:.:,......... . .... -...... . ~ p,- :.'.... -\ '4 :.L. _'\ - . rL. , "\' ',-- 'v\' - _C\' 0...\. ---~,\,\ 'i ?I ,-\1'0 J \ ~\Ev qD3.\~ ~ - \ r-..>.. ~ ~~\0;L ~ 'A'~f . \0 C,t/\ \ 0 .e:.. , , '3~ i.:; ~:: . i: - ,-. G \ - f. 100 ~1 ~\,06 ') 6" \ \)V 'J.-1..0 \ 0 ;;:: s> S ~\ LtO J.. "Lo-,~ ~.pe\ 'f' .;-. ~I' -.-_. .;... -" '-~'---'-. ,".. ,-,'. '-' .~. ......~~:' :_'.. ~_-: .~:.:.:.::~. .::..:,._0__.:':.........:'.:-- ";'.. ..::~... ..--.....'-...-..-..--. --'--'-.".' '. - .........-.-.1.. _ ",' ~.~.~-,-.>".-.;._.'^ e ; (S/6;/ .c A c.- &::- ) F ... ('() (1) e PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. SUP/90-25 Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 1990 Project Location: 319 West Pine Street Comprehensive Plan District: RCM Zoning District: Multi-family residential Applicant's Name: Bruce and Vikki Brillhart Type of Application: Special Use Permit {Bed and Breakfast} Project Description: A Special Use Permit to conduct a five bedroom Bed and Breakfast establishment. e Discussion: The request is to conduct a five bedroom Bed and Breakfast establishment in the Hersey Bean Home on the Southeast corner of Pine and Sixth Streets. This home is extremely large. It has been an eight-plex since approximately 1960. The applicants have stated that they plan to restore the house back to a single family dwelling and provide three Bed and Breakfast rooms on the second floor and two on the third fioor. They also plan to submit the home to the State Historical Society for National Register nomination. The existing lot is quite large as shown by the attached site plan. The plan also shows where off-street parking will be located on the property. This is adequate for the proposed Bed and Breakfast use. The lot will also be screened from the adjacent property to the south with a wood fence and a hedge on the west. A sign plan has been submitted with this application along with the sign location as shown on the site. plan. This 317511 sign meets the sign provisions in the Bed and Breakfast Ordinance. . There was an initial concern about the distance of the home to another Bed and Breakfast Inn, in this case the Rivertown Inn. According to the Ordinance, another Bed and Breakfast Inn shall not be within three blocks of another. If a typical block in the City is identified. Its approximate length is concluded at 300 feet {six lots all 50 feet wide}. It is determined that the distance between Bed and Breakfast establishments must be approximately 900 feet. In this case, the applicants have stated that the distance between this home and the Rivertown Inn is 350 paces or 1,050 feet which is well over three typical city blocks. The report filed by the applicant states each provison in the Bed and Breakfast Ordinance and how they will adhere to each provision. e CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. SUP/90-25 1. The manager of the residence shall live on-site. 2. Before use as a Bed and Breakfast, the building and cooking facilities shall be approved by the County Health Officer, Fire Marshall and City Building Official and a Letter of Occupancy received by the community Development Director. (This may be done in stages as rooms are available for guests.) 3. One parking space for each_guest room shall be set aside and marked "FOR GUEST ONLY". Additional spaces are available for owners use. 4. If provided, dining facilities for breakfast shall be available to registered guests only (not available to the general public). 5. No liquor shall be sold on premises. 6. One four square foot sign is allowed on-site consistent with the architectural character of the building (maximum height four feet). 7. Adequate pedestrian scale lighting shall be provided between the Inn and parking area. 8. No general external lighting of the site that may impact the surrounding residential area is allowed. 9. The Special Use Permit is not transferable. New property owners or managers shall require a new Special Use Permit. 10. The Bed and Breakfast use permit shall be reviewed before the Planning Commission and City Council for revocation if complaints regarding the Bed and Breakfast use are received by the Community Development Director. 11. The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Survey before final approval. 12. Access easement shall be kept clear for the property owner to the South. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: See listed conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. FINDINGS: The proposed use will not be lnJurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare and is in harmony with the general purpose of the Bed and Breakfast Ordinance. e ATTACHMENTS: - Report - Site Plan - Sign Design. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval with new conditions Nos. 11 & 12. e 5/4/90 Attachment to Special Use Permit Request for 319 W. Pine Introduction The city code of Stillwater Chapter 31/Subdivision 23 Supplementary Regulations/Section 'h.' sets forth:requirements for applicants to meet,ffthey wish to be issued a Special Use Permit to operate a Bed and Breakfast facility. The following explanation is to illustrate our complete compliance with these items. Each item listed directly corresponds to a requirement listed numerically in Section 'hr. It is the intent of Bruce and Vikki Brillhart to make 319 W. Pine their home, and make the operation of their home as a Bed and Breakfast a positive contribution to the historical and commercial community of Stillwater. Furthermore, an eventual goal of the rehabilitation of this historic property shall be placement on the National Register of Historical Places. Explanation e 1) Attached is a Preliminary Site Design Plan which illustrates the proposed arrangement of the required seven (7) parking spaces. These are arranged to provide minimum impact on the major facades of the structure~ and neighborhood. 2) Dining facilities shall be available only to registered guests. 3) The proposed facility is located on the S. E. corner of the intersection of Pine and 6th St.The closest existing Bed and Breakfast facility , the Rivertown Inn, is located one "long block" north and one block east on the N.W. corner of the intersection of Olive and 5th St. The shortest pedestrian travel between these two facilities is approximately- 350 paces or 1,050 ft. Comparatively, the length of the 300 block of W. Pine St. which is typical to most Stillwater city residential blocks is about 110 paces, thus a typical dis tance of 3 blocks would be approximately, 990 ft. This interpretation would place the two facilities more than the required distance apart, and complies with the intent of the supplementary provision. 4) Liquor shall not be sold on the premises. . (cont.)S.U.P. Request Attchment 319 W. Pine 5) The proposed location of a Four(4) Square Foot identification sign is shown on the attached preliminary Site Design Plan. A design sketch of the sign is also attached. 6) The proposed location at 319 W. Pine is in an RCM Zoning District which is permissible to Bed and Breakfast facilities by Special Use Permit. 7) The current conf~!me~ age of this structure is 1884,when Jacob Bean, a prominent business man, is recorded in the City Directory as having his residence here. An illustration of the house during his residency is attached. The house was probably built by the Hersey family for E.L. Hersey shortly before 1884,but definite historical confirmation is pendine. Historical note is made of the structure. in Looking Backward by E.L. Roney ,a historical pamphlet from the Stillwater Public Library collection. "Samuel Hersey never resided in Stillwater, although two of his Bons did and they built three of the most elegant homes in the city.... Facing each other at Pine and Sixth, are the former Bean home, now made into apartments,: and the home across Pine Street,.... They and the Hersey-Staples block are the remains of the Hersey-Staples partnership lauched in Bangor, Maine 115 years ago." An illustration of these three homes is attached from a 1910 Sanborne map of the city. 8) The proposed facility will offer 5 bedroom units of varying historical character in additon to the restored original 1st floor Parlor and Dining Rooms. 9) Area lighting shall be provided between the structure and parking areas utilizing. ground mounted bollard type fixtures. This type of fixture provides safe levels of illumination without illuminating the building facades unnaturally or raising light levels of adjacent properties. 10) No additonal external lighting shall be installed other than as approved by the city of Stillwater for Item 9 above. 11) The proposed facility will comply with all State and County requirements for operating licenses and forward written proof of compliance to the Stillwater Director of Community Development prior to commencing operation. e ,~.I~J"'{!L,b,Nar:~...I,~~I~~ . j;wN11f1ZAl1oiJs~N .3f1 VI. 'f'I ~ 5/.2 7/tO . . (W~~ .-p4Z-A~V~) ?c6--fc:A? 51r11~1""'o~l~ .' 5i^IR tJ~ ?b<':>I e '~Q~. .sIN 1~-rO 3RDrt-1< . 'WltJOcY/? - ~ .s1(dJ~' I cLbro1-1-PAlN-r~ t:,NAr1~1- . - ~ .5lbU A~ 3.t/f s.F7 -rorAl- ( COf"Y 'fO~~t;;V -pY G.j--('i 'PiJ:+JN t".. ) ~ ill '0 -, . ?O~1S 4)(4. ?Al~ WOOD wi 4~h~~ CDJ2.N~ 'e " 6 o \ --t e tit , i J I .",.' I, \,~ ,""', \, \,' ,\ .. I-J . ; .' ~' ,t , , f' ;,"( ~\, \" \ ' , . . , ' ,. ,~ ,J .. :; oj o /" '~ ~< --, ~ ,- : . -- /- ---- <: tI ---- ..--" '- I' . ( .......... ( ---.. ~ ....." ~ tI I': l!~J ~H \0/ . f) "\ \ \ , // ./ N ~ 1 . ~... .."~J' .-/ " . // . ~.\.(:s.'ll";....);:- .. .~ ~~.~.f ".~.( . \\. 7:-"'t'. . :~/ ,I~~ i.y. j/''..:--!'-P .~, ;. ., \ (P' ./ \ ~~ ~//- , 1\1~ ~'>// : //\ // \/ /// ". ... ' 'J. I ~ ---r(--O'\--- .--- c::a. o ,A~\ /..----.....:~.~-:~ Q.'". ~(2 ~ Ii I, \ :l \ - ll-\ ';;. \/1_/,; :' \ '" \ \\ ,,'-~\ \\ iJ \:" ~~" .' 'I.....' ~, \ '\ \ '" ./~-<,; __~ S'{. __ 0-tr 0'~' 'I \ t \t< --~\ !'l .., .;-... -- ). , ~~ ~U'", ..-:> . ..-u \~ . e \ pll .. ~~ ~,.1'" ~,^,:-<.<. . (i~ ,. 'I /- "1'& ',. .' 1"1"" " \,1. .1 / // ,!l \ \('~/~.~, , I.~ \ \] , /- .--1J\'\ " (I~'; '.. __ )1. \ .~~.../\ ~ /1.\ <I> ~ . 'J I,:S \t~""'.}'~ ~ ~ V . f"'. \-::;. ~ l:-c- VI1.f!. t'Gl ~.~:"s. HOLCOMBE 7...[ .~.- ,.,-- / 1, \S\.>.. <:J / ('\ . // v..../' (>.;./ //'<.," ,6 .\ \, (' ';:\Z II '{\ " ')l:' .....;\,,/. \1. .. . \5 ~ 'J'/fll-l'l _AI. "" Y' .n I '~l\ w...\ /~"I:i~. \ '11 "'. .._'~ r. / / /' ~ (j\ "1\ \ e '. .; ~ !. : . l.. ~::.,;i.;'~~':::~~7;;":~~~)}."':'':. ,.e i . t. RI T r-~ , ~ . : ," ;;..... . ....~.. '..' , ,,' . . . ...... ~~~~;~f~~s'j~[,b ~1SHA-rIc. -wvd.-DP\1G:tJ1 ~ -, I ?~ ~XISll~e,. ~~. . :l. Sf' 1=='1..001:.:. .3RD nroQ J - A-V)~iJr~~~ .~IVE%-y.~Y ~~'N' ~ {pll,o..lcoP ~iJ::~ (~) I j. I 'l : ~ f-6f~At11 5 I ?~I*"~ ~! 6 I /Jr ~',(I~ JJ& ~-"K\JcnJ i< ~ " ~t:;;rlN (",. c.l..!12B> -c..tJr: crOg~t1,b,lN ) .~ N01<:Ji-'. .31 CJ wi/I kl f. !SI-rp ..flAtJ P I 1-::::20. (~~1iz) I j ~- . i:: r-. .,..,..........--~~~~~:-...,....; .-. '.'- . ~---~ .......:,.._.;...' .:...,.., e cR. enee {!. :J.ueLia.fz. 504 ~outfz. ~ixtfz. ~hed ~tilLwate'tJ dV{inne~ota 55082 A)/-/ )~,;,-r 0 .' " , ~ 1/71):03; !?1iJ ~ 1 ~~~ (Jdz ~d e~ ~ yd~~ tfI~ LL-M<-~ c:?2/fd ~ . ~iaaLht, /4. /-;dpLtti-L4.,f::t". I c;1~ 1P-"3()J~ '''\ ~.. ~U'YtlU14 0-1 ~"~ ~ .~~ . /7./) , C;U:A~'7J ~1-1AO ~ : J~~t6~~~.~.1J ~CL bJJ&.~ cut ::;//1 ?U, 1?0lG.dt ') ~-I~aP~~~l .. ~.~ ~ ~ 3,~{Z7 p..'LWJ ~./ 4'~. .~t.. {J/FL'-nLd,@...<.uLv U ' "). I L-/ 4-vJ- ~ ?UA-t.-t. {1.~/~c~/lA,~ .~-1.. I . . C' . ~ G ) . -I' -P . { 5 (j rj c;xJ. t:,7 '..df~ . ___ ~"-- .-;Cf;Ce-:t ~. 91Jz.- /~-G ,. u/ O_~_.~.~~.;;tz; V e , ~~0jJ~~' " ~ -o~(J~~;Z0L ~~'~fC~~C~ .;zA.-~/~"--u( . --()~ ~L P';MtA.d2,.L . ~7f. ~m, ~. -- f):1-;;. .- ."t-:-h ~UU-e&~0 ~ /}1.-L6LU-<..1.. . ~M'. /~:::z 8 " ,/ ~ ~.tc '--...-- V'-"'~ U .... '_._L'-'~lli~'_!l._~_ .:....t.;.~ ,- ...." - .~" -';~~.L..~ ::,~:~: ;~. '/~~ ~Z< ,~f-;~.h~~~~t,~;~:~~~~~~~?~~,?~:'~~~~~~i.;~~';;~t.~.~~~~~~a?1~:~~_ Ornamental A840 on No. 50 WB features au- thentic "glass-like" polycarbonate acorn shape (14 x 24") on our vintage bracket shown in verde green. Overall scale is a dramatic 14 x 53". Use 75,100, or 175 watts of mercury vapor or 50, 70 or 100 watts of high pressure sodium. The larger scale A850 16'h x 29" can be used with this bracket. It also carries our G-16 globe. See page 7. Twin 4620TF on 78 WB shown in black these elegant lanterns each scale 12 x 38" and fea- ture Colonial design, antique seeded acrylic lens and frosted chimneys to carry 100 watts of mercury each or 50 watts of high pressure sodium. Ballasts must be remote. Overall twin unit scale is a dramatic 30 x 38". Coor- dinates with our larger #9623TF pole lan- terns. Almost thirty other models of this de- sign are available in varying scales and mounting. Call for literature. ( A820/1SBB coordinates with our Ornamental A850 and A840 wall units where a medium scale fixtures is needed. Shown in verde green with a white polycarbonate globe the unilS feature a fluted fitter, unique fonte (tail) and baflast backplate for either 50 ""att mercury vapor or 35 watt high pressure sodium. Our A850115BB scales 8 x 26" H with a 12. projeaiDn. G ..~ . . G14 on No. 60WB shown with a bronze tint polycarbonate 14" globe in our architectural medium bronze finish on the bracket. Unit scales 14 x 29" with a 17'h" projection and carries incandescent up to 150 watts or 50 watts of mercury vapor or 70 watts of high pressure sodium. The bracket will handle our C or RC cubes per the selector chart on page 3. Our slightly larger No. 62 WB bracket is scaled for 16 thru 24" globes or 15 to 20" cubes. Either bracket can be used on our poles. ! ~ 20 8675 wall bracket fixture has an impressive' 15 x 30" scale with a 19'h" projection. Shown is our architectural medium bronze and with a six-light candle cluster this design features our eight-sided cage and sixteen plane Man- sard roof. The 8675 is joined to our U.l. ap- proved splicing compartment backplate (providing 19" of vertical adjustment) by an elegant "S" scroll holding the fixture. Other mountings are available including pier units. See page 3 for the post top model. '.O~~".('~""',~ Special Ornamental 3-A840 WI wall unit scales a striking 42 x 72" with three of our 14 x 25" ornamental.A840 authentic glass-like "acorns" reproduced in polycarbonate (Le- xan). All aluminum constructiOlll assures durability. Shown in Antique Broa;ze finish these brackets are available in incandescent. 50.75 or 100 walts of mercury vapor or 50 or 70 watts of high pressure sodium. Coordi- nates with ourA8S0 pole fixtures on page 3 and the single bracket shown on dNs page. e " '" . \ '^ ~ Eightscape/Bollard 6300. . . .._."-_.,-~_....",..--,,,-_:.,,,".'..""'-'".:- e MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FR: Heritage Preservation Commission DA: June 5, 1990 RE: RESTORATION PLAN OF HOME AT 319 WEST PINE STREET The Heritage Preservation Commission reviewed the restoration plan for the Hersey, Staples and Bean mansion at 319 West Pine street at the June 4, 1990 meeting. Mark Balay and vikki and Bruce Brillhart presented the plan. The Heritage Preservation Commission supports the restoration of this home. The proposed Bed and Breakfast use is appropriate for .the restoration and preservation of this wonderful home. The Brillhart's are sensitive to the historic integrity of this structure. e e PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. SUP/90-26 Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 1990 Project Location: 421 South Main Street Comprehensive Plan District: Central Business District Zoning District: CBD Applicant's Name: Kenneth G. Duneman Type of Application: Special Use Permit PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Special Use Permit to conduct a temporary food vending business out of a popcorn wagon along Nelson Street. DISCUSSION: The request is to place the popcorn wagon which was recently located on the corner of Main and Nelson Streets to a new location along Nelson Street. The wagon has been located in Downtown Stillwater for a number of years and the owner would like to remain in the general area. This area along Nelson Street between Water Street and the river is very busy during the Summer. The Rivertown Trolley is across the street from the site. Buses often unload passengers in this area for the Andiamo Boats and other visitor attractions, and five restaurants are located within a half-block radius. Adding to this congestion may cause additional traffic problems in the area. There are no sidewalks along Nelson Street in this vicinity so there is no definition between pedestrian space and the street. This Special Use request is similar to requests made for peddlers licenses in Lowell Park with the exception that this will be located on private property along a public street. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The electric hook-up shall be inspected by a Stillwater Building Official. 2. The popcorn wagon shall be setback ten feet from the property line. 3. The popcorn machine shall be removed by November 1, 1990. 4. A trash can shall be placed near the service counter and maintained by the owner. 5. The placement of the popcorn wagon on-site shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. e 6. This application shall be reviewed after November 1st for next season. e e RECOMMENDATION: Determination of request. FINDINGS: This is a very intensively used area in Downtown Stillwater. Adding an additional commercial use to this area may cause a conflict with pedestrians and vehicles. ATTACHMENT: Site Plan. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval as conditioned. e MU ') ~ I~ ~., J Xg,n's Q{efe ~ashion Popcorn CO'I Inc. 1510 Mainstreet, !J{opKins, Minnesota 55343 · ojfit.e 9{umEers: 4;J() O~ 933-6069 Specia[ tJJea[/ To introduce ourselves we offer FREE: one 75 cent box of popcorn with any ice purchase of $1.00 or more. 401 Main Street South, Stillwater GOOD TIIRU 1O~ 1-89 We also sell: Popcorn (with or without salt) Pop Haagen Dazs Ice Cream Fruit Bars Tropical Snow Carmel Corn Ice (cubes or blocks) Thanks, Ken e AC 100 e Case Numbe~~I/1.e. f!:_J_G 00" . --- Fee Paid ___ __________ Da:e Filed __(!f-l-'i!_____ . PLANNING ADJ\i\INISTRATIVE FOR1v\ Street Location or Property: '___'!i~~{____~!.?!:~~___!..~t(i2_5_t. . .~. t . -Fe -e J77f J?> c 1. t?) . ~ f) / Legal Doscnpllon 01 Property. ---------------------------------------- Own e r: N a ~ e Ke .:d:::.:.e72__r:1.__._A_'t.:::._c:.~0:..IJ.-:.~---------_- ~...... "-/ sT' ../lCYN;t.lJ' ~.J)yJ I...; /(j I- 1-1 ;v.. . - Address____~____!J~7~---------------- Phone:~~:?~c6~~~ A60licant (if other then oWJ1er): Name _________________________________ . . uJ 04/( c?v>\ ~?R7?J Address______________________________ Phone:_______________ Type of Request:. ___ Rezoning ___ Approval or Preliminary Plat X- Special Usa Permit ___ Approval of ~inal. Plat ___ Varianca ___ Other ____________. .______ ~escriP:ian L~e~iP ~~-::~~~~7~~J~Er-~~ j~. --~------..---------------------------------------..----------- ;;.~2.A-t f- . _~.n-.._ '. ! ot. ______Je__________________________________ -------- -~--------- Signatu~e of Applicant:&_ -~-- ~-E--:"'''-----~ Date or Public Hearing: _____________________________________~__..:.____ 'NOTE: Sketch of proposed 'property and structure to be drawn )n back oi t.'ris form or at- tached, showing the following: 1. North direction. 2. Location of proposed structure on lot. 3. D~mens~ons oi. :front an~ side set-backs. ~ ~ ~ ~. 4. DlmenslOns 01 proposea. structure. ,~ -.. ;:::!Ii;; RI" 5. Street names. J.; ~ ~ &; i 6. Locatio.n .of adi.o.cent existing buildings. "p if<< &;:1 ;0:; 7. Other lnrormation as may be requested. \~n S Fi r;;\J \c":> (j . . .'~~ Approved ___ Denied ___ by tho 'Planning Commission on ________.:.:..~~fr\.t'0j subied to the following conditions: ____________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ e Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Council on ________________ subied to the ~ II' d'" . .0 oWIng con lilons: ________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Comments: (Usa' other side) \ , , v' l.~3- tl-~~ ~ '^ "" e ..------ 00 .o"J I &1\ ~ r), ~ " " III ~....... 1\0 ,,0 0'1 ~~ l)." ~fl '.",- fi:: ~. ~ ~ 'Il Cl '" ~ II ~ ~ rI. 'I ~ " ~ \ \ r-. \ ':2.. I;) V. ......~ Cl () .. 't.....\ ~ ;,- 't\.. I' _~ tr _. n---_ '::) '. <:> \" <;) \:' ~~ l;) '. o ......."'\ ~t:> ::::. :-\. l\ ~'j:> ~l\'tr' o ' C> -y '::. \1,<- ~ (1) \J'- 'i- ~ ('\0- n.. ~ 1. ~ Q> Il> \) t\. ~.......<;) "'"::. "::t-~ \\ -, \ \ m ~ ~ ~ tP o .~ " " <. , I \ -\ / '. ^ " , / / ~ <" t'> \ .. - ~.7 '(-) / r\ /' '- " ~ ...----- I::'::l . \ ~ U"\ & o '" ~ \)~~ _\So T \I)~.... ~ r\..1'':1" --J ~\ -~v: \)> - """'-. -0- tI>::' \ Cl..,1' /\ ~ l) z.. \ ~ \Il_ l\> i ~vc .... I\~ (I> "'v. t'~ (' ~ ""'"(\ ~rT- t\... \3\ C) "- ~~ A ~() ~~ " ,\l,.lA I\~ f'\,. ';'''~~ l\) 1\ t.I ~. -...I~I\ ~ ,lo,\ -... ,.1) lXlO (). ...... "'~ II ~ ~~~ ~ ....~ \:a~O 1toCt.l~ l.l~~ ~~\ ~l\ tV "'\ "- ('" \. .../ -~~~~ ~~~ ,"2... Ul ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " " " .r'\ I / \ \ /~ \ \ ~ o ..s> cP \ ~ ~t~. t\ , ~~. ~, I\~ o::! :::t-. ~ b..O '\)"'1 fI~l\ \:0 ' tl " ~. '1) l.&~}.." "I) ? WO ~ )1;:../\ l4 "\" ~~ "';S ~. \ \ o , , () ~ >S\ 1> \ \ -0.. '"l:> :'b \ \ ./ /~:/ ?/...::. ~ //,~// /. / <>/' \ / ./.- ./' /, / ) G,)I (i. fi ....,. :, <... r (r, ~ ~. (j) () ., :) 3 :tJ (\ "\ '. ./ ,./''', e e y ... PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. ANN/90-1 Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 1990 Project Location: North of Extended West Orleans and South of Lily Lake- Benson Farm. Zoning District: Stillwater Township R-A Applicant1s Name: Steven C. Fiterman - Ground Properties >'- . Type of Application: Annexation Request PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Annexation request to add 88.5 acres to the City boundary. The area is known as the Benson Farm. DISCUSSION: The request is to annex the Benson Farm to the City. The old Benson Farm is completely surrounded by the City of Stillwater and street access and utilities are available to the site. The annexation application is part of a three part application including a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA90-1) and Zoning Amendment (ZAM/90-I). The proposed use of the site is single family. The single family'use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. A detailed PUD and Subdivision request consistent with the Comprehensive Plan is required after annexation. Two parcels of land to the North, currently in the Township, of the site are not a part of this petition and should be considered for annexation. (See map) RECOMMENDATION: Approval with annexation of additional lands to the North of the petitioned area. ATTACHMENT: - Annexation Site. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval. - ,'..... -- \ .-J-..;.... --- e sTAll TR\lM~ H'GH"''' MO." '::-~ ~ = - = BENSON FARM PROPERTY , / I II I SITE DATA I I GROSS ACRES - I I STRUT R/W - 88.5 ACAES I = 13 g AC I l"OAn,"ROP NEER LILY LA.E = 2'. A AES 'HEAR SC . CAES I .AR'ANO . WAL."OOL = ~.. ACAES / I HEY AC;:~S = 8.8 ACAES .! = 59.8 ACAES L I L Y I AVERAOE LOT SIZE = I LOT W'OTN AT n.900 SO. FT. SlET8ACtc: LINE ~ 65 f'T. LA ~E \ I I 'NO. OF LOTS = ~19 I \ I I I , , :-..w.. , , I }----.-..- ," q,'v~ (f'l-O ~" o. c;" .. , , \ , , \ \ " \ \ .. I , ;)--"'~-' ,\,.......... -J \,...;...:....,..-::....-i-...... " .-': : '\ ,(,- , ' ' \ ..; ....:\ "'" 1 ~ -L -L I r- I'. e " > PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW e CASE NO. CPA/90-1 Planning Commission Meeting: May 14, 1990 Project Location: Benson Farm - North of West Orleans, South of Lily Lake. Comprehensive Plan District: Single Family and Multi-Family Residential Zoning District: Township R-4 Applicant's Name: Steve Fiterman - Ground Development Type of Application: Comprehensive Plan Review. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Comprehensive Plan Review adding 88.5 acres of land to the City Plan boundary describing the area land use single family and adding the land to the City of Stillwater Urban Municipal Service Area (MUSA) boundary. DISCUSSION: The site is located in the recently approved Stillwater Business Park Plan Area. The single family designation is consistent with the residential land use designation for the area (see Land Use Map). The Business Park Plan designates the South portion of the Benson site multi~family residential. The proposal is for single family residential. With that designation, it is particularly important that care be taken to buffer the single family use from the commercial use located South of Orleans. A Subdivision Plan submitted with this application shows a possible development concept. A neighborhood park located to the South of the site would provide for project park needs as well as buffer the residential area. The property abuts Lily Lake to the North. Lots are shown adjacent to the lake. The Business Park Plan indicates the slopes around Lily Lake shall be protected and maintained. Some of the lots along Lily Lake will have to be reconfigured to maintain the sloped areas. The Development Concept provides most project access off of West Orleans except for eight lots adjacent to Pine Tree Trail. Other policies in the Business Park Plan related to the site pedestrian access to Lily Lake School and Lily Lake Park. (See section from Stillwater West Business Park Plan attached.) . At this point, the proposed development arrangement is a concept project. Changes regarding access to Pine Tree Trail and bluffline protection can be made before specific project (PUD) submittal. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. FINDINGS: The request is consistent with the City Comprehensive Plan. - PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval. e ~ 51711~ )1 ~ ;b' (Vs.--- 0J !J'1II~~.f , .. ~ site # Lakes its ap 819na9 5 and Site #3 - Benson Farm. The Benson Farm is designated single family and multifamily in the land use plan. The area adjacent to the Pine Tree Tail residential area and around Lily Lake is designated single family and the south portion of the site located along extended West Orleans multifamily resident~al. A neighborhood sized park, 5-10 acres, is located in the southeast corner of the site. Access to the Benson Farm area shall not be provided from Pine Tree Trail. The Benson Farm is not currently in the City of stillwater.' When the area is ready to develop, a conceptional Planned Unit Development plan showing land use, residential densities, buffer area, park lands, road system and open space area should be presented to the City with a request for annexation. .If the. plan meets with City approval the required annexation request, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and MUSA line extension can be processed with the Metropolitan Council. and state Municipal Board. or incentive nd 19 iI/II ttlcn::ii ~'6~~~~ U"""".. . ~~:~:= .~'." -'_..r... .c ;!;~~~ ~ ~:.~~~~ o ....:jc~'" W '" It 4. S ~ i~ ':: Ul " _, lit S .",: : '" " .. . 0" ~ ~ " o ~-- -- ~" " , , "- , '.... ~>- O:l- ~o: ZU1 Oe. (/)0 ;to: we. to - ..: ..: ... ... d: .. . ~~ ~ .. -; ~ .. . ~.~ .. .. ~.. .. . " '" . .. '" " ': i . .. S ~ .. ft <II o ..J lO- o o % -. III _ _ --sc- <( >- oJ ..J oJ .-- '. +. va... .. J't\ 0.. "", e e " r ilIwater ~ ~ THE-:--IRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA ~ TO: FR: Mayor and City Council Planning Department DA: May 11, 1990 RE: ZONING AMENDMENT REQUEST'-FOR' BENSON FARM. ZONING SINGLE-FAMILY PUD. CASE ZAM/90-I. STEVE FITERMAN~ APPLICANT. The request is to Zone the 88.5 acre site Single-Family Residential, R-A. The proposed zoning is consistent with the recently approved Comprehensive Plan for the site. See Comprehensive Plan staff report. Recommendation: Approva 1. Condi ti on: Zoning shall not go into effect until after land has been annexed to the City and the Met Council has approved the City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan Amendment request. Attachment: Ordinance PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 .[~ INO, SCHOOL OlSTRIC.T . AC 100 .. e Case Number ZiLI!JJ!lfL:./ 7a~ Fee Paid ___.3.LLa__:'"___ Da;a filed --1flfJ2.----- . PLANNINGADlv\IN!STRATIVE FOR1v\ Street'Location or Property: '_~_,,-_(J ~~5-~~~_~\_,-_______________ L I D. .~. 0" P"o ty. ~ ~\\ ~<0l-e. 'l ego cs~np,'a~\~~ ~~~-e=--~~\-~\:~------------- Owner: Name ---------------------.-------------------------------- ~ Address~~\2\t~~~c)if~-~-- Phon\ ~~___9~!::::5\ Ap~licc:nt (if othe\~~~ O~l\:~~~ ~~~~ ~-.~~~~3-~~~'L\.~-t~\-f-~:;-~~>--- ~<1,. d ' \IV\.. c)\ ~ . VV\A... . 'S..'S:. '-\ \ b ~ \:) - L ~ ~ A aress ____r___+_____________________ Phone: --------------- Type of Request:. _1_ Rezoning ___ Approval' or Preliminary Plat ___ Special Usa Permit ,___ Approval of ~inaI. Plat ___ Variancs - ___ Other ____~_______. .------ D -' J.: .c R J.. ~~~ ~~ ~, ~ C\. ~~~\~ ~ _~~:~~~1?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---------------------------~-------~------:;;L~~~--"~~~, Signature or ApgJJcqpt: ~""'?:~~~ -?-.:- o(...,.'\l~~ ~~ J[~..ft:-JC;'~-'(b(e.+ TF-A"a.:.l( e s+d<-. Date of Public Hearing: --------------------------------------------- . NOTE: Sketch of proposed 'property and structure to be drawn. )n 'back oi t.1:is foWl or Q:~. tacheci., showing the following: 1. North direction.. 2. Loca.tion oi Foposed str-.:ch'Ue on lot. 3. Dimensions of front a.'"ld side set-backs. 4. Dimensions oi proposed structure. 5. Street nar.les. 6. Loca.tion oi adjacent existing buildings. Other information as may be requesteci.. subiec-: to the following conditions: .,-------___________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ e Approved --- Denied --- by the Council. on ---------------- subiec to the. .c I I' d". . ..0 oWing con lilons: ______________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Comments: (Use other side) e e , ..... ':" ... .,. ORDINANCE NO. ZAM/9u-1 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE BY ZONING AN 88.5 ACRE TRACT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL "RA" The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: 1. Zoning. The 88.5 acre tract of land annexed to the City by action of the Minnesota Municipal Board in concurrent detachment/annexation proceeding and that is the subject of a comprehensive plan amendment as set forth in Resolution #8039 adopted by th~ City Council on March?, 1989, is hereby zoned Single Family Residential "R_A". 2. Amending. That the zoning map as adopted by Section 31.01, Subdivision 5 of the Stillwater City Code is hereby amended to include that tract as Single Family Residential "R_A". The tract is shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit "A". . . 3. In all other ways, the City Code shall remain in full force and effect. 4. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and publication according to law. Adopted by Council: Wally Abrahamson, Mayor Attest: Mary Lou Johnson, Clerk Publish: .. . ~ illwater ~ -- ~ --- -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J e MEMO TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 1, 1990 SUBJECT: UPDATE ON NEW NATIONAL GUARD ARMORY AND REQUEST TO NEGOTIATE PURCHASE OF-LAND FOR NEW ARMORY SITE. BACKGROUND: On May 22 members of the City Council and Armory Committee members visited the new Albert Lea Armory. The City of Albert Lea participated in the development of the facility so that community activities could be better accommodated by the building. The drill floor was enlarged, storage rooms added, the kitchen was enlarged and appliances added, and meeting room modifi ed. The National Guard personnel who manage and book community events feel the joint project is successful based on community use. Local business and community organizations and activities use the facility with some participants staying overnight in area hotels and using local catering services. In order to proceed with the National Guard on developing a new Armory, a site for the facility must be purchased by the City and given to the National Guard. A preliminary review of sites indicate there are several that may be suitable. The size of the site needed for an Armory/Community Facility is 8-14 acres, dependent on the facility. It is estimated that the cost of the land will be $300,000-$500.00. In order to proceed with purchase of a site, Staff should be directed to obtain information on the availability and cost of sites and to work with the Armory Committee to develop a purchase recommendation for Council review. RECOMMENDATION: Direct Armory Committee and Staff to identify site{s) for purchase for a new Armory and make purchase recommendation. e CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER. MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 ~,~.'. "~I ~ ":'~--;, 6 ':;:Fr--;.} "'Lt,. ~~~~'.~H"~ I"'icrt::f ~ :,~ -; 1f..:,~:t""""f4 .'" <'i~~~~1'7,']17.111112 [.--::W :: I ,i'~.,:i-!n _ ~ ~ ~J- ~I ., ~~ ... R~l:-:l ~... 4;,.. \ , r,'~:"7''''''....c--'' ~-:':~~.__ '"f.. 11 ,... w ~ S <J:~' ~ [ ~ 0':.' ,,~~ I -- HI:'.: . ,-;.. "1~ '---l_~_; ,,';.'\.~I . I! 0 S:-; . . , I '.. : 1; ......" -4 ,', '1,t,~ J'--,.,-:.:..:..'- ~Yl'<- I 'j" "",<c';.0".;:;~-N :"- ~:~~D, .j: ;.. J ';'13 (" ~ "'~C"VtEEl ~/ ":,'~:<'::~'_~~~~.~ .'....) - ~..Jt.p.h~,;k.'-~ .jl tJ./ ,:f~T-- .:lit :M.:l, 5 ~ \--'__' . -. _' " ,. '." . .,; ,. : , . ' . :3:l:.I Z' /..!2. . .. ~ ~/ /. ., ~ '-:'.:..::':>"':-,z,~. ." . "'-::;.:.::~ ~'1I1!1'T! -'III!- '<-1' :::rr;::: . Ie ,Tl):;l ,,'T ; ITTB ~ ':'" .' ,,~"~~..';~>.~'''''':J':> ",:,.-ii..,o' sim2~lf'\ 'i II rt f-l::Z+ :f';r~- I ~- -~ ~~~-~~f,{+~ f.llJ ':j "~',,:j~.9~l~~///~j~~' I~ ,- fI [cn:i:~ "~iJ):~Y ~ i - , '~.. L .,fj;:;-1' '. (8'/ /'". I" pORK \~ ~r '--w - O~IVE l :" .'~ P~R~{J;~0'" ~: ::) I '-.2 r l ;: '[~~~ · -\. i--(~.'\ i "e It ~ '~j : \.~;~;: ~~ .' ,I:, ~~" 7 ,:' ;~j~ ~ ~~f~~~~. ~*[ '.' ~ . ~~, ~' ~I '-'\..c1~ ~ . f - \ )--:: . -.' "'R" -, ".---1 \ \ ' Q'll~,.' z _ '7f= -L-r=" .. ....:= 'IL H'! I ... . '- ';. ! I Z; : .J. -,L..... ~Ilt-. :.: ! - ''<0'" _~U-1 .- lj-::::24':'- ~~'.- -1'8-.J 13 0 k:-lIO,f+.J -;::r::;:6 - - 3 ~ ~.~ ~ ' I' a: ~ ~ ~ ~r ,-, , \ -'.J H -, _I . --r-- --t .....,-+-.-~ ,1..- r' 'i' I '.I-:-....l I, z- -~L_ _. _1 ~ -\ \~~__ : -'T"'!: -=,1-"'- ., '~ .. 'ill. . .t. ' I r 2~ ~r::~ DRIVE -- -y I .....' .. S T al---r-- 1-1 T = ---vr- ~ ~ - : RA.~;-,~-:f'~~/\' 111 OAJ<~IDGE'. .'-1 ~26~~'\=;~'19~i~~4~~~5~3' "I'_I/+-~f : '-(", ~'_ -.--; "'.' ,/5."1'-'" "j..Ll,.,.l...Jl/J i", ,,~8fir~ 8-. . I ,r:J/~-'1W;1 1.T'I"! !,'rl ~-'I,+'~ l . " , --<, - "l 'I . I,; / ;T . ~I .... ~ ~ , .' l.iJ'~ -, .,' t '.' /'~. ~ _~ ,2 ~~. - ..... .. _. ' ~ 000: ~"...... '/loUt. " '1~'~": '~~~;-~ ~ L , -- -,_~~".7' ' : I :" ~;:"'-="":~"'Q,<' /i /:.. - 4' '--;.~i J : I ,/ E'\l4~D ~ - -.........'";--1 : , : .....;:,~ . q'S I ' , \ /-. ~ ~..- _J . , I ! 2+--. 't;;- ---, \ 1...... '8 ; .' t, ...;'., " ., , i Ii' / -.,.... ~ 1 ----', I . -- ~ VI' '.j . /. Ir! ,,, j' I..., 1f'rr.... . I: -- --t.--.,;~ ~:, . .... I : : '~ - ,,' '~.' ~"._i i ;', r- if;. ,J ~./, /" I ; - ~. ,\:;; -;\,.--. --...' :. .""" ,..L I - ::1- .II'" ;t ,.;~, ~);.-:-;,~ "!--~'j_ .' ~~[if ...J I SCHOOL \ 1'''' - "' , " L K ~ ,.I"t~.. ~-- '-vr:~~r S ;. ~. .~/ \' :- -~~ ._..L - I 1"\ (/(;- - 'nj:;:~~. - \ ~\~, ), ~ ,;,"' ,r-"r ;, _~ I-.~' '" -l .:. _~i \~ (",.j' ,'" \'l . .-~' '.'. / {u - ~#13. "'.' i" '.':::'f" R A I. iO:! .~" -\"", '. ~._'-< 6 1'":1 N . - ~ - . T./ .:::::::. . .. '\. ". '" : y ~ '7' I .;, I U,. '" 'leA" . ~ !,,'f~>;~ti:f - '~~;i_~ I f-J;'i-\> __--~ . '. ".......--~,.... 47.7ACRES .J' ~:~.f~'-m'.>~~/~'~' .~.l -":''':_~1. <l'O~"Q." ~' j, '11___ R4 ~::.'~ .~; ": . .---' '~Y5" PAR", i ~'" . (LILY LAKE ... '.\ ,'. , : ,,~~ .. t ' C'~; ~ RECREATION i ~.--\. /\" ''{.~'l.'--J / ~ ~ ~ '1 \~ ~///. ~~TER) , . /} . ";,i)$;'. ~ / q,7 '''' . ~ '-,/ I f'//,/.- >j' "(''r:rl. ,t'..,,;""- ~ I.P ~ .;~,:- "." <I- ),/ j t %~ \' J: ~-T 7, L -~-1'" . -1 i /......... -:::::--1 S J r---., ~...... ---' .. A . . . - .- . ~ - _ .--1" .~ '.--~i ~. ~r /~""~ "J~',/,;r;cR o~~~;..- l- . \ I 2 ---Pi ,f v / /. j '- '" v./ ~ '\ \. "\ j 'OT";' m J'JT"': C ! I '0" - .-.. ~. ~AL', A(,. /1 ~:4t..: ~If :;~. I ~ -alA ___\ , 11 ~/ y'~ ~T~ A JI -( o~(. 9 ~'" ~ '121'1 !...;~ "=.1.,~'" -'........__1(;1"- 1[/ //'..~ p..aL' ~~rEl K ~.A' L'",,'I/~ ~ l~~tK~-f' f!""~r ':'Z'/ ,~ ~ /~," ~~~ < '3 .~/~rrLA -- ~ ...., ~ ~./L.~: ' ~~'- r!#~ ~RI:E : S: IIB~VID ,w ~ ~.~.i O2 r;~L i~ ~ 7 .' : '\i-~ 6 - I ~ 1 i~-A1T : . U ~~. 7 '-I ~ 121" '0 9 I, T ~ ' if ,21 " i"'T~'f:~;L~; -;- ~ I 2-;- " ~ .. ."~................i I P-' 'll ,; 7 Ul I I I 10 I ' ~i==-_- y'" IP-I I 2 i ! 9..L.; i-- -:- 2 ~ ',. ... ,I , , / 7 ,~'" ! -I ~ I ],/ . .... ~~r:2 -~ I' .... rCI · .~ ;~~3 ~~D IJ~ MINI t-- , L ooTIDT , "EXCePTION I ,1; TORAG -.~_._._. '_._' ._---......... I ~ h~ <- FRONTAGE ROAD - ;,- RA ..y.~ . /' - /:/// ',,-r. '/ --- ~-~ ~- -.;:;:~ .~ TRUNK HIGHW: NO. 36 _..~ I J J" "~'i~?{~t:;~~~}2::~:':? F,::;~;;"j~~'7~,~~tALBERT LEA' ....... . . .; ":':~~~~~~%~;,~jA:- RM DRY/CONV' EN'TION '~?(ff:~~~~~;!.'(~t.~:':;;~~t:~' ~T~~~~{f:~~B~~~ii~'~~IGUard A~~ry .. . .. .;'.. 410 Prospect Avenue Albert Lea, MN 56007 Phone: (507) 373-5914 ~',i;\.~~~t ...,,~ . '7~~.l>."t".:'. .-, c:.''''t\'.'' ,"'~ CENTER~ rr :l . Located behind the Green Briar Inn, the Albert Lea National Guard Armory/Convention Center's main floor space will accommodate functions for groups up to 1200 people with exhibition space and conference rooms. SERVICE AND EQUIPMENT Electrical outlets; podium; 508' tables; 600 chairs; full kitchen with walk..in cooler; 16' x 16' portable stage; and audio visual equipment available. .I _ .,;" "- FACILITIES ; The Albert Lea Armory is fully air conditioned; one large loading door to exhibition hall; kitchen off exhibition hall; and a 5 lane 20 yard indoor firing range. Accessible for handicapped; restrooms; phone and ample parking. Located within walking distance of motels/hotels and restaurants. Seating Capacity Dimensions Ceiling Room Length & Width Height Banquet Theatre Classroom Round Table Exhibition Halll 74' x 124' 26' 800 1200 400 600 Dining Area Classroom I 20' x 25' 8' 6" 25 Classroom II 20' x 25' 8' 6" 25 Ubrary 24' x 21' 8.6.. 24 .,.. e ~ '. ! 1= ~ III i < ~ ~.,.., I1111 !~ ;!lii ~ ::i g lIil: ~ I ,;. H .... .p:: ~ ~ ../ ! I . ':: . ~::- "'-- L-:::: ___~ ')~: - ".'.---a:: .I )1~ -. "6-. ........ . '" '"" - "--- :. I .......-- .-1 I ''_ ~ :z ~ Il J~ - - .. ~ I CI) b - - , ~ , FACT SHEET . ALBERT LEA ARMORY t?:tl- . ~'i. , :~:w~ :t*'-:....~ ::;-:t,::. "~''''''':~<l;;~~~~ 410 Jlro'spect Avenue l, :~~ . ~; ~ i. SIZE: z 22,235 feet UNIT: Co A, 1st Bn 135th Infantry Commander: Captain Rodney Peterson Strength: Authorized = 152 Assigned = 154 (101.3% as of 5 October 87) COST FIGURES: Construction $1,724,653.00 A & E 101,764.00 $1,826,417.00 FOUR LEVELS OF FUNDING: Federa 1 = State = County =, Community =' 1,071,752.00 348, 5'00. 00 357,000.00 144,500.00 CONTRACTOR: M.A. Mortinson & Company, Minneapolis . -- ARCHITECT: Kane Johnson Associates, Inc.; Austin ANNUAL UNIT PAY ROLL: Approximately = $500,000.00 KEY PERSONNEL: Mayor of Albert Lea = Harlan Nelson City Administrator = Paul Sparks County Administrator = Truman Thrond e HISTORY OF 135th INF ATTACHED: . .......:... '-'. '~'< .: . .-.:' ...