The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-06-04 CITY OF HASTINGS COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday, July 6, 2004 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER: II. ROLL CALL: III. DETERMINATION OF QUORUM: IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Approval of Minutes for the Regular Meeting on June 21,2004 V. COUNCIL ITEMS TO BE CONSIDERED: VI. CONSENT AGENDA: The items on the Consent Agenda are to be acted upon by the City Council in 8 single motion. There wiJ/ be no discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or citizen so requests, in which event the items will be removed from the Consent Agenda to tha appropriate deparlmant for discussion. 1. Pay Bills As Audited 2. Budget Adjustments 3. Resolution-Gambling Premises Permit Application by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society-Minnesota Chapter (Westside Bar & Grill, 880 Bahls Drive) 4. Resolution-Renewal of Old Mill Pawn License 5. Approve 2004 Rivertown Days Agreement 6. Acknowledgment of Receptivity to an LCA Funding Award 7. Approve Street, Draina~e, and Utility Easement Across Industrial Park Property for Glendale Heights 2n Addition Emergency Trail 8. Approve Land Subsidy Agreement/Property Sale-Westview Packaging: Lot 1, Block 3 Hastings Industrial Park NO.3 (SW corner of Spiral & Enterprise) 9. Order Public Hearing-Vacation of Right-of-Way #2004-36: Forest Street, North of 2nd Street West (Robert & Heidi Langenfeld) 10. Authorize Chassis Payment-Fire Department Tanker VII. AWARDING OF CONTRACTS & PUBLIC HEARING: 1. Award Contract-Project 2004-4: 10th Street & Highway 61 Improvements VIII. REPORTS FROM CITY STAFF: A. Public Works B. Planning 1. Resolution-Site Plan #2004-32: Eischen Cabinet 2nd Building (625 Commerce Drive) 2. Deny Request to Construct Destroyed Building at Former Setback-Hastings Inn (1520 Vermillion Street) 3. Resolution-Site Plan #2004-21: Lawrence Condos at Whispering Lane & Crestview Drive (Lawrence Builders) C. Administration 1. Schedule Special City Council Meeting/Downtown Redevelopment Project (July 12, 2004) 2. Downtown Riverfront Project Development Petition IX. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE: X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: XI. NEW BUSINESS: XII. REPORTS FROM CITY COMMITTEES, OFFICERS, COUNCILMEMBERS: XIII. ADJOURNMENT: Next City Council Meeting on Monday, July 19, 2004 Hastings, Minnesota June 21, 2004 The City Council of the City of Hastings, Minnesota met in a regular meeting on Monday June 21, 2004 at 7:00 p.m., in the City Hall Council Chambers at the Hastings City Hall, 101 East 4th Street, Hastings, Minnesota. Members Present: Mayor Mike Werner, City Council members Hicks, Moratzka, Riveness, Schultz, and Yandrasits Members Absent: Councilmember Hazlet Staff Members Present: City Administrator David Osberg; Administrative AssistanUCity Clerk Melanie Mesko Lee; City Attorney Shawn Moynihan; Planning Director John Hinzman; Public Works Director Tom Montgomery; Fire Chief Mark Holmes Assistant Finance Director Char Stark Approval of Minutes Mayor Werner asked if there were any corrections or additions to the minutes of the regular meeting of June 7, 2004. Hearing none, the minutes were approved as presented. Council Items to be Considered Staff requested that an item be added to Bills to be Paid. Moved by Councilmember Hicks, seconded by Councilmember Schultz to amend the agenda as requested. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Consent Agenda Moved by Councilmember Moratzka, seconded by Councilmember Riveness, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. 6 Ayes; Nays, None. 1. Pay Bills As Audited 2. Budget Adjustments 3. City Hall Storm Gutter Painting Proposal 4. Grand Excursion Balloon Launch Agreement 5. Approve Joining LMCIT Municipal Pool for Long Term Disability Coverage 6. 2004/2005 Liquor License Renewals 7. Authorization to Solicit Quotes for Hockey Rink at Pioneer Park 8. Approve 2004 Sealcoat Program 9. Approve Gambling Permit & 3.2 Liquor License for Hastings Fire Department Relief Association Booya (September 12, 2004) Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 21, 2004 Page 2 of 6 Presentation of 2003 Comprehensive Financial Statement and Audit Report Assistant Finance Director Char Start and Jennifer Tiennes of Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd., the City's auditor, provided a brief presentation on the 2003 CAFR. Moved by Councilmember Hicks, seconded by Councilmember Yandrasits to accept the CAFR as presented. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Award of Bid-Fire Truck Fire Chief Holmes recommended award of bid to Ferrara Fire Apparatus, Inc. in the amount of $285,066. Moved by Council member Yandrasits, seconded by Councilmember Riveness to award the bid as recommended. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Public Hearing-Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 18 of City Code Regarding Certain Property Maintenance Requirements Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7: 1 0 p.m. City Administrator Osberg provided a brief background on the proposed restrictions regarding parking on private property. No on spoke for or against the proposed changes. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:12 pm. Second Reading-Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 18 of City Code Regarding Certain Property Maintenance Requirements Councilmember Yandrasits requested that a committee review regulations regarding the location of permitted parking on private property, citing concerns with appearance and water quality. Moved by Councilmember Moratzka, seconded by Council member Yandrasits to approve the code amendment as presented. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. . Copy of ordinance on file. Public Hearing-Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 8 of City Code Regarding Parking Regulations in Municipal Parking Lots and City Streets Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. City Administrator Osberg provided a brief background on the proposed restrictions regarding parking on public property and municipal lots. No on spoke for or against the proposed changes. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:19 pm. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 21,2004 Page 3 of 6 Second Reading-Ordinance Amendments to Chapter 8 of City Code Regarding Parking Regulations in Municipal Parking Lots and City Streets Moved by Councilmember Riveness, seconded by Councilmember Hicks to approve the code amendment as presented. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Copy of ordinance on file. Public Hearing-2004 Public Works Fee Schedule Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. Public Works Director Montgomery requested approval of fees, which have not been updated since 1992. No on spoke for or against the proposed changes. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:24 pm. Resolution-Adopting 2004 Public Works Fee Schedule Moved by Council member Yandrasits, seconded by Councilmember Riveness to approve the resolution as presented. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Copy of resolution on file. Public Hearing-City Code Amendment #2004-20: Rezoning A to R-3: Vitt Property (13th & Tierney) Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7:24 p.m. Planning Director Hinzman provided brief background on the rezoning request. He requested that formal action be delayed on the rezoning until the Planning Commission reviews the site plan and preliminary plat. A resident on 13th Street questioned the traffic impact on the neighborhood with this project. Hinzman stated that all roads would need to be constructed before building permits would be able to be pulled. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:28 pm. Public Hearing-City Code Amendment #2004-29: Adopt 6-Month Moratorium on Multiple Family Site Plan Approvals Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Planning Director Hinzman stated that the moratorium affects residential developments of more than two units, with the Downtown Riverfront Redevelopment developer being exempt. The moratorium would last 6 months or until the Council rescinds it, whichever comes first. No on spoke for or against the proposed moratorium. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:34 pm. Second Reading-City Code Amendment #2004-29: Adopt 6-Month Moratorium on Multiple Family Site Plan Approvals Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 21, 2004 Page 4 of 6 Council member Yandrasits stated opposition to the ordinance, stating that it is a negative message to non single family home development. Moved by Councilmember Moratzka, seconded by Council member Riveness to approve the moratorium ordinance as presented. 5 Ayes; Nays, one, Councilmember Yandrasits voting against. Copy of ordinance on file. Public Hearing-City Code Amendment #2004-30: Amend City Code Section 11.07: Park Dedication Requirements Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7:34 p.m. Planning Director Hinzman stated that the ordinance amendment would reduce the park dedication requirements for two-family and three-family attached developments. The single family rate would remain the same. The changes are necessary to ensure park dedication rates represent a "fair and reasonable" value for land dedication as required by state statute. No one spoke for or against the proposed changes. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:354 pm. Second Reading-City Code Amendment #2004-30: Amend City Code Section 11.07: Park Dedication Requirements Councilmember Schultz expressed frustration at the proposed reduction and asked what the definition of "fair and reasonable" is. Planning Director Hinzman stated that "fair and reasonable" park dedication requirements are defined as 10-15% of unimproved land costs. The City's previous requirements were 20% or more, thus the suggested changed. Moved by Councilmember Yandrasits, seconded by Councilmember Hicks to approve the ordinance amendment as presented. 5 Ayes; Nays, one, Councilmember Schultz voting against. Copy of ordinance on file. Public Hearing-Vacation of Right-of-Way #2004-27: Portion of 1st Street- American Legion Mayor Werner opened the public hearing at 7:39 p.m. Planning Director Hinzman stated that American Legion is requesting the vacation of right-of-way to construct an 18-foot wide deck on the north side of their existing building. No one spoke for or against the proposed changes. Hearing no further public comments, Mayor Werner closed the public hearing at 7:41 pm. Resolution-Vacation of Right-of-Way #2004-27: Portion of 1st Street- American Legion Councilmember Yandrasits questioned what building materials would be used. The applicant stated that a stone retaining wall and patio will be fiber concrete, with a wrought iron decorate railing. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 21, 2004 Page 5 of 6 Moved by Council member Hicks, seconded by Councilmember Schultz to approve the vacation as presented. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Copy of resolution on file. Resolution-Site Plan/SUP #2004-7: Construction of a Patio-American Legion (50 Sibley Street) Moved by Councilmember Yandrasits, seconded by Councilmember Hicks to approve the special use permit/site plan as presented. 6 Ayes; Nays, none. Copy of resolution on file. Authorize Reimbursement/Credit of Park Dedication Fees Planning Director Hinzman requested authorization for reimbursement or credit for park dedication fees paid under the former fee schedule. This would result in a reimbursement of $64,200 in fees already paid and a credit of $114,594 in fees required but not yet paid. Councilmember Schultz stated opposition to the credit. Councilmember Yandrasits stated opposition to the credit, noting that any savings to the builder/developer will not be passed on to the homeowner. Councilmember Moratzka stated that developers were notified of the proposed fee amendments and did not comment during the public hearing process. Councilmember Hicks stated that the Council has essentially acknowledged the fee adjustment and credit should be given to the developers. Councilmember Riveness stated that it is not the City's business to determine what the developer should do with any credit or refund. Moved by Councilmember Riveness, seconded by Mayor Wemer to authorize reimbursement/credit of park dedication fees. Roll Call Vote was taken. 3 Ayes; Nays, three, Council members Moratzka, Schultz, and Yandrasits voting against. Motion fails. Resolution-Final Plat #2003-56: South Oaks of Hastings 3rd Addition (Greg Jablonske) Planning Director stated that the applicant has requested removal of this item from the agenda. Consider South Frontage Road Annexation/Authorize Staff to Schedule Meeting with Neighboring Townships Staff authorized to contact neighboring townships to schedule a meeting to discuss growth boundary and timing for future annexations. Report from Downtown Riverfront Redevelopment Committee Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 21, 2004 Page 6 of 6 Council member Moratzka stated that the committee met on June 14, 2004. An open house will be held on Monday, June 28, 2004 from 5:30 to 8:30 to discuss the project. The public is encouraged to attend and provide feedback. Adjournment Moved by Councilmember Riveness, seconded by Councilmember Schultz to adjourn the meeting at 8:05 p.m. 6 Ayes; Nays, None. ATTEST Mayor City Clerk Date: 06/30/2004 Time: 16:21:05 Opera tor: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ COUNCIL AND MAYOR COUNCIL AND MAYOR ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATION CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK FINANCE FINAbTCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE FINANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAIN'l'ENANCE PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING M.I.S. M.I.S. CNA INSURANCE JULY PREMIUMS Total for Department MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT 07/02: CONNELL MN CHILD SUPPORT PMT 07/02: PUCH CASE Total for Department 000 CASE 00 0013861 FILTERFRESH SPRINT COFFEE SERVICE MONTHLY TELEPHONE Department 102 Total for FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ ju1y MUSIC WORKS JULY 2 PERFORMANCE/GRAND NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE RENT 'N' SAVE PORTAB PORTABLE RESTROOMS/ GRAN SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE STILLWATER TROLLEY GRAND EXCURSION/ TROLLEY ZIEGLER, INC. GRAND EXCURSION/ GENERAT Total for Department 105 DUQARELS BAR &: GRILL REIMBURSE OFF-SALE L1Q L FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july SCHROEDER, ADELINE MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 107 FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTC PREMIUM/ july GOVT FINANCE OFFICER COST ANALYSIS &: ACTIVITY GOVT FINANCE OFFICER FINANCIAL POLICIES/DESIG GOVT FINANCE OFFICER STARK/ TRAINING SEMINAR GRAPHIC DESIGN BUS CARDS/ WEBSTER HASTINGS AREA CHAMBE MAY LOooING TAX SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE STARK, CHARLENE EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT Total for Department 120 FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE . T.D. 'S CLEANING JUNE CLEANING TOWER CLEANING SYSTE JUNE CLEANING XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY Total for Department 140 FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july HINZMAN JOHN CONF LONG DISTANCE SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 150 FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE Total for Department 160 Page: 1 Amount ----------.- 254.22 254.22j> 238.57 438.39 676.96j> 180.00 13.33 193.33* 61.40 1,600.00 37.84 1,233.00 166.99 945.00 841. 00 4,885.23* 200.00 15.90 35.43 13.33 264.66* 91.05 35.00 35.00 1,100.00 55.38 4,241.59 100.91 719.19 6,378.12'" 16.26 43.59 1,150.73 1,196.21 4,033.55 6,440.34* 41.44 20.8S 66.63 128.92* 26.11 26.65 52.76* VI-1 Date, 06/30/2004 Operator: BECKY KLINE Time: 16,21:05 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department vendor Name Description ---~---------------- -------------------- ------------------------ POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE BOISE CASCADE OFFICE OFFICE SUPPLIES COFER, MARY CONFERENCE EXPENSES CDW GOVERNMENT INC OLYMPUS HEADSET DE LAGE LANDEN FINAN DICTATION SERVICE FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTC PREMIUM/ july HASTINGS BUS CO DARE STUDENT TRANSPORT KUSTOM SIGNALS, INC. REPAIR RADAR UNIT MN DEPT OF ADMINISTR STATE LINK NAT'L ASSN OF TOWN W NAT' L NIGHT OUT ITEMS NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE SPRINT MONTHLY TELEPHONE XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY Total for Department 201 BUILDING AND BUILDING AND BUILDING AND INSPECT FORTIS BENEFITS INS INSPECT SPRINT INSPECT SPRINT LTC PREMIUM/ j ul y MONTHLY TELEPHONE TELEPHONE Department 230 Total for PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS ANDERSEN, E.F. & ASS SIGN BDM CONSULTING ENGIN KENNEDY SCHOOL INSP FEES FBRRELLGAS PROPANE FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTC PREMIUM/ july G oX K SERVICES TOWEL RENTAL GURNEY, DAVID EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT MN DEPT OF TRANSPORT GRADATIONS SCHMIDTKE SAMANTHA EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT SPRINT TELEPHONE SPRINT VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS TWIN CITY STRIPING STRIPING UNLIMITED SUPPLY INC SAFETY GLASSES UNLIMITED SUPPLY INC STORAGE BIN CREDIT UNLIMITED SUPPLY INC SUPPLIES XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY YOCUM OIL CO INC OIL Total for Department 300 . PARKS AND RECREATION FIRST NAT'L BANK LOAN 0320243279 PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTC PREMIUM/ july Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 101 PARKS AND RECREATION ERICKSON LEE PARKS AND RECREATION FARMERS MILL & ELEVA PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS PARKS AND RECREATION LEEF BROTHERS, INC. PARKS AND RECREATION NEXTEL COMMUNICATION PARKS AND RECREATION NINE EAGLES PROMOTIO PARKS AND RECREATION NORTHWEST LANDSCAPE PAINT/ SUPPLIES/ ISABEL PRO MARKING DUST LTD PREMIUM/ july SHOP TOWELS CELL PHONE TESSIER/ CLOTHING IRRlGATION/ PARTS & SERV Page: 2 Amount ------------ 522.97 251.44 30.93 290.05 657.37 428.02 73.90 37.00 933.79 55.33 712.00 36.02 4,028.82* 92.88 66.63 13.33 172 .84* 132.16 151.00 25.56 267.64 133.84 43.44 125.79 12.85 222.63 149.29 5,434.11 181.58 -223.28 620.86 12,789.08 903.70 20,970.25* 1,527.35 8.49 1,535.84* 45,982.29* 131.93 266.25 114.46 49.95 278.13 249.00 786.34 Date: 06/30/2004 Operator: BECKY KLINE Time: 16:21:06 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 3 Department Vendor Name Description Amount -------~------------ -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT PARKS AND RECREATION XCEL ENERGY Total TELEPHONE VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS JUNE ELECTRICITY for Department 401 Total for Fund 200 PARKS AND RECREATION CONZEMIUS MICHAEL SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION WUEBBEN GINA SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION SAGER RACHEL SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION VERDICK JIM SWIM