~,:r~,_.. ~;~~:~-i;y;: ":':~:_".' e ~ illwater ~-- ~ --- -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J TO: FROM: DATE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JUNE 1, 1990 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION AND COMMENTS ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR STILLWATER/HOULTON BRIDGE. BACKGROUND: The attached Resolution is proposed as the City of Stillwater's position on the Stillwater/Houlton Bridge and DEIS. Detailed comments that usually accompany the resolution will be distributed at meeting time. I have also included Washington Countylsand the Metro Council IS position on the DE IS and bridge location. --e CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e RESOLUTION NO. RECOMMENDATION TO MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION REGARDING THE PREFERRED LOCATION FOR THE NEW ST. CROIX RIVER/STILLWATER/HOULTON BRIDGE WHEREAS, there is a documented regional and local need for a new bridge across the St. Croix River to relieve local and regional traffic problems and to provide for future growth; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Wisconsin Department of Transportation have developed plans showing alternative corridor locations for a bridge crossing; and WHEREAS, a draft Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared identifying potential environmental, economic, historic, archeological, social, visual, noise, and transportation impacts of the various corridor alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Statement describing potential impacts; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater has held several public meetings to present the plan and receive citizen1s comments on the bridge alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater Planning Commission, Downtown Plan Steering Committee, Heritage Preservation Commission, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Association and Downtown Development Corporation have recommended the South Corridor Bridge location and maintenance of the existing historic lift bridge; and WHEREAS, based on the needs, City Comprehensive Plan policy, local transportation system, historic, archeological, land use, economic and visual impacts as indicated in the attached summary report, the South Corridor Bridge location has the least detrimental impacts to the City; and WHEREAS, based on the above information and testimony, the Central or North location would be detrimental to the environmental, cultural and historic resources, health, welfare, and economy of the Stillwater community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater that the South Corridor location is the preferred location for the new St. Croix Stillwater/Houlton Bridge and the betterment of the City of Stillwater, the Birthplace of Minnesota. Adopted by the Council this 5th day of April, 1988. MAYOR ATTEST: e CITY CLERK '.' M& R&Q. WASHINGTON COUNTY REQUEST FOR BOARD ACTION JUne 5, 1990 BOARD MU11HQ DAta AGE.NDA ITEM NO. I.. Public lotmks/Eng1neer. ., ORIGIHATlHQ DUMTMEHT/SEJMCI ~~.:...'t.:;.'~..<" -r:-e-:;1.: Donald Wisni "\ ~', \> R&QUUTOWS S1GHATU' '.. BOARD ACnON REQUESTED . . Authorize C2lai.Iman to sign letter to be fotWarded to }t{/OOT and Stillwater-lb1l.tal Bridge Task Force supporting build decision on south corridor for bridge replacement project. Previous review of the draft invironmental ~ct Statement was accarplished em Hay 15, 1990. A staff sumnary of the draft ErS is attached. The attached letter was prepared for subnittal to officials at the Minnesota Department of Transportation . The letter states: 1. Washingtal Camty reccmnends D.ri.ld.i.ng the replacanent bridge. 2. Wa.shi.nqtoo Cotmty favors and reccmnends building the bridge en the south corridor . 3 . Access to the Government Center ITI.1St be adequately addressed with south oorridor. 4. Wa.shi.nqtoo Camty does not want ultimate jurisdictioo and responsibility for the existing bridge, if left inplace. 5 . ~ts to the T.H. 36 corridor sha.1ld include iJrprovements to the separated interchange at T .H. 5/CSMI 5 and T .H. 36 to alleviate sight and safety problem;. PREVIOUS AcnOH ON REQUEST IOlliER PARllES ADVISED Review Draft EIS on May 15, 1990/Ncae COUNTY ATTORNEY REVIEW/DAte '* PlHAHC1AL IMPUCAnoHS: t H'IY ADMINISTRATOR/DATI ADMINISTRATlW RECOMMEHDAT1OH CJ I#fOitM. CJ DDUL .., MCOInIOIOA,.. SlEfMCI!: IUDGETD: fUNDING: OIJI!CTI \'II - uw 0TMIIl COMM .. W fact Cowrty IUgbvayw requ1ri~ aod- ficaUoaa aDCl expeQliitur.-. Deuil dollar value DOt lmDND at ~. tiJIi I COMMEHTI Donald C. Wisniewski, P.E- Dlreetor Public Works/Colfl1ty Engtnf WAS INGTON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 11860 MYERON ROAD NORTH, · STilLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082.9573 6121-43~ Mark L Mattson, Assistant Director Public Works J Richard 0. Herold. Design/Construction Engineer e John P. Perkovich, Parks Director MEMORANDUM Lawrence W. Bousquet, Traffic and Maintenance Engineer FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Don Wisnie ski n . / I / , t Dick Herold JV~~ ~ 4-23-90 Stillwater River Bridge Draft EIS lyle C. Ooerr. Facility Manager TO: I have reviewed the Draft EIS for the stillwater River Crossing and offer the following comments-- The no build alternative is not a reasonable choice. It does not address the i sue of the existing bridge having a limited life span, the traffic problem in down town stillwater, the im- pact on river traffi, and the traffic problems along TH 36 that exist today. The traffic problems will continue to get worse with the increase in traf ic. Accidents will increase, conflicts be- tween auto traffic a d pedestians will increase, and the downtown stillwater's his tori al rivertown flavor would be diminished. Neither the n choice. The grades higher, the impact impacts), and the co south tunnel appears a reasonable more severe, the energy use is to the river are higher (except for visual struction costs are considerably higher. The South Corri or is most favorable followed by the central and then the North i energy use. or is most favorable followed by the Central om a transportation standpoint. The South direct route to western Wisconsin. The South reas of traffic congestion potential. The ues to provide reasonable access to downtown n with the existing bridge removed (the provides this feature). The South corri and then the North f Corridor is the most Corridor bypasses South Corridor conti Stillwater and Hoult Central Corridor als The South Corri or is most favorable followed by the Central and then the North 'n impacts to the Scenic River from the river user standpoint. The North Corri or is most favorable followed by the South and central from the driver visual view of the Scenic River. The North Cor idor is most favorable followed by the South .. and then the central corridor from a noise standpoint. ~ Washington Cou ty does not discriminate on the basis of race. color. national origin, __.. ._1:_:__ ___ -...I ...__.....:_____....1 _..-& e e The Central Corridor is most favorable followed by the South and then the North from a wetlands standpoint. The North Corridor is most favorable followed by the South and then the central from a Historic standpoint. The North Corridor is most favorable followed by the South and then the Central from an overall social standpoint. Overall, the South Corridor Bridge is the best alternative. Fur- ther, keeping the existing bridge only delays the inevitable im- pacts to transportation as the bridge will be removed someday. The delay to river traffic will have an undesirable impact on the river user that is not justified if either the South or Central Corridors are selected. I recommend the South Corridor Bridge location and the removal of the existing bridge. Further, if the decision is to keep the ex- isting bridge with any location we should be on record that the County does not want responsibility for the existing bridge. Dennis C. Hegberg District 1 Russ urkin District 2 Sally Evert e District 3 Phillip R. McMullen District 4 Donald G. Scheel District 5/Chairman W A HINGTON COUNTY BARD OF COMMISSIONERS GOVERNMENT CENTER 14900 61ST ST EET NORTH, P.O. BOX 6 · STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082-0006 Office: 6121779 401 FAX: 6121779-3900 May 21, 1990 Mr. William M. Crawford Minnesota Deplrtment of Tr Metro District - Oakdale 3485 Hadley Avenue North Oakdale, MN 55128 Re: Stillwater-Houlton EI Dear Mr. Crawford: Mr. Michael Louis attended the May 15th meeting of the Washington Cotmty Board of Ccmnissioners, and he p ovided information regarding the Stillwater-Houlton Bridge Project and the dr t Environmental Impact Statement. We appreciate the time he spent review' this important document. As a result of our review of the EIS, we wish to make the following ccmnents regarding this proposed pr ject. Washington Cotmty rec s building the replacement bridge. The no build alternative is not a reas nable choice. It does not address the issue of the existing bridge having a imited life SpUl, the traffic problem in downtown Stillwater, the impact on river traffic, and the traffic problems along T.H. 36 that exists t.oda.y. Washington County favors corridor bridge location. From this data, we con transportation and envir and recommends building the bridge on the south The EIS discusses many variables in great detail. lude that the most favorable alignment from a ntal standpoint is the south corridor. Eventual disposition of the existing bridge is of concern to the County. Keeping the existing bri e delays the removal decision tmtil a later date. River traffic is affect by the existing structure today. If the south corridor bridge location . s chosen and a decision is made to keep the existing bridge, the County does ot desire ultimate jurisdiction and responsibility for the structure. Realizing that detailed design features will be available after a specific corridor is chosen, we do want to mention our concerns regarding access to the Washington Cotmty Gave t Center if the south or central corridor bridge location is selected. e are presently planning a law enforcement center, jail and parking facility. Ease of access from T.H. 36 is essential. TI1orough analysis of ac ss at Osgood Avenue is extremely important, ani we would like to provide i put in the design process regarding selection of access locations along th corridor. e Finally, we request that improvements planned for the T.H. 36 corridor also include changes to the gr e separation at T .H. 5/CSAH 5 and T .H. 36. Sight \o~.....---.4->':" i-'" t<"'f ~ u).-i(\ '\ f}....,00 e e HI-. Crawford Page 2 May 21, 1990 distance difficulties and safety concerns at the ramp intersections with T.H. 5/CSAH 5 exist presently. Future developnent adjacent to this intersection will only accentuate the problems. We appreciate the time and attention you have given this letter and our conments. We shall look forward to MN/roI"s decision regarding this project in Washington Cotmty. Sincerely, HI-. Donald Scheel, Chairman Washington County Board of Commissioners cc: Washington County Board of Conmissioners Chuck Swanson, Cotmty Administrator Don Wisniewski, Director of Public Works/County Engineer /' r illwater ~ - ~ TH~RTHPlACE OF MINNESOTA ~ e June 5, 1990 Mr. Leonard W. Levine Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Mr. Levine: The City Council of the City of Stillwater would like to reiterate our positions on the new Stillwater/Houlton Bridge. As stated in Resolution No. 7893 and again in the attached resolution, the City favors a southern bridge location and retention of the existing historic lift bri dge. Further, the Ci ty of Stillwater contends that if a central corridor location or a IIno-buildingll option is determined, that Section 106 review (Historic Preservation Act) and Section 4f (Department of .Transportation Act) and possibly additional 'NEPA review to fUlly consider the affect of the decision on the recognized historic and cultural resources of Downtown Stillwater must be considered as stated in the attached material. Commissioner, the ball is in your court to approve the project and find the necessary funding. Sincerely, Wally Abrahamson Mayor Attachment c.c. William M. Crawford, District Engineer .e CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e RESOLUTION NO. RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGARDING THE PREFERRED LOCATION FOR THE NEW ST. CROIX RIVER/STILLWATER HOULTON BRIDGE WHEREAS, there is a documented regional and local need for a new bridge across the St. Croix River to relieve local and regional traffic problems and to provide for future growth; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Wisconsin Department of Transportation have developed plans showing alternative corridor locations for a bridge crossing; and WHEREAS, a draft Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared identifying potential environmental, economic, historic, archeological, social, visual, noise, and transportation impacts of tne various corridor alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Statement describing potential impacts; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater has held several public meetings to present the plan and receive citizen's comments on the bridge alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater Planning Commission, Downtown Plan Steering Committee, Heritage Preservation Commission, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Association and Downtown Development Corporation have recommended the South Corridor Bridge location and maintenance of the existing historic lift bridge; and WHEREAS, based on the needs, City Comprehensive Plan policy, local transportation system, historic, archeological, land use, economic and visual impacts as indicated in the attached summary report, the South Corridor Bridge location has the least detrimental impacts to the City; and WHEREAS, based on the above information and testimony, the Central or North location would be detrimental to the environmental, cultural and historic resources, health, welfare, and economy of the Stillwater cOlnmunity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater that the South Corridor location is the preferred location for the new St. Croix Stillwater/Houlton Bridge and the betterment of the City of Stillwater, the Birthplace of Minnesota. Adopted by the Council this 5th day of April, 1988. MAYOR 4It ATTEST: CITY CLERK e COMMENTS ON STILLWATER/HOULTON ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a new Stillwater-Houlton Bridge is being reviewed. This project has been discussed many times and it seems likely at this time a bridge at some location will be constructed because of the need for a bridge, from a regional as well as local perspective. The 1980 City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan calls for such a bridge and previous plans back to the 60's discuss Downtown congestion and the need for a new bridge across the St. Croix. A new Stillwater/Houlton Bridge will significantly affect the City of Stillwater and environs - possibly more than any other public works construction project in its history. In determining its position regarding a preferred bridge corridor location, the Stillwater City Council has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and special reports, held special meetings to describe the project to the public, receive comments and attended MnDOT meetings to discuss the project. Recommendations regarding bridge locations have been received from the City Planning Commission, Downtown Plan Steering Committee, Certified Heritage Preservation Commission, Downtown Business Association, Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Development Corporation. It is now time to make the City's position regarding the bridge corridor location known to the State and the Stillwater community. The major envi ronment, transportati on, 1 and use, hi stori c and cul tural resources and economic impacts of the bridge alternatives are well documented. It is important to make the City's position known and actively try to influence the decision making process because of the importance of the IIbridge issuell in the future for Stillwater. Depending on location, the bridge could solve many of the Downtown traffic problems or cause irreparable damage to an endangered cultural and historic resource, Downtown Stillwater. Beyond the Downtown, interchange locations and designs could significantly affect other parts of Stillwater; the Highway 36 commercial corridor, major City streets, South Fourth Street, Greeley Street, and County Road 5. Once a bridge corridor location is selected, careful attention will have to be paid to specific bridge and frontage road design and appearance. Based on the community input the Draft EIS and local transportation needs, the following facts and statements present the City's position regarding the bridge corridor location and Draft EIS. e COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY The north and central bridge corridor locations are inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The plan calls for a new St. Croix bridge outside of the Downtown. The overall goal statement in the Downtown Plan recognizes Stillwater historic rivertown image and natural setting: liThe image and identity of Downtown Stillwater is of primary importance. It is represented in its historic buildings, its natural setting, and in its dedication to open spaces and the river. The goal of the Downtown Plan is to enhance and retain the historic rivertown image of Stillwater through a conscientious and 1 e gradual process of change and economic growth so that Stillwater, the Birthplace of Minnesota, continues to be a special place to live, to work, and to visit." A Central Corridor bridge would be inconsistent with the underlying goal for the area. More specifically, the Downtown Plan called for the retention of the existing lift bridge recently designated to the National Register of Historic Places, as part of the Downtown historic character and for the new bridge to be located in the South Corridor. e TRANSPORTATION The City of Stillwater appreciates being involved in the planning and environmental review process for the proposed new river crossing over the St. Croix River. The City has been actively cooperating with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and other transportation planning agencies for the past thirty years in efforts to resolve the existing traffic problems. The City has had an opportunity to review several previous reports from Mn/DOT as part of the environmental review process and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The City of Stillwater is very aware of the deficiencies and capacity restraints of the existing road system. The City has lived with congestion caused by the lack of capacity for many years. No other community or agency is impacted by the existing problems like the City of Stillwater. The existing lift bridge and the approaching roadways do not provide sufficient capacity to accommodate current traffic. The existing roadway is narrow and the intersections are very restricted. The Downtown area is congested and has many conflicts between pedestrians, automobiles and trucks. The Environmental Impact Statement provides a historical review of past efforts. The City has worked for the past thirty years to improve the flow of traffic in the Downtown area. The City has removed parking on Main Street from MYrtle Street to south of Chestnut Street. All parking has been removed on Chestnut Street between Main Street and the bridge. Left turns have been banned and left turn lanes added. This has been done to improve the flow of traffic and has often worked to the detriment of the Downtown businesses by reducing local traffic circulation and removing valuable parking spaces. Numerous other options have been studied over the past thirty years. Total removal of parking along Main Street and creation of double left turns westbound would slightly increase westbound capacity at the Main Street and Chestnut Street intersection. However, a large, northbound vehicle would be unable to turn in the remaining portion of Main Street. The use of one-way streets using various combinations of Water Street, Main Street, Nelson Street, Chestnut Street, Second Street and Olive Street have been reviewed and found to be unworkable because of the narrow rights-of-way and the grades on some of the streets. Reconstruction of the roadways in the Downtown area to include a bypass through the east side of the Downtown would virtually wipe out much of the historic character and several of the buildings within the Downtown area. There would still remain a single lane in each direction on a lift bridge creating congestion. The use of other streets, such as Third 2 e Street, Fourth Street or Myrtle Street has been reviewed and found to be lacking because of the steep grades and the discontinuous platting of streets in the residential areas. The City has been bypassed by a route from HIghway 36 and County Road 15 on the west side of Highways 96 and 95 on the north side. This marked bypass has removed only a few vehicles. Despite all the efforts the City and the State have made, traffic delays and congestion have continued to increase. In the 1960's traffic delays occu rred on Fri day nights for two to four hours and for a few hours on Sunday. As traffic grew, congestion occurred from early afternoon Friday through late Sunday night and began to occur every evening. Today, traffic delays occur for two to four hours Monday through Thursday and from Friday noon until late evening and all day on Saturday and Sunday. Even on weekdays when the lift bridge is operated, congestion immediately occurs in the Downtown area. Stillwater residents and visitors continue to cite traffic as a major concern. The traffic situation is responsible for some Downtown businesses leaving the Downtown area. Traffic volumes have grown with the development of Western Wisconsin as part of the greater Metropolitan Twin City area. The bridge traffic is composed of recreational traffic on weekends but most of the weekly traffic comes from work and business related trips. In 1962, the average daily traffic (ADT) on the bridge was 4,900 vehicles per day. In 1970, the volumes had- risen to 8,000 and in 1980 they were at 11,000 ADT. Volumes in 1986 were 12,400 ADT. Traffic volumes in the Downtown area have grown even greater. Volumes on Highway 36 immediately south of the Downtown area is currently 17,400 vehicles per day (1986). This is one of the heaviest volume two lane roadways in the Metropolitan Area. Generally, volumes between 8,000 and 12,000 will require a four-lane roadway. The backup of northbound traffic on Highway 36 frequently extends back to the HIghway 95 and Highway 36 intersections, more than a mile from the Main Street and Chestnut Street intersection. Traffic attempting to bypass this backup have used a combination of several less desirable routes. Some traffic utilizes the HIghway 5 interchange (which has a very 1 imited sight distance). Traffic then uses County Road 5 and 01 ive and Myrtle Streets or Pine to reach the Downtown area. Others will use County Road 12 and Myrtle Street. In a typical evening, traffic will back up for a few block s on Myrtle Street from the stop si gn at Third Street. Traffic also uses South Fourth Street and Third Street and other combinations to reach the Downtown area and approach the bridge on Chestnut Street. Others will use a combination of Owens Street, Greeley Street, Pine Street, Olive Street, and Churchill Street. Traffic from the south on Highway 95 will often use County Road 23 (Beach Avenue) and travel through Oak Park Heights and Stillwater, using Fourth Avenue and any other combi nation of streets. Some wi 11 util i ze Chil i coot Hill on Second Street approaching the Downtown. This hill has been deemed dangerous enough to be closed each winter. e 3 e This bypassing of traffic through residential neighborhoods has created documented speeding problems, numerous complaints from residents, and request for stop signs. Traffic, with its frustrations of backups and bypasses, will speed, roll through stop signs, and create serious concerns for the safety of pedestrians who may be crossing any of these residential streets. The commercial and industrial development in Western Wisconsin, including Somerset and New Richmond, has created heavy commercial traffic traveling through the Downtown area. A single commercial vehicle has a significant turning problem at the Main Street and Chestnut Streets intersection and generally travels slow on the hills coming up from the Downtown Stillwater area. With the growth in commercial vehicles, a new capacity restraint has been added to the Downtown again significantly reducing the ability to travel through the City. The lift bridge is a serious congestion factor. Through the cooperation of numerous agencies, a rigid schedule for opening the bridge has been established which has diminished some of the previous problems of frequent openings. However, the greater number of boats using the lift bridge has created a longer time length of opening, decreasing the street capacity in the Downtown area. Any time the lift bridge is opened, it stays open for several minutes creating an immediate backup of traffic into the Downtown area. An early 1980's Minnesota Department of Public Safety report on pedestrian safety in several communities indicated that the City of Stillwater has half its pedestrian accidents in the Downtown area. Included are fatal accidents involving pedestrians crossing downtown streets in the face of heavy traffic. While the City and State have cooperated in attempting to make pedestrian safety a higher priority, pedestrians are still at risk anywhere in the Downtown area. A simple change in phasing of the traffic signal at Main Street and Chestnut Street to protect pedestrians from left turning traffic resulted in a intolerable backup of westbound traffic. Traffic frequently backs through the Nelson Street and Main Street intersection forcing pedestrians to walk between vehicles. It is virtually impossible to cross Chestnut Street at Water Street at any time. The accident rate for Highway 36 from the St. Croix River to Highway 95 is almost double the state-wide average for a two lane urban roadway. This is despite the fact that at many hours of the day, traffic is at a standstill or moving slowly significantly reducing the possibility of accidents. e The major concern of the City of Stillwater is the future of the City under a "no-build" option. The Mn/DOT forecasts under the "no-bui ld" alternative is 2'8,200 vehicles per day on the lift bridge, 'double the current volume. Volumes on Highway 36 south of the Downtown area would be 33,700 vehicles per day, almost twice the existing volume. It would be physically impossible to carry these volumes of traffic with any semblance of order. Traffic would be beyond capacity for several hours a day. The major concern is that traffic would back up significantly further than currently along Highway 36 to the south. The backup 4 e e ~ndoubtedly would reach the high speed four-lane sections in Oak Park Heights. Traffic diversions would be numerous and many of the residential streets would be faced with high volumes. Third Street, Fourth Street, Myrtle Street, Chestnut Street and others approaching the Downtown would have blocks of backed up traffic attempting to access the single lane of traffic heading into Wisconsin. Volumes on the Wisconsin side of the bridge would be similarly affected. The forecast is for 9,000 vehicles per day on the County Trunk Highway E approach, a roadway marked by IIDangerous Hill II signs. A concern is that traffic, once clearing the bridge, would drive fast and dangerously, attempting to make up for the lost time waiting in traffic. Traffic will not divert to the Hudson bridge several miles away because of the need to travel through NOrth Hudson and Hudson, or Bayport and Oak Park Heights. The alternate route would take 20 to 35 minutes depending upon the time of day. In addition, the volumes of traffic will significantly back up far beyond the Highway 35 and 64 intersection and beyond the Highway 36 and 95 intersections. Diversions would be down county roads and other city streets not designed fro the types of traffic that will occur. The City has looked at TSM options. They simply are not workable. Transit would sit in the same traffic backups. Ridership would be low. IINo actionll or IIno-buildll is clearly an unacceptable alternative to the citizens of Sti11water and to the thousands of motorists waiting in traffic each day currently and the many thousands who will utilize the bridge in the future. Travel in the Downtown area would be impossible. Pedestrians would be at risk any time they stepped into any street because of bypassing traffic. Cars would be idling on virtually every street with obvious impacts on air pollution. Of major concern is the impact of exhaust fumes on the old brick and stone facades which were constructed back in the 1860's, 1870's and 1880's. Also of concern is the impact of the vibrations from the increasing numbers of commercial vehicles. Replacement of the bridge on site is clearly unacceptable. While a newer bridge could be built, it would have similar capacity problems and the same tremendous negative impacts on the street and highway systems of Downtown Stillwater, residential Stillwater, and Western Wisconsin that the existing bridge has. Tne City of Stillwater has recently devoted a large amount of resources in terms of both time and money, for a study of the Downtown area. This Downtown study has resulted in a Downtown Plan developed by the Stillwater City Council. The plan took years to develop and implement, went through numerous public meetings and hearings, and was tne result of efforts by two different citizen committees. The plan has had the approval of not only the City Council, but also the Planning Commission, Economic Development Committee, Historical Committee, Chamber, and others. 5 e As a part of the study, the City reviewed the North, Central and South Corridors. A North Corridor would not relieve traffic in the Downtown area and would create numerous access problems for the City of Stillwater. This is in addition to the disruption of the scenic qualities of the more natural appearing river. The north alternative is not a viable alternative for the City of Stillwater. Similarly, the central alternative is inconsistent with the Downtown Plan and past plans for the City. The central bridge location would impact the visual qualities of the river and the Downtown area. It would also perpetuate many of the problems on the hills in Western Wisconsin. The City intends to expend funds to improve the aesthetics of the river front, primarily in Lowell Park, for a few blocks either side of the existing bridge. The visual impact of the bridge passing diagonally in front of much of the park area would be visually unacceptable. The touchdown of the bridge on the east side of the river would be in City owned Kolliner Park near the existing lift bridge. The view of the elevated bridge would destroy the visual quality of the river and the Wisconsin bluff lines as viewed from Downtown. It would impact the charm of the historical Downtown district with its characteristic church steeples and Pioneer Park as viewed from the river. It would be the most visible structure possible in terms of river traffic. The City also believes that the noise impact of the projected 22,000 to 33,000 vehicles per day would be unacceptable to people in the Downtown, residents living on either side of the area or traffic on the river. A central bridge would destroy the future use of the City owned river front property referred to as the Aiple Property south of the Downtown, which is currently planned for open space and river recreation as an extension of Lowell Park. The Central Corridor location would degrade the quality of the experience of visiting Lowell Park enjoyed by over a million visitors per year. The main view from the park would be the bridge. A central bridge location would also limit the attractiveness and value of City owned Kolliner Park as open space recreation resource. The City, after careful review of the many documents and reflection upon thirty years of transportation studies and more than one hundred years of river front existence, has unanimously supported the South Corridor. The corridor aligns most closely with the existing highway. A well designed, aesthetic bridge is consistent with the existing uses on the Minnesota side of the river and careful design would minimize the impacts on the Wisconsin side of the river. The bridge would have significantly less visual impact than the smoke stacks, conveyor belts, and coal piles of the NSP power plant, or some of the other industrial uses made of the river at this location. The western shoreline is clearly fully developed and the bridge would have little visual impact to users of the river. Noise from a bridge at this location would be significantly less than the industrial noise form the Andersen plant or the King plant or from the overpowered boats currently using this portion of the St. Croix River. The noise levels would definitely be less than the unacceptable congestion noises that would exist in the Downtown Stillwater area directly adjacent to pedestrians and numerous ~ people oriented businesses. 6 e fI . fhe City of Stillwater has lived with the traffic problems since the invention of the automobile. The City has made great sacrifices in the Downtown area to adapt to the use of CIty streets as well as county roads and highways by non-Stillwater traffic. The City has attempted to retain the scenic qualities of the St. Croix River as proven by its preservation of some of the river front, developments of park and recreation activities overlooking or adjacent to the river and the support of the recently adopted Downtown Plan. With this type of commitment to the river, it is extremely difficult for the city to recognize the claims of some individuals and groups that the traffic problem exists for merely a few hours for recreation traffic. HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL Minnesota was born along the banks of the St. Croix River in what is now Downtown Stillwater in 1848. This event and the succeeding evolution of the area has a lot to say about what is the essence of Downtown Stillwater, and to some extent, Minnesota. The pattern of activity and remnants of the lumbering and manufacturing eras can still be seen in Downtown Stillwater. In fact riverside parks, Lowell Park, Kolliner Park and Aiple Property were all lumbering sites given .to the City after the demise of lumbering. Stillwater has always been recognized as the town of brick and church steeples on the St. Croix. Recently, the general perception has been formally recognized through the nomination of Downtown Stillwater as a National Register Historic District. The existing lift Bridge and several other historic buildings, already on the National Register, strengtnen the historic significance of the Downtown. Fortunately for Stillwater, and unfortunately for many Downtowns that experienced road and bridge projects during the fifties, sixties and early seventies, historic and cultural resources are no longer taken for granted. Through Federal and State laws, special attention must be paid to recognized historic resources such as Downtown Stillwater. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires projects such as this bridge project, to take into account its affect on historic properties. Section 4f of the Department of Transportation Act states that projects shall not be approved which destroy or substantially alter a historic property of Local, State or National ilJ1)ortance unless there is no "feasible and prudent alternative" and all possible planning is undertaken to minimize harm. NEPA requires an EIS for major federal projects that will significantly affect the quality of the environment including important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage. Dr. Norene Roberts, author of Historic Reconstruction of the Riverfront: Stillwater, Minnesota 1985 and Intensive National Register Survey of Downtown Stillwater, Minnesota, 1989 has indicated that a 106 review should be conducted for the Downtown and Bridge due to existing traffic vibration and exhaust. Beside these impacts, the visual and noise impact of a central Bridge location would affect the character and attractiveness of historic Downtown Stillwater. The Central Bridge Al ignment or a "no-build" option will affect the Downtown historic Stillwater properties; the Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic District, Lift Bridge, Freighthouse Depot, Roscoe Hersey House, St. Croix Lumbermill,Lowell Park anu Vittorio's and the required NEPA, Section 106 and 4f reviews must be completed before a Central Corridor and "no-build" option can be selected. 7 e e . The National Wild and Scenic River Act also supports the preservation of historic areas. The Act declares lIit is the policy of the United States that selected rivers of the nation which with their immediate environments possess outstanding remarkable scenic, recreational, geological fish and wild life, historic, cultural or other similar values shall be preserved in free flowing condition that their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. (underline added) The Lower St. Croix Master Plan, the plan developed by State and Federal natura 1 resource agenci es, to recogni ze and protect the Lower St. 'Croi x Ri ver states liThe development and management of the St. Croix should place primary emphasis on maintaining and enhancing aesthetic, scenic, historic, fish and wildlife and geologic features. II (underline added) The Wild and Scenic River Act and Lower St. Croix Master Plan requires that the historic and cultural resources of historic Stillwater on the banks of the St. Croix be preserved for future generations enjoyment. ECONOMIC The economic impacts of a new bridge are concerns of the City. A Central Corridor Bridge or a IIno buildll decision would have a negative impact on Downtown. The Downtown is congested and suffers economically because of the congestion and heavy truck traffic. Increased traffic would only worsen the economic viability of the area. If a Southern Corridor Bridge location is selected, the interchange and frontage locations and design will be critical to provide convenient access to the adjacent businesses. CONCLUSION It lS clearly evident to the City that a IIno-buildll or Central Corridor location are unacceptable and unmanageable. It is also clear that the South Corridor has a significant number of advantages for the traveling public, the river user and the adjacent communities. The City urges the Minnesota and Wisconsin Departments of Transportation to support the South Corridor and to continue to maintain a schedule for construction and opening of the new bridge to alleviate the unacceptable transportation and safety problems in the Downtown area and other areas of Stillwater. If a IIno-buildll or Central Corridor location is selected, it is the City's position that additional NEPA, Section 106 and Section 4f study and review is necessary. 8 .. ,. e \,~l::~"C~", \.,!~er~;;",:t. /~ tit GAB Business Services Inc 380 Lafayette Freeway Road Suite 118 POBox 7007 St. Paul Minnesota 55107 Telephone 612-292-1234 Branch Office May 15, 1990 Mr. GiS Restoration 319 North Main street stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. Granger: GAB FILE NO: 56542-11236 INSURED: CITY OF STILLWATER CLAIMANT: MR. GI SjJIM GRANGER OIL: 04-23-90 After careful review of the facts surrounding your claim we must deny any liability on behalf of the City of stillwater. As you know, the cause of your sewer back-up has been a grease build up. The City has made several attempts and in fact continues to attempt to find out who is responsible for allowing this grease into the system. It is our contention that the individual(s) not properly disposing of their grease and not the city are who is responsible for your damages. The City is responsible to perform ordinary and reasonable maintenance on the sewer line that services your property. It is our opinion that they have done so. If and when the City is able to deter- mine who is allowing this grease into the system it would be our recommendation that you pursue a claim against them. In order to obtain this information you may want to contact Mr. David Junker of the Public Works Department. If you have any questions regarding our decision in this matter please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Gregory H. smith Adjuster GHS:dlm cc: City of stillwater cc: McGarry - Kearney Agency :1~'i~Slfqi'Cfi"1;\rE1i&;CD!;';""''01w~t;;rr:';;[01W~%4:'j"o''"''''4',i\'''''}\'''':i.dq;:,~!,H';~?~~f"~i,T e NAME OF CLAIMANT ADDRESS 3 / C; . WHEN DID EVENT OCCUR? ~.s7 z ]- PHONE NO. Y y y: 7/;/'. 61-?1 W~ENED1 WHY DO YOU FEEL THAT THE CI Y WAS AT FAULT? ~ NAME Of PERSON MAKING REPA R; OR GIVING CARE 0_ STATE THE NATURE OF TH D \\A . I -l/Ld/h.e-; ~/\..__ SIGNATURE You have to formally notif the City in writing within thirty (30) days of the occurrence of an event whe eby you feel you have suffered damages. .' Jrnpnnal Page No. of Pages APOLLO HEATING & VENTILATING CORP. 6510 N. HWY. 36 BLVD. OAKDALE, MINNESOTA 55109 Phone 770-0603 PROPOSAL SUBMITTED TO PHONE 439-7149 JOB NAME 319 N. Main St CITY, STATE AND ZIP CODE Mr. GiS Restoration JOB LOCATION DATE OF PLANS JOB PHONE We hereby submit speCifications and estimates for: repair to furnace $305.00 Includes Repair to low voltaqe, blower bearinqs. gas valve, fan and limit switch, cleaning burners and Dilot. and residue in the heat exchanqer left from the water JllIr Jroposr hereby to furnish material and labor - complete in accordance with above specifications, for the sum of: U on Payment to be made as follows: dollars ($ ) , All material is guaranteed to be as specified. All work to be completed in a workmanlike manner according to standard practices. Any alteration or deviation from above specifica- tions involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders. and will become an extra charge over and above the estimate. All agreements contingent upon strikes, accidents or delays beyond our control. Owner to carry fire, tornado and other necessary insurance. Our workers are fully covered by Workmen's Compensation Insurance. Authorized Signature K~~ Note: This proposal may be withdrawn by us if not accepted within days, Date of Acceptance: Signature Atttpmutt of Jropnsul- The above prices, specifications and conditions are satisfactory and are hereby accepted. You are authorized to do the work as specified, Payment will be made as outlined above, Signature PrOpciSar Number . '. t1 25 6 ~) L.,{, 7..7-'%~) , Ori inal Woodworks Date 360 North Main Stillwater, MN 55082 (612) 430-3622 (612) 429-2222 c-r.;'hv; DISCLAIMER: Owner to carry all necessary insurance on items left on the premises. Items not picked up within 10 days after notice will be charged $1.00 per day per Item storage fee. Not responsible for items left over 30 days. , Notice mailed e Proposal Invalid After (30 pays) Name Wood Species Address City and State Res. Phone # Finish Type Stain Ii!.. ...,~ /..1 L I"~ r'f. ' ,Ii .'/ ,.> ,'}f/Ii I/' A /1..;: I. . "\ I /lll ..fr.'! '-;1 ',/'JiJ... ,1./ , ./) iA.Jh''h.Kd A', ,," / ,'{.-{VJ-~I I ..." I I, ',./;I ~ -'--I /( ,//...-(.1 / (' ...;U'_ -j-1lLllf/!)/..;/i,c1J ~I r cr' , (~ '!"'~/:;;&-'1..f(-/;...0;;'VC/iA:-t:f/,'- ....- /:: j/ " /1/, C) (' .J~. .if g' "', :!1.,':>{ ~ /..........~./...".A~ l' ~,/"../c:r/ .{I.:>'~_ J " I""... ( ( I ~j ttyv(;..y" 'tt: c;. , It.. .j ,.,...';,Ai' , 't!h,rRr..(. . ' ,.'~ ,/! j "''''/C-,.'''~~. C/ . ,-j ,I' .' . \/..A,....(.'ev, (l~ x/l:'~e. ,ft" .l.i~~ .1'-./,.:.;~;."jrr0 lA' / ,,.-- '7 /.:,'. .' .,. ~j---/1.' /i.(~,."".,..I.-..,.'.....~........l"-" r_.- . f' ._-7 ..,- L....':t-' -', , ,,' 1 Ilt/ ~ '., . / All material is guaranteed to be as specified, a d the above work to be completed in a substantial workman like manner for the sum of: Dollars ($ TERMS: ( OOAl) Down Payment Check # (5 oAl) Upon Completion Check # Date Date Respectfully It Any alteration or deviation from the abov Involving extra cost will become an extra cost over and above the estimate. A finance charge of 1.5% will be computed p rmonth (18% per annum) on all unpaid balances of 30 days. A $15.00 service charge will be added for all returned checks. Accepted X Date White. Order File Vel - Customer Copy Pink. Contract Copy Goldenrod. Customer Receipt .. e -- STATEMENl f , To Address City Terms I' E/7j {)f S~LLlu~HP~ ( ) .c ffiA2:L ~ L~ .}l'i .du 9,~ ~ ,2 1/ L.tV Y ~<;..M ~/ ::2:2... P ~ ..Ii. t?- ~ P ~ ~p "'" :2:'" v ,,-- ~~ ~ 19 j2-n - 0- <7_____ - e - Richard C. Ilkka A. W. Clapp, III, Esq. Special Assistant Attorney General Suite 200 520 Lafayette Road st. Paul, MN 55155 DAVID T. MAGNUSON " A TIORNEY AT LAW . SUITE #260 THE GRAND GARAGE & GALLERY 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 . (612) 439-9464 May 23, 1990 Re: DNR v City of Stillwater Dear Bill: The City Council has reviewed the latest settlement proposal that you submitted and they are appreciative of your efforts toward a compromise. The major stu~bling block, however, .is the DNR's insistence that we amend our Ordinance to eliminate references to "visually inconspicuous alteration of substandard structures." It ~eems to the City that this is an inconsistent position for the DNR to be taking since we understand they have just certified Bayport's amended ordinance that contains an identical provision. We would appreciate your thoughts on this. DTM:kn ~ c: Nile Kriesel' . Very truly yours, DAVID T. MAGNUSON David T. stillwate ~~ fVV; #' e ~illw}te~ T" ."""... OF .""so~ June 5, 1990 Mr. Leonard W. Levine Commissioner Minnesota Department of Transportation Transportation Building St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Mr. Levine: The City Council of the City of Stillwater would like to reiterate our positions on the new Stillwater/Houlton Bridge. As stated in Resolution No. 7893 and again in the attached resolution, the City favors a southern bridge location and retention of the existing historic lift bridge. Further, the City of Stillwater contends that if a cen~ral corridor location or a "no-building" option is determined, that Section 106 review (Historic Preservation Act) and Section 4f (Department of Transportation Act) and possibly addi ti ona l' NEPA revi ew to fully consider the affect of the decision on the recognized historic and cultural resources of Downtown Stillwater must be considered as stated in the attached material. Commissioner, the ball is in your court to approve the project and find the necessary funding. sinlerelY, tlJdak (jlt:t.~/'~rl/W~- Wally Abrahamson Mayor Attachment c.c. William M. Crawford, District Engineer tit CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e RESOLUTION NO. 8291 RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSIONER OF THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION REGARDING THE PREFERRED LOCATION FOR THE NEW ST. CROIX RIVER/STILLWATER HOULTON BRIDGE WHEREAS, there is a documented regional and local need for a new bridge across the St. Croix River to relieve local and regional traffic problems and to provide for future growth; and WHEREAS, the Mi n ne so ta Depa rtment of Transportati on and Wi sconsi n Department of Transportation have developed plans showing alternative corridor locations for a bridge crossing; and WHEREAS, a draft Environmental Impact Statement has been prepared identifying potential environmental, economic, histor.ic, archeological, social, visual, noise, and transportation impacts of tne various corridor alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Stillwater has reviewed the draft Environmental Impact Statement describing potential impacts; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater has held several public meetings to present the plan and receive citizen1s comments on the bridge alternatives; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater Planning Commission, Downtown Plan Steering Committee, Heritage Preservation Commission, Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business Association and Downtown Development Corporation have recommended the South Corridor Bridge location and maintenance of the existing historic lift bridge; and WHEREAS, based on the needs, City Comprehensive Plan policy, local transportation system, historic, archeological, land use, economic and visual impacts as indicated in the attached summary report, the South Corridor Bridge location has the least detrimental impacts to the City; and WHEREAS, based on the above information and testimony, the Central or North location would be detrimental to the environmental, cultural and historic resources, health, welfare, and economy of the Stillwater community. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater that the South Corridor location is the preferred location for the new St. Croix Stillwater/Houlton Bridge and the betterment of the City of Stillwater, the Birthplace of Minnesota. Adopted by the Council this 5th day of April, 1988. ..~ " ,,~J/'7'~:-'~,~-~:::""'~~:':-:'.' "-. -" ". .'~O'--. ._:.~n -:'--~'<::.o'::.-:. . - - - :.'~. _:~;;,;,,,,,:,;,';.;_~j-_"-:';""_i<':_</~:-':::-" ~h/;t;;~-/"'a~~~/' MAYOR . ATTEST: ~7 ~ e COMMENTS ON STILLWATER/HOULTON ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING The Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a new Stillwater-Houlton Bridge is being reviewed. This project has been discussed many times and it seems likely at this time a bridge at some location will be constructed because of the need for a bridge, from a regional as well as local perspective. The 1980 City of Stillwater Comprehensive Plan calls for such a bridge and previous plans back to the 60's discuss Downtown congestion and the need for a new bridge across the St. Croix. A new Stillwater/Houlton Bridge will significantly affect the City of Stillwater and environs - possibly more than any other public works construction prOject in its history. In determining its position regarding a preferred bridge corridor location, the Stillwater City Council has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement and special reports, held special meetings to describe the project to the public, receive comments and attended MnDOT meetings to discuss the project. Recommendations regarding bridge locations have been received from the City Planning Commission, Downtown Plan Steering Committee, Certified Heritage Preservation Commission, Downtown Business Association, Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Development Corporation. It is now time to make the City's position regarding the bridge corridor location known to the State and the Stillwater community. The major environment, transportation, land use, historic and cultural resources and economic impacts of the bridge alternatives are well documented. It is important to make the City's position known and actively try to influence the decision making process because of the importance of the IIbridge issuell in the future for Stillwater. Depending on location, the bridge could solve many of the Downtown traffic problems or cause irreparable damage to an endangered cultural and historic resource, Downtown Stillwater. Beyond the Downtown, interchange locations and designs could significantly affect other parts of Stillwater; the Highway 36 commercial corridor, major City streets, South Fourth Street, Greeley Street, and County Road 5. Once a bridge corridor location is selected, careful attention will have to be paid to specific bridge and frontage road design and appearance. Based on the community input the Draft EIS and local transportation needs, the following facts and statements present the City's position regarding the bridge corridor location and Draft EIS. It COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY The north and central bridge corridor locations are inconsistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. The plan calls for a new St. Croix bridge outside of the Downtown. The overall goal statement in the Downtown Plan recognizes Stillwater historic rivertown image and natural setting: liThe image and identity of Downtown Stillwater is of primary importance. It is represented in its historic buildings, its natural setting, and in its dedication to open spaces and the river. The goal of the Downtown Plan is to enhance and retain the historic rivertown image of Stillwater through a conscientious and 1 e gradual process of change and economic growth so that Stillwater, the Birthplace of Minnesota, continues to be a special place to live, to work, and to visit." A Central Corridor bridge would be inconsistent with the underlying goal for the area. More specifically, the Downtown Plan called for the retention of the existing lift bridge recently designated to the National Register of Historic Places, as part of the Downtown historic character and for the new bridge to be located in the South Corridor. e TRANSPORTATION The City of Stillwater appreciates being involved in the planning and environmental review process for the proposed new river crossing over the St. Croix River. The City has been actively cooperating with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and other transportation planning agencies for the past thirty years in efforts to resolve the existing traffic problems. The City has had an opportunity to review several previous reports from Mn/DOT as part of the environmental review process and the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The City of Stillwater is very aware of the deficiencies and capacity restraints of the existing road system. The City has lived with congestion caused by the lack of capacity for many years. No other community or agency is impacted by the existing problems like the City of Stillwater. The existing lift bridge and the approaching roadways do not provide sufficient capacity to accommodate current traffic. The existing roadway is narrow and the intersections are very restricted. The Downtown area is congested and has many conflicts between pedestrians, automobiles and trucks. The Environmental Impact Statement provides a historical review of past efforts. The City has worked for the past thirty years to improve the flow of traffic in the Downtown area. The City has removed parking on Main Street from MYrtle Street to south of Chestnut Street. All parking has been removed on Chestnut Street between Main Street and the bridge. Left turns have been banned and left turn lanes added. This has been done to improve the flow of traffic and has often worked to the detriment of the Downtown businesses by reducing local traffic circulation and removing valuable parking spaces. Numerous other options have been studied over the past thirty years. Total removal of parking along Main Street and creation of double left turns westbound would slightly increase westbound capacity at the Main Street and Chestnut Street intersection. However, a large, northbound vehicle would be unable to turn in the remaining portion of Main Street. The use of one-way streets using various combinations of Water Street, Main Street, Nelson Street, Chestnut Street, Second Street and Olive Street have been reviewed and found to be unworkable because of the narrow rights-of-way and the grades on some of the streets. Reconstruction of the roadways in the Downtown area to include a bypass through the east side of the Downtown would virtually wipe out much of the historic character and several of the buildings within the Downtown area. There would still remain a single lane in each direction on a lift bridge creating congestion. The use of other streets, such as Third 2 e Street, Fourth Street or Myrtle Street has been reviewed and found to be lacking because of the steep grades and the discontinuous platting of streets in the residential areas. The City has been bypassed by a route from HIghway 36 and County Road 15 on the west side of Highways 96 and 95 on the north side. This marked bypass has removed only a few vehicles. Despite all the efforts the City and the State have made, traffic delays and congestion have continued to increase. In the 1960's traffic delays occurred on Friday nights for two to four hours and for a few hours on Sunday. As traffic grew, congestion occurred from early afternoon Friday through late Sunday night and began to occur every evening. Today, traffic delays occur for two to four hours Monday through Thursday and from Friday noon until late evening and all day on Saturday and Sunday. Even on weekdays when the lift bridge is operated, congestion immediately occurs in the Downtown area. Stillwater residents and visitors continue to cite traffic as a major concern. The traffic situation is responsible for some Downtown businesses leaving the Downtown area. Traffic volumes have grown with the development of Western Wisconsin as part of the greater Metropolitan Twin City area. The bridge traffic is composed of recreational traffic on weekends but most of the weekly traffic comes from work and business related trips. In 1962, the average daily traffic (ADT) on the bridge was 4,900 vehicles per day. In 1970, the volumes ha~ risen to 8,000 and in 1980 they were at 11,000 ADT. Volumes in 1986 were 12,400 ADT. Traffic volumes in the Downtown area have grown even greater. Volumes on Highway 36 immediately south of the Downtown area is currently 17,400 vehicles per day (1986). This is one of the heaviest volume two lane roadways in the Metropolitan Area. Generally, volumes between 8,000 and 12,000 will require a four-lane roadway. The backup of northbound traffic on Highway 36 frequently extends back to the HIghway 95 and Highway 36 intersections, more than a mile from the Main Street and Chestnut Street intersection. Traffic attempting to bypass this backup have used a combination of several less desirable routes. Some traffic utilizes the HIghway 5 interchange (which has a very limited sight distance). Traffic then uses County Road 5 and Olive and Myrtle Streets or Pine to reach the Downtown area. Others will use County Road 12 and Myrtle Street. In a typical evening, traffic will back up for a few blocks on Myrtle Street from the stop sign at Third Street. Traffic also uses South Fourth Street and Third Street and other combinations to reach the Downtown area and approach the bridge on Chestnut Street. Others will use a combination of Owens Street, Greeley Street, Pine Street, Olive Street, and Churchill Street. Traffic from the south on Highway 95 will often use County Road 23 (Beach Avenue) and travel through Oak Park Heights and Stillwater, using Fourth Avenue and any other combination of streets. Some will utilize Chilicoot Hill on Second Street approaching the Downtown. This hill has been deemed dangerous enough to be closed each winter. e 3 e This bypassing of traffic through residential neighborhoods has created documented speeding problems, numerous complaints from residents, and request for stop signs. Traffic, with its frustrations of backups and bypasses, will speed, roll through stop signs, and create serious concerns for the safety of pedestrians who may be crossing any of these residential streets. The commercial and industrial development in Western Wisconsin, including Somerset and New Richmond, has created heavy commercial traffic traveling through the Downtown area. A single commercial vehicle has a significant turning problem at the Main Street and Chestnut Streets intersection and generally travels slow on the hills coming up from the Downtown Stillwater area. With the growth in commercial vehicles, a new capacity restraint has been added to the Downtown again significantly reducing the ability to travel through the City. The lift bridge is a serious congestion factor. Through the cooperation of numerous agencies, a rigid schedule for opening the bridge has been established which has diminished some of the previous problems of frequent openings. However, the greater number of boats using the lift bridge has created a longer time length of opening, decreasing the street capacity in the Downtown area. Any time the lift bridge is opened, it stays open for several minutes creating an immediate backup of traffic into the Downtown area. An early 1980's Minnesota Department of Public Safety report on pedestrian safety in several communities indicated that the City of Stillwater has half its pedestrian accidents in the Downtown area. Included are fatal accidents involving pedestrians crossing downtown streets in the face of heavy traffic. While the City and State have cooperated in attempting to make pedestrian safety a higher priority, pedestrians are still at risk anywhere in the Downtown area. A simple change in phasing of the traffic signal at Main Street and Chestnut Street to protect pedestrians from left turning traffic resulted in a intolerable backup of westbound traffic. Traffic frequently backs through the Nelson Street and Main Street intersection forcing pedestrians to walk between vehicles. It is virtually impossible to cross Chestnut Street at Water Street at any time. The accident rate for Highway 36 from the St. Croix River to Highway 95 is almost double the state-wide average for a two lane urban roadway. This is despite the fact that at many hours of the day, traffic is at a standstill or moving slowly significantly reducing the possibility of accidents. e The major concern of the City of Stillwater is the future of the City under a "no-build" option. The Mn/DOT forecasts under the "no-bui ld" alternative is 2'8,200 vehicles per day on the lift bridge, 'double the current volume. Volumes on Highway 36 south of the Downtown area would be 33,700 vehicles per day, almost twice the existing volume. It would be physically impossible to carry these volumes of traffic with any semblance of order. Traffic would be beyond capacity for several hours a day. The major concern is that traffic would back up significantly further than currently along Highway 36 to the south. The backup 4 e e undoubtedly would reach the high speed four-lane sections in Oak Park Heights. Traffic diversions would be numerous and many of the residential streets would be faced with high volumes. Third Street, Fourth Street, M,yrtl e Street, Chestnut Street and others approac h in g the Downtown would have blocks of backed up traffic attempting to access the single lane of traffic heading into Wisconsin. Volumes on the Wisconsin side of the bridge would be similarly affected. The forecast is for 9,000 vehicles per day on the County Trunk Highway E approach, a roadway marked by "Dangerous Hill" signs. A concern is that traffic, once clearing the bridge, would drive fast and dangerously, attempting to make up for the lost time waiting in traffic. Traffic will not divert to the Hudson bridge several miles away because of the need to travel through NOrth Hudson and Hudson, or Bayport and Oak Park Heights. The alternate route would take 20 to 35 minutes depending upon the time of day. In addition, the volumes of traffic will significantly back up far beyond the Hi ghway 35 and 64 i ntersecti on and beyond the Highway 36 and 95 intersections. Diversions would be down county roads and other city streets not designed fro the types of traffic that will occur. The City has looked at TSM options. They simply are not workable. Transit would sit in the same traffic backups. Ridership would be low. "No action" or "no-build" is clearly an unacceptable alternative to the citizens or Sti11water and to the thousands of motorists waiting in traffic each day currently and the many thousands who will utilize the bridge in the future. Travel in the Downtown area would be impossible. Pedestrians would be at risk any time they stepped into any street because of bypassing traffic. Cars would be idling on virtually every street with obvious impacts on air pollution. Of major concern is the impact of exhaust fumes on the old brick and stone facades which were constructed back in the 1860's, 1870's and 1880's. Also of concern is the impact of the vibrations from the increasing numbers of commercial vehicles. Replacement of the bridge on site is clearly unacceptable. While a newer bridge could be built, it would have similar capacity problems and the same tremendous negative impacts on the street and highway systems of Downtown Stillwater, residential Stillwater, and Western Wisconsin that the existing bridge has. Tne City of Stillwater has recently devoted a large amount of resources in terms of both time and money, for a study of the Downtown area. This Downtown study has resulted in a Downtown Plan developed by the Stillwater City Council. The plan took years to develop and implement, went through numerous public meetings and hearings, and was the result of efforts by two different citizen committees. The plan has had the approval of not only the City Council, but also the Planning Commission, Economic Development Committee, Historical Committee, Chamber, and others. 5 e As a part of the study, the City reviewed the North, Central and South Corridors. A North Corridor would not relieve traffic in the Downtown area and would create numerous access problems for the City of Stillwater. This is in addition to the disruption of the scenic qualities of the more natural appearing river. The north alternative is not a viable alternative for the City of Stillwater. e Similarly, the central alternative is inconsistent with the Downtown Plan and past plans for the City. The central bridge location would impact the visual qualities of the river and the Downtown area. It would also perpetuate many of the problems on the hills in Western Wisconsin. The City intends to expend funds to improve the aesthetics of the river front, primarily in Lowell Park, for a few blocks either side of the existing bridge. The visual impact of the bridge passing diagonally in front of much of the park area would be visually unacceptable. The touchdown of the bridge on the east side of the river would be in City owned Kolliner Park near the existing lift bridge. The view of the elevated bridge would destroy the visual quality of the river and the Wisconsin bluff lines as viewed from Downtown. It would impact the charm of the historical Downtown district with its characteristic church steeples and Pioneer Park as viewed from the river. It would be the most visible structure possible in terms of river traffic. The City also believes that the noise impact of the projected 22,000 to 33,000 vehicles per day would be unacceptable to people in the Downtown, residents living on either side of the area or traffic on the river. A central bridge would destroy the future use of the City owned river front property referred to as the Aiple Property south of the Downtown, which is currently planned for open space and river recreation as an extension of Lowell Park. The Central Corridor location would degrade the quality of the experience of visiting Lowell Park enjoyed by over a million visitors per year. The main view from the park would be the bridge. A central bridge location would also limit the attractiveness and value of City owned Kolliner Park as open space recreation resource. The City, after careful review of the many documents and reflection upon thirty years of transportation studies and more than one hundred years of river front existence, has unanimously supported the South Corridor. The corridor aligns most closely with the existing highway. A well designed, aesthetic bridge is consistent with the existing uses on the Minnesota side of the river and careful design would minimize the impacts on the Wisconsin side of the river. The bridge would have significantly less visual impact than the smoke stacks, conveyor belts, and coal piles of the NSP power plant, or some of the other industrial uses made of the river at this location. The western shoreline is clearly fully developed and the bridge would have little visual impact to users of the river. Noise from a bridge at this location would be significantly less than the industrial noise form the Andersen plant or the King plant or from the overpowered boats currently using this portion of the St. Croix River. The noise levels would definitely be less than the unacceptable congestion noises that would exist in the Downtown Stillwater area directly adjacent to pedestrians and numerous people oriented businesses. 6 e e The City of Stillwater has lived with the traffic problems since the invention of the automobile. The City has made great sacrifices in the Downtown area to adapt to the use of CIty streets as well as county roads and highways by non-Stillwater traffic. The City has attempted to retain the scenic qualities of the St. Croix River as proven by its preservation of some of the river front, developments of park and recreation activities overlooking or adjacent to the river and the support of the recently adopted Downtown Plan. With this type of commitment to the river, it is extremely difficult for the city to recognize the claims of some individuals and groups that the traffic problem exists for merely a few hours for recreation traffic. HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL Minnesota was born along the banks of the St. Croix River in what is now Downtown Stillwater in 1848. This event and the succeeding evolution of the area has a lot to say about what is the essence of Downtown Stillwater, and to some extent, Minnesota. The pattern of activity and remnants of the lumbering and manufacturing eras can still be seen in Downtown Stillwater. In fact riverside parks, Lowell Park, Kolliner Park and Aiple Property were all lumbering sites given .to the City after the demise of lumbering. Stillwater has always been recognized as the town of brick and church steeples on the St. Croix. Recently, the general perception has been formally recognized through the nomination of Downtown Stillwater as a National Register Historic District. The existing lift Bridge and several other historic buildings, already on the National Register, strengthen the historic significance of the Downtown. Fortunately for Stillwater, and unfortunately for many Downtowns that experienced road and bridge projects during the fifties, sixties and early seventies, historic and cultural resources are no longer taken for granted. Through Federal and State laws, special attention must be paid to recognized historic resources such as Downtown Stillwater. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires projects such as this bridge project, to take into account its affect on historic properties. Section 4f of the Department of Transportation Act states that projects shall not be approved which destroy or substantially alter a historic property of Local, State or National irq:>ortance unless there is no IIfeasible and prudent alternativell and all possible planning is undertaken to minimize harm. NEPA requires an EIS for major federal projects that will significantly affect the quality of the environment including important historic, cultural and natural aspects of our national heritage. Dr. Norene Roberts, author of Historic Reconstruction of the Riverfront: Stillwater, Minnesota 1985 and Intensive National Register Survey of Downtown Stillwater, Minnesota, 1989 has indicated that a 106 review should be conducted for the Downtown and Bridge due to existing traffic vibration and exhaust. Beside these impacts, the visual and noise impact of a central Bridge location would affect the character and attractiveness of historic Downtown Stillwater. The Central Bridge Alignment or a IIno-buildll option will affect the Downtown historic Stillwater properties; the Downtown Stillwater Commercial Historic District, Lift Bridge, Freighthouse Depot, Roscoe Hersey House, St. Croix Lumbermill, Lowell Park and Vittorio's and the required NEPA, Section 106 and 4f reviews must be completed before a Central Corridor and IIno-buildll option can be selected. 7 . ' e e The National Wild and Scenic River Act also supports the preservation of historic areas. The Act declares "it is the policy of the United States that selected rivers of the nation which with their immediate environments possess outstanding remarkable scenic, recreational, geological fish and wild life, historic, cultural or other similar values shall be preserved in free flowing condition that their immediate environments shall be protected for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations. (underline added) The Lower St. Croix Master Plan, the plan developed by State and Federal natural resource agencies ,to recogni ze and protect the Lower St.Croi x River states liThe development and management of the St. Croix should place primary emphasis on maintaining and enhancing aesthetic, scenic, historic, fish and wildlife and geologic features. II (underline added) The Wild and Scenic River Act and Lower St. Croix Master Plan requires that the historic and cultural resources of historic Stillwater on the banks of the St. Croix be preserved for future generations enjoyment. ECONOMIC The economic impacts of a new bridge are concerns of the City. A Central Corridor Bridge or a "no buildll decision would have a negative impact on Downtown. The Downtown is congested and suffers economically because of the congestion and heavy truck traffic. Increased traffic would only worsen the economic viability of the area. If a Southern Corridor Bridge location is selected, the interchange and frontage locations and design will be critical to provide convenient access to the adjacent businesses. CONCLUSION It is clearly evident to the City that a IIno-buildll or Central Corridor location are unacceptable and unmanageable. It is also clear that the South Corridor has a significant number of advantages for the traveling public, the river user and the adjacent communities. The City urges the Minnesota and Wisconsin Departments of Transportation to support the South Corridor and to continue to maintain a schedule for construction and opening of the new bridge to alleviate the unacceptable transportation and safety problems in the Downtown area and other areas of Stillwater. If a IIno-build" or Central Corridor location is selected, it is the City's position that additional NEPA, Section 106 and Section 4f study and review is necessary. 8 r illwater ~ ---~ ---- -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J e June 1, 1990 Garneth O. Peterson, CTPG Project Manager Regional Transit Board Mears Park Centre, 7th Floor 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Mr. Peterson: The City of Stillwater supports the request from Washington County for a community transit grant. The information gathered from the study could be used by the City of Stillwater in identifying City transit needs and services as a part of the upcoming City Comprehensive Plan Revision. Should you have questions regarding the City Comprehensive Plan, feel free to contact Steve Russell at 439-6121. Sincerely, ;JiLt1 al1d"dl.&~~ Wallace Abrahamson Mayor c.c Jane M. Harper, Washington County Office of Administration e CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612.439-6121 e e , . Metropolitan Council Meeting of May 24, 1990 Business Item: C-l METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth St., St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 REPORT OF THE METROPOLITAN SYSTEMS COMMITTEE Referral Report No. 90-35 DATE: May 18, 1990 TO: Metropolitan Council SUBJECT: TII 36, Stillwater-Houlton River Bridge DEIS. Referral File No. 13200-3 BACKGROUND At its May 15, 1990 meeting the Metropolitan Systems Committee considered the staff review and recommendations on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a new St. Croix River Crossing. The staff found that the DEIS adequately addresses: the impacts on local and regional plans; temporary and long-term natural resource impacts and the transportation impacts of the build and no-build alternatives. Staff also found that reservation of right-of-way would be consistent with the Major River Crossing Study Report and improvements to TII 36 between TH 15 and Stillwater are not among the Council's recommended 2010 highway plan improvements. ISSUES AND CONCERNS A committee member asked about the use of RALF funds to reserve right-of-way for TH 36 improvements. Staff said RALF might be available if the project were first officially mapped or approved according to our Controlled Access Approval procedures. RECOMMENDA TlONS That the staff report and findings be submitted to Mn/DOT as the Council's comments on the DEIS for the Stillwater~Houlton River Crossing. Respectfully submitted, Don Stein, Chair . e e ,6 Metropolitan Council Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth St., St.