LESSON REFUND PARKS AND RECREATION AQUA LOGIC, INC. CHEMICALS PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july PARKS AND RECREATION HALOGEN SUPPLY COMPA ACID PUMP SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION KINEMATICS LTD COPING STONE PARKS AND RECREATION NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE PARKS AND RECREATION PEN IMPRESSIONS PENS PARKs AND RECREATION SPRINT TELEPHONE PARKS AND RECREATION VISTAR CORPORATION CONCESSION SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 201 CABLE AURAN. PAUL MEETINGS/ CONSULTING CABLE SPRINT TELEPHONE Total for Department 420 Total for Fund 205 CABLE CABLE CABLE HASTINGS ACCESS CORP ACCESS SUPPORT HASTINGS ACCESS CORP SUPPORTIVE EQUIP HASTINGS FORD-JEEP-E RUNNING BOARDS/ VAN Total for Department 420 Total for Fund 206 , HERITAGE PRESERVATIO FORTIS BENEFITS INS HERITAGE PRESERVATIQ SPRINT LTD PREMIUM/ july TELEPHONE Total for Department 170 Total for Fund 210 FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE AMERIPRIDE LINEN & A TOWELS BUMPER TO BUMPER BALL MOUNT/ HITCH PIN CCP INDUSTRIES INC BIG ROLL TOWEL FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july GAHNZ FURNITURE LOUNGE RECLINERS GELHAR JAMES REIMBURSE/ STATION SUPPL GERRY I S FIRE PROTECT RECHARGE FIRE EXT 273.45 298.58 2,678.03 5,126.12* 5,126.12* 22.00 27.50 27.50 27.50 1,757.25 25.72 83.61 2,585.00 71.61 95.00 123.29 358.36 1,823.05 7,027.39* 7,027.39* 3,564.14 13.33 3,577.47* 3,577.47'" 30,000.00 3,564.14 592.06 34,156.20* 34,156.20* 2.59 13.33 15.92* 15.92'" 27.62 48.96 282.61 249.59 958.00 43.75 29.90 Date, 06/30/2004 Operator' BECKY KLINE Time: 16:21:06 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ FIRE FIRE FIRE SPRINT TELEPHONE HAGEMEYER NO AMERICA SENSOR OXYGEN XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY Total for Department 210 AMBULANCE PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION OXYGEN Total for Department 220 Total for Fund 213 PARKS AND RECREATION DAKOTA COUNTY TREASU JT POWERS/WETLAND HEALTH Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 401 EQUIPMENT REVOLVING EQUIPMENT REVOLVING ELECTION DATA DIRECT VOTING BOOTHS MAP CONSTRUCTION, IN MATERIAL & MOBILIZATION Total for Department 800 Total for Fund 403 HOUSING AND REDEVELO FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTC PREMIUM/ july HOUS ING AND REDEVELO SPRINT TELEPHONE Total for Department 500 Total for Fund 404 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FORTIS EENEFITS INS LTC PREMIUM/ july ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HINZMAN JOHN RE REDEVELOPMENT/ REUSE Total for Department ISO Total for Fund 407 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS EDM CONSULTING ENGIN 03-6 GS DR/ BRIDGE BDM CONSULTING ENGIN RSO BDM CONSULTING ENGIN SPIRAL/31ST ST EXT XCEL ENERGY ''t SO OAKS 2ND/ OUTDOOR LIG Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 493 PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC CONSTRUCTION P 10TH/HWY61 TURN LANE Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 494 DEBT DAKOTA COUNTY PROPER ST UTIL DRAIN ESMNT/2000 Total for Department 700 Total for Fund 520 Page: 4 Amount ------------ 455.23 157.81 934.54 3,188.01* 84.96 84.96* 3,272.97* 3,080.00 3,080.00* 3,080.00* 1,830.82 3,300.00 5,130.82* 5,130.82* 23.60 13.33 36.93* 36.93* 5.01 485.00 490.01* 490.01* 291. 75 16,911.38 2,433.75 5,007.70 24,644.58* 24,644.58* 171.90 171.90* 171.90* 40.00 40.00* 40.00* Date: 06/30/2004 Time: 16:21,06 Operator: BECKY KLINE page: 5 Department Vendor Name Description Amount CITY OF HASTINGS PM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS CITY CLERK CITY CLERK CITY CLERK VOGELGESANG JERI REFUND OVERPAY ON FINAL WATERS SONJA REFUND OVERPAY ON FINAL FAULKNER CRAIG / JEN REFUND OVERPAY ON FINAL BARTON SAND &. GRAVEL GRAVEL BASE FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july GRAPHIC DESIGN WATER SHUT OFF NOTICES MN PIPE &- EQUIPMENT MARKING PAINT NINE EAGLES PROMOTIO PEINE/ SHIRTS OTTO EXCAVATING, INC STREET REPAIRS/PLEASANT SPRINT TELEPHONE SPRINT VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS SYSTEM CONTROL SERVI REPAIR LABOR SYSTEM CONTROL SERVI REPAIRS T . D. 