-Paul, MN 55101 DATE: May 6, 1990 TO: Metropolitan Systems Committee FROM: Ann Braden, Transportation SUBJECT: TH 36, Stillwater-Houlton River Bridge DEIS. Referral File No. 13200-3 AUTHORITY TO REVIEW AND BACKGROUND In accordance with the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, the Minnesota Department of Transportation has submitted a Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a new St. Croix River Crossing to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment. The project is a cooperative effort between Minnesota and Wisconsin, with Mn/DOT assuming lead agency responsibilities. In March, 1987 the Council reviewed the Final Study Outline/Scoping Document for the proj ect. At that time the Council expressed concern that the north alignment might have considerable negative impact on MDIF policies. The Council found "Because of the potential impact on local and regional plans, the scoping decision should be amended to include local land use impacts and impacts on regional plans and policies as part of the in-depth (DEIS) analysis." PROJECT DESCRIPTION The DEIS examines the reconstruction of TH 36 in Washington County, functional replacement of the existing drawbridge over the St. Croix River, and reconstruction of approach highways leading to the bridge. The proj ect is needed primarily to remedy both roadway deficiencies, and safety problems. Maj or deficiencies affecting traffic flow on the existing bridge and approach corridors include traffic light and other impediments in downtown Stillwater, the drawbridge and the narrowness of its roadway, numerous intersections and access points along TH 36 and STH 35/64 in Wisconsin and the merging of the four-lane TH 36 with the two-lane TH 95. All vehicles using the lift bridge must pass through downtown Stillwater, whether they have business there or not. Bottlenecks caused by inadequate turn lanes, the signal at the intersection of Chestnut and Main and conflicts with pedestrians and local traffic are compounded by the opening of the lift bridge. Peak congestion occurs on weekends and holidays in the summer. Accident rates are higher than average for TH 36 to the lift bridge. On the four-lane stretch of TH 36 (from TH 15 to TH 95) the rate was 2.8 accidents per million vehicle miles compared to a statewide average of 2.5 for suburban expressways. On the stretch of TH 36 from TH 95 to the lift bridge, the accident rate was 7.6 compared to a statewide average of 4.3 for two lane urban/suburban roadways. , Alternatives Analvzed The "no-build" alternat ve includes No-action, replacement-an-site, and TSM strategies, includi g mass transit options. e The following "build" a ternatives were' developed for three corridors and are illustrated on the ttachment: North Corridor This alternative contai s two potential river crossing construction options on different al gnments. They consist of a 2,500 foot long bridge with a 185 foot clearan e over the St. Croix, and an estimated cost to Minnesota of $39 millio , including approach highways; and an 8,200 foot long tunnel under the S . Croix at an estimated cost of $129-179 million, including approach hig ays but not including support facilities, such as ventilation, drainage a d lighting. Central Corridor This alternative has fa r potential design variations: 1) a 3,300 foot long br dgewith a 2,990 foot elevated roadway section over TH 95, a river cle rance that varies between 60 and 70 feet, and an estimated Minnesota cas of $44.3 million; 2) a 2,975 foot bridge ith a 3,100 foot long roadway section over TH 95, a clearance between 41 an 74 feet and an estimated state cost of $42.9 million; 3) a 2,650 foot long bridge with a 3,100 foot long elevated roadway section of TH 95, a 3,0 0 or a 4,600 foot long land tunnel beneath the Wisconsin bluff, a rive clearance that varies between 19 and 41 feet, and would cost the state be een $58.3 and $67.6 million; and 4) a 4,175 foot long c integrated Th 95 roadwa and 65 feet, and an est bination river and approach bridge with an design, a river clearance that varies between 52 ated cost of $37.1 million. South Corridor Northern Alignment: 1) a 4,900 foot long br dge with a river clearance that varies between 53 and 105 feet, and estim ted cost of $38.4 million; and 2) a 4,900 foot long br dge, a 900 foot long land tunnel beneath the Wisconsin bluff, a clea ance of 53 to 105 feet, and a Minnesota cost of $43.66 million. e '. e Central Alignment: 1) as, 100 foot long bridge with a river clearance that varies between 70 and 157 feet, and an estimated Minnesota share of $39.5 million; 2) a 4,925 foot bridge with a river clearance that varies between 45 and 113 feet, and an estimated cost of $39 million to the state; and 3) a 4,925 foot long bridge, a 920 foot long land tunnel beneath the Wisconsin bluff, a river clearance that varies between 45 and 113 feet, and an estimated cost of $44.3 million. Southern Alignment: 1) a 5,900 foot long bridge with a river clearance that varies between 60 and 100 feet, and an estimated cost of $43.6 million; 2) as, 900 foot long bridge with a 31 to 108 foot clearance and a cost of about $43.3 million; and 3) a 6,200 foot long bridge with a river clearance that varies between 126 and 143 feet, and an estimated cost of $48.6 million. DISCUSSION Research and Long-Range Planning (Dick Thompson) The Draft EIS has adequately addressed the impacts of the proposed improvements on local and regional plans both in Minnesota and Wisconsin. The Draft EIS addresses land use impacts and farmland impacts for each of the three corridors. The Draft EIS indicates that the northern Corridor would impact land use and farmland most severely. It indicates further that the Northern Alternative would be contrary to the development plans of the Metropolitan Council. A northern route would be outside the urban service area of Stillwater, a freestanding community in the Metropolitan Development and Investment Framework (MDIF). The Draft EIS states "construction of a new highway in the North Corridor could increase development pressure and demand for services along the route." e From the perspective of farmland preservation, the central corridor would pose the least impacts. The worst-case alignment would require 28 acres from four farms in Wisconsin with no impacts to farmland in Minnesota. In terms of general land use, the Central Corridor would encourage future development to occur along existing TH 36 rather than in rural areas. On the other hand, the Central Corridor would severely impact downtown Stillwater and affect the city's plans for the waterfront south of Lowell Park. The Central Corridor would most severely impact the unincorporated. community of Houlton. From the standpoint of the MDIF, however, the Central Corridor would be consistent. The Southern Corridor w uld have land use impacts similar to those of the Central Corridor, excep that it would require more relocations in Oak Park Heights. The Sout ern Corridor would have minimal impacts on agriculture in Minnesot , but Wisconsin could potentially lose 103 acres of farmland. From a pI ning viewpoint, the Southern Corridor "is consistent with Stillwa er's current Comprehensive Plan and. . . the Stillwater Downtown PIa , an element of the Comprehensive Plan." The Southern Corridor is co sistent with the MDIF insofar as it is within the urban service area of S illwater. St. Croix County has taken a position favoring the Southern C rridor as well. e Thus, from the standpoi t of analyzing impacts on local and regional plans, the Draft EIS ha done an adequate job. From the analysis presented, the Southern Corridor appears to be the favored alternative. Natural Resources (Flor nce Myslajek) The proposed constructi n of a bridge/tunnel will have impacts on water quality, wetlands, floo plain, ground water and surface water in the area. For example, Brown's Cr ek, which would be impacted by the North Corridor alternatives, is one of the streams identified for priority protection in the Council's Water Res urces Development Guide Policy Plan. More wetlands would be impac ed by the North Corridor alternatives. With regard to natural esources, the Draft EIS is very complete and discusses the temporary and long term impacts and mitigation measures in detail sufficient for p esent circumstances. As stated in the document, a more detailed examinati n may be necessary once alternatives are selected. Transportation (Ann Bra The analysis adequately addresses the transportation impacts of the Stillwater Bridge alte atives. The Central and South c rridor alternatives involve reconstruction of a segment of TH 36, which is a metropolitan highway. For these alternatives TH 36 would be reconst cted as a freeway between CR 15 and TH 95 with possible interchange lo at ions at CR 15, TH 5/County 5, Oasis Avenue, and TH 95. The 2010 Highwa Plan described in the Council's Transportation Policy does not recotmDe d any improvements to this segment of TH 36. In 1989 the Council acc pted the Major River Crossings Study Report and instructed staff to sch dule a revision to the highway project rankings section of the Transpor ation Policy Plan to include regional bridge priorities; and instruct~ staff to use the Maj or River Crossings Study as the major source of dat 'for the revision. e '... e The Maj or River Crossings Report ranks replacement of the Stillwater bridge as a distant third, of the twenty bridges ranked. The Bloomington Ferry Bridge and TH 169 (Anoka) Bridge respectively ranked first and second with 695 and 603 points. The Stillwater Bridge earned 475 points, The fourth ranked Hastings Bridge earned 473 points and the fifth ranked I- 35W Burnsville Bridge received 467 points. The report makes the following recommendations regarding the Stillwater Bridge: The Environmental Impact Study (EIS) that is now in process should be completed. Once the preferred alternative is selected, if it is a build alternative, Mn/DOT, Wis/DOT and County and city governments should work together to protect the right-of-way and develop a funding scheme, since the total costs are significant, ranging from $46.4 to $53.2 million. (Minnesota's share would be half this amount.) Minnesota's approach roadways would cost $6.1-$15.4 million, depending upon the corridor selected. In support of the above recommendation, with the exception of right-of-way reservation, the Council should not recommend state expenditure on the the Stillwater bridge in advance of construction of the Bloomington Ferry Bridge or reconstruction of the TH 169 bridge. Improvements to TH 36 as the approach road to the bridge are also not included in our 2010 transportation plan. FINDINGS 1. The DEIS adequately addresses the impacts on local and regional plans, and based on the analysis, the Southern Corridor appears to be the favored alternative. 2. The Draft EIS adequately addresses the temporary and long term natural resource impacts and mitigation measures of a new bridge. 3. The analysis adequately addresses the transportation impacts of the build and no-build alternatives. 4. Reservation of right-of-way would be consistent with the Major River Crossing Study Report. 5. Improvements to TH 36 between TH 15 and Stillwater are not among the Council's recommended 2010 highway plan improvements. RECOMMENDATIONS That the above staff report and findings be submitted to Mn/DOT as the Council's comments on the DEIS for the Stillwater-Houlton River Crossing. e a1bl1lll1 e MINNESOTA WISCONSIN Figu re 1 Key Regional Highway Corridors 3T1U.~TI'" l"t>r~,. :: : = I I ",1 L1.wAT!R :I . =< eI <J ......... ,:~:r~,.o. ,. ii' ,~. ST. :1 :-3'lU.1..WATlR OWH,5HP.. I C.3.A.H.. 2 I I ..___ _I GRANT TO'#f"SH~ .. ,--' I ., I .. I I .. ,J > < r.t~.., '" - ~f'-if -~-~~,~. il 1_-"'" I I bt:'J ~ .. r. .-: I ~ ~ r ~ ...::..~ I .,." ~~Hn~ J< . '\, NORTH:ORRIOOR CENT;:;Al CORRIQOR SOUTH :::::RRIOOR e SOUTH TUNNEL NORTH TUNNEL Figure 2 Present Study Corridors e e ~ " TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 1, 1990 SUBJECT: FINAL APPROVAL OF TWO LOT RESUBDIV IS ION FOR PROPERTY AT 412 & 418 WEST WILKINS STREET IN THE RB DISTRICT. STANLEY AND ELIZABETH McDONALD, APPLICANTS. Thi s request was prel iminarily approved by the City Council September 9, 1989. The Certificate of Survey shows the exact location of the existing, the proposed structures and new lot line. Both new lots meet the 7,500 square foot single family lot requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Resolution approving the resubdivision. ATTACHMENT: Certificate of Survey. CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612.439.6121 .. X0.,r~{:.\.: ',0:' . ::~: i?iU~;?~~" .f'. :' , ~ . -; ~- -. . ~~:,;_:>,"~~::'. ~.,. .;!.. -. . r;;;.~: "".:: :".: ~ '". .0 _._. '....". '.'... PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NOS. SUB/89-48, V/89-46, V/89-47 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: August 14, 1989 PROJECT LOCATION: 412 - 418 West Wilkins Street COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISTRICT: Two Family Residential ZONING DISTRICT: RB APPLICANT'S NAME: Stanley and Elizabeth McDonald PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS: The project has three planning reviews, a resubdivison to modify a property boundary (SUB/89-48), a variance required for the existing garage that results from the location of the new lot line (V/89-46) and a variance for the construct i on of a new attached garage (V/89-47). SUB/89-48 - The request is to resubdivide two lots (lots 25 and 26 of 11,070 square feet and lot 27 of 5.535 square feet) into two lots marked Lots A and B on the site plan of A = 68'x135' = 9,180 square feet and lot B 55'x135' = 7,425 square feet. The single family lot size requirement is 7,500 square feet. Existing lot 27 is 5,535, so the modification brings one lot more into conformity with lot size requirements. V/89-46 - One variance is for the existing garage that would be located on new Lot A. The proposed sideyard setback is 2 1/2 ft, 5 ft. is required. V/89-47 - A second variance is requested to construct a new attached garage to the existing residence at 418 West Wilkins Street. The proposed garage is a sixteen ft. one stall garage. The proposed setback is two ft. The adjacent residence to the east is approximately 30 ft. away. It would be possible to reduce the width of the garage to fourteen ft. and for the garage to accommodate a one car stall. RECOMMENDATION: 1. SUB/89-48 - Approval. 2. V/89-46 - Approval. 3. Approval with possible reduction of width of garage to 14 or 15 ft. FINDINGS: Because of the existing structure location and small lot sizes, the proposed is consistent with the intent of the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. CONDITION OF APPROVAL: 1. The garages shall meet building code requirements for fire separation. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Approval with condition. ATTACHMENT: Plan. J ,/-~ .~", ~ ...,... .. " :' to: . e CERTIFICATE \ :.~ BRUCE A. FOLZ & ASSOC/A TES LAND SURVEYING LAND PLANNING 1815 NORTHWESTERN AVENUE STILLWATER, MN, 55082 (6121439-8833 ""'jtl ,', ';.'i1'~~~lj ~'. .'~ ~}~:-5. .., .. of SURVEY I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DRAWING IS A CORRECT REPRESENTATION OF THIS SURVEY AND ALL MONUMENTS HAVE BEEN PLACeD IN THE GROUND AS SHOWN, THIS SURVEY OR PLAN WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. --!j." ....-:;. ~ ,:.....:.. ~~c..~. BRUCE A, FOLZ c::<- c:J~. MINN, REG, NO, 9232 ~-/8-9 0 f ::( Survey For: ST ANLEY AND ELIZABETH McDONALD 412 AND 418 WEST WILKIN STREET STILL WATER. MN 55082 DATE "l ;., i':j SEE 'ATTACHED SHEET FOR LAND DESCRIPTION SCALE: I Inch. 20 feet , '.:4 o . '0 20 ;.'~ I, :'.-~ '. j ..., :~ ,.. \'.) I I I I N8~01'J'.q.2"wl --5"1-.(.,1-- ... -, (- \ \ II. 1", \ J \..... I I ., \, ,:: " I ~, I I L]. I I I I -J ~ -' , , ... 1 t:.l.T . ~ ::~ . " ,- '1.3."1"1-. I 1 \ N W Cor, I Lot U. ~ I ~ I ~ ~ I j Q~ I" '<0'" S~ ~ NN ,( I -:; ~" " I { ~ PARCELl .8\0 s,!, Ft,:t, I ? : I \.. 5~ O-r- ,', It.! .0 f'! I :;~ . '.~'~,' i.....: r-1I\ .., -z.. '~.Jo ,. c<1 I'" -, - L- o ~ ~Q~ 7 ~.:EI o 1 I \S\'\)' III : 0. d> 1"1 - ."I!.. II:!. -, :...-I'i..-----~~ 1\ll~~.".\. ~ ; I P"oposed. : U& I :z. SF '".J 13....:a~~...: ~ f: ~ Hou,5e N s "~~ \ t "'\ ~' ('i18'N.W;Ik.;,,) -21--: ,.._' i'~ : -'r-.... '0' '. .~ I'! . I.._~':._.n~ ~1 . ~.-' F ...,:." ." ,.1 Op~n pot"c.h r-- 1J) V' iI' ~-t.:, IY! ell;.,,!! 1l1;t- c....:. 2"! 'j ;iJ -'.;i drill ""k ~\' ~<.I\ ' I;; I.~:~';J.U."'J.~I ~~ j ~~ I ~~&:'=It~ '\ ~:. I '~ -~ .in' !'lor'" '" 9<" ~ 7 I (~fl;..~+,;:tI,\1 I ' ", ....~ /,,q /TI" ...."....1 ".r Sid"Wa/k __....... ',-' ~!..n m ,~d,~ ...,,,,''-It ~,;nm~, 4/,1"1,.., . .:Q~ ./ o. Z ~r-rh, '" ." .. 'I ~ 8/ ., ',':" I , , , I ~ ".f S-CC"/..Ui!J I'A; , . '..-. -. -'-. /,1110- " 'r:,. ..,.- 1,'_.:...:-.,;.,:~'-~"6?",' .- ......:.~,. : _:-~ .- ~ ~o 98-..... . . . -' .~ I . .' ," .... .',' ," 4'" ." .......... ("-... ..,;.,- .1' -' -- " '--G.2 53 --' '....,. ~'. ,:..' '1.(/'" :: -:--j-:;i ~ \.- -. --~, 8.90/') '1fIj."W- sw c;;r.,..r- ~~f. .;;:n~;f3890/-9 'J.1J.E'~': ~:,-"'.i..; - :'::"':':'C- _ow:"':" CM':. walk , -..-- --,..,.,.. - - - ~_ ---.J.."~ '. :~~ 77 J' Con<, A~~oil. ~ ii:"'.1~~tv~;r:.",. .,:;:~~~~.'<"'~" . .. - ~--.' . ~~~"'cJ, w.\Li';:::::(!,:~~,'~':~~~':~I L KI N I ST R E E T,o" ,;.~:~::,.t, L1: ,. 41.1' IT'I ~~ i r. L/I,"m ME C.........< lJ>+ 2~ ."7 f S850/~'42"E --Go B.89'- . ':, \ . 'l: \~, \ :i. \ / \ \ ~ \ ':i: V..... \' ~ \ \ \' ,; \ - l\ \ ~" , \' I \ ,~ \I i. 't ; 1'-- :1 I I I ~f I -OJ: I Or-I ' N r-' MUll . <<1 0-;-1 \I)' " P~RCEL. A I 8895 Scj, Ft. :t I,':, Cone. I.:'.:'.: ap.,..on ~ N t.~ t ,... J.11.nm , \ I N . . \'.' ( ~\ \_' , \~I \ I 't' . ,..~ :i '\I~ .~ :llJ -r- ,-N r- . I- .1"'1 ~ t,) <:) 7 :~.I ~. B exi~+iY'l:J 3araj<<- ., ., oil If\ ... '" 2::, ".7 (: 1 ,l<J , : r--.Q \. N~ :~'I iii; r:.', ('r'). - 0 :~ ~~ ~3 .1.: 7~ ..~, 14! ""wooden o - -d..c.k ~ 'I. I'll:. ... f1.~ " 12!. '.. ., ",; 25F N Ho....s<:. ('112 W. Wi Ikin) r, " N e c"-,,I""/'J)t! ~s ~/.. fred-" o DENOTES 1/2 INCH IRON PIPE MONUMENT SET AND MARKED WITH A PLASTIC CAP INSCRIBED "RLS. 9232". UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE. DISTANCES SHOWN TO FEET 110,30. ETCJ ARE EXACT EXTRINSIC VALUES. ..; r .. DENOTES RECORD DIMENSION m" DENOTES MEASURED DIMENSION ORIENTATION OF THIS BEARING SYSTEM IS ASSUMED THERE ARE NO VISIBLE ENCROACHMENTS FROM OR ON SAID PROPERTY OTHER THAN SHOWN HEREON. , '. l~ '; .. ) o' e r illwater ~ ----~ --- ~r"\ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JUNE 1, 1990 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING SAEDC In order to be recertified as a Star City, SAEDC is required to have resolutions approved by the cities within the SAEDC area supporting their work. Attached to the draft resolution is a one year plan of action for activities during the coming year. RECOMMENDATION: Approval. e CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612.439-6121 e s a e d c STILLWATER AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION MEMORANDUM ~~ - \ \. \. ;=Ot!- GG Jc.I" (V ~ 10. TO: LINDA NEWELL, BAYPORT ~RB O'NEAL, OAK PARK HEIGHTS ~STEVE RUSSELL, STILLWATER (\~ FROM: JAMES W. TORSETH, PRESIDENT~ RE: STAR CITY ANNUAL RECERTIFICATION DATE: MAY 10, 1990 The Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development requires all Star Cities to recertify annually. The requirements for recertification vary depending upon the date of initial certification. Because your community has a very recent certification date, the requirements are minimal. It will only require the Council to adopt a resolution stating your intent to continue to work with and support SAEDC as the Star City Commission on matters relating to industrial and commercial planning and land use, and the approval of SAEDC's One Year Work Plan. The resolution and One Year Work Plan are attached. If possible we would like this resolution passed no later than your June 1990 Council meeting. Please return the signed resolution to Bob Lockyear, Washington County Government Center, 14900 North 6lst Street, Stillwater, MN 55082. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 439-7795. JWT:yt cc: Bob Lockyear Attachments e P.O. BOX 21 . STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 e e WHEREAS, we are party to an Agreement with Stillwater Area Economic Development Corporation as the Star City Commission; and WHEREAS, Stillwater Area Economic Development Corporation as Star City Commission serves us as an advisor to our council/board; and WHEREAS, we have reviewed and approved the 1990 Star City Work Plan hereto attached; and WHEREAS, we desire to have Stillwater Area Economic Development Corporation continue to advise us on matters relating to joint planning and land use control so as to encourage and guide the orderly development of areas suitable for industrial and commercial development; IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this governmental party has caused this Agreement to be entered into in their behalf by their respective Chairman, Mayors, Clerks and Administrators pursuant to the resolutions adopted by their respective Boards and Councils. CITY OF BAYPORT Passed and adopted by the City of Bayport this , 1990. day of ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor CITY OF OAK PARK HEIGHTS Passed and adopted 1:y the City of Oak Park Heights this day of. 1990. ATTEST: City Administrator Mayor CITY OF STILLWATER Passed and adopted by the City of Stillwater this . 1990. day of ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor e e e e STILLWATER AREA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ONE YEAR PLAN MISSION STATEMENT Promote communication and cooperation among member communities to support retention, expansion and establishment of businesses consistent with community development goals. .' FIR S T YEA R ACTION P LAN e The intent of this plan of action is to more specifically identify the how, when, and what of the initial stages of a long range plan. Each of these goals then will indicate what we want to accomplish; who is responsible to initiate action; the operation timeline and contain measurable results. Goal 1. A major short term goal of SAEDC will be to establish a centralized location for information dissemination. This will create an effective flow of information both in and out of SAEDC. The information will be distributed to various interested parties described in greater detail below. Information will be gathered by the Marketing Committee, headed by Steve Gimmestad, through the following methods: - Communications network within the structure of SAEDC committees. Each committee chairperson will gather information relating to their respective areas of concern, Le. Business Retention, Development, etc. It will then be filtered to the marketing chairperson for processing into information database. Establish communications with outside agencies. To obtain a broader spectrum of information, outside concerns such as developers, contractors and the Chamber of Commerce will be asked to participate in the network. They will be able to share information concerning land use, permits for commercial/industrial development, new projects and possible trends in related market areas. Confidentiality of protected information will be strictly adhered to by SAEDC. Infor- mation will only be used on a statistical level. -The general public will be solicited through various means to contribute their ideas and comments. It is important to receive feedback from the communities SAEDC is servicing. It will help to adjust policies and plans according to popular opinion or sentiment if necessary. These comments can be taken under advisement and acted upon accordingly. The distribution of information will be broken down into two groups: local concerns and prospective developers. These groups will be reached in the following means: - A newsletter will be developed and include information pertinent to each group. e Information relating to SAEDC and its activities, community information and profiles, individual business profiles, recent accomplishments and new business opportunities will be covered in each issue. At first, this newsletter will be published on a quarterly basis. As the infor- mation pool grows, the newsletter will be published more,often. - A rotating schedule of S EDC members will write a column to appear in either the Stillwater Ga ette or the Valley Press. This will allow SAEDC a and businesses. Not onl also provide a consisten various aspects of SAEDC - Working with the Stillwa Committee will establish organizations and offici By providing a personal local community can gain activities. In addition functions, other people SAEDC will be asked to s the public as to current e hance to reach a broad market of local people will it give SAEDC added exposure, it will and reliable source of information regarding activities. er Area Chamber of Commerce, the SAEDC Marketing a speaker's bureau for touring of local functions, I agencies. nd interactive session with SAEDC officials, the a better and more supportive position toward SAEDC to having SAEDC officials appear at these rom related organizations or concerns regarding eak on certain issues. This will better inform affairs regarding their local areas. The SAEDC Maketing Commi tee will constantly be exploring new areas in which to promote SAEDC a tivities or SAEDC positions on various issues. Available materials for istribution of information include: - Newsletter - Reply Card - Fact Booklet - Teaser Brochure - Personal Contact - Promotional Video A tentative schedule for information distribution is as follows: August: September: October: November: December: January: February: March: April : May: June: July: Article in Chamber Newsletter SAEDC Newsletter Column in local newspaper Article in Chamber Newsletter SAEDC Newsletter Column in local newspaper Article in Chamber Newsletter SAEDC Newsletter Column in local newspaper Article in Chamber Newsletter SAEDC Newsletter Column in local newspaper As a more clear picture of SAEDC member availability is established, a schedule of personal appear nces can be assembled. Goal 2. Develop a referral service for commercial and industrial properties, to be kept at the Chamber of Commerce office. The Stillwater Area Chamber of Commerce lacks a comprehensive listing of business and industry prope ties. Local property owners and realtors have e ... . marketed their products in the past. e Without impacting negatively on the private sector SAEDC will build a referral service and become the first point of contact for prospective buyers and lessors of business property. The Chamber of Commerce would be the main contact point for SAEDC until a permanent space is established. Jack Lux of the Development Committee will spearhead the effort to consolidate the various information into a viable format by June of 1990. Goal 3. Establish a lobby to encourage community governments to increase service capacity and land reservation for industrial and commercial develop- men t . In order to be a more effective and cohesive economic development unit the SAEDC will actively work with each of our member communities. We will inform them of our activities and continue to educate them about the advantages of a county effort in industrial development. Cathy Buck will head up the contact team. One community will be contacted each month beginning in September with completion of our first contacts by May of 1990. Goal 4. Investigate impact of new State Highway 36 bridge. SAEDC must be prepared for the potential impacts of the proposed Highway 36 bridge. Steve Russell will procure and analyze the Environmental Impact Statement for District "9" MN DOT by November of 1989. A short report on impact and recommended strategies will be prepared by the Development Committee by May of 1990. Goal 5. Develop a list of funding sources for use by prospective developers. Because funding is such an integral part of any business expansion a list of funding sources will be prepared and kept at the Chamber of Commerce office for distribution to prospective developers. Local financial institutions, venture capital firms, city and government financial assistance programs will be outlines. Appropriate contact persons and telephone numbers will be a part of this information packet. Steve Zinnel of the Finance Committee Will spearhead the completion of this document by January 1990. Goal 6. Continue pro-active efforts to retain local businesses and assist their ex.pansion. We must maintain a close working relationship with existing manufacturers and major employers in SAEDC communities. e Action Plan: By November, 1989: Business Retention Commiettee shall update its list of manufacturers and major employers to identify: 1) change in . . status from 1987, 2) int rest in being contacted regarding business expansion or relocation plans, and 3) determine interest in involvement with local ~ development issues. ,., By December, 1989: Fo11 w up with personal visits to all business raising a "red flag". By February 1990: Repor to SAEDC municipalities on findings of follow-up study. Goal 7. Investigate ava lability and use of economic development incentive programs for SAEDC membe communities and local industries. We must be prepared to p ovide assistance to local units of government interested in pursuing p blic financing incentive programs or who wish to review the need for such programs. We should also assist in the development, review and adoption of e onomic development incentive policies for manu- facturing sector. Action Plan: By Novembe , 1989: Business Development Committee shall assemble a summary of ec nomic development incentives programs for distribution to local un.ts of governments and industries. By January, 1990: Busin government interested in Committee shall evaluate and review economic meeting needs of member communities. Retention Committee shall identify local units of economic development incentive programs. By May, 1990: Business development incentive pr Ongoing: Business Retention Committee shall attend public meetings and hearings related to econo ic development. Goal 8. Market area to s ppliers of existing industries in the SAEDC area. (Coordinate with goal 11 in five year plan). Action Plan: Establish list of target industries (Business Retention Committee). Exhibit at T ade Show(s) for targeted industries e.g. medical, wood products (Marketing ommittee). Coordinate recruitment with five year plan goals two, three, an nine. Goal 9. Establish a in five year plan). ess incubator facility (coordinate with goal three osal for facility as outlined in the five year plan, al for incubator facility to the bankers consortium star cities and anchor tenant candidates. Begin t to prospective client businesses. Action Plan: goal three. Market (Growth, Inc.), the marketing incubator e .... " .."Ii. e ORDINANCE NO. 7oL~ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE BY ENACTING A PROVISION REGULATING THE POSSESSION, DISCHARGE AND SALE OF WEAPONS The City Council of the City of Stillwater does ordain: 1. The Stillwater City Code is hereby amended by adding Section 51.13 that shall hereafter read as follows: "Section 51.13 Subdivision 1. DEFINITIONS. A. "Weapon" means any gun, pistol, revolver, wrist rocket, sling-shot, sand club, metal knuckles, dagger, dirk, bowie knife, razor, air rifle, air gun, B-B gun, spring gun, stun gun, nun chaku, throwing stars, bow and arrow, switch blade, firearm or any similar device for the propulsion of shot or other metal pellet by whatever 'means, and any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument. "Person" means any person, firm, partnership or corporation. '. B. A weapon is "concealed" within the meaning of this ordinance whenever the fact that a person is carrying a weapon is not readily ascertainable upon observing the person. Subd. 2. UNLAWFUL ACTS. Except as otherwise provided herein, it shall be unlawful for any person: A. To fire, discharge, release, throw or in any other manner propel a weapon within the City of Stillwater. B. To wear under one's clothes or conceal about one's person any weapon, or to carry a loaded weapon in any bag, sack, box, knapsack, purse, or other such carrying device which hides the presence of the weapon. C. To wear or carry a loaded weapon for hunting or other purposes in the City of Stillwater. Subd. 3. SEIZURE, CONFISCATION, PENALTY. A. If any police officer personally observes conduct in violation of Subdivision (2), the weapon may be immediately seized and held in the custody of the City Police Department pending appropriate court action. e B. If the court determines a violation of Subdivision (2) has occurred, the weapon involved in such violation shall be forfeited to and confiscated by the City of Stillwater. C. In additio Paragraph B above, v misdemeanor and resu imprisonment not to Subd. 4. EXCEP shall not apply to: A. POLICE OFF the City, when in th any officer of any c to make arrests, nor Stillwater Police De enforcement agency, or her possession or to any confiscation and forfeiture under olation of this ordinance shall be a t in a fine not to exceed $700.00 or xceed ninety (90) days, or both. e The prohibitions of this ordinance CERS. Duly author~zed police officers of course and scope of their duties, nor to urt whose duty shall be to serve warrants or to persons who shall have obtained from the artment or some other appropriate law license or permit to handle or have in his control any weapon. B. ENCASED WE PONS. Persons in possession of any weapon that is unloaded and properly encased and/or is being stored, transported or displ yed within a residence. C. BOWS AND ROWS. Persons in possession or control of bows and arrows whil engaged in instructional programs on archery ranges super ised by Independent School District 834. D. SALE IN RE possession or contro of the weapon as lon person's lawfully au '" E. LICENSED or Federal law, as by the license. F. TARGET the City Council ULAR COURSE OF BUSINESS. Persons in of any weapon for the purpose of the sale as the sale is in the regular course of the horized business. RSONS. Persons licensed pursuant to State ng as the activity or conduct is permitted ES. Target Ranges lawfully authorized by he County, State or Federal Government." 2. In all oth r ways, the City Code shall remain in full force and effect. 3. This Ordin nce shall be in full force and effect from and after its passag and publication according to law. Dated this Attest: day of May, 1990. Wally Abrahamson, Mayor Mary Lou Johnson, Cl rk e DORSEY & WHITNEY A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDINO PROYF.SSIONAL CORPORATIONS - 2200 FIRST BANK PLACE EAST MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402 ( 612) 340 -2600 TELEX 29-06015 TELECOPIER (612) 340-2868 May 25, 1990 Mr. Nile Kriesel, Coordinator City of Stillwater City Hall 216 No. 4th Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Re: Proposed Nursing Home Facilities Revenue Bonds (The Long Term Care Foundation), Series 1990 Dear Mr. Kriesel: We understand that Rod Pakonen of Health Dimensions, Inc., has discussed with you this proposed financing, as to which we have prepared and enclose herewith, for appropriate action by the City Council, the following documents: 1. Resolution Calling a Public Hearing, for consideration by the Council at its next regular meeting. A representative of the borrower (The Long Term Care Foundation) will be present to describe the financing and to answer any questions. The resolution includes a Notice of Public Hearing which the City should publish in the official newspaper of the City and a newspaper of general circulation in the City (which may be one -and the same), not less than 14 nor more than 30 days before the date set by the Council to hold the public hearing. We will require an executed copy of the resolution as well as an original affidavit of publication of the notice of public hearing. 2. Extract of Minutes of the public hearing, which should be completed at or following the closing of the hearing. We will require one completed copy. 3. Resolution Giving Preliminary Approval to the Project, for consideration by the Council, following the closing of the public hearing. Again, a representative of the borrower will be present at the meeting. We will require an executed copy of the resolution. .e f ~'\) \~ (,{!> =' ~~ Mr. Nile Kriesel May 25, 1990 Page 2 DORSEY & WHITNEY 4. Resolution pproving a Joint Powers Agreement for consideration by the Council following ad ption of the resolution referred to in paragraph 3. We will require an executed cop of the resolution. 5. Joint Powers Agreement, approved by the resolution referenced in paragraph 4, to be signed by he Mayor and another appropriate official of the City. We will require two execute copies of this Agreement. follows: As Rod has pro ably told you, the financing proposal is essentially as 1. The Long Te m Care Foundation (the Borrower), a Tennessee non- profit corporation, proposes 0 purchase from Beverly Enterprises 18 nursing homes in 14 different cities in Minn sota. The Borrower proposes that the purchase price of each nursing home and ce tain improvements thereof be financed by an issue of bonds under the Minnesota .ndustrial development bond law. 2. Each of the ties will hold a public hearing on the Borrower's proposal to purchase, impro e and finance the nursing home (or homes) in that city. e 3. The cities wi 1 enter into a joint powers agreement authorizing the City of Minneapolis to sell an issue all of the bonds, in its behalf and in behalf of all the other cities. 4. Minneapolis .11 apply to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development for a proval of the financing and, assuming that approval and further appropriate docu entation, sell and issue the Bonds and lend the proceeds to the Borrower to 'nance the purchase and improvement of all the nursing homes. We have enc osed a copy of the Application to be on file with the City. Thank you for y ur cooperation. If there are any questions regarding the enclosed documents, plea e call me at 340-2813 or Linda Obidowski, a legal assistant in our office, at 340- 687. JM:lj Enclosures cc: Mr. Rod Pakonen (w/enc1. Very truly yours, a" /./;:/) "'.1 ~il)lAjh/ ~'&~} /I~~ . .~ erry Mahoney .. ,,~ , '...:.1 <:0 ~rv ~ , .' e RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION RELATING TO A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF THE LONG TERM CARE FOUNDATION UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING THEREON BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1 Recitals 1.1. The City is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165 (the Act), to issue its revenue bonds to finance capital projects consisting of properties used and useful in connection with a revenue-producing enterprise, including nursing homes to be owned by non-profit corporations. 1.2. The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower), has advised this Council of its desire to acquire the existing nursing home located at 105 West Linden Street in the City and known as Linden Healthcare Center and to make certain improvements thereto. Such acquisition and improvements are hereinafter referred to as the Project. 1.3. The Borrower proposes that pursuant to the Act the City issue its revenue bonds, in a principal amount not to exceed $3,900,000, and lend the proceeds of such revenue bonds to the Borrower to pay part or all of the costs of the Project. SECTION 2 Public Hearinq 2.1. Section 469.154, Subdivision 4 of the Act requires that prior to submission of an Application to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development requesting approval of the Project as required by Section 469.154, Subdivision 3 of the Act, this Council conduct a public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project. Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended and regulations promulgated thereunder, require that prior to the issuance of the Bonds, this Council approve the Bonds and the Project, after conducting a public hearing thereon. 4It 4240F e e 2.2. A public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project through the issuance of the Bonds is hereby called and shall be held on , 1990, at o'clock P.M., at the City Hall. 2.3. The City shall cause notice of the public hearing to be published in , the official newspaper of the City and a newspaper of general circulation in the City, at least once not less than fourteen (14) nor more than thirty (30) days prior to the date fixed for the public hearing. The notice to be published shall be in substantially the following form: -2- e NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED PROJECT AND THE ISSUANCE OF NURSING HOME FACILITIES REVENUE BONDS UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT, MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 469.152-469.165 CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the City), will meet on , 1990, at ____ o'clock P.M., at the City Hall, 216 North 4th Street, in Stillwater, Minnesota, for the purpose of conducting a public hearing on a proposal that the City issue its revenue bonds, in one or more series, under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165, in order to finance the acquisition of and certain improvements to an existing nursing home facility located at 105 West Linden Street in the City and commonly known as Linden Healthcare Center (the Project) by The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower). The maximum aggregate principal amount of the proposed bond issue is $3,900,000. The bonds will be limited obligations of the City, and the bonds and interest thereon will be payable solely from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof. No holder of any bonds will ever have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the City to pay the bonds or the interest thereon, nor to enforce payment against any property of the City except money payable by the Borrower to the City and pledged to the payment of the bonds. A draft copy of the proposed Application to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development for approval of the Project, together with draft copies of all attachments and exhibits thereto, is available for public inspection at the office of the City during business hours, ____ A.M. to ____ P.M., on normal business days. All persons interested may appear and be heard at the time and place set forth above, or may file written comments with the City prior to the date of the hearing set forth above. Dated: , 1990. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL By/S/ City e -3- e 2.4. A draft copy of the proposed Application to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development, together with draft copies of all attachments and exhibits thereto, are hereby ordered placed on file with the City and shall be available for public inspection, following publication of the notice of public hearing, between during normal business hours, ____ A.M. to ____ P.M., on normal business days. 2.5. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and without publication. Adopted this ____ day of , 1990. Mayor Attest: City (SEAL) e -4- e e . ~. MINUTES OF PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED PROJECT CITY COUNCIL CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA The Mayor stated that this was the time and place fixed by Resolution No. of this Council, adopted on , 1990, for a public hearing to be held on the proposal that the City undertake and finance a project (the Project) on behalf of The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165. The presented an affidavit showing publication of the notice of public hearing at least once not less than 14 nor more than 30 days prior to the date fixed for the public hearing, in the , the official newspaper of the City and a newspaper of general circulation in the City. The affidavit was examined, found to be satisfactory and ordered placed on file with the The Mayor then opened the meeting for the public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project on behalf of the Borrower. The purpose of the hearing was explained, the nature of the Project and of the proposed revenue bonds was discussed, the draft copy of the Application to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development with draft copies of all attachments and exhibits were available, and all persons present who desired to do so were afforded an opportunity to express their views with respect to 4241F e - . ,'- the proposal to undertake and finance the Project, in response to which the following persons either appeared, were recognized and made statements, summaries of which appear opposite their respective names: Name of Speaker Summary of Views The [reported that no written comments had been] [read a summary of the written comments]* filed in [his] [her] office before the date of the hearing. After all persons who wished to do so had stated or filed their views on the proposal, the Mayor declared the pUblic hearing to be closed. *Strike inappropriate language -2- e e , RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION GIVING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL TO A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF THE LONG TERM CARE FOUNDATION AND ITS FINANCING UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; REFERRING THE PROPOSAL TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR APPROVAL; AND AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION OF NECESSARY DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the City), as follows: SECTION 1 Recitals and Findinqs 1.1. This Council has received a proposal that the City finance a portion or all of the cost of a proposed project under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165 (the Act), on behalf of The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower), consisting generally of financing the acquisition of and certain improvements to an existing nursing home facility, commonly known as Linden Healthcare Center located at 105 West Linden Street in the City (the Project). 1.2. At a public hearing, duly noticed and held on 1990, in accordance with the Act and Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project, all parties who appeared at the hearing were given an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal to undertake and finance the Project. Interested persons were also given the opportunity to submit written comments to the City before the time of the hearing. Based on the public hearing, such written comments (if any) and such other facts and circumstances as this Council deems relevant, this Council hereby finds, determines and declares as follows: (a) The welfare of the State of Minnesota requires the provision of necessary health care facilities to the end that adequate health care services be made available to residents of the State of Minnesota at reasonable cost, and the State of Minnesota has encouraged local government units to act to provide such facilities. (b) The undertaking of the Project would further the general purposes contemplated and described in Section 469.152 of the Act. 4242F e - , (c) This Council has been advised by representatives of the Borrower that conventional, commercial financing to pay the cost of the Project is available only at such high costs of borrowing that the economic feasibility of the Project would be reduced. (d) This Council has also been advised by representatives of the Borrower that on the basis of their discussions with potential buyers of tax-exempt bonds, revenue bonds of the City (which may be in the form of a revenue note or notes) could be issued and sold upon favorable rates and terms to finance the Project. (e) The City is authorized by the Act to issue its revenue bonds to finance capital projects consisting of properties used and useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise engaged in providing health care services, such as that of the Borrower, and the issuance of the bonds by the City would be a substantial inducement to the Borrower to undertake the Project SECTION 2 Determination To Proceed with the proiect and the Financino 2.1. On the basis of the information given the City to date, it appears that it would be desirable for the City to issue its revenue bonds under the provisions of the Act to finance the Project in the maximum aggregate face amount of $3,900,000. 2.2. It is hereby determined to proceed with the Project and the financing and this Council hereby declares its present intent to have the City issue its revenue bonds under the Act to finance the Project. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, the adoption of this resolution shall not be deemed to establish a legal obligation on the part of the City or its Council to issue or to cause the issuance of such revenue bonds. All details of such revenue bond issue and the provisions for payment thereof shall be subject to final approval of the Project by the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (the Department) and may be subject to such further conditions as the City may specify. The revenue bonds, if issued, shall not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City, except the revenues specifically pledged to the payment thereof, and each bond, when, as and if issued, shall recite in substance that the bond, including interest thereon, is payable solely from the revenues and property specifically -2- e e , pledged to the payment thereof, and shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional, statutory or charter limitation. 2.3. The Application to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (the Application), with attachments, is hereby approved, and the Mayor and City are authorized to execute said documents on behalf of the City. 2.4. In accordance with Section 469.154, Subdivision 3 of the Act, the Mayor and City are hereby authorized and directed to cause the Application to be submitted to the Department for approval of the Project. The Mayor, City , City Attorney and other officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized and directed to provide the Department with any preliminary information needed for this purpose. The City Attorney is authorized to initiate and assist in the preparation of such documents as may be appropriate to the Project, if approved by the Department. SECTION 3 General 3.1. If the bonds are issued and sold, the City will enter into a loan agreement or similar agreement satisfying the requirements of the Act (the Revenue Agreement) with the Borrower. The loan payments or other amounts payable by the Borrower to the City under the Revenue Agreement shall be sufficient to pay the principal of, and interest and redemption premium, if any, on, the bonds as and when the same shall become due and payable. 3.2. The Borrower has agreed and it is hereby determined that any and all direct and indirect costs incurred by the City in connection with the Project, whether or not the Project is carried to completion, and whether or not approved by the Department, and whether or not the City by resolution authorizes the issuance of the- bonds, will be paid by the Borrower upon request. 3.3. The Mayor and City are directed, if the bonds are issued and sold, thereafter to comply with the provisions of Section 469.154, Subdivisions 5 and 7 of the Act. 3.4. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and without publication. -3- It . Attest: Adopted this ____ day of I 1990. City -4- Mayor e RESOLUTION NO. ____ RESOLUTION RELATING TO A PROJECT ON BEHALF OF THE LONG TERM CARE FOUNDATION UNDER THE MINNESOTA MUNICIPAL INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ACT; APPROVING A JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS BY THE CITY AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: 1.01. Authority and Approvals. This Council, acting pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165 (the "Act"), has held a public hearing on, and given preliminary approval to, the issuance of its revenue bonds in a principal amount up to $3,900,000 and the loan of the proceeds thereof to The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the "Borrower"), for the purpose of financing the acquisition of an existing nursing home facility commonly known as Linden Healthcare Center and certain improvements thereto (the Project) located at 105 West Linden Street in the City. 1.02. Proposed Joint Powers Action. The Borrower has informed this Council that the Borrower is requesting the cities of Anoka, Bloomington, Delano, Excelsior, Fridley, Hopkins, Long Lake, Minneapolis, New Brighton, Osseo, Roseville, St. Louis Park and St. Paul (collectively, the "Other Cities" and, with the City, the "Participants") to issue similar bonds in order to finance similar projects on behalf of the Borrower located in each of the Other Cities. The Borrower has proposed that the City and each of the Other Cities enter into a joint powers agreement pursuant to the Act authorizing one of the Participants to issue revenue bonds under the Act to finance each of such projects, including the Project. In particular, the Borrower has proposed that the joint powers agreement provide that the City of Minneapolis issue the bonds authorized by each of the PartiCipants in order to finance each of said projects. 1.03. Joint Powers Authority. The City is authorized, pursuant to Section 471.59 and the Act, to enter into and perform such contracts and agreements with other municipalities as this Council may deem proper and feasible for or concerning the planning, purchase, acquisition and financing of a project whereby one city issues its revenue bonds on behalf of one or more other cities. The City is authorized by said Section to enter into the joint powers agreement proposed by the Borrower as described in Section 1.02 hereof. e 4243F I 1.04. Documentation. A form of Joint Powers Agreement has been prepared and submitted to this Council and is hereby directed to be filed with the City Section 2. Authorization and Approval of the Joint Powers Aqreement. The issuance of bonds by the City of Minneapolis on behalf of the City and each of the Other Cities for the purpose of financing the Project and the other projects described above, pursuant to the Act and the Joint Powers Agreement, is hereby approved. The form of the Joint Powers Agreement referred to in Section 1.04 is approved subject to such modifications as are deemed appropriate and approved by the City Attorney and the Mayor, which approval shall be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the Joint Powers Agreement by the Mayor and the City The Mayor and the City are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Joint Powers Agreement. The Mayor and the City are also authorized and directed to execute such other instruments as may be required to give effect to the transaction herein contemplated. Section 3. Authentication of Proceedings. The Mayor and City and other officers of the City are authorized and directed to furnish to the Borrower and the attorneys rendering an opinion on the issuance of the bonds, certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the bonds and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officer's custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained therein. Adopted this ____ day-of , 1990. Mayor Attest: City e -2- e e ~ JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE OF NURSING HOME REVENUE BONDS UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTIONS 469.152 THROUGH 469.165 TO FINANCE PROJECTS ON BEHALF OF THE LONG TERM CARE FOUNDATION This AGREEMENT is entered into as of the day of , 1990 between the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota, ("Minneapolis") and the cities listed in Schedule I attached hereto (the "Cities"). 1. Statement of Purpose and Powers to be Exer~_sed. 1.1. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.152 through 469.165, cited as the "Municipal Industrial Development Act" (the "Act"), Minneapolis and each of the Cities is authorized to (i) issue its revenue bonds to finance properties, real or personal, whether or not now in existence, used or useful in connection with a revenue producing enterprise, including revenue producing enterprises whether or not operated for profit, engaged in providing health care services, including nursing homes, and (ii) enter into and perform contracts and agreements with other cities concerning planning, purchase, acquisition and financing of a project and whereby one city issues its revenue bonds in behalf of one or more other cities. 1.2. The Act recites that the welfare of the State requires the active promotion, attraction, encouragement and development of economically sound industry and commerce to prevent, as far as possible, the emergence of blight and areas of chronic unemployment and to prevent economic deterioration and that the welfare of the State requires adequate health care facilities so that adequate health care services are available to residents of the state at reasonable cost. 1.3. The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the "Borrower"), has proposed that Minneapolis and the Cities enter into a joint powers agreement under Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 and the Act, pursuant to which Minneapolis, acting for and on behalf of itself and the Cities will issue a series of revenue bonds in an amount not in excess of $43,000,000 (the "Revenue Bonds") and loan the proceeds thereof to the Borrower to finance the costs of the Projects shown on Schedule II attached hereto. - 1.4. The undertaking of the proposed Projects and the issuance of the Revenue Bonds to finance the cost thereof will promote the public purposes and legislative objectives of the Act by providing substantial inducement for the Borrower to acquire and construct the Projects, and each of the Projects constitute a "project" within the meaning of the Act. 2. Manner of Exercisinq Power. Minneapolis and each of the Cities has adopted or will adopt a resolution authorizing the joint issuance of the Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount not in excess of $43,000,000, of which amount the maximum principal amount to be issued with respect to Minneapolis and each City and each Project shall be as shown in Schedule II. Minneapolis shall exercise the powers of the Act on behalf of itself and the Cities by adopting, approving and executing such resolutions, documents, and agreements as shall be necessary or convenient to authorize, issue and sell the Revenue Bonds and such other resolutions, documents and agreements as shall be necessary or required in connection with the issuance of the Revenue Bonds and giving effect to or carrying out the provisions of this Agreement and documents under which the Revenue Bonds are issued and/or secured. 3. Source and Contribution of Funds: Allocation of Funds. The source of funds for the Projects shall be the proceeds of the Revenue Bonds and, if necessary, a contribution to be made by the Borrower. The funds shall be deposited and applied as provided in an Indenture of Trust (the "Indenture") between Minneapolis and a bank as trustee. The Indenture shall provide for separate accounts in which the proceeds of the Bonds to be used to finance each of the Projects shall be deposited. The proceeds of the Revenue Bonds deposited in such accounts may be used only for the specified Project and may not be used or applied by the Trustee or the Borrower for any other Project. 4. Nature of Revenue Bonds. The Revenue Bonds shall be special, limited obligations of Minneapolis, payable solely from proceeds, revenues and other amounts pledged thereto and more fully described in the Indenture. The Revenue Bonds and the interest thereon shall neither constitute nor give rise to a pecuniary liability, general or moral obligation or a pledge of the full faith or loan of credit of Minneapolis or any of the Cities, within the meaning of any charter, Constitutional or statutory provisions. e 5. Term of Aqreement: Termination. Unless otherwise provided by concurrent action of Minneapolis and the Cities, this Agreement shall terminate upon the retirement or defeasance of the last outstanding Revenue Bond, and this Agreement may not be terminated in advance of such retirement or defeasance. -2- It 6. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended by Minneapolis and the Cities at any time by a writing signed by each. No amendment may impair the rights of the holders of the Revenue Bonds, unless they have consented 0 such amendment in the manner provided for an amendment of the Indenture. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Minneapolis and each of the Cities has caused this Agreement to be executed on its behalf by its Mayor and attested by its City clerk, all as of the day and year first above written. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA By Its Mayor ATTEST: Its City Clerk CITY OF , MINNESOTA By Its Mayor ATTEST: Its City Clerk e -3- SCHEDULE I It LIST OF CITIES Anoka Bloomington Delano Excelsior Fridley Hopkins Long Lake New Brighton Osseo Roseville St. Louis Park St. Paul Stillwater It -4- It City Anoka Bloomington Delano Excelsior Fridley Hopkins Long Lake Minneapolis New Brighton Osseo Roseville St. Louis Park St. Paul Stillwater It SCHEDULE II LIST OF PROJECTS AND BOND AMOUNTS Project Description for all Cities Acquire an existing nursing home facility and make certain improvements thereto. -5- Principal Amount of Bonds $ 800,000 1,500,000 1,300,000 1,200,000 1,150,000 2,500,000 975,000 10,450,000 2,325,000 2,000,000 8,125,000 6,400,000 1,000,000 3,900,000 e Revised January, 1990 A STATE OF-MINNESOTA MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRADE AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BOND PROJECT PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES, SECTION 469.152 THROUGH 165 (please submit this fonm in duplicate - all supporting data in single copy only) D t . Ma v 2 5, 1 9 9 0 a e. ......~........... The governi ng body of .. .l'1~r;~!=.a.99~}'.s........, County of . .ij~M~I;lip......., Mi nnesota, hereby applies to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (Department) for approval of a proposed Industrial Development Bond issue as required by Minn. Stat. 469.152-.165. Address of issuer ..G ~ ty. .fi~~f",. .~ ~P. ~Q1J t-l1. .F;~ ftJ1. .~trAAt;... W.rVj~~p.o.:U ~.... J1~QPf=:;~tl?- ..... ....... ... ........ ......... ........ ..... ........ ... ..... ....... ...... ............. Attn: .................................... Telephone: ............................... We have entered into preliminary discussions with: F i nm: .1I:~. .L.q~9. ]'.~r:Ill. ~.a.r:~. f9.lV1ct~t.i.q!j. Attorney: Guy Collier and Lisa Gilden ~f.qt; :PP?t.~ ~ . ~.i.l.~ . ~. .E.l1lEi n'. . . . . Add res s: . J..8.5.q .~. i'.t,,:r;~~t.,. .S 1Jj..t..~ . ~ p.o. . . . Add res s: . f.8.5. q . 1<. .S.t.liEi~t.,. .~\l}..t.~ . ~ Q P. . . . City: ..~~~P.i..q9t-PJ1...... State ..Q.~...... City: ..VJ9-i>J1.i..q9t:PJ1...... State .q;s:....... Name of Project: .. .~';1f.s.i.~g. !1.~IlJ~. f.a.c;,~t~t.i.~~. !<!=.~Ei~~!=. .~9Q?s.. ~ 1'~!=. .li91}S'. .1;Ei{Ip. .C.cH~ Founoation), Series 1990 Tbis ,firm, is engaaed orimar,i11Y 1.n (nature. of business): ~P.Ei;~t}..n.CJ.t~ll.'1.1;~J~.c;~J.e... facllltles. T~ese facl itles nrovlde lona term care servi~es in~lll~inn 'sKi ll"ea' nttrs iner. 'care',' 'rehab'i'i i la't'{ve. s'erv i~'e~.' ;'s'';~h;. 's'~;' f~'l' ,;~~~~,;:~:,..::lo . . 'cina' ~.erson'at. c~r'e' serv~ce s' 'to' thet .ei de';i y' a'n"d' i~.ti;~: · .. .'ur"" .'Y.. r.".. Y.. . . . The proceeds from the sale of the Ind~str1al Development Bonds will be used to (desc ri be, the rRro6 ect~: . .c;~9~.\r:t; . ~~1.~1; ~!1~. .~ Vf f.i.l1~ . PP.lTl~ . fp.c.~~ ~t.i.Ei~ . ~r.ct .Ill9-l<~. . . . ...;:~~c;;~.~.p.~.~~.~~~~.~I:~J~~~'.~~.Ill9f~.{~~~~.9~~h~~Q~A.~Q.P~~Ei9~~Ei.~.p~~eto ...................................................................................... . Add f P j t. See Schedule 1 hereto ress 0 ro ec . ................................................................... ........... .... ..... ........... ....... ...... ......... .... ................. ............. Proceeds from the sale of the bonds of approximately $.1~...s.4~,O!l.o., will be applied toward payment of costs now estimated as follows: e Acquisition of land: and facilities New construction: Demolition and site preparation: Acquisition and Installation of Equipment: Fees: Architectural, engineering, inspection, fiscal, legal, administration, or printing: Construction Interest: Initial Bond Reserve: Contingencies: Other: $ .~ 4 . OAn" 0 0.0. . . .l. PAl" 0 0.0. . ............. . .............. . .~ . ~ .5.~.. OO.D. . . . . . 5.1.9...400. . ..~. ~2.o...00D.. .....].5.,.600. . .............. AEDP I/10-1 It is presently estimated that construction will begin on or about ..~~~............., 19...., and will be complete ~n or about .......~/.~........., 19..... When completed, there wl1l be approximately ..(^. new jobs created by the project at an annual payroll ~f approximately $...N/~....., based upon currently prevailing wages. (If applicable) .here are ...2.1.9;'.. existing jobs provided by business. (If applicable) Thif!. will be ....~~~..... jobs created by construction of the project. Number of hours ....:~..... Average wage 1 evel $.... .tJtf........ Repayment of the proposed issue will be amortized over a period of ......~O.... years. The following exhibits are furnished with this application and are incorporated herein by reference: 1. An opinion of bond counsel that the proposal constitutes a project under Minn. Stat. 469.153, subd. 2. 2. A copy of the resolution by the governing body of the issuer giving preliminary approval for the issuance of its revenue bonds and stating that the project, except for a project under Minn. Stat. 469.153, subd. 2(g) or (j) would not be undertaken but for the availability of Industrial Development Bond financing. 3. A comprehensive statement by the municipality indicating how the project satisfies the public or purpose and policies of Minn. Stat. 469.152-.165. 4. A letter of intent to purchase th~ bond issue or a letter confinming the feasibility of the project from a financial standpoint. 5. A statement signed by the principal representative of the issuing authority to the effect that upon entering into the revenue agreement, the infonmation required by Minn. Stat. 469.154, subd. 5 will be submitted to the Department (not applicable to project under Minn. Stat. 469.153, subd. 2(g) or (j). 6. A statement signed by the principal representative of the issuing authority that the project does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or consumed in the production of property for sale, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used as a penmanent residence. 7. A statement signed by a representative of the issuing authority that a public hearing was conducted pursuant to Minn. Stat. 469.154, subd. 4. The statement shall include the date, time and place of ~he meeting and certify that a draft copy of this application with all attachments was available for public inspection and that all interested parties were afforded an opportunity to express their views. 8. Copies of notice(s) as published which indicate the date(s) of publication and the newspaper(s) in which the notice(s) were published. 9. Provide a plan for compliance of employment preference of economically disadvantaged or unemployed individuals. (See Minn. Stat. 469.154, subd. 7.) AEDP 1/10-2 e We, th.e undersigned, are duly elected representatives of ..~l:~.f:.i.l:iX.?.f..t:1}PP.~~rt9f.i.~; Minnesota and solicit your approval of this project at your earliest convenience so tnat we may carry it to a final conclusion. ~Signed by: (Principal Officers or Representatives of Issuing Authority; type or print official's name on the line to the left of the signature line. Thank you.) ................ .... .......... ... ........ ... ..... ... ......... ..... ........ ........ Mayor/chair MAYOR Signature ..................................... .... .. .... ........... ....... ............ ..... Title CLERK Signature This approval shall not be deemed to be an approval by the Department or the State of the feasibility of the project or the terms of the revenue agreement to be executed or the bonds to be issued there:or. . .... ..... . .................. .... ............. ...................... Authorized Signature, Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development Date of Approval Please return to: Minnesota Department of TraJe and Economic Development Division of Community Development Attn: Richard Nadeau 900 American Center Building 150 East Kellogg Boulevard St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 AEDP 1/10-3 - , It May 25, 1990 Commissioner Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development 900 American Center 150 East Kellogg Boulevard st. Paul, Minnesota 55101 Re: $43,000,000 Nursing Home Facilities Revenue Bonds (The Long Term Care Foundation), Series 1990 City of Minneapolis, Minnesota Dear Sir: We have reviewed a resolution adopted by the governing body of the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the City), on May 25, 1990 (the Resolution), relating to a proposal that the City issue its revenue bonds under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165, to finance, in whole or in part, a project (the Project) on behalf of The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower). On the basis of our review of the Resolution and preliminary discussions with a~d representatives of the Borrower and Manufacturers Hanover, investment bankers, as to the nature of the Project and the proposed financing thereof, it is presently our opinion that (i) the Project constitutes a "project" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.153, Subdivision 2(d) and (ii) the City is authorized, assuming further proceedings are taken in accordance with the provisions of Sections 469.152 through 469.165 and any other applicable law, to issue its revenue bonds as proposed by the Resolution. e - Commissioner Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development Page 2 We have reviewed certain proceedings of the City and the cities shown on Schedule I attached hereto, which show that public hearings have been held with respect to the Project and the financing thereof with the proceeds of the revenue bonds in compliance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.154, Subdivision 4, and Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Very truly yours, DORSEY & WHITNEY By e COMPREHENSIVE STATEMENT - The undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting Mayor and of the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the City), certify that the City Council has been provided by representatives of The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower), with certain information concerning a proposed project under the Minnesota Municipal Industrial Development Act, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165 (the Act). On the basis of such information the City Council, by resolution adopted May 25, 1990, has given preliminary approval to the proposed project and the financing thereof by the issuance of revenue bonds of the City. The following are factors considered by the City Council in determining to give preliminary approval to the project: 1. The proposed project consists generally of the acquisition of existing nursing home facilities described on the attached Schedule I and certain improvements thereto located in the cities as shown on the attached Schedule I (the Project). 2. Bond Counsel is of the opinion that the Project constitutes a "project" within the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.153, Subdivision 2(d). e 4050F - 3. Representatives of the Borrower believe that the undertaking of the Project will further promote the public purposes and legislative objectives of the Act by providing substantial inducement for the continued health care operations of the Borrower in the City and surrounding area. 4. The City will provide the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development (the Department) with the information required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.154, Subdivision 5, upon entering into a revenue agreement (as defined in the Act) with the Borrower, and the information required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.154, Subdivision 7, as required. 5. The Project does not include any property to be sold or affixed to or consumed in the production of property for sale, and does not include any housing facility to be rented or used as a permanent residence. 6. A public hearing on the proposal to undertake and finance the Project was conducted pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.154, Subdivision 4 and Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, on May 25, 1990, at 9:25 o'clock A.M., at the City Hall, at which public hearing all interested parties were afforded an opportunity to express their views. A draft copy of the application to the Department with all attachments was available for public inspection prior to the public hearing. e -2- It (SEAL) e Dated: May 25, 1990. Mayor City -3- I e Angelus Convalescent Ho~e 4544 4th Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55409 Chateau Healthcare Center 2106 Second Avenue South Minneapolis. MN 55404 Hopkins HealthCare Center 725 Second Avenue South Hopkins, MN 55343 LaSalle Convalescent Home 1920 LaSalle Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 Lynnhurst Healthcare Center 471 Lynnhurst Avenue ~est St. Paul, MN 55104 Osseo Health Care Center 525 Second Street, SE Osseo, MN 55369 '. BEVERLY FACILITIES Bloonington Nursing Home 9200 Nicollet Avenue South Bloomington, MN 55420 Delano Health Care Center 433 County Road 30 Delano, MN 55328 Innsbruck Healthcare Center 2800 Highway 694 New Brighton, MN 55112 Linden Healthcare Center 105 West Linden Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Lynwood Healthcare Center 5700 East River Road Fridley, MN 55432 St. Louis Park Plaza Healthcare Center 3201 Virginia Avenue South St. Louis Park, MN 55426 SCHEDULE I Central Care Center 1828 Central Avenue tlE Minneapolis, HN 55418 Excelsior Nursing Home 515 Division Street Excelsior, MN 55331 Lake Ridge Health Care Center 2727 North Victoria Roseville, MN 55113 Long Lake Nursing Home 345 South Brown Road Long Lake, MN 55356 ~1etro Care & Rehab Center 1300 Olson remorial Higmiay Minneapolis, MN 55411 Twin Rivers Care Center 305 Fremont Street Anoka, ~lN 55303 I [Letterhead of Manufacturers Hanover] [Draft of Feasibility Letter] Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Minneapolis Minneapolis, Minnesota Re: Proposed $ Nursing Home Facilities Revenue Bonds (The Long Term Care Foundation), Series 1990 City of Minneapolis, Minnesota Mayor and Council Members: At the request of The Long Term Care Foundation (the Borrower), we have conducted a study of the preliminary economic feasibility of the proposal that the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the City), issue its revenue bc:ds under the provisions of Minnesota statutes, Sections 469.152 through 469.165, to finance, in whole or in part, a project consisting of the acquisition of existing nursing home facilities as more fully described on Schedule I attached hereto. Our study has led us to conclude that, on the basis of current financial conditions, the project is feasible from a financial standpoint and the proposed revenue bonds of the City can be successfully issued and sold. We understand a copy of this letter will be forwarded by the City to the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development to serve as the feasibility letter required by the Department. Very truly yours, MANUFACTURERS HANOVER By Its e 405lF I ~ [Letterhead of The Long Term Care Foundation] [Draft of compliance of employment preference letter] , 1990 Honorable Mayor and Council Members City of Minneapolis Minneapolis, Minnesota Re: Proposed $ Nursing Home Facilities Revenue Bonds (The Long Term Care Foundation), Series 1990 City of Minneapolis, Minnesota Plan of Compliance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.154, Subdivision 7 Mayor and Council Members: This letter is intended to satisfy the requirements of item 9 of the Application For Approval of Industrial Development Bond Project to be filed by the City of Minneapolis, Minnesota (the City), with the Minnesota Department of Trade and Economic Development in connection with the project to be financed with the above-referenced bonds, and may be attached as an exhibit to said Application. It is the plan and intent of The Long Term Care Foundation, a Tennessee nonprofit corporation (the Borrower), to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.154, Subdivision 7 (to the extent that compliance by the Borrower is legally required by such provisions), and, upon request, to assist and cooperate with the City in complying with those reporting requirements of said Subdivision 7 which may be applicable to the City. Nothing herein contained shall be construed so as to impose any obligation or requirement on the Borrower or the City which.is not otherwise imposed by said Subdivision 7. Very truly yours, THE LONG TERM CARE FOUNDATION By Its ~ 4052F ... r illwater "~ -- ~ ~ -- -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J e TO: FROM: DATE: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR JUNE 1, 1990 SUBJECT: LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY GRANT REQUEST FOR TRANSIT PLAN FROM THE REGIONAL TRANSIT BOARD- Washington County has requested a letter supporting their grant request. A draft letter is attached for Council approval. e CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e June 1, 1990 Garneth O. Peterson, CTPG Project Manager Regional Transit Board Mears Park Centre, 7th Floor 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 Dear Mr. Peterson: The City of Stillwater supports the request from Washington County for a community transit grant. The information gathered from the study could be used by the city of Stillwater in identifying City transit needs and services as a part of the upcoming City Comprehensive Plan Revision. Should you have questions regarding the city Comprehensive Plan, feel free to contact Steve Russell at 439-6121. Sincerely, Wallace Abrahamson Mayor c.c Jane M. Harper, Washington County Office of Administration e CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082. PHONE: 612-439-6121 WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION PLANNING AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIVISION GOVERNMENT CENTER 14900 61ST STREET NORTH. P.O. BOX 6 · STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082-0006 Office: 6121779-5401 FAX: 6121n9-3900 Robert J. Lockyear Director Jeff Hanson Intergovernmental Relations Jane Harper Physical Development Lois Yellowthunder Human Services DATE: May 14, 1990 TO: All Washington County Local Units of Government RE: Washington County Comprehensive Plan/Transit Component Washington County is in the beginning stages of updating its 1980 comprehensive plan. One of the first and largest activities the county will undertake as part of the update is to develop a detailed transportation plan for the county. This transportation plan will have both a highway and a transit component. The basic philosophy of the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Development Guide/Policy Plan is that the region cannot meet growing demands for transportation by simply adding new roads and services; the emphasis of transportation planning must shift more to providing a variety of transit options. In view of this needed shift in emphasis in the county comprehensive plan, the county is applying to the Regional Transit Board for a Community Transit Planning Grant. The purpose of this grant program is to aid communities in planning new and innovative methods for meeting their present and future transit needs. If the county is awarded a grant it will be used to conduct a needs assessment for Washington County. The assessment will consist of: 1. an inventory of present transit options in the county, 2. a survey of transit dependent populations designed to better understand their transit needs, and 3. an analysis of existing data and studies to determine what transit options would be most appropriate to implement in Washington County. e The Regional Transit Board is encouraging joint venture proposals that encompass more than one local unit of government. All grant proposals will be evaluated, in part, on the degree to which there is community support. The county is soliciting a letter of support from your community. Your letter should stress the importance of conducting the needs assessment, indicate how this information will be used by your community (e.g. updating your comprehensive plan, providing better transit service for the elderly and handicapped, etc.), indicate whether or not your community has money available to implement projects that come out of the plan, and list a contact person who could answer questions about your community's plans regarding this project. ~~~ 0~ \. -+~ Washington County does not discriminate on the basis of race. color. national origin. sex. religion. age or handicapped status in employment or the provision of services. ~.'''GTO'--=C;.