'S CLEANING JUNE CLEANING XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 600 HOSE &. INSERTS/ NOZZLE LTD PREMIUM/ july HEUSSER/ ANNUAL CONFEREN STREET REPAIRS/FLORENCE STREET REPAIRS/WEST 5TH JUNE ELECTRICITY FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL C FORTIS BENEFITS INS MN WASTEWATER OPERAT OTTO EXCAVATING, INC OTTO EXCAVATING, INC XCEL ENERGY Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 601 FORTIS NEXTEL SPRINT BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ july COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE TELEPHONE Total for Department 107 Total for Fund 610 PARKS AND RECREATION DOERER' S GENUINE,.. PAR HOSE/ OIL PARKS AND RECREATION FORTIS BENEFITS INS LTD PREMIUM/ ju1y PARKS AND RECREATION NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE PARKS AND RECREATION SHERWIN-WILLIAMS WOOD SEALER/ BRUSH PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT TELEPHONE PARKS AND RECREATION SPRINT VOICE/DATA CONNECTIONS PARKS AND RECREATION XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY Total for Department 401 PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS Total for Fund 615 COLT ELECTRIC INC. FORTIS BENEFITS INS SPRINT REPAIR LABOR LTD PREMIUM/ july TELEPHONE 46.80 101.10 1.65 68.65 130.50 37.28 289.64 156.00 905.00 129.35 149.29 739.14 450.00 319.50 7,710.52 11,234.42* 11,234.42* 574.70 53.79 200.00 1,339.60 1,800.00 1,070.84 5,038.93* 5,038.93* 43.60 45.10 15.33 104.03* 104.03* 29.63 59.85 72.67 191.40 95.56 298.58 3,948.70 4,696.39* 4,696.39* 112.50 17.30 43.59 Date, 06/30/2004 Time, 16,21,06 Operator, BECKY KLINE Page: 6 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description Amount ._-~---------------- -------------------- ------.----------------- ------------ PUBLIC WORKS XCEL ENERGY JUNE ELECTRICITY 2,625.74 2,799.13* Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 620 2,799.13* PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING BDM CONSULTING ENGIN ADDITION REVIEW BDM CONSULTING ENGIN PLANNING REVIEW 8DM CONSULTING ENGIN REVIEW Total for Department 150 4,125.00 1,125.00 4,250.00 9,500.00* 8DM CONSULTING ENGIN SO PINES 4TH 8DM CONSULTING ENGIN WALLIN W 8DM CONSULTING ENGIN WALMART Total for Department 300 291. 75 37.75 97.25 37.75 1,207.25 302.00 1,973.75* PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS BDM CONSULTING ENGIN CENT SO BDM CONSULTING ENGIN MKT PLC WEST BDM CONSULTING ENGIN SIEBEN CREST Total for Fund 807 11,473.75* Grand Total 168,099.25* July 6, 2004 ~draJ;its Mayor Werner Q1yofH.6ligs Memrcrrl.m To: City Council From: Becky Kline, Finance Department Date: 06/25/2004 The attached Department Report itemizes vouchers that were paid on June 25, 2004. Thank you. Date: 07/01/2004 Time: 08:53:17 CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice - Check Register Operat.or: Ranges: Bank '#: (A) Check Date: (R) 06252004 - 06252004 Check '#: (A) Cash #, (A) Options: Format: 2 '# of copies: 1 Check '# Sort only: B Print Void Checks: Y Bank '# Cash '# Check Date Vendor '# Account/Title Vendor Name Check '# Type project Description BECKY KLINE Page: 1 Amount ------ ---------- -------------------- ----------------------------------------- ---------- ---- ------------------ 1 494 06/25/2004 D12750 DEPARTMENT OF MILITARY AFFAIRS 494-300-3611-6590 CONTRACTORS & CONSTRUCTION 31ST ST RIGHT OF WAY PURCHASE 17728 R 210024-00 PO# TOTAL FOR INVOlCE'# TOTAL FOR CHECK'# 17728: Total Regular, Total Manual: Total Regular & Manual: Total voided: Bank Total: Grand Total: 16,967.70 -------------- 16,967.70 ..................-=.. 16,967.70 16,967.70 .00 16,967.70 .00 16,967.70 16,967.70 atyaf 1-Ls1; 95 NeImtnim To: City Council From: Becky Kline, Finance Department Date: 06/29/2004 The attached Department Report itemizes vouchers tha!..were paid on June 29, 2004. Thank you. '. Date: 06/29/2004 Time, 09:17:47 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry . Invoice Payment - Department Report Department Vendor Name Description -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ DELTA DENTAL PLAN OF JULY PREMIUM REGINA MEDICAL CENTE JUNE WELLNESS Total for Department 000 ADMINISTRATION IKON OFFICE SOLUTION STAPLES FOR COpy MACHINE Total for Department 105 MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE MAINTENANCE CHEMSEARCH SOAP DISPENSERS LIFEWORKS SERVICES I MAY SERVICE M!A ASSOC-DIAMOND GL CLEANING SUPPLIES ORKIN PEST CONTROL JUNE SERVICE RIVERTOWN HEATING A!C REPAIR!FIRE DEPT R &: 0 ELEVATOR CO. I QTRLY MAINT WALMART COMMUNITY CONTACT ADHESIVE Total for Department 140 POLl CE POLICE POLl CE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE POLICE EURNSVILLE, CITY OF TRAINING CLASS INSTRUCTO CITY OF MPLS. AUTOMATED PAWN SYSTEM CDW GOVERNMENT INC DICTATION HEADPHONES ELECTRO WATCHMAN, IN ALARM SERVICE GALLS, INC. RESERVE UNIFORMS GRAPHIC DESIGN OFFICE SUPPLIES HASTINGS VEHICLE REG 2001 BUICK CENTURY! TABS HELMER PRINTING CRIME FREE MULTI HOUSING INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTO LASER PRINTER MID-AMERICAN SPECIAL STICKER BADGES! CRIME PR NAT'L ASSN OF SCHOOL HICKS! MEMBERSHIP NORTHLAND BUSINESS S DICTATION EQUIP! MAINT C ON SITE SANITATION GUN RANGE ARCH WIRELESS PAGER LEASE SHAMROCK ANIMAL CLIN IMPOUND WALMART COMMUNITY GENERAL SUPPLIES Total for Department 201 Page: 1 Amount ------------ 1,960.35 100.00 2,060.35* 101.16 101.16* 81.91 158.40 76.36 91.30 479.39 315.75 1.67 1,204.78* 300.00 166.00 30.94 57.51 624.81 317.38 9.50 14.00 271.31 308.00 30.00 1,290.56 50.65 225.31 277.41 143.35 4,116.73* BUILDING AND INSPECT DAKOTA FENCE OF MN CANCELLATION OF PROJECTS 80.00 BUILDING AND INSPECT AIR MASTERS INC CANCELLATION OF PROJECT 20.40 BUILDING AND INSPECT MOES MAY SAC CHARGES 33,412.50 Total tor Department 230 33,512.90* PUBLIC WORKS ACI ! ADDISON COMMON HOIST RENTAL 200.00 PUBLIC WORKS ACTIVAR ! SEELYE PLA PLASTIC STENCILS 161. 