~.~, :.:" ~ ,.. ~. "~ .., . . - . . e e Comprehensive Plan/Transit Component May 14, 1990 Page 2 Address your letter to Garneth O. Peterson, CTPG Project Manager Regional Transit Board Mears Park Centre, 7th Floor 230 East Fifth Street St. Paul, MN 55101 but please mail it to me so I can include it with other letters of support as part of the grant proposal. Your letters must be received by May 30, 1990. If you have any questions please contact me at 779-5183. Sincerely, ~~ Jane Harper Physical Development Planner Washington County Office of Administration c. County Commissioners Washington County Administrators Robert Lockyear, Planning Director e e /' ,. r illwater ~ -- - ~~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA J TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: STEVE RUSSELL, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: JUNE 1, 1990 SUBJECT: COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES fOR CONSTRUCTION 'Of LAUNCH RAMP AT LILY LAKE. BACKGROUND: The Department of Natural Resources is requesting new language for one section of the agreement as specified in their letter. The original language is attached. I do not think new wording would interfere with the current operation of the ramp and if, for good reason it does, the City could request State approval for regulating the ramp's use. The City Attorney may want to comment on this. RECOMMENDATION: Approval of Agreement. CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FOURTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 r! STATE OF ~~[g~@LJ~ e DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES TRAILS AND WATERWAYS, 1200 Warner Road, St. Paul, Kinnesota 55106 PHONE NO. 296-3572 FILE NO. Kay 17, 1990 Kr. Steve Russell Community Development Director 216 North 4th Stillwater, KN 55082 Dear Steve: I reviewed the Lily Lake Cooperative Agreement that the City modified. I found some of the modifications suitable and others unsuitable. .Section I. Improvement and Cost 1. Changing the second word from State to City is appropriate; I missed that in my proofing the final copy. Section II. acceptable. Operation of the Access 2. The change here is also 3. The language change that was made here is following language is acceptable: -No site otherwise restrict public use of the access at written consent of the State.- unacceptable, however, the monitor shall oversee or any time without the express I have enclosed a copy of the new agreement. I hope that the City will approve and sign this agreement. Remember that I need five copies with original signatures. Thank you for your attention to this. Sincerely, ././.~~./ ~../J/ ~ /., .~ /:7'~/~. ~ .:::.-- ~/ ~/ ,;;/ Lawrence M. Killien Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor UtK/jl Enclosure cc: John Steward Del Barber e AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER e AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made between the State of Minnesota, acting by and through the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, hereinafter referred to as the "State" and the City of Stillwater, hereinafter referred to as "City". WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Natural Resources has the authority, duty and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, Section 97A.141, Subdivision 1 to provide the public with free state water access sites on lakes and rivers where access is inadequate; and WHEREAS, the City and the Commissioner have determined that the existing public water access site hereinafter referred to as "Access" on Lake Lily legally described to wit: 9033-3000 Section 33, Township 031, Range 20, Part Southwest of Northwest 1/4 being all part lying West of West of Greeley Street except the South 307.28 feet - subject to 8 feet wide cable utility easement. Original Town. First Ward. 1/4 line is inadequate and "high priority" for improvement under the Public Water Access Program; and WHEREAS, the City is fee owner of the Access; and WHEREAS, the City desires that the State of Minnesota make funds avilable through the Small Lake Management Program for improvements to the access to enable the public e to use it. NOW, THEREFORE, in the consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the public bodies hereto and for the benefit of the general publdc, I the parties agree as follows: I. IMPROVEMENT AND COST e 1. The City shall fund the construction of a parking lot and a concrete boat launching ramp on the Access pursuant to the specifications of the State. Payment or partial payment will be made within a reasonable time after the City submits v riiied proox ox authorized expenditures has substantially ontracted for and provided for a timely of incurred and paid, provided the City e and the cost completion of the mprovement and development ox the Access. 2. The State shall have the right to review and approve the Access plans. 3. The State shall have the right, but shall not be obligated to make additional improvements on the Access as needed to provide access to the lake. 4. Th State shall provide signs informing the is cooperatively provided by the public that the Minnesota Departm Natural Resources and the City. 5. Th State shall provide signs necessary for the operation of he access, such as Boaters Rules. II. OPERATI N OF THE ACCESS 1. City shall maintain the Access for use by the public. The shall remain open for a minimum of 16 hours per da between the hours of 5:00 A.M. and midnight. 2. Th State shall have the right to suggest to the City chang s in the land access improvements, structures, build ngs or signs, that are made or erected on the Access. 3. No site monitor shall oversee or otherwise restrict public III. e of the Access at any time without the express written nsent of the State. y e Each ty agrees that it will be responsible for its own acts and the results thereoi to the extent I authorized by th, law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the ot~er party and the results thereof. The I State's liability! shall be governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 3.736, and other applicable law. e e. . e e IV. TERM The Agreement shall commence on the date it is encumbered by the Commissioner o~ Finance and be perpetual, except as amended by the parties. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES By: Title: Date: CITY OF STILLWATER By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION By: Special Assistant Attorney General Date: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE - ENCUMBERED By: Title: Date: LILYAGR.DOC e ~ illwater ,,~ - - ~ ---- -i'- THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA . J April 5, 1990 Larry M. Killien Area Trails and Waterways Supervisor Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1200 Warner Road St. Paul, MN 55106 Dear Larry: Enclosed are five copies of the executed agreement. The City Attorney has made some minor changes to the agreement. Please return one executed copy for our files. If you have any questions, please call. Steve Russell Community Development Director Attachment: Agreement SR/sm e CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF STILLWATER AND THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES FOR RAMP AT LILY LAKE THIS AGREEMENT is made between the State of Minnesota, acting by and througn the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources, hereinafter referred to as the IIStatell and the City of Stillwater, hereinafter referred to a s II City II . WHEREAS, the Commissioner of Natural Resources has the authority, duty and responsibility under Minnesota Statutes, Section 97A.141, Subdivision 1 to provide the public with free state water access sites on lakes and rivers where access is inadequate; and WHEREAS, the City and the Commissioner have determined that the existing public water access site hereinafter referre to as IIAccessll on Lake Lily legally described to wit: 9033-3000 Section 33, Township 031, Range 20, Part Southwest 1/4 of Northwest 1/4 being all part lying West of West line of Greeley Street except the South 307.28 feet - subject to 8 feet wide cable utility easement. Original Town. First Ward. is inadequate and IIhigh priorityll for improvement under the Public Water Access Program; and " WHEREAS, the City is fee owner of the Access; and WHEREAS, the City desires that the State of Minnesota make funds available through the Small Lake Management Program for improvements to the access to enable the public to use it. e NOW THEREFORE, in he consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the public bodies he eto and for the benefit of the general public, the ~ parties agree as follow: I. IMPROVEMENT A D COST 1. The Ci ty concrete boat launching the State. The State wi cost within a reasonabl authorized expenditures City has substantially the improvement and dev ha 11 fund the constructi on of a parking lot and a ramp on the Access pursuant to the specifications of 1 reimburse the City for all or part of the City's time after the City submits verified proof of and the cost thereof incurred and paid, provided the ontracted for and provided for a timely completion of lopment of the Access. plans. 2. The State shall have the right to review and approve the Access 3. The State shall have the right, but shall not be. obligated to make additional improve ents on the Access as needed to provide access to the 1 ake. 4. The State shall provide signs informing the public that the Access is cooperatively provided by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources and the City. 5. The State shall provide signs necessary for the operation of the access, such as Boaters Rules. II. OPERATION OF THE ACCESS 1. The City shall maintain the Access for use by the public. The access shall remain op n for a minimum of 16 hours per day between the hours of 5:00 A.M. and midni ht. e II 1. LIAS ILITY Each party agrees that it will be responsible for its own acts and the results there of to the extent authorized by the law and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. The State's liability shall be governed by the provisions of the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 3.736, and other applicable law. IV. TERM The Agreement shall commence on the date it is encumbered by the Commissioner of Finance and be perpetual, except as amended by the parties. DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES CITY OF STILLWATER By: ~ady ~ Title: ~~ Date: (t~ f S Iq q (J f/ .) By: l~~l ~1~~'J Title:LU LL~ ); U By: Title: Da te: By: Title: Date: By: e APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION '. '..... By: Special Assistant Attorney General e Date: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE - ENCUMBERED By: Ti tl e: Date: LlLYAGR.DOC. e WASHINGTON COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 11660 MYERON ROAD NORTH · STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082-9573 612-439-6058 Facsimile Machine 612-430-0472 Donald C. Wlsnlewskl, .P.E. Director Public Works/County Engineer Mark L Mattson, Assistant Director Public Works Richard D. Herold, Design/Construction Engineer John P. Perkovich, Parks Director Lawrence W. Bousquet, Traffic and Maintenance Engineer Lyle C. Doerr, Facility Manager May 17, 1990 Mr. Nile Kriesel, Coordinator City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: Turnback Agreement for turning back Fourth Ave. So. from E. Orleans st. to Burlington st. and Burlington st. from Fourth Ave. So. to So. 3rd st. Dear Mr. Kriesel Attached is a revised agreement for the City execution. The revisions are at the request of the County Attorney and to correct errors in street descriptions. Also attached is a draft resolution that will accompany this agreement to the County Board. If you have any questions, please contact me. ~. ce elY,... / - ,t/ ~/ I Richard D. Herold P.E. Design/Construction Engineer cc: Dave Magnuson e Washington County does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age or handicapped status in employment or the provision of sen/ices. ~ -8> <0 "- ~ ~ r' _I DAVID T. MAGNUSON ATTORNEY AT LAW SUITE #260 THE GRAND GARAGE & GALLERY 324 SOUTH MAIN STREET STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 e (612) 439-9464 May 23, 1990 Richard C. Ilkka Mr. Nile Kriesel City Coordinator 216 North Fourth st Stillwater, MN 550 Re: Turnback Agree ent for Fourth Avenue South from East Or1e ns Street to Burlington Street and Burlington Street from Fourth Avenue South to Third Stree Dear Nile: I have reviewed the Turnback Agreement that was sent to you by Dick Herold of Wash'ngton County and that was enclosed with his letter to you of Ma 17, 1990. This document looks to me to be legally sufficient but you and the engineer should review it to make sure that the streets being turned back are tho e that were agreed upon. Please call with an questions. Very truly yours, DAVID T. MAGNUSON DTM:kn - ,~\) '$> (?,-D< # }r e e 1< AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT by and between the City of Stillwater, a municipal corporation of the state of Minnesota, hereinafter called "City", and the County of Washington, a body politic and corporate of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "County"; WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City approved by RESOLUTION NO. 7943 adding East Orleans Street from south Third Street to Fourth Avenue South to the County State Aid System; and removing Fourth Avenue South from East Orleans Street to Burlington Street and Burlington Street from Fourth Avenue south to South Third Street from the County State Aid Highway system. WHEREAS, the County now has juristiction of East Orleans Street from South Third street to Fourth Avenue South; and WHEREAS, Stillwater will take over juristiction of Fourth Avenue South from East Orleans Street to Burlington Street and Burlington Street from Fourth Avenue South to South Third Street; and WHEREAS, prior to execution of this Agreement the County was to overlay said Fourth Avenue south and Burlington Street; and WHEREAS, said Fourth Avenue South and Burlington Street need utility improvements; and WHEREAS, utility improvements would require replacing the bituminous surface on said Fourth Avenue South and Burlington Street; and WHEREAS, these utility improvements would remove the pavement of said streets; and . WHEREAS, the City has requested the County to transfer $30,000.00 to the City, which is the amount estimated for the overlay. / NOW THEREFORE, IT IS AGREED by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. The County will transfer jurisdictional responsibility of Fourth Avenue Sou h from East Orleans Street to Burlington Street and Burlingtol Street from Fourth Avenue South to South Third Street. 2. The County shall transfer $30,000.00 to the City to be used for improvement~ to said Fourth Avenue South and Burlington Street. 3. The City s all put said $30,000.00 in a interest bearing account. 4. Said $30,0 0 and accrued interest shall be used only for street improveme ts to Fouth Avenue South from Orleans Street to Burlington street and Burlington street from Fouth Avenue south to south Third Street. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and ~eals. CITY OF STILLWATER COUNTY OF WASHINGTON By By Chairman, Board of County Commissioners Mayor By City Clerk Attest: County Administrator Date: , 1989 Date: , 1989 Approved as to form and execution: Washington County Attorney Stillwater Attorney Recommended for apPlova1: Washington County D'rector of Public Works ~.~ e - e e .. ~......~ . PLANNING APPLICATION REVIEW CASE NO. V/90-31 Planning Commission Meeting: None. Project Location: 115 North Harriet Street. Zoning District: R-B Applicant1s Name: James and Susan Lund Type of Application: Variance PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Variance to construct swimming pool in the front yard. DISCUSSION: The request is to construct a 161x321 swimming pool in the front yard of a residence. Because of the location of the existing residence, it is not practical to construct the pool in the rearyard. The pool location is 66 feet from North Harriet Street and an existing hedge screens the pool site from the street and adjacent houses. The pool will be enclosed by a six foot wrought iron fence. This application has not been to the Planning Commission but because construction of the pool has begun, a special Council review is requested. .C 100-, 'LA US ~ -\-~.\:J\ U() -1 r-enQ.L. Case Number r( liil:_~L~_ ~. fee Paid __ e - --------- _!_Jj~O ___ "PLANNING ADlv\INlSTRATlVE FORlv\ Street location or Property: .__JJ_'2__1J_,-~JJ~ri,~t_Qt_~~i_dL~c0!_r . I ".' ,. P t ~1-!-tAcit " Lega Doscnptlon 0\, roper y: _-LY_L~_______ -----------------------__ Owner: Ne~e __slQ\.~.e.~__~_"_~_~_~~__b:~_~______________ Address __U_C_N.~_~r.r!4_?t_____ Phone: _12Q_-:Q.1~~_ Date. filed __ Ao"olicent (if other then oWJler): Name _________________________________ . . Address______________________________ Phone:_______________ Type or Request:. ___ Rezoning ___ Approval. or Preliminary Plet ___ Special Use Permit .___ Approval of ~inal. Plat _"I-- Variance . --- Other ------------:-. .----- De~ci~~t~eque~tQ-:l?-gj-~-L-t~-~~~~~~~1 I ~!i----~---~------~~-~-----------------------~ ___~~~_~~___~~~_f1t_~~~-l~jfg-r------------- I Signctu;e or Applicant: ~~~ Date of Public Hearing: _____________________________________________ . NOTE: Sketch of proposed property and structU4'e to be dravm 1n 'l:lack oi t.\i.s iorw. Or at- t<i.ched, showing the following: ) 11 ,. . ' , ,?/.> 1. North dir-edion.A , . ~.J / 2. Location oi n. ron. osed. structure on lot. ;{:.c,;, . ~ .; >1''5' It." 4~. 3. Dimensions of front a,"l.d side set-backs. J"": ~ ~ ~ 4. Dimensions oi proposed structure. I;~ ~ (). ~ ~\~ 5 Sf." 'J "'~. "A t9t -:). .. .., . t:-eet narues. ..- _ \~ ~~.b ~ ~ :-- ."'" 6. Location oi adjace!lt existing buildings. 8 .. 7/. 0 Ul ,] 7. Other iniormation ;;.s may be requested. ''''9), ',~t~ ~ <1 02. ici'>/ Approved ___ Denied ___ by the'Planning Commission on ___________ ( ;%}t~~W b. ... ~ ~L f 11. d.... su lec. ,0 Ine 0 oWing con 1110ns:,,:-.:,:-________-:'"':'___._____________:::_____ e Approved ___ Denied ___ by the Coun ciI on ________________ subiec: to the .c II' d." . I 0 oWing con I,lons: ________________________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------ Commen~s: (Usa other side) " ... e May 30, 1990 Sti llwater Planning Commission City Hall Stl1lwater, MN Dear Members: We are requesting a variance to allow construction of a residential . swimming pool on our property for the following reasons: 1, A permit has already been granted for the construction of the pool, and excavat i on has begun. 2. A question has arisen as to whether the pool site is in the front yard or back yard of the lot. As shown in the accompanying drawings, the site is in our view clearly to the rear of the house. Because of the age of the house (120 years) and its unusual placement on the bluff adjoining Myrtle Street, it actually faces a street (Holcombe) that doesn't exist. 3. The proposed pool placement which is directly behind a 12 foot tall Lilac hedgerow, makes it invisible from Harriet Street. 4. The proposed pool will be constructed in-ground of concrete, and surrounded by a cobblestone deck and decorative iron "hoop style" fence consistent with the age and architectural style of the house (see attached drawings). 5. We have discussed the project with all the neighbors in the vicinity and all are agreeable, A letter from our nearest neighbor is attached, Thank you for your consideration in this matter. tit James and Susan Lund e e MIY 30, 1990 to: Stillwater Planning Commission City HIli from: Marge Hooley 116 Hlrrlet Street . I haue no objection to the swimming pool the Lunds Ire building neHt-door to my house. In fact, I think the pool will be an enhancement to our neighborhood. tJt~ e <('~ ~ :-c~' " ~ f1! " lIo( , L-- -~ \. \ / --~.- ----~v ---3- ~ :j<~ ij~.I "\\~' ~ l -:--- ~~o..' . . \\, ~ ;? ~ ~.. .~\ ...... % ~\... """ 'R'J-- , -....J \ '.' -. --,~,. .,,' -.,- ','\\. y ~~/\'.~l. , '\ " \,' '-oJ ~" a:z ',".., \. \ · '1 ~ i -:~j,~~.:~'~-~_<=> __--C~/ i - -._~----_. " "'- A .... ~ .... r.........., 5>-' .......... ___ ~ to... ~\ -.t:::: . ' .... ~ \ r \\ , \vJ ~ ~ ~ 'I \ --,--~---,- . 'f'- i I\~ ~(--\- a \~ t ( A i-1 I . I I ~ .... ~...T"'i i ) \ r ,,' ( \ y- -,.,/ , .... "- } yo ) ,I, \. _ J \tJ ~) ~ .J::: ~ ~ 0' ( "- ... 1 ~ j ~ J , \ , -., I r ,- r ( , . r \ \. ~ . r \ . ; \ \ r \, '-- 1 ..... ,;:;. \ ~ 1_ ( \ I ; - r- j ~ ( \:. < ,; '" r I r'" ~- . ~/ D , ! ....,...,'. ~ ".,....V "'- - f---~'---==-':.... - - ----r ~ ~ ....J \. I i-------...- --~ ,// - '--7 f"......X ~- i ;' \ \ /"- '" -" "--.... / / ---...../ t ~- ~ 1~ I '" -~ .......J_ _ I"K] rl,. " .' - ~ .- ,-- . -f\ \ I -<--+ I r i -~ J -)- ~ "\ ~7 ~7;; ~. I \' ---4- ---- ,--------~-~~-- -- Q __ -r.4l ~ "1.:=J---l-- -..1 " -oJ- N \ \ , .....-- r \ ~f -- ' ~ -,~ ( ~-' - -- - " ~-~~.:JL~--:= 7-__.-_- .' " __---~- ~~~ \ ~~ ::!~------ ______________.L ___ - ~-;::- \ ,----- -,..~- ~~-j- ' ~ ~ ~ ____.n.-=> -~ if ~. ~-----~--=-~I~~-- ^' -- ~~ -.-- .- , \~- I ~., . e e r I - 7 ~~/~ -f~u csec+;~ ~' ~ ~ p~ ( {e,lt\U- Jer~ I " , I t/ ~t)k "hoop st.ile' ""3" so Iud e. I 'r ~ P o<;~ <;. c;p~ce oJ " ~pCUrt - ~+ iL-t Ce-Y.C're-te. .. koo&s~ f~dw.i.s '(z~ r~~ IrQ"h 2- Bt{.,fe~ I ~ ~ l<Uj locks e i~, \U' I ! +- \U ~ ~, ~ i -:t I I . I <:. '....."'------, ~ \ ! ~ I ~ -~ ~~ i "" I, Q l~ ...... o ......- '- (,/1 _ - N ;,;, to"" ~ '/.. ~~ U1 _ ~-= :::> rJ: ( -.-.-........ [[] \ ~ N / ~{p , ~, ,,~, ..:;,. '0\ ':::21 ! \ ( ) i . ./ / .-J ,I -~ ; "1 . . 1 -1.__'" ~'\ ~ ~ ~ ---'. -~ ...-P- ...""" -'" .......... ~"... ~-~.~ .,,,."'" , i\.... -" t..--, ~ / - \\ e. ~ v\ '( '\ " ~ ~ ;S S1 ~ a- \) - , 'i- -; , iC'-2:'";. ~ t' ..... ..... e LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 8286 e Abrahamson Nurseries Airlift Doors American Planning Assn. Anderson Sod A T & T Bryan Rock Products Careful Painting Coordinated Business Supplies Courier, The Deb1on, Diane Del's Stillwater Ecolab Pest Elimination Equipment Supply Inc. Flexible Pipe Tool Company Glaser, Paul Goodin Company Gopher Sign Company Gopher State One Call Greeder Electric Company Hydrocon, Inc. I. C. B. O. Jim's Building Mte. Jim Hatch Sales Joe's Precast, Inc. Johnson, Mary Lou Kimble, Jay Kriesel, Nile Lawson Products League Mn. Cities-Insurance Lind, Leslie & Gladys Lynde Chemical Company Magnuson, David Metropolitan Waste Control Comm. Mn. Cellular Telephone McGladrey & Pullen M. J. Raleigh Trucking Model Stone Motorola, Inc. National Computer Systems North Star Dodge N. W. Tire & Battery Peterson Seed Company Protect-Aire Prudent Publishing Company Public Safety Equipment Co. Pump & Meter Service, Inc. Plants $ Repair Door-Fire Dept. Membership Sod Long Distance calls Crushed Rock Painting Offices Mte. Contract May Publications Mileage 4 Spark Plugs Pest Control A/C Repairs Nozzle Boiler Engineer Toilet 6 Signs Locate Requests Lift Station Repairs Estimate No. 1 UBC Check List May Services Gloves Storm Sewer Repair Mileage/Meeting Mileage Meals-Albert Lea switches for Lights Workers Comp. Insurance Land Purchase Diamond-Dry Legal Services SAC Charge Mobile Phone 1989 Audit Black Dirt Manhole Blocks Mte. Agreement Mte. Agreement Air Conditioner Line Battery Turf Field Mix 2 Protective Screens Christmas Cards Calibrate 5 Radar Units Equipment Parts 146.72 1,136.00 178.00 9.00 10.42 129.36 2,190.00 274.70 317.72 14.00 9.40 185.00 524.27 238.50 200.00 145.64 136.09 95.00 863.40 29,456.38 25.00 676.60 27.00 665.00 18.25 10.00 57.00 211.27 27,045.25 927.00 440.00 7.95 3,100.00 456.00 57.60 176.55 268.33 58.50 66.84 232.50 156.00 112.63 100.00 63.68 Northern states Pow Northern States Pow Rand Materials St. Croix Cleaners Short Elliott Hendr'ckson Snap on Tools STAC Hydraulic Comp ny Stafford, R. H. Was ington County Treasurer State Chemical Mfg. Company Stillwater Area C 0 C Stillwater, City of Stillwater Ford-Lin Superior Computer E T. A. Schifsky & So Thommes & Thomas Traver, Joan Twin City Concrete roducts Twin City Silica Uniforms Unlimited WMI Services of Min esota Zack's, Inc. Co. Co. oln change s Energy Charge Street Lighting/L.Lake Step Ladder Laundry-Fire Engineering Socket Repair Sweeper Map Cleaners Donation-Margaret Rivers Petty Cash Repair Computer Assy. Color Monitor/Card Blacktop Tree Removal Refund-Damage Deposit Field Lining Chalk Sand Uniforms Portable Toilets Chemicals ~ 2,791.49 16,854.49 419.46 32.50 7,751.19 6.81 256.28 e 2.50 368.03 2,000.00 98.22 201.08 225.00 712.95 300.00 300.00 144.00 20.63 364 . 96 375.00 150.00 e ( " LIST OF BILLS EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION NO. 8286 e e Abrahamson Nurseries Airlift Doors American Planning Assn. Anderson Sod A T & T Bryan Rock Products Careful Painting Coordinated Business Supplies Courier, The Deblon, Diane Del's Stillwater Ecolab Pest Elimination Equipment Supply Inc. Flexible Pipe Tool Company Glaser, Paul Goodin Company Gopher Sign Company Gopher State One Call Greeder Electric Company Hydrocon, Inc. I. C. B. o. Jim's Building Mte. Jim Hatch Sales Joe's Precast, Inc. Johnson, Mary Lou Kimble, Jay Kriesel, Nile La\llson Products League Mn. Cities-Insurance Lind, Leslie & Gladys Lynde Chemical Company Magnuson, David Metropolitan Waste Control Corom. Mn. Cellular Telephone McGladrey & Pullen M. J. Raleigh Trucking Model Stone Motorola, Inc. National Computer Systems North Star Dodge N. W. Tire & Battery Peterson Seed Company Protect-Aire Prudent Publishing Company Public Safety Equipment Co. Pump & Meter Service, Inc. Plants $ Repair Door-Fire Dept. Membership Sod Long Distance Calls Crushed Rock Painting Offices Mte. Contract May Publications Mileage 4 Spark Plugs Pest Control A/C Repairs Nozzle Boiler Engineer Toilet 6 Signs Locate Requests Lift Station Repairs Estimate No. 1 UBC Check List May Services Gloves Storm Se\ller Repair Mileage/Meeting Mileage Meals-Albert Lea S\IIitches for Lights Workers Comp. Insurance Land Purchase Diamond-Dry Legal Services SAC Charge Mobile Phone 1989 Audit Black Dirt Manhole Blocks Mte. Agreement Mte. Agreement Air Conditioner Line Battery Turf Field Mix 2 Protective Screens Christmas Cards Calibrate 5 Radar Units Equipment Parts 146.72 1,136.00 178.00 9.00 10.42 129.36 2,190.00 274.70 317.72 14.00 9.40 185.00 524.27 238.50 200.00 145 .64 136.09 95.00 863.40 29,456.38 25.00 676.60 27.00 665.00 18.25 10.00 57.00 211.27 27,045.25 927.00 440.00 7,951.10 5,959.80 7.95 3,100.00 456.00 57.60 176.55 268.33 58.50 66.84 232.50 156.00 112.63 100.00 63.68 Northern states Co. Northern States Co. Rand Materials St. Croix Cleaners Short Elliott Hendri Snap on Tools STAC Hydraulic Compa y Stafford, R. H. Washington County Treasurer State Chemical Mfg. Stillwater Area C of Stillwater, City of Stillwater Ford-Line ln Superior Computer Exchange T. A. Schifsky & Sons Thommes & Thomas Traver, Joan Twin City Concrete P oducts Twin City Silica Uniforms Unlimited WMI Services of Minnesota Zack's, Inc. MANUAL CHECKS Blue Cross/Blue Shield Commissioner of Revenue Frito - Lay, Inc. Fritz Company Government Training Service Junker Sanitation Service League Minnesota Cities Madcapper MWCC Postmaster Postmaster Sherin, John Snyder Bros. #16 Stafford, R. H. Wash.Cty.Treas. Stafford, R. H. Wash.Cty.Treas. Turchman, Inna M. ADDENDUM TO BILLS Amdahl, Chris Beberg, Byrdie Business Equipment B okerage Capitol Communicatio s Conway Fire & Safety Energy Charge Street Lighting/L.Lake Step Ladder Laundry-Fire Engineering Socket Repair Sweeper Map Cleaners Donation-Margaret Rivers Petty Cash Repair Computer Assy. Color Monitor/Card Blacktop Tree Removal Refund-Damage Deposit Field Lining Chalk Sand Uniforms Portable Toilets Chemicals May Billing Sales Tax Concession Supplies Concession Supplies Seminar-Rylander May Payment LMC Conference NSF Check - Bourasa Sac Charges 3-1988 Stamps-police Mailing Permit-Billing Meeting - 4 Film/Rabbit Food License Plate License Plate Reimbursement-Skirt Keys Cut Computer Entries/Typing 12 Cassettes Repairs/Install Radios Re-fil1s 5,791:4'9 16,854.49 419.46 32.50 7,751.19 6.81 256.28 e 2.50 368.03 2,000.00 98.22 201.08 225.00 712.95 300.00 300.00 144.00 20.63 364 . 96 375.00 150.00 2.608.01 402.05 41.98 309.60 20.00 58,500.00 1,320.00 24.22 1,050.00 25.00 575.63 8.00 19.54 47.00 7.00 53.40 50.00 430.00 24.00 867.50 26.00 e e e .c lib Food s Custom Fire Apparatus Deb1on, Diane Gognon Printing Company Goodwill Industries G & K Services Hance Office Machines Hydrocon, Inc. Lakes Gas Company Med-Compass, Inc. Minnesota Blue Print N. American Life & Casualty Short Elliott Hendrickson Stillwater Bakery Thompson Hardware company Washington County Human Serv. Watson, Dennis WyBrite, Inc. Ivory Dish Soap Repair Water unit Health Insurance/Mileage 50 Budget Books May Expenses Uniform Rental Service Contract Estimate No. 2 Propane 3 Physical certificates 1 Set R.R. Curves Health Insurance-Johnson Engineering Bakery Goods Supplies Evaluation-Allen/Pluff Computer Programming Mte. Agreement Adopted by the Council this 5th day of June, 1990. APPROVED FOR PAYMENT 25.50 248.00 204.89 170.84 507.34 791.77 230.00 27,440.08 51.00 117.00 264.00 120.00 15,920.49 9.00 274.85 150.00 426.36 157.00 e Tim Ball Construction Rt. 3, Box 345 Osceola, Wi 54020 CONTRACTORS APPLICATIONS June 5, 1990 Masonry & Brick Work New Oenny.s Drywall Plastering, etc. New Rt. 1, Box 310 Centuria, Wi 54824 Encon Utilities/Consolidated Sewer, Water & Plumb. Renewal Mechanical 1530 E. Cliff Rd. Burnsville, Mn. 55337 Hearth Services, Inc. General Contractor New 10253 91st Ave. No. Maple Grove, Mn. 55369 R. E. Hughes Construction Co. General Contractor New 5323 Stillwater Blvd. No. Stillwater, Mn. 55082 Rudy J. Lenz, Inc. Masonry & Brick Work Renewal 3052 No. McKnight Rd. Maplewood, Mn. 55109 Mariah Remodeling Co. General Contractor New 721 No. Third St. Stillwater, Mn. 55082 Mark Miller Construction, Inc. Masonry & Brick Work New 6771 Wyoming Trail Wyoming, Mn. 55092 Prestige Pool & Patio Swimming Pool Install. Renewal 245 E. Roselawn Ave., Suite 29 St. Paul, Mn. 55117 Scenic Sign Corp. 828 So. 5th St. Sauk Rapids, Mn. 56379 Sign Erection New Stanis Aluminum Service 10933 Beard Ave. So. Bloomington, Mn. 55431 T. J. Builders 508 W. Sycamore St. Stillwater, Mn. 55082 General Contractor New General Copntractor Renewal e e . OFFICERS STEVE ZINNEL President MICHAEL A. MORRISON V P.Campaign KAY ANDERSON V P-Communications JOHN BAIRD V P.Allocations KEITH OLSON Treasurer JENNIFER WHITING Secretary BOARD MEMBERS MARIANNE BEYER PAM BROMEN CATHERINE BUCK SUSAN DUNN SALLY EVERT TRACEY A. GALOWITZ JOHN T. HALL JAMES GILLESPIE JEFF HANSON BARBARA HELD RODELL L. HOFLAND CHIP HOOLEY DICK JEANS ROGER KARRICK PAUL KIOLBASA ERVIN NEFF HARRY D. PETERSON ROBERT E. PETERSON DEBBIE PIERRE DIANE THOMPSON Life Member JC PFEIFFER Executive Director LAURIE MAHER Assistant 'i\.l .,." ~ I ",-~~.. V'. '- ST. CROIX AREA UNITED WAY 14791 N. 60TH ST.. SUITE 10. STILLWATER. MINNESOTA 55082-6359 6 1 2/439-3838 May 11, 1990 Mayor Wally Abrahamson and Members of the City Council 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Mayor and Council Members: The St. Croix Area United Way is requesting pennission to hang two United Way street banners, one on Main Street near Olive and one on Chestnut Street near Union. The thrust of our fund drive will be from September 10 through October. Therefore, we would like to have at least one of them hung sometime during the last week of August. They can be taken down around November 1. We understand that the Stillwater Fire Department will hang and remove the banners. The banners measure 30 feet by 30 inches, have a white background wi th black and red lettering and the standard United Way logo, and are made of heavy-duty canvas. They are current 1 y stored with the Stillwater Fire Deparbnent. Slncerely, ." ~ i~i(f;r Executlve Dlrector JP:lm cc: Mike Morrison, Campaign Chair Kay Anderson, Corrmunications Chair ~)I .,,~'''( 00 f j/.....U)~/L,...,. (:'~"-,,"i i. Z--f . ';HP e /) 12 ,. /' .f ~,-~Le..~',<.__.~1" fl.A....t.A.....: 112. Ii )/.I c; i/C~(lO It brings out the best in all of us.@ illwater ......... --- -~ THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA May 18, 1990 Mr. J. C. Pfetffer, Exec. Director St. Croix Area United Way 14791 No. 60th St., Suite 10 Stillwater, Mn. 55082-6359 Dear M. Pfeiffer: We received your letter re uesting the installation of banners for the 1990 United Way fund drive. Ho ever, the location of Main and Olive Streets has already been approved for wo other groups for the time period you requested. Therefore, I am suggesting that your banner be installed at Main and Myrtle Streets, the Kolliner Buil ing site. The Chestnut St. site is open for the dates you requested. Please notify me by mail 0 give me a call at 439-6121 by May 29 so I can place you request on the C uncil Agenda for June 5. mlj 5/ d-d I "! u Y/Jv1. f e-fA#-- (J_~6-cj_LL-L ~Lf-' Sincerely, ~_ ~?;-f~-/ Mary -~:UI Johnson City Clerk J 0~ :- [1u~"H~ 'V- ____Ck"L--cLD-~~ tiLe /' CITY HAll: 216 NORTH FO RTH STillWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 e e e May 2 2, 19 9 0 Ms. Mary Lou Johnson City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mary Lou, This letter is to request the hanging of the Lumberjack Days' banner across Main Street from July 9th through July 30, 1990. I appreciate the City's cooperation in all the community activities sponsored by the Chamber. Please let me know is this presents a scheduling problem. Si~7,elY , I! ~ ~. a;J/vq~ Jeryn~fer Tschumper Ext;Ptive Vice President e Brick Alley Building · 423 So. Main Street. Stillwater, Minnesota 55082-5127 · (612) 439-7700 e e TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: M E M 0 MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MARY lOU JOHNSON, CITY CLERK MAY 31, 1990 COUNCIL POll OF MAY 22 REGARDING ADDITION TO PUBLIC HEARING lIST FOR JUNE 5. On May 22 a poll of Council was taken regarding the addition of three cases to the Public Hearing list for the June 5 meeting pertaining to the Benson farm annexation and change of zoning. Please pass a motion ratifying the results of this poll which was: Ayes - 4; Nays - 1, Councilmember Farrell. e May 21, 1990 1336 Jackson St. St. Paul, Minnesota 55117 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Honorable Body: This letter is written to express our concern about the dilapidated house on Biqhway 36 next to the Zantigo Restaurant. The house has a hole in the roof, windows out, debris around the yard area, etc. The other pro?erties on the frontage road have been cleaned and spruced up with the clearing of lands and completion of Tuenge Drive. We would suggest that the house be moved or demolished to improve: a. the sight aesthics for our City b. any health problems - rodents, fire, etc. If the City could help in accomplishing the above it would help clean up an unsightly area in the City of Stillwater. Sincerely, RLB PROPERTIES Ro~!~~wner RLB: j k - ~~~ "'~ ~* rY - --,-~:""':---"":""-;"'~"~~~:'"-.~...' ..~-~ ~ e ~ BLOOMINGTON BROOKLYN PARK BURNSVlllE CHAMPLIN CIRCLE PINES COlUMBIA HEIGHTS DEEPHA YEN EDEN PRAIRIE EDINA FRIDLEY GREENWOOD HASTINGS HOPKiNS LAUDERDALE MAPLE PLAIN MAPLEWooD MINNETONKA MINNETRISTA NEW BRIGHTON NORTH ST. PAUL ORONO OSSEO PLYMOUTH RICHFIELD ROBBINSDAlE ROSEVILLE SAVAGE ST. LOUIS PARK SHAKOPEE SHOREVIEW SPRING PARK WAYZATA WEST ST. PAUL WOODLAND - SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY May 22, 1990 Mr. Nile Kriesel City Coordinator City of Stillwater Stillwater City Hall 216 North 4th Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. Kriesel: I am writing to you on behalf of the Suburban Rate Authority (SRA), a joint powers organization consisting of 34 metropolitan area suburban municipalities. On behalf of the SRA Board of Directors I want to invite the City of Stillwater to join the SRA. Stillwater's participation is vitally important to the continued representation of suburban ratepayers in utility matters that significantly affect residents, businesses and municipal services. The SRA monitors on behalf of its members, rate matters involving Northern States Power, Minnegasco, Northwestern Bell and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. The SRA has actively intervened in rate cases before the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and on numerous occasions has realized substantial savings for its member residents and those of all suburban communities. For example, the tiered Northwestern Bell metropolitan telephone rate ratios have been cut in half over the last ten years to the benefit of outer suburban residents and businesses. The SRA was the sole voice in favor of such ratio modification until recently when the Attorney General began supporting the SRA position. SRA intervention in NSP rate cases through the 80s has also resulted in significant dollar savings to suburban ratepayers and municipalities. The SRA has successfully and repeatedly prevented the municipal pumping rates from being raised substantially by NSP. The present issues in which the SRA is involved include an NSP petition to increase revenues by $120,000,000, a Northwestern Bell petition for approval of a four year incentive regulation plan, and Environmental Protection Agency proposed requirements of the MWCC for stringent water and sewer discharge standards. Each of these issues involves millions of dollars to the suburban ratepayers. Without SRA intervention in these cases, suburban city residents affected by potential rate changes have no voice. The SRA benefits all metropolitan area suburban municipalities whether those municipalities are SRA members or not. The risk to the City of Stillwater in nonmembership, however, is that the SRA may be unable to continue its active intervention in rate matters. The greater the membership, the greater the voice of suburban cities in important utility issues. Those issues will clearly become more and more important during the 90's. The SRA must maintain its voice. 470 PILLSBURY CENTER · MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402 . (612) 337-9300 ';be}:. 0"\ ~~ ~ Page Two May 22, 1990 ,. e In terms of return on embership dollar, I don't think that any other organization which a metro area city could join can match membership in the SRA. A conservative calculation of dollar sa ings to SRA members from 1975 to the present is $175,000 per vote on theSRA Board. Each member city is allowed one vote per 5,000 population. The assessment per me ber will be $375 per vote (5,000 in population) in 1991. I strongly urge your ity to consider SRA membership. The SRA Board meets quarterly at the Ambas ador Motor Hotel in St. Louis Park. Our next meeting is July 17. We welcome your ttendance. If you have any questions, please call me at 935- 1951 or legal counsel D ve Kennedy at 337-9232. Also enclosed are the minutes from the most recent SRA eeting and a form Joint Powers Agreement and Resolution to become a member. Sincerely, Robert DeGh 0 City of Minnetonka Chairman SRA Board of Directors cc: SRA Executive Committee D. J. Kennedy, Ho mes & Graven, Chartered James Strommen, olmes & Graven, Chartered e ~~\;) 0" ~ ~* ., JOINT AND COOPERATXVE AGRBEMEH'1' e I. PARTIES 'fhe pani.. to this afre_ant are CJoverraen tal un! ta of i:he st.ate of Minnesota. This agreemen~ is _4. pursuan~ to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59, as amended. II. GENERAL PURPalB The CJeneral purpose of this aCJreement is to establish an organization to monitor the operation and activites of public utilities in the metropolitan area, to conduct research and . investigation of the activities of such utilities, and to conduct such other activities authorized herein as may be necessary U) insure equitable and ,reasonable public utility rates and service levels for. t.he citizens of t.he members of the organizat"ion. . III. NAME 'lhe name of the organiza t.ion is the SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY. The name may be changed in accordance with Article XII. IV. DBFIN:I'rJ:ONS Section 1. , por purposes of this agreement, the teDlS defined in this article have the meaning given them. Sect.ion 2. -Authority" means the joint and cooperative organization created by this agreement. section 3. "Board" or "Board of Directors" means the Board of Directors of the Authority established by Article ~. Section 4. "Council" means the governing body of a governmental unit. e ." . sec;tion 5. Unit- means a city or town in" the ..tJ:opolitan a e section 6. - etropolitan Area- means tho metropolitan &rea defined anc! d scribec1 by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 4738.02, .s amend . Section 7. means a governmental unit which has enterecl into and b come a party to this agreement. Section 8. · ublic Utility. or"Utility. means an investor owned utility supp yinq gas or electricity under franchise within one or more qovernmenta1 units; the term may include other utilities as provided in Article XII. The texm does not include municipall owned utilities. Section 9. · tatutory Cities. means cities orqanized under Minnesota Statute, Chapter 412. V. MEMBERS HIP Section 1. qoverIU!.'lenta1 unit in the metropolitan area is eliq ible to be member of the Author i ty . . Section 2. A qovernmental unit desirinq to became a member shall execute a co y of this agreement and conform to the member- ship provisions Sect~on 3. e initial m~ers shall be those members who become members on before January 1, 1975. Section 4. vernmenta1 units wishing to become members after January 1, 75, may be admitted only upon the favorable vote of two-thirds of the votes of the members of the Board of Directors. rd may, in its by.-1aws, impose conditions upon the admission of additional members. e -2- e e SecUon 5. A chaDCJe in the gover.ental boundarie., .truc- . tur., clas.ification or organization of a governmental unit affect. the eli9ibility of a unit to become a member of the Autbo~i~.. VI. - GOVERNIRa BODY I BOARD 'or DIREcroRS 8eo1:ion 1. The governing body of the Authority is ita Board of Directors. Each member is entitled to one director on the Board. BaCh director is entitled to one vote for each 5,000 . . of population or fraction thereof of the governmental unit represented by t.he director: provided, however, that each director shali have at least one vote aDd no director shall bave more than 20 votes. For purposes of this section, _ populatioll of a governmental unit shall be that population det.ermined pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statute 275.53. Prior to Decemb~r 31 of each year, the Secretary-Treasurer of the Authority shall detennine the population of each member in accordance with this section and certify the results to the chairman. Se~ion 2. A director shall be appointed by resolution of the council of the members for a term of one calendar year. A director shall serve unt.il his successor is appointed and . . .... qualifies~ Directors shall serve without compensation fraa the Authori ty, but nothing in this section shall be construed to . . prevent a governmental unit from compensating its director for service on the Board if such compensation is otherwise authorized by law. Section 3. The Board, in its by-laws, may- provide for the appointment of alternate directors and prescribe the extent of their powers and duties. -3- which shall be held 0 later than 15' day. aftu sue!) call. Section 4. The first .eeting ofth. Board shall' be the orqani..t~l ...ti q of the Authority. At the organizational .!-..... . ....tin,-, ... at each annual .eeting thereafter, the Board shall .elect fraa among th director. a chairman, a vice-chairan, and a secretary-trea Section 5. At e organizational uetinCJ, or as SOOl1 there- e after as it may the BoareS shall adopt by-laws . governing its proced res, inclUding the time, place, notice for. and frequency of its reqular meetings, procedure for calUng special meetings, an such other matters as are required by this agreement. amend the by-laws from time to .. .,;' tine~ The Board sha 1 meet at least once each year and on such other dat~s as may b provided in its by-laws. . VIII. POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE BOARD 'OF DIRECTORS , Section 1. The powers and duties of the Board of Directors of the Authority are set forth in this article. Section 2. Board may make such contracts and enter as it deems necessary to make effective. the Authority by this agreement. It may into such any power granted contract with any of its members or others to provide space, services or materials on behalf of the Authority. . Section 3. It ay provide for the prosecution, defense, or other participation in actions or proceedings at law in which , it may have an inte est, and may employ counsel for that purpose. It may employ such other persons as it deems necessary to accanplish e its powers and duti s. Such employees may be on a full-time or , -5- 'e e: par~-ti_, or consultinC) ba.i. a. the Board 4etemin.s, and the Boar4"J~ any required empl~er contributions which local gove~t.unit. are authorized or required to make by law. " s,iaOtiOa 4. It may conduct such research and iDvestiC)ation and tAke such action as it deems necessary, incl\1f!iDCJ partici- pation and' appearance i1& proceedinCJs of state and federal regulatory, legislative or administrative bodies, on any matter related to or affecting utility costs, levels of service, rates or franchises, and advise members concerning such matters with a view toward obtaining compliance.with franchises granted to utilities and'insuring reasonable rates and service levels for the members and their residents. The Board may conduct the activities authorized by this section on behalf of any govern- mental unit located outside the metropolitan area at the request of such a unit~ embodied in a resolution of its governing body; provided however, tha~ the conduct of such .activities on behalf of any such governmental unit shall be specifically authorized . by the Board and shall be subject to such reasonable conditions as to cost of service and other matters as may be Uaposed by the Board. Section S. The Board may obtain from any utility and from any other source such information relating to utility rates, costs and service levels as any of its members is entitled to obtain from such utilities. . Section 6. It may receive and hold moneys from any utility to the extent and in the manner as may be provided by this , -6- '''''. a,Z'._ni: or any Z'anchi.. ,Z'ant.ed to . Ui:ilit.y by . ._rl ~ it may ac:c:epi: yo1 tary cont.ributions frC8 ita members or other source.... provid d in Article X. ~"h. Authority shall have no e taxing ~r. It may aCCUlllUlate reserve funda and may invest and re-inveat 1 i:. . not needed for current expen.e. in the manner limitation. applicable by law to statutory may not incur obligations in excess of funds citie.. then available to Authority. Section 7. . he Board shall make a financial accounting and. report to the .members at least once each year. The books and records of Authox:i ty shall be open and available for inspection by . Section 8. reasonable times. grants of money he Board may accept gifts, apply for and' use other property from members or othex: govern- . mental units or ganizations, and may enter into agreements required in conne tion therewith, and may hold, use, and dispose of such moneys property in accordance with the terms of the grant, gift or eement relating thereto. Section 9. he Board shall establish the annual budget for' the Author! ty as rovided in Article X. Section 10. The Board may, in its by-laws, establish an executive committ e and may deleqate duties and authority to such a committee betwe n Board meetings. Section 11. The Board may purchase public liability insurance and such other bonds and insurance as it may deea necessary. .e -7- e SectioD 12. '1'he Board ~y exerci.. any oth~r power nec;e..uy and conveDieat to the implementation of the powers and duties given ~;~~br this agreement. . . . ..~~:.-... . ~~~- .. IX. OnICSRS 'Section 1. ' The officer. of the Board shall consist of a chairman, a vlce-cbairJDWl, an~ a secretary~treasurer who shall be elected by the Board, for a tena of one year and until their . successors are elected and qualify, at the annual meeting. New officers shall ~ake office at the adjournment of the annual meet- ing at which they 'were elected. An officer must be a duly qualified and' appointed director. e . Section 2. A vacancy in 'the office of chairman, vice- chairman, or secretary-treasurer shall occur for any of the reasons for which a vacancy in the office of director shall occur. Vacancies in these offices shall be filled by the Board for the unexpired portion of the term. Section J. The chairman shall preside at all meetings of the Board. The vice-chairman shall act as chainaan in the absence, disqualification or disability of the chairman. Section 4. The secretary-treasurer is responsible for keep- ing a re~rd of all the proceedinqs of the Board, for custody of all funds, for keeping of all financial records of the Authority and for such other duties as may be assigned to him by the Board. Persons may be employed to perform such services under his super- vision and direction as may be authorized by the Board. The secretary-treasurer shall post a fidelity bond or other insurance -8- "against: loss of funds in tbe account: specifie4 by the soar4. The cost of such bond or insurance shall be paid by the ~.: 2IIe Boar ..y provide for CGlp8Ds.tion of the secretary- . :;.~12?... + ue.... fo!: hi .ervices. PINANCIAL MATTBRS . Section 1. The fiscal year of the Authority is the calendar year. Section 2. Author i ty funds may be ezpended in accordance with the proced es established by law for statutory cities. Orders, checks d drafts shall be signed by the chairman and . . secretary-treasurer or such other person as may be designate by the Board in its by-laws. Other leqal instruments shal . be executed on behalf of the Authority by the secretary-treasurer. Contracts shall be. let and purchase made in accordance with the procedures established by 1 w for statutory cities. Section 3. The acti vi ties of the Authority shall be . available to it UDder Article XII, from' utions from its ~rs or from other sources, and by contribu ions from members of the Authority if it is deter.min~d by t e Board by a two-thirds vote of all .votes of then existing such contributions are necessary. Such be made by the Board not later than August 1 of eac year in order to obliqate laembers to make contributions d ring the en~uinq calendar year. The total annual contribution by members for the en~u1ng year shall be established e , -9- e by the SOUl! on the basi. to anticipated expencU.tur~. and only if ~be~ti~pated expenditure. are in exces. of the anticipated :~:~. . . funda o~_ to the Autho~ity. The contribution in any year by a ..:lr ahall be in direct proportion to the number of vote. to which the director representing the ___r OIl the. Board is entitled. Such contrib"tionsshall be made by the member to the Authority as follows: One-half on or before Pebruary 1 of . each year anel one-half on or before August 1 of each year. . , . Section 4. An annual budget shall be adopted by the Board at the organizational meeting and at the annual meeting each year. Copies.of the budget shall be mailed promptly to the chief administrative office of each member. 'rhe budget is deemed approved by the members except one who, at any time prior to. . the annual meeting gives notice in writing to the secretary- treasurer that it is withdrawing from the Authority. XI. DURATION AND DISSOLU'l'ION Section 1. The Authority shall exist, and this agreement. is in effect, for an indefinite term until dissolved in accordance with Section 3 of this article. Section 2. A member may withdraw from the Authority by filing a~ritten notice with the secretary-treasurer by June 15 of any year giving notice of withdrawal at the end of that calendar year; and membership shall continue until the effective date of the withdrawal. A notice of withdrawal may be rescinded e . . at. any time by a member. If a member withdraws before dissolu- tion of the Authority, the member shall have no claim on the assets of the Authority. , -10- . .Section 3. e Authority .ball - di..olved "benevertbe withdrawal of a mber reduces total _mbersbip in the Authority e to le..tbaD the umber of members required for organization of ,. . the A1i~l~y unc! r Article VII, Section 2. 'lbe Authority may he dissolved at unanimous vote of all. the -.bers of ~e Board Section 4. rectors. n the event of dissolution, ~e Board shall determine the mea ures necessary to affect the dissolution and shall provide taking of such measures as promptly as circumstances 't, subject to the provisions of this agreement. issolution of the Authority all remaining assets of the Aut ority, after payment of obligations, shal~be distributed among the then existing members in propor~ion t~ the number of the r votes on the Board and in accordanCe with . procedures establ shed by the Board. The Authority shall continue to exist after dissolution for such period, no longer than six months, 5 is necessary to wind up its affairs but for no other purpose. XII. TRANSI IONAL AND MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS he activities of the Authority shall be con- Section 1. fined to.gas and lectric utilities, provided however, that the Authority may ext nd and broaden its activities to any other public utility as defined in this agreement by a 75' majority vote of all the v tes of the Board of Directors, taken at a regular meeting 0 the Board. In the event the activities of the Authority are so extended and broadened, the Authority and e -11- e . it. Board of Director. shall ba.. all of the power. and duties with r.~~~_ to any other public utilit.y that it bas with refe~" ,.. and electric utilities under this agreement.. .-"'<,,,,.- . .. ~... ..\'-~. ~2. fte n_ of the organization created by this agreeJII8Dt. may be changed when de..4 appropriate by the Board, but. only upon a 75' majority vote of all the vous'of the Board of Directors t.aken at. a regular meeting of th~ Board. If the naM of the organization ~s so changed, the Board shall provide in its by-laws for necessary measures to effect the change in official and unofficial documents, papers, and other e..ential respects. Section 3. It is the intention of the parties to this agreement that the organization created thereby is the successor to the Suburban Rate Authority now in existence. It is further the intention of the parties that any funds made available to the organization created by the agreement fram assets of the present Suburban Rate Authority shall be used exclusively for the purposes of this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersiqned governmental unit. has caused this agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officers'and delivered on its behalf. e -12- In the preaeace ofa i!-......: . ~..-.-: ;~. Dated: Piled in the of f ice of day of (Governaental Unit) --, , MINHBSO'rA 8y Its 8y Its , 1990. Mayor Manager , 1990. , this e e e MINUTES OF THE QUARTERLY MEETING OF THE SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY April 18, 1990 Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, meeting of the Suburban Rate Authority was held at Motor Hotel in the City of St. Louis Park, Wednesday, April 18, 1990, commencing at 6:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Robert DeGhetto. the quarterly the Ambassador Minnesota, on 2 . ROLL CALL: Bloomington Brooklyn Park Circle Pines Columbia Heights Deephaven Edina Fridley Maplewood Minnetonka New Brighton Robbinsdale Roseville St. Louis Park Shakopee West St. Paul John G. Pidgeon Graydon R. Boeck James Keinath Edward M. Carlson William D. Schoell John Wallin Mark Wenson Dan Faust Robert DeGhetto David Childs Jerome Ruffenach Steve Gatlin Don Rambow Gloria Vierling William Craig .Also present were Robert Renner of Messerli & Kramer, and Dave Kennedy, Robert Lindal1 and James Strommen of Holmes & Graven, SRA attorneys. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The minutes of the January 17, 1990 meeting were presented for approval. It was moved by Ms. Vierling and seconded by Mr. Schoe11 that the Minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously. 4. OFFICERS' REPORTS: Mr. Wallin presented the Treasurer's report, a copy of which is attached to these minutes. Mr. Craig moved to accept the Treasurer's report. His motion was seconded by Mr. Keinath, and it carried unanimously. 5 . ANNOUNCEMENTS: e a. New Members: Mr. Strommen announced that the City of Woodland had indicated its intent to rejoin the SRA. Mr. Schoell's efforts contributed to the City's decision. 1 b. SRA U iform Electric Franchise: Mr. Strommen ~ reported that Mr. Pu due has been made aware that NSP has been ., providing model fran hise agreements to municipa1i ties that NSP represents are SRA pproved agreements. Upon review, these agreements have been ound to contain provisions not approved by the SRA. Mr. Keinath and Mr. Pidgeon indicated that their cities had also received di ferent versions of the franchise agreement from NSP. Mr. Purdu had brought this to the attention of NSP previously. The pr blem apparently continues to exist. Mr. Boeck moved that co nsel for the SRA write a letter to NSP general counsel raisi g this issue and demanding that there be no further distribution of "SRA approved" agreements unless SRA counsel has reviewed them. Mr. Carlson seconded the motion and it carried unanimous1 . 6. UNFINISHED visor Committee: Mr. Wenson reported that from Fr idley, has been appointed to the dvisory Committee. SRA directors were applications for those posi tions chosen by RA has several member cities represented on c. MWCC A John Flora, director newly formed MWCC encouraged to submit MWCC precinct. The the Committee. a. CSO F Mr. Strommen introduced Robert Renner, attorney and lobbyist for the SRA. Mr. Renner gave a report on the presen .status of the CSO legislation. Mr. Renner reported that the C 0 Funding Bill is presently in conference committee where the rimary issue is who will bear the financial responsibility for a rojected $8,000,000 in annual shortfall due to inflation and fed ra1 funding shortfall. The options range from looking to Minn apolis, St. Paul and South St. Paul users only, to requiring a 1 state taxpayers to pick up the cost. The SRA supports reqiring the three cities to pay on the grounds that they are the cost ca sers. Mr. Renner's estimates show that the shortfall can be made up with a relatively modest increase of $15 - $20 per year per c stomer of the three cities. The prevailing position in the Ie islative conference committee is a 50/50 shar ing between stat taxpayers and users in the three ci ties. Absent adoption of he conference committee position the state taxpayers would bear he full burden. Mr. Renner pointed out that continued opposition to the Minneapolis-St. Paul PCA position on CSO funding may yield limi ted returns to t e SRA. Minneapolis-St. Paul interests are heavily represented in the conference committee, and this funding is part of a large onding bill allowing the funding to escape closer scrutiny. r. Renner opined that SRA examination of potential common gr und wi th Minneapolis, St. Paul, the PCA and/or MWCC on other related issues may net greater gains to SRA communities next legislative session. e 2 e e A discussion ensued following Mr. Renner's departure about the possibility of forming a committee of SRA directors to study the need or benefit to SRA communities of identifying sewer or water treatment related issues of common interest to SRA communities, Minneapolis-St. Paul, the PCA and MWCC. Mr. 'Craig explained that potential existed for cooperative efforts between and among those entities. Mr. Craig moved that such a committee be formed. Ms. Vierling seconded the motion. A friendly amendment was added to authorize the committee to meet with representatives of the above entities. Mr. Craig moved for the amendment. Mr. Schoell seconded and the motion as amended passed unanimously. Chairman DeGhetto selected Mr. Craig, Mr. Schoell, Mr. Boeck as committee members. Ms. Vierling and Mr. Ruffenach also volunteered to serve on the committee. The committee is charged to give a report on its findings at the July SRA meeting. b. Northwestern Bell Update: Mr. Strommen reported that the Commission has tabled its hearing on a Tier System investigation until the Commission has decided whether to accept or reject Bell's incentive regulation plan. The Commission must make a decision on the incentive plan by June 8. This delay was precipitated by the SRA raised issue of separating the rate design issues from any approval of an incentive plan. The Commission has adopted a position consistent with the SRA argument. Mr. Strommen further reported on the incentive regulation plan proceeding. Briefs are due April 23, oral argument will be held May 14 and a decision made by June 8. Mr. Strommen indicated that the SRA had made a specific proposal calling for a ratioed sharing of revenue returns under the Plan, according to geographic location of the customer. This proposal equalizes the benefit received by outer tier customers as compared with Tier I and outstate customers. There is no indication as yet as to whether the Commission will adopt this proposal, or some version thereof. The Board also agreed to adopt a position supporting a cap on Bell return on equity during the planned period, if the Commission approves the plan. This motion was brought by Ms. Vierling, seconded by Mr. Pidgeon and carried unanimously. The Board also authorized SRA counsel to support a minimum of 50% sharing, with increasing return to ratepayers as Bell's return on equity increases. SRA counsel also has authority to suggest inverted payer-Shareholder sharing as an alternative. c. NSP General Rate Case: Mr. Purdue had submitted a memorandum reporting on the present status of NSP's $135,000,000 revenue petition. This constitutes a request of 13.25% return on common equity. Mr. Purdue indicated that the SRA will take its traditional position supporting the municipal pumping group, oppose street lighting rate increases and take affirmative 3 positions on various other issues. The Commission is statutorily required to decide 0 this rate case by September 2, 1990. d. EPA- CC-MPCA Issues: Mr. Lindall reported on activity in the dis ute between the EPA, MPCA and MWCC regarding restr ictions to be imposed upon the MWCC in its new national pollutant discharge elimination system permit for the Metro Wastewater Treatment plant. The EPA has threatened to withdraw the MPCA' s authorit to regulate the MWCC. If stringent EPA standards are impos d the cost to the metropolitan rate payers could greatly incr ase due to the probable need for over $100,000,000 in ne facilities. Mr. Lindall, and other SRA representatives, att nded a March 26, 1990 MWCC breakfast at the Sheraton-Midway. Th's breakfast was called by the MWCC expressly for the SRA. At t e breakfast Mr. Voss expressed his concern about the cost of . mp1ementing present EPA requirements. Mr. Voss was open t the possibility of greater MWCC-SRA communication and i volvement on this and other issues. Mr. Schoe1l moved that the SRA continue monitoring MWCC-EPA issues and that such monit ring be coordinated with the efforts of the newly formed CSO Fu ding Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Childs and passe unanimously. e. Membe value of the SRA Vierling moved and counsel to prepare accomplishments. Th and sent to nonmembe shi: There was discussion regarding the nd the need for additional members. Ms. r. Gatlin seconded a motion authorizing SRA letter and short summary of SRA purpose and letter would be signed by Chairman DeGhetto suburban cities. 7. S: Mr. Strommen and Mr. Wallin presented a proposed 1991 budge , attached to these Minutes. The proposed budget is to be dis ussed with the SRA member cities. The Board will take formal ction on the proposed budget at the July meeting. After re iew and discussion there were no suggested modifications to the budget. 8. CLAIMS: r. Purdue of Messerli & Kramer submitted a bill for his servic s to date in the amount of $11,320.29. Mr. Renner of Messerli & Kramer presented a bill for his services totalling $6,461.45 Mr. Strommen submitted a bill totalling $11,110.65 for services rendered by the Holmes & Graven law firm. Mr. Faust moved that the claims be paid as presented. Mr. Wenson seconded that motion and it carried unanimously. : Mr. Boeck moved that the meeting be idgeon seconded the motion which passed hair declared the meeting adjourned. Next b held July 18, 1990. 9 . ADJOURNMEN adjourned. Mr. unanimously. The regular meeting to 4. e e e e Attest: Secretary Attachments: Treasurer's Report Proposed 1991 Budget 5 Chairman RESOLUTION NO. BBSOLUTIO AUTHORIZING PARTICIPATION IN THE SUBURBAN RA TE A UTHORITY; DIRECTING THE BDCUTION AND DELIVERY OF A JOINT POWERS ; AND DBSIGNATlNG A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE CITY S ITS MEMBER ON THE BOARD OF THE SUBURBAN ATE AUTHORITY. e is authorized by Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.59 to enter into join and cooperative agreements with other governmental units, and WHEREAS, the Ci Council has determined that the City cooperate with other municipalities in the m nitoring of utility services in the Metropolftan Area by participating in the Subu ban Rate Authority, and WHEREAS, the Ci y is presently a member ot the Suburban Rate Authority establfshed by joint agr ement in 1962 to administer the regulatory provisions of uniCorm franchises grant d to Minneapolis Gas Company, and WHEREAS, the Ci y Council has determined that it is necessary and desirable that Authority continue in existence, notwithstanding the tory powers by the State, for the purpose of monitoring assumption ot utility r utility services and parti ipating to the maximum degree possible in the utility rate- making procedure, and at the Suburban Rate Authority's scope of activities can be broadened to include electric utilities and other utilities it necessary. NOW, THEREFOR , BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of . 1. Minnesota, as follows: (Clerk, Manager) are authorized and directed to execute the attached Joint and Coop rative Agreement providing for membership of the City in the Suburban Rate Autho ity. e 1 e e 2. In accordance with the provision. of the Joint and Cooperative Agreement, the councll bereby deslpates as Its first director on the Board of DIrectors of the SubUrban Rate Authority. Passed and adopted this day of April, 1990. Attest: City Clerk 2 Mayor @ May 18, 1990 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 I I 612 222-8423 Dear Mayor and Staff: On behalf of the Board and staff of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission, we would like to invite you to attend one of our annual Budget Breakfast meetings where we would seek your comments on our proposed 1991 Budget. This year we are planning the continental breakfast meetings in convenient "regional" locations and anticipate that they will draw from several MWCC Precincts. 'The schedule for the 1990 breakfasts is as follows: JUNE 8 - 7:30 A.M. HOLIDAY INN ROSEVILLE 2540 Cleveland Avenue (35E & Cleveland - West of Rosedale) JUNE 11 - 7:30 A.M. RADISSON SOUTH, Bloomington 7800 Normandale Blvd. (I494 & Hwy 100) JUNE 18 - 7:30 A.M. SHERATON-MIDWAY I94 & Hamline Ave, st. Paul When the MWCC held its pre-budget breakfast meetings in March we agreed to provide attendees with a summary of the questions which were raised by the cities' representatives. We have enclosed a synopsis of those questions and MWCC responses. The Commission thanks all those who attended and gave us their input on the proposed 1991 budget. It is very helpful to us to have your comments as we prepare the Commission's budget. We know and understand that wastewater treatment is a major cost in your city's budget and we are anxious to provide our system users with effective treatment at a reasonable cost to everyone. Please plan to meet with us again at one of the scheduled breakfasts for continuing dialogue on our proposed budget. For reservations, please call Eunice at 229-2110. The final opportunity to comment will be at the Commission meeting on July 17, 1990, at Mears Park Centre. sincerely, ~ SiZ7~ Paul McCarron Chair, strategic Planning Committee It Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer ~0 ~'( 2. 6 199() I -- opportunities or cities to be involved in the process. - standards a d regulations: Many of the cities, the SRA, and the i dustrial users expressed an interest in lobbying offic'als at the state and federal level for more workable wastewater treatment standards. They requested more background information in order be able to understand he proposed rules and how they could help impact the fin 1 rules. - community i volvement: It was suggested that MWCC could make gre ter use of various city staff. The General A visory Commi ttee was created to study issues direct d to them from the strategic Planning Committee an make recommendations back to that committee. T e composition of the GAC is as. follows: eight members representing municipal staffs from the 8 MWCC precincts, eight elected municipal officials, four representative from industry, four representatives from environmental rganizations, and one member representing disadvantaged enior citizens. At this time, there are still some pos'tions available on the GAC. comment2 I e @ e Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55101 612 222-8423 May 18, 1990 Mr. Wally Abrahamson Mayor City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor Abrahamson: The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission is undertaking a systemwide evaluation of Infiltrationl Inflow (III) of clear water into the wastewater collection system of the Metropolitan Disposal System. The first part of this study will quantify the volumes and rates of III in both the metropolitan interceptor sewers and local sewer systems, and will then examine the resulting effects of III on Commission facilities. The second part of the study will evaluate the feasibility of implementing a system of incentives and disincentives to encourage III reduction. Please note that this study is not a repeat of the III studies performed by individual communities in the early 1980s, as part of the Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) construction grant program. We will focus on the systemwide impacts of III on wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities, rather than site-specific quantification of wet weather flows. We will approach III control from the perspective of long-term benefits such as improved system operation and reductions in capital expenditures for expansions. The ultimate goal of this study is to develop a program to encourage III reduction to minimize wastewater conveyance and treatment costs. Because of the importance of this study to local communities and the region, we are requesting your input as we develop the III evaluation. The first formal opportunity to participate in our study will be at informational meetings to be held at various locations throughout the metropolitan area. The purpose of the meetings is to provide to you more detail about proposed methodologies and the goals and objectives of the study. We will also ask for your comments and answer any questions. Please see the attached schedule of times and locations for these informational meetings. We encourage you to attend one of the meetings and appreciate your assistance as we work on this very important study. If you cannot attend and are interested in participating in the study, please contact: Mary Richardson, Richardson, Richter and Associates, at 334-3210; or Wayne Rikala, Project Manager, MWCC, at 229-2127. Very truly yours, Gc~ d, LJ~ Gordon Voss Chief Administrator e GLT968/034.51 Attachment cc: Lurline Baker-Kent, Chair, MWCC Judy Fletcher, MWCC Commissioner Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer ~G) Date June 18 June 19 June 20 June 20 June 21 GL T968/035.51 Metropolitan Waste Control Commission SJ stemwide III Evaluation-Meeting Schedule e Time 2 30 - 4:30 p.m. 2 30 - 4:30 p.m. 2 30 - 4:30 p.m. 7.00 - 9:00 p.m. 2 :30 - 4:30 p.m. Location Dakota County Library-Wescott 1340 Wescott Road Eagan, Minnesota 55123 Public Meeting Room Hennepin Technical College-Eden Prairie Campus 9200 Flying Cloud Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 Room HU7 and HU8 White Bear Lake Police Station 4700 Miller Avenue White Bear Lake, Minnesota 55110 Old City Council Chambers City of Falcon Heights 2077 West Larpenter Avenue Falcon Heights, Minnesota 55113 City Council Chambers Brooklyn Center Civic Center Community Center 6301 Shingle Creek Parkway Brooklyn Center, Minnesota 55430 Constitution Hall - AAA Fyr cc-- AlA en METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mean Park Centre, 230 &w Fifth Street. Sr. Paul, MN. 55101 612291-6359 May 11, 1990 Allen E. Dye Project Manager Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street Sl. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Stillwater Wastewater Treatment Plant Expansion Metropolitan Waste Control Commission Project No. 865300 Plans & Specifications Metropolitan Council Referral File No. 15123-1 Dear Mr.Dye: At its meeting on May 10, 1990, the Metropolitan Council considered the plans and specifications for the expansion of the Stillwater wastewater treatment plant. This consideration was based on the following report from the Consent List which was adopted by the CounCil: The Metropolitan Waste Control Commission has submitted the plans and specifications for the expansion of the Stillwater wastewater treatment plant. The project consists of modifications to the administration building, aeration building and secondary clarifiers, new preliminary treatment building, primary clarifiers, aeration basins, secondary clarifiers, blower/chemical building, chlorine contact basin, disinfection building and sludge handling facilities. This facility is a secondary treatment plant with phosphorous removal. The effluent is discharged to the St. Croix River. The facility is being expanded from 3.0 million gallons per day (mgd) to 4.5 mgd to accommodate additional growth in the service area as well as facilitate the elimination of the Bayport wastewater treatment plant. This project is in accordance with the Water Resources Management Development GuidelPolicv Plan and the approved Implementation Plan. The estimated cost of this facility is $16.25 million. ;r4~ Steve Keefe Chair SK:lv _ Attachment cc: Steven Russell, Director Community Development, City of Stillwater Jack Frost, Metropolitan Council Staff e e .. STILLWATER PUBLIC LIBRARY 223 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 BOARD OF TRUSTEES MINUTES MAY 7, 1990 ,. The regular monthly meeting of the Stillwater Public Library Board of Trustees was held on Monday, May 7, 1990. Present: Anderson, Cass, Doe, Engebretson, Hansen, Ka1inoff, We1shons and Berta1mio. 1. The meeting was called to order at 6:36 P.M. by President Hansen. 2. The agenda was adopted as printed. m./s./p. 3. The minutes were adopted as corrected (addition of "will be explored" to Special Projects Committee report). m./s./p. 4. Received letter from group concerned about proposed Video Check-out policy. President Hansen will deal with this matter. 5. Payment of bills in the amount of $7,571.49 was approved. m. / s. /p. 6. Committee Reports - Administration - will meet to discuss the Sexual Harrassment Policy. Budget & Finance - no report. Building & Grounds - discussed grounds renovation and Master Gardeners event on May 22. Public Relations - discussion on brochure and book bag. Special Projects - report on display case, discussion on Lumberjack Days Parade. WCL Liaison Report - no report. 