89 PUBLIC WORKS ANDERSEN, E.F. &: ASS STOP SIGNS 197.87 PUBLIC WORKS EMILY'S CONDAC LUNCH 127.48 PUBLIC WORKS HASTINGS VEHICLE REG 1992 FORD! TITLE 27.00 PUBLIC WORKS KIMBALL-MIDWEST PAINT!LUBRlCANT!OIL!PROT 317.86 PUBLIC WORKS MENARDS EDGING! SPRAYING 65.77 PUBLIC WORKS SHERWIN-WILLIAMS SUPPLIES 48.74 PUBLIC WORKS UNITED PARCEL SERVIC SHIPPING CHARGES 20.51 PUBLIC WORKS WALMART COMMUNITY BATTERY 62.66 PUELI C WORKS WALMART COMMUNITY WINDEX 13 .52 Total for Department 300 1,243.30* Date: 06/29/2004 Time: 09:17:47 Operator: BECKY KLINE CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report Page: 2 Department Vendor Name Description Amount MISCELLANEOUS -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ LEAGUE/MN CITIES INS WORKERS COMP/ 3RD INSTAL Total for Department 600 Total for Fund 101 PARKS AND RECREATION CHEMSEARCH LUBE/ SOAP Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 200 PARKS AND RECREATION BOUND TREE/NORTH AME FIRST AID SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION DIPPIN DOTS, INC. 5 CASES PARKS AND RECREATION ELECTRO WATCHMAN, IN SECURITY MONITORING PARKS AND RECREATION FIRST LINE BEVERAGES CONCESSION SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION RECREATION SUPPLY CO CHEMICAL TEST SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION RIVERTOWN HEATING BOILER SERVICE PARKS AND RECREATION VISTAR CORPORATION CONCESSION SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY CONCESSION SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY POOL SUPPLIES PARKS AND RECREATION WALMART COMMUNITY SWIMMERS Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 201 REGINA MEDICAL CENTE JUNE WELLNESS Total for Department 000 FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE FIRE ADIRONDACK DIRECT TWO MULTIFUNCTION CHAIRS HASTINGS CHRYSLER CE 1497/ CABLES IPD CO INC SB KIT FL AIRLINER NEXTEL COMMUNICATION CELL PHONE CHARGES SIXTY ONE MARINE & S ATV FUEL VALVE TROPHIES PLUS 21 ACCOUNTABILITY TAGS WALMART COMMUNITY OFFICE SUPPLIES WHITEWATER WIRELESS, RADIO MOUSE Total for Department 210 .. AMBULANCE AMBULANCE AMBULANCE MOORE MEDICAL CORP. MEDICAL SUPPLIES PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION OXYGEN REGINA MEDICAL CENTS AMBULANCE MEDS Total for Department 220 Total for Fund 213 PARKS AND RECREATION BARR ENGINEERING CO. LAKE ISABEL Total for Department 401 Total for Fund 401 PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC CONSTRUCTION P 10 & 61 TURN LANE 26,444.00 26,444.00* 68,683.22* 336.91 336.91* 336.91* 428.12 455.00 79.88 590.65 102.31 75.00 563.80 105.09 225.50 23.36 2,648.71* 2,648.71* :210.00 210.00* 489.86 34.61 434.90 80.94 28.74 44.73 86.01 20.00 1,219.79* 356.93 119.94 331. 06 807.93* 2,237.72* 1,960.50 1,960.50* 1,960.50* 171. 90 Date: 06/29/2004 Time: 09,11:41 Operator: BECKY KLINE page; Department Vendor Name Description Amount CITY OF HASTINGS FM Entry - Invoice Payment - Department Report PUBLIC WORKS -------------------- -------------------- ------------------------ ------------ PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLI C WORKS PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS SEH ENGINEERS 10 & 61 TURN LN CONST Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 494 BERRY COFFEE COFFEE ELECTRO WATCHMAN, IN ALARM MONITORING GRAPHIC DESIGN MAY STATEMENT MAILING GRAPHIC DESIGN WORK ORDER PADS LASERSHARP, INC. TONER MISSISSIPPI WELDERS OXYGEN NAT'L WATERWORKS HYDRANT PARTS REGINA MEDICAL CENTE JUNE WELLNESS SEH ENGINEERS PROF SERVICES U.S. POSTMASTER CYCLE 3 BILLING WALMART COMMUNITY BAGGIES WALMART COMMUNITY SUPPLIES Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 600 REGINA MEDICAL CENTE JUNE WELLNESS Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 601 PARKS AND RECREATION ELECTRO WATCHMAN, IN 7/1-9/30 ALARM QUARTERLY PARKS AND RECREATION GRAINGER, W.W. INC. 10 FUSE TIME DELAY 30 AM PARKS AND RECREATION GRAINGER, W.W. INC. MULTIMETER FLUKE PARKS AND RECREATION REGINA MEDICAL CENTE JUNE WELLNESS Total for Department 401 PUBLIC WORKS Total for Fund 615 GRAINGER, W.W. INC. PUMP Total for Department 300 Total for Fund 620 Grand Total 709.39 881.29* 881.29* 36.00 57.51 215.50 69.23 95.85 18.26 580.00 40.00 347.90 558.73 2.07 29.29 2,050.34* 2,050.34* 10.00 10.00* 10.00* 57.51 70.61 124.61 30.00 282.73* 282.73* 482.13 482.13* 482.13* 79,573.55* VI-2 To: Honorable Mayor and City Council members CC: Lori Webster From: Char Stark, Assistant Finance Director Date: 6/30/2004 Re: 2004 Budget Adjustments Recommended City Council Action Staff requests the approval of transferring postage budget out of the Administration department to the various departments in order to assist in costing out postage to the individual government functions of the City. This will enable each department to track the true costs of that department. Department affected: Admin Council Finance Maintenance Planning Building & Inspections Code Enforcement Engineering Streets Parks Pool Heritage Cable HRA Industrial Park TRAC Arena Total Change in Budget $-3,000.00 5.00 2.200.00 5.00 500.00 600.00 400.00 1,250.00 45.00 100.00 110.00 200.00 25.00 525.00 5.00 15.00 5.00 $ 0.00 Staff requests the approval of increasing building and structures expense for the sandblasting and painting on the City of Hastings building canopy and downspouts. Cash is on hand in the ERF Capital outlay account. Total cost: $9,700 Account: 403-800-0000-6520. Staff also requests the approval of a budget adjustment to park equipment for the new Eagle bluff park. This money is on hand in the parks capital project fund. Approval to use the money from C.R. 42 was requested and received at the April 19th council meeting. Total cost: 32,000. Account: 401-401-4146-6590. VI-3 ' Memorandum I To: From: Date: Re: Mayor Werner & Councilmembers Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk June 30, 2004 Resolution-Application for Premises Permit by National Multiple Sclerosis Society for Lawful Gambling at Westside Bar & Grill, 880 Bahls Drive Council Action Reauested: Adopt the attached resolution that approves the application by the National Multiple Sclerosis Society for a gambling premises permit. Backaround: The Applicant has been made aware of the reporting and donation requirements established by the City Council. CITY OF HASTINGS DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 07-_-04 RESOLUTION APPROVING APPLICATION OF A PREMISES PERMIT APPLICATION FOR LAWFUL GAMBLING WHEREAS, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society: Minnesota Chapter has applied for a license to conduct lawful gambling at the Wests ide Bar & Grill, 880 Bahls Drive, Hastings, MN 55033; and WHEREAS, the premise application would permit raffles, paddlewheels, tip boards, and pull-tabs; and WHEREAS, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society: Minnesota Chapter shall comply with all applicable laws governing lawful gambling, including the requirement for 50% of lawful gambling expenditures to be used for lawful purposes with the City of Hastings trade area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Hastings that the Mayor and Administrative Assistant/City Clerk are authorized and directed to sign this resolution and forward it to the Minnesota Department of Gaming, Gambling Control Division, showing approval of this application for a Premises Permit to the National Multiple Sclerosis Society: Minnesota Chapter at Westside, 880 Bahls Drive, Hastings, MN 55033 ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS THIS 6th DAY OF JULY 2004. Ayes: Nays: Absent: Michael D. Werner, Mayor Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk (SEAL) VI-4 . Memorandum To: From: Date: Re: Mayor Werner and City Council Melanie Mesko Lee, Administrative Assistant/City Clerk June 30, 2004 Renewal of Old Mill Pawnbroker/Precious Metal Dealer License Reauested Council Action: Approve the renewal application from Old Mill Pawn Shop at 1912 Vermillion Street for the license period of July 1, 2004-June 30, 2005. Backaround: Application has been received from Bob Bohn for a renewal of the pawnbroker/precious metal dealer license for the Old Mill Pawn Shop located at 1912 Vermillion Street. The Police department indicates in the attached correspondence that Old Mill is in compliance with reporting requirements. Page 1 of 1 From: Val Scharfe Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 9:18 AM To: Melanie Mesko Lee Subject: RE: Old Mill Pawn Melanie, Old Mill Pawn has been In compliance. Other than being late in paying thler bills, they have been reporting as they should. I did a compliance check last month to check accuracy of their reporting. They did have a few violations, but nothing major. All was fixed. I will be doing more regular compliance checks to insure thier continuing accuracy. Val -----Original Message----- From: Melanie Mesko Lee Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 20044:18 PM To: Val Scharfe Subject: Old Mill Pawn Val-have Old Mill Pawn on the July 6 2004 CC meeting for renewal of their license; can I get a memo from you stating their compliance status and any issues with a renewal? An e-mail is just fine; I'll attach it to my memo. Our agenda meeting is June 30, so if I can get it by then, that would be great. Thanks for your help! Melanie file:/^\CityhalI2\company\CityDocuments\City Council\Agenda Ite...\RE Old Mill Pawn.ht 6/