7 . OLD A. B. BUSINESS - Adult Programming Proposal - work continues. Human Sexuality Awareness Coalition Video Project - Proposal has been submitted. Summer Hours - The Library will maintain winter hours year around. C. 8. NEW BUSINESS - A. Children's Librarian Vacancy - adopted job description revisions as suggested by the Director. B. Farewell parties for Carol Belanger: May 18 - Board/Staff at the library May 23 - reception in the Children's Area. C. Acknowledgment of Lynne's honor as the 1990 Jaycee "Young Person of the Year." e e .. Minutes, 5/7/90 Page 2 9. President's Report - given. 10. Director's and other staff reports - received. 11. Programming Report - 807 catalog checks were handled by the Reference staff that the public could have handled themselves if the Library had a current, up to date r catalog. 12. Adjournment - 8:20 P.M. m./s./p. Submitted: Jane Dickinson Cass Secretary, pro tem e e r i1lwater ~ ~ THE-;-;RTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA ~ May 24, 1990 TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL DEPARTMENT HEADS MARY LOU JOHNSON, CITY CLERK FOOD SHELF DRIVE FROM: SUBJECT: This is an update on the Foodshelf. During the week of May 14, Press-On collected the food donated by businesses and then turned it over to the Washington County Foodshelf. On the afternoon of May 24, representatives from the various businesses gathered at Press On for the award of the traveling trophy and drawing for the balloon ride or night at Fantasy Suites. The trophy was awarded to First State Bank of Bayport who collected 31.32 lbs. of food per employee. Stillwater collected approximately 4.00 lbs. per employee. The winner of the drawing was an employee of Lakeview Memorial Hospital. Thanks for your participation. We are all winners for helping the area food shelves. CITY HALL: 216 NORTH FOURTH STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 PHONE: 612-439-6121 "'f 1 .'! ./~-/1 ..- .' .r e ~ V.'A? Minnesota Pollution Control Agency rS 520 Lafayette Road, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55155 'C~ Telephone (612) 296-6300 MINNESOTA 1990 June 1, 1990 The Honorable Yallace L. Abrahamson Mayor, City of Stillwater Ci ty Hall Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Mayor Abrahamson: RE: Stillwater Yastewater Treatment Facility NPDES Permit No. MN 0029998 The purpose of this letter is to inform you of discussion which took place in a meeting on May 30, 1990, among representatives of the city of Stillwater, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), the Metropolitan Council, and the. Metropolitan Yaste Control Commission (MYCC). The MPCA has been informed of several instances of bypassing which have occurred at the Stillwater Yastewater Treatment Facility from April 1989 through March 1990. During this time five bypasses occurred in which amounts of wastewater ranging from 116,000 to 550,000 gallons received only partial treatment following storm events. The bypassed volumes did receive primary treatment and disinfection. However, the MPCAis concerned whenever bypassing of this volume and frequency occurs. The MPCA staff believes you should be aware of this situation. It is possible that the current condition of sewers in the city of Stillwater is impacting the Stillwater Yastewater Treatment Facility following storm events. This situation is of sufficient concern to the MPCA staff that current and future requests for sanitary sewer extension permits may be delayed. Ye encourage the city of Stillwater to take appropriate steps to alleviate this situation as soon as reasonably possible. Ye understand that the city of Stillwater has under consideration the implementation of its Downtown Plan which includes sewer repair and/or replacement. The MPCA would like to be informed of the status of this implementation following relevant public meetings which we understand are scheduled in the month of June. e Regional Offices: Duluth. Brainerd. Detroit Lakes. Marshall. Rochester Equal Opportunity Employer Printed on Recycled Paper ":'~r'''' ,.r... I tv .-~' ! I The Honorable Vallace L. Abrahamson Page 2 If you have any quest'ons on this matter, please call Cynthia Kahrmann at (612) 296-7315. Sincerely, ~ Gerald L. TJillet Commissioner GLTJ/jmg ~ cc:Mr. StephenS. R ssell, Community Development Director, City of Stillwater Mr. Gordon O. Vo s, Chief Administrator, Metropolitan Vaste Control Commission Mr. Steve Keefe, Metropolitan Council Chair '\ " e e n~ ~~ ~ e ~-~" .......""" .(, METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Mears Park Centre, 230 East Fifth Slreet, SI. Paul, MN. 55101 612291-6359 May 31, 1990 The Honorable Wallace Abrahamson Mayor, City of Stillwater 216 N. 4th St. Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mayor Abrahamson: Yesterday my staff met with Steve Russell, Stillwater Community Development Director, Dick Moore, the city's consulting engineer, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission (MWCC) staff to discuss Stillwater's initiatives regarding infiltration/inflow removal from the city's collection system. As you may be aware, the MWCC was required to bypass portions of its treatment process at the Stillwater treatment plant several times last fall and earlier this year because of flows exceeding plant capacity. In addition, the plant failed to meet its effluent standards for removal of organics because the influent concentrations were extremely diluted due to infiltration/inflow. Based on these instances, the MPCA has been concerned about approving any further sewer extensions in the city. As was indicated at this meeting, in June of this year Stillwater will be considering Phase I of its downtown plan which deals with infrastructure improvements in the downtown area. Mr. Moore indicated that these improvements should remove 0.207 million gallons of clear water per day on the average, and more during peak rainfall events. These improvements will assuredly help in relieving the capacity problems and effluent limitations at the treatment plant. In addition, the city of Stillwater should realize a significant savings in sewer charges from the MWCC because of removal of this clear water. These savings will increase over time because of the escalation in the MWCC's future sewer rates. I would strongly recommend that Stillwater approve this phase of its downtown plan. If the city needs any further clarification regarding this matter, please let me know. Sincerely, S~/Lf- Steve Keefe Chair cc: Steve Russell, Stillwater Community Development Director e ~ ,. TENNESSEN ASSOCIATES, INC. Industrial/Management Consultants e 3200 EAST 51st STREET. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55417 612-729-0595 June 4, 1990 Nile L. Kriesel City of stillwater City Hall 216 North Fourth street Stillwater, Minnesota 55082 Dear Mr. Kriesel: Attached is our proposal and cost estimate to conduct a Staff and Facility Planning Study for your firm. Projected cost reflects our estimate of hours required to do a thorough analysis and design. Cost is based upon our understanding that the city of stillwater will provide data and direction for development of the master plan with internal resources. For example, selection of any special fire department equipment, if needed, will be made by the City management team. Consultant will assist in compiling information. The same understanding applies to development of estimated revenue forecasts. It is assumed that the city will provide projected revenues for period covered by the study. City will also develop a plan for obtaining sources of funding. Consultant will use revenue forecast to assist in planning of remodeling or construction schedules. Nile, if skills related to development of a master plan, revenue forecasts, privatization analysis or other areas, need to be included, please let us know. These resources are available and can be added to the team. Thank you for this opportunity to offer our services. I am confident that this proposal will be successful in meeting your present and future needs, and I look forward to working with you. Sincerely, //~/~_ r. ~m~s ~~essen President e JVT:ypn EFFECTIVE PLANNING TO HELP YOUR BUSINESS PROFIT e STAFFING AND FACILITY PLANNING STUDY FOR CITY OF STILLWATER TENNESSEN ASSOCIATES, INC. Industrial/Management Consultants JUNE 1990 e e staffing and Facility . Planning study Prepared for: City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth street stillwater, Minnesota 55082 By: TENNESSEN ASSOCIATES, INC. Industrial/Management Consultants 3200 East 51st street Minneapolis, MN 55417 612-729-0595 e e TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SCOPE OF STUDY A. Objective B. Project Parameters II. BASIC SERVICES A. Review Project Parameters B. Develop Master Plan C. Develop Planned Operating Processes D. Develop Office Space E. Develop Operations and Maintenance Shop Space F. Develop Operations and Maintenance Storage Space G. Develop Relationship Chart H. Approve Final Space Requirements I. Develop Facility Configurations J. Develop Final Report III. COMPENSATION A. Basic Services Costs B. Reimbursable Expenses C. Billable Hourly Rates IV. HOURLY BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT PHASE V. PROJECT TEAM VI. REFERENCES e VII. PROJECT DRAWINGS e I. SCOPE OF STUDY - e e I. SCOPE OF STUDY A. Obiective Study objectives are to: Determine projected office, operations and storage space needs for Administration/Finance, Public Safety, Public Works, Parks and Community Development. Develop comparison of projected space needs for each department with current available space. Identify expansion options: alternative methods of facility configurations for. 'meeting projected office, operations and storage needs of involved departments. B. Project Parameters Client will provide proj ected demographic and growth data of the City for development of Master Plan. Master Plan will be utilized to identify projected 5, 10 and 15 year staffing and space requirements. Blue prints of current buildings .will be provided by client. Project approach will be based upon active participation by client; therefore, client should assign key management and operating people to work with consultant. Two revisions will be made by consultant to detailed layouts proposed to client. Client will develop detailed layouts for three (3) facilities. Current staffing and space for each department will be documented by client before start of study. Study will cover approximately 70 people and 75,000 square feet. Client will document space before start of study. Current staffing and space for each department will be documented by client before start of study. Consultant will develop a total of five (5) process 1 e workflow charts for planned operating processes to provide productivity and quality improvements. Client will provide data and direction for development of Master Plan and revenue forecast with internal resources. Remodeling and construction cost estimates for planned space will be provided by client's architect. e 2 - II. BASIC SERVICES e e II. BASIC SERVICES A. Review proiect Parameters A meeting will be held so that consultant can details of proposal with management and representatives, to insure complete understanding staffing and facility planning study before start study activities. review staff of the of any B. Develop Master Plan Consultant will meet with client management team to assist in gathering data for development of a Master Plan, which will document proj ected demographics and growth of the City. Developed Master Plan will be the basis for consultant development of projected space and staffing needs. Upon completion of Master Plan, client and consultant will identify workload factors that reflect department staffing and throughput requirements. Consultant will provide collection forms for development of projected workload factors, such as: numbers of people serviced, monthly billings, payments processed, meters monitored, vehicles repaired, streets and parks maintained, neighborhoods patrolled, fire stations supported, programs initiated and coordinated, and record files maintained. Frequencies of workload factors will also be documented. Completed forms will be reviewed by consultant for completeness. Reviewed sheets will be entered into a data base to generate projected workload volumes. Summary of projected workload volumes will be presented to client for review and approval. Approved workload frequencies and volumes will be utilized by consultant after development of planned operating processes to project staffing and facility requirements. C. Develo~ Planned Qperatinq Processes e Consultant will interview management and operating personnel to develop work flow diagrams to document major flows of work and communications in office, operations and storage processes for the various departments. Developed flow diagrams will be presented to client for review and approval. 3 e Client and consultant will review work flow diagrams and select five (5) that will be developed into detailed process flow charts. Completed process flow charts will provide detailed record of all relevant acti vi ty in an orderly manner. Charts will identify each activity, who performs the activity, and required forms and equipment. Completed process flow charts will be reviewed with management team to identify potential areas for improvements, including bottlenecks, time consuming activities, costly processes, activities with high customer impact and processes that involve duplicate efforts. During review each detail on the process flow chart will be challenged for possible elimination. Remaining activities will be evaluated for possible combination with other activities, movement to different department or person, change in sequence, simplification or automation. Consultant will redraw process flow chart to reflect recommendations approved by the management team. Planned processes will be compared to those utilized or planned to be implemented at other cities of comparable size. Completed process charts will be the basis for development of staffing and work space requirements for the departments. D. Develop Office Space A master list of personnel classification by department-- Administration/Finance, Public Safety, Public Works, Parks and Community Development--will be developed. Standardized survey forms will be distributed to office personnel for their documentation of employee work stations, department requirements, and any other special needs based upon planned processes. Survey sheets will be reviewed by consultant for appropriateness based upon planned processes and discussed with client. Changes, if appropriate, will be made before client enters data into a software data base to document employee and department space requirements. Prototypal work stations (identifying individual work station components) will be developed for selected categories of clerical and supervisory personnel. In addition, department equipment and related support space will be recorded. e 4 e Total square foot requirements, based upon individual workstation needs and department support and circulation space, will be identified for each department. Based upon department employee projections, employee support requirements (lunchrooms, conference and meeting rooms, lockers, showers, break rooms and restrooms) and facility support requirements (electrical and mechanical rooms) will be documented. Summary of findings and recommendations will be presented to client for review and approval. Planned standards will be compared to those utilized or planned to be implemented at other cities of comparable size. E. Develop Operations and Maintenance Shop Space A master list of involved operations and maintenance work center such as Equipment Maintenance, Sewer, Street and Parks will be developed. Interviews will identify existing and planned equipment and work space needs based upon the planned processes. Total square foot requirements for each work center will be developed. Besides planned processes, requirements will be based upon planned workloads volumes, repair volumes, equipment needs, staging space, circulation space, and material handling aisles. Required vehicle and equipment storage, both internal and yard, will be documented. Resu1 ts will be presented to management for review and approval. Planned spaces will be compared to those utilized or planned to be implemented at other cities of comparable size. F. Develop Operations and Maintenance Storage Space e Client and consultant will identify the number of line items of material that must be stored in each department. Consultant will physically measure a percentage of line items, record planned inventory levels, and identify weight and other special storage requirements for each line item. Information will be entered by consultant into an inventory software package to identify cubic requirements for stored line items by family classification. Information from study will be extrapolated to determine number of racks and shelves needed to meet planned inventory needs for the various departments. 5 e Material handling equipment required for storage-- receiving, transporting, storing and picking--will be selected. Equipment will be selected to reduce space requirements and increase cube utilization, operating and throughput levels and level of service to customer. Planned storage spaces will be compared to those utilized or planned to be implemented at other cities of comparable size. G. Develop Relationship Chart Master relationship charts for involved department will be developed by consultant. Consultant will also develop master relationship charts for work centers within departments. Charts will be distributed to selected management and operating personnel for ranking of spatial relationships between departments and for ranking of spatial relationships of work centers within departments. Completed relationship charts will be reviewed by consultant for inconsistencies on rankings. Follow-up interviews will be conducted when appropriate to discuss inconsistencies and reach agreement on rankings. Final relationship charts with specific rankings will be prepared and presented to management for review and approval. Approved charts with identified spatial relationships will be used for development of facility configurations needed to satisfy projected space needs. H. Approve Final Space Requirements A meeting will be held so that client can review and approve projected space requirements for office, operations and storage for the involved departments. Identified square foot requirements will reflect study findings, recommendations, developed process flow charts, spatial relationships, office, operations and storage needs and projected workload volumes. comparison of projected space requirements versus existing space utilized by individual departments will be provided for client information and review. e 6 e I. Develop Facilitv Confiqurations Block layouts for proposed facility configurations will be developed on Computer Aided Design (CAD) system to provide overall conceptual understanding of remodeling or expansion requirements of existing facilities. option will include development of a new site if required. Layouts will illustrate relative department size and spatial relationships of departments within planned facilities. Proposed facility configurations will be presented to client for review and approval. Any questions by client will be researched and necessary adjustments made to facility configurations before development of design and construction cost estimates by selected architectural/engineering firm. Design and construction cost estimates will be prepared for each remodeling or expansion alternative. Cost estimates will be presented to client for review and approval. After client review of projected city revenues, client will select desired remodeling or expansion option. Upon selection of remodeling or expansion by client, consultant will begin detailed layout of facilities. Detailed layouts will show location of the various office (desks, files, conference tables, mail equipment and reception furniture), work shops, and storage (racks, shelves, staging spaces, and receiving) areas. Detailed layout for three (3) facilities will be presented to management team for review. Client's questions will be researched and necessary adjustments made before second presentation. Changes requested by client during second review will be documented. Consultant will make appropriate changes to drawings before presentation of drawings for third review. J. Develop Final Report Findings, recommendations, projected service volumes, work flow diagrams, process flow charts, remodeling or expansion options, preliminary design and construction costs, timing of improvements or construction based on revenue availability, individual department square foot requirements and staffing plans and city master plan will be identified. e Report will be submitted to client for review and approval. Changes will be made based upon client requests. 7 e III. COMPENSATION e e e III. COMPENSATION A. Basic Services For management planning services rendered, consultant will be compensated on a fee schedule based upon work effort expended. Estimated cost for basic services is $38,700. B. Reimbursable Expenses Reimbursement expenses include actual expenditures for the project, such as cost of reproduction of documents, postage, automobile travel at $.22 per mile, long distance telephone calls, meals and lodging, data processing and other expenses as authorized by client. Total estimated cost for reimbursable expenses is $3,900. C. Billable Hourly Rates Principal Consultant Systems Analyst Project Leader Project Analyst Data Processing Operator Computer Processing $65.00/hour $55.00/hour $50.00/hour $40.00/hour $35.00/hour $15.00/hour 8 e IV. HOURLY BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT PHASE e e e HOURLY BREAKDOWN BY PROJECT PHASE PHASES A: Review Project Parameters B: Develop Master Plan C: Develop Planned Operating Processes D: Develop Office Space E: Develop Operations and Maintenance Shop Space F: Develop Operations and Maintenance Storage Space G: Develop Relationship Chart H: Approve Final Space Requirements I: Develop Facility Configurations J: Develop Final Report Total 9 HOURS 16 58 119 48 67 77 23 22 234 64 724 e V. PROJECT TEAM e e JAMES V. TENNESSEN PROJECT CONTRIBUTION: Jim Tennessen has over twenty years of experience with military, insurance, utilities, manufacturing, printing, graphic arts, medical, 'government and service organizations. . ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND: Jim has a B.A. in Economics, an M.B.A. in Business Administration, and an M.S. in Management. His professional associations include the International Facility Management Association and Institute of Industrial Engineers. EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND: At Ellerbe, Jim conducted long-term space planning studies. At State of Minnesota, he conducted data processing studies. In united States Air Force, he directed development of manning standards. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: Designed 155,000 square foot warehouse and yard storage facility, including 40,000 warehouse storage, 83,000 yard storage, and 32,000 for line crew truck. staging for a municipal utility. Study improved oper~ting efficiency and provided move plan. . . . Designed 9,500 square foot warehouse and 22,000 square foot vehicle staging area for rural electrical cooperative. Study consolidated service facili ty and integrated operating processes. . Designed 31,000 square foot warehouse for an public utility. Study improved operating efficiencies and consolidated storage. . Developed Strategic Analysis and Relocation proposal for a national hardware manufacturing company to document rationale and justification for moving 450,000 square foot facility to another location. e . . Designed 75,000 square foot assembly, warehouse and testing facility and planned 95,000 square foot office and related support services area for manufacturing company. 10 e GARY T. WATKINS PROJECT CONTRIBUTION: Gary Watkins has a comprehensive 20 year background in manufacturi~g and industrial engineering studies, including work measurement, work simplification, facility planning, plant and office layout, software development, project management, asset inventories, and remodeling and new construction projects. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND: Gary has a B. S. in Manufacturing Engineering. He is member of International Facility Management Association and American Institute of Industrial Engineers. EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND Gary was purchasing and facility manager at Watkins Pattern Co. As president of Furniture & Equipment Inventories, Inc., he co-developed the ZebraScan Barcoded Inventory System. At Graco, Inc., Gary conducted work measurement studies and developed plant layouts. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: . Provided facility engineering, construction coordination and management services for a variety of office and manufacturing remodeling and new construction projects. . Designed 138,000 square foot for firm specializing in aerospace industry. Provided space planning, facility layout, material handling engineering and construction coordination. . Provided space planning, facility layout and construction coordination services for recycler of high quality paper products. . Developed sophisticated PC based barcoded furniture and equipment inventory, move planning and asset management system. Provides inventory, planning and management services for clients around the country. e . Conducted inventories of up to 650,000 sq. ft. for major clients throughout the United States. 11 e PERRY D. JOHNSON PROJECT CONTRIBUTION: Perry has 13 years experience in consul ting , proj ect management and ongoing facilities administration. working with facilities departments, architects and engineers, he has provided consulting services for insurance, medical, educational, manufacturing, and computer industries. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND: Perry has participated in numerous seminars related to workplace management, long range strategic planning, facilities forecasting, budgeting and cost justification. He is a charter member of the International Facility Managers Association (IFMA). EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND: At Control Data, Perry was responsible for fit-up of two facilities and managed facilities that contained approximately 250,000 sq. ft. of space. At Lee Data Corporation, he was responsible for construction of the 250,000 sq. ft. headquarters facility, and created the facilities department. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: . Developed and implemented several facility management tools and programs including On-Site Facility Evaluations, Master Facility Planning, PC based software for monitoring costs and measuring performance. . Project manager for construction and fit-up of facilities totaling more than 450,000 sq. ft. and several hundred projects inVOlving remodeling, renovation, and relocation. . Developed and implemented procedures for comparing and effective product or service. comprehensive bidding selecting most cost . Established several facilities policies and procedures with a focus on pro-active facility Management and improving the quality of facilities services. e . Through creative and innovative management, saved corporation more than $650,000 in cost reductions and cost avoidance over a four-year period. 12 e ROBERT J. ZEMAN PROJECT CONTRIBUTION: Bob Zeman is an experienced project manager with knowledge of facility maintenance and facility layout. He has more than 20 years experience in methods and procedures studies, layout development and relocation planning. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND: Robert studied Engineering Technology at st. Cloud State College and has attended numerous Plant Layout Seminars. Professional associations include membership in the American Institute of Industrial Engineers and Material Handling Society. EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND At Farm Credit Services, Bob directed all maintenance, housekeeping, construction and security operations. At Tennant Company, Bob conducted plant layout and engineering studies. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: . Developed 1,500 square foot office layout and processes and workstations for 2 , 500 square foot. test lab in existing facility for a supplier to electrical companies. . Designed 9,500 square foot warehouse and 22,000 square foot vehicle staging area for a rural electrical cooperative. Study consolidated service facility, integrated operating processes and increased cube utilization. e . Designed 31,000 square foot warehouse for 10,000 inventory line items for an public utility. Study improved operating efficiencies, consolidated storage and improved space utilization. . Designed 68,843 square foot manUfacturing facility with manufacturing, warehouse, employee and facility support space for a manufacturer of vinyl products. Proj ect improved workflow, consolidated manufacturing space, reduced work-in-process material, increased throughput capacity, increased cube utilization and improved long- range planning. 13 e JOHN J. ULRICK PROJECT CONTRIBUTION John Ulrick has twenty years of data processing experience in application design, programming, and technical and' customer support, using large mainframe systems and mini-computers at major local firms. As a programmer and consultant, he currently focuses on personal computers as a business tool. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND John studied accounting and economics at North Iowa Community College, Mason City, and has a Certificate of Data Processing. He is a member of the Independent Computer Consultants Association. EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND As programming manager at I.C. System Inc., John established the Information Center. He established the Business Programming Department at National Computer Systems, and, at International Multifoods corporation, designed order processing and sales reporting systems. At Control Data, he programmed financial data. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: . Analyzed needs of many small businesses, helped develop PC based systems for controlling their administrative requirements, provided daily technical assistance and support to update and keep the systems running and continues to develop new programs for the companies. . Implemented complete corporate accounting system, order processing and sales reporting systems and manufacturing control system for small manufacturing firm. . Analyzed workflow requirements for a dental company and identif ied management control requirements needed to accomplish daily activities. Designed programs to meet operating requirements. e . Developed warehouse inventory configuration analysis program for identification of racking and shelving requirements by inventory family. 14 e DAVID A. JORDANI PROJECT CONTRIBUTION: As a CAD specialist, David Jordani assists clients in selection of office automation and computer aided design and facility management systems. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND: David has a B.S. in Mathematics and Architecture and a Masters Degree in Architecture, and is a registered architect in Illinois. He is past chairman of the American Institute of Architects (AlA) National Committee on Computers and of the Computers in Architecture Committee for the Minneapolis Chapt~r, AlA. EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND: David is president of David A. Jordani & Associates (DAJA), a Minneapolis based independent consulting firm. At Ellerbe, David was responsible for planning, direction, and implementation of computer aided design systems. He taught design methods at the university of Illinois. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: . Performed major CADD impl~mentation study for systems used to support master planning, design, and construction. Prepared Implementation Plan that defined training and standards requirements. . complete analysis of automation needs for organization that manages 5400 facilities. Results of analysis led to development of system requirements for computer Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) and Office Automation (OA). . Analyzed automation needs for facilities planning group that manages one million square feet of administrative and support space for more than 3,500 employees. Developed benchmark test to evaluate Facility Management, CADD, and file management features of prospective vendors. . Evaluated current use of automation. Study focussed on project control systems, office automation, computer aided design systems, and network implementation, and included development of a management plan, systems acquisition strategy, cost analysis and schedule. e 15 e BRIAN P. LITTLE PROJECT CONTRIBUTION: Brian Little has 21 years industrial engineering consulting experience designing and implementing productivity and quality systems for manufacturing firms. ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND: Brian has a Bachelor of Science degree from Drexel University. He is a Certified Management Consultant (CMC) and is a member of the Institute of Management Consultants, Association of Managing Consultants, Institute of Industrial Engineers, and American Management Association. PROJECT ACCOMPLISHMENTS: . Developed methods and standards, and piecework incentive system for childrens' knit apparel manufacturer. . Guided design application of Gainsharing employee reward incentive system in the oil refining industry. . Prepared staffing requirements for mailrooms inserting operations of major newspaper publishing firms. . Prepared policy manuals, employee handbooks, and daily operating procedures for dairy products manufacturer. . Designed workplace layouts, operating methods, and engineered standards for piecework incentive system for automatic bank teller manufacturer. . Developed engineered methods and standards for federal mint facilities. . Analyzed workflow, paperwork, and customer service procedures; designed scheduling, tracking, and expediting systems for steel-processing firm. e 16 e VI. REFERENCES e e REFERENCE LIST NORTHERN STATES POWER 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES 4000 East River Road NE Rochester, Minnesota 55904-2813 NORTHERN STATES POWER PO Box 600 Monticello, Minnesota 55362-0600 TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE 210 West Jessie Street Rushford, Minnesota 55971 MARSHALL MUNICIPAL UTILITIES 113 South Fourth Street Marshall, Minnesota 56258 METROPOLITAN WASTE CONTROL COMMISSION Mears Park Centre 230 East Fifth Street st. Paul, Minnesota 55101 CONTROL DATA BUSINESS CENTERS Box 0 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55440 ST. PAUL COMPANIES 385 Washington st. Paul, Minnesota 55102 COMPUTYPE, INC. 2285 West County Road C st. Paul, Minnesota 55113 MAGNETIC CONTROLS COMPANY 4900 West 78th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435 ANDERSEN CORPORATION Bayport, Minnesota 55003 It NCR COMTEN, INC. 2700 Snelling Avenue N st. Paul, Minnesota 55113 17 Bob Ewanika 612-330-5521 Ed Schwanke 507-280-1540 John Weyhrauch 612-295-5151 Dennis Peterson 507-864-7783 Richard Voller 507-532-4451 Jean Erickson 612-229-2008 . Raj Dhir 612-853-4404 Dave Block 612-221-7233 Ed Walczak 612-633-0633 Richard Palmer 612-835-6800 Chris Dahl 612-770-7415 Eric Wickiser 612-638-8420 e BLACKBOURN, INC. 10150 Crosstown Circle Eden prairie, Minnesota 55344 Ford Nicholson 612-944-7010 UPSHER-SMITH LABORATORIES, INC. 14905 23rd Avenue North Minneapolis, Minnesota 55447 George Tomaich 612-473-4412 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER 5000 West 39th Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 J. Paul O'Connor 612-927-3007 R & S LITHO, INC. 1907 Hiawatha Avenue S Minneapolis, Minnesota 55404 Ron Nelson 612-338-3304 FLOWER CITY 7119 31st Avenue N New Hope, Minnesota 55427 Carl Wolk 612-546-0502 STYLMARK, INC. 6536 Main Street NE PO Box 32008 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55432-0008 Donn Mooty 612-574-7474 LIQUIPAK INTERNATIONAL, INC. 2285 University Avenue st. Paul, Minnesota 55114 Tom McKinley 612-645-0651 MCGILL/JENSEN, INC. 655 North Fairview Avenue st. Paul, Minnesota 55104' Mark McManus 612-645-0751 I.C. SYSTEM, INC. 444 East Highway 96 Vadnais Heights, Minnesota 55110 Marlin Olson 612-483-8201 e 18 e VII. PROJECT DRAWINGS e LJ "'/ r--\ r-- ..([ oL LJ 0- o o u U r--\ oL r-- U LJ ~ LJ r r-- -Z ~ o U \ r--\ ex:::. r-- . ROCHESTER PUBLIC UTILITIES !1.ECt. ~. ws::M. EalM'. ...... ""'" 1OOl. IlOClOI rn ~ ~ ~~~~~ ------------------------------~-------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- r-----r-----l r-l r----------- I I I I I I_ I I I I I I --.r I ~ I ~ I I I I I I I I I I IIDCa I I I ~ I I I ~----+-----~ ~ : l : I I I! I I I I ~ I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I L_____L_____J D~' L_J D .r_ _ _ a::::::. ... i ~ i ft i i\ r -Z ..([ 0-- ~ Or ur-- r--\ oL~ LJr--\ ?<-i Ou- 0-- (/)0 LJ-j r-uJ ..([u \-r--\ (/)r-- -z. -ZO ex:::.~ LJ -r. \- ex:::. o -Z ~ <[ z o I----l l- <[ Z ~ W l- Z r---i ~ <[ CL I----l :J CS I----l ~ ~ \ R~~lSOR or S\A\0\~S 8 o o ~ l R 2x S LITHO, INC. 0 0 00 ~D Oc:J s~ES iD 0 a OO\~ o 0 JIJJl oc:=J ~ - o 0 _--~O~!!i---- """" -~ -----, \ JIJJl a \ I a a c::::I c=:::I II II a II ~ . R 8x S LITHO) INC. D Vet) 0 V cOD 0 cUo cUo 0 0 0 D LUNCH ROOM _IJ-r I I I II 1/ I I I I I I IIBB STORE ROOM LOCKER ROOM EEHffiBHE ~OrnDroD~ SALES CD o . L CONTROL DATA BUSINESS MANAGEMENT SERVICES 00 0 Doo REa:PTlON Slt.rs 0 0 ~ Slt.ts GOE:RH.. 1WloIIGl:R CON"EROCE: ROOM 0 0 DISTRICT UllRARY SUPPLJES t8fliJ) E:QUIPNE:I/T IIEDfANlCAL CCPY ~. I:~~ CJ CRENa:: P\oDlE: I}l c:=JDD ~ DPERA TlONS LS, CJ~9D GOE:RAI... _Gl:R D~9D STtRIllZ CJ~9D ODD ODD DDDDDD SHIPPING SCKJJJl.E:R c=ll ILlL-l VINIXIY 0 0 c.> ~8 ~... ....... 540' HOR1ZONT AL CONVEYOR IN NE\J BUILDING I ST. PAUL COMPANIES 18 FLOORS 17 FLOORS @13'8' . 1 FLOOR @20'8' NEV BUILDING 60' TUNNEL 120' HORIZONTAL CONVEYOR IN TUNNEL 368' HORIZONT AL CONVEYOR IN OLD BUILDING 7 FLOORS 7 FLOORS @13'll' EXISTING BUILDING e ~ .. t, BURMEISTER ELECTRIC COMPANY D ORDER ENTRY DDD D 000 I- D 0 z D D w j::l ..... (.I) D w IX D OJ&] a.. 0 0 RECEPTIONIST DD I I DO B I- ...J Z ~ 0 W 0::: A I- ..... B~ (.? z w 0 0::: U a.. W a.. >- w 0::: IX CI IX 8 B CI Ww I- > :c>- z (I) IX w <l:A > ~ (I) z z ..... Cl c=J ...... I- <t: 0::: W a.. Cl SALES (I) w ....I DO DO <l: (I) 0 ~ ~; ~~ ODooD LUNCH ROOM CONFERENCE ROOM VISUAL INSPECTION EEj D REPAIR 0 EB D ST AMPING EE ONING D r- (.I) W I- ...J <l: U ..... IX I- U W ...J W D OJ!"; drn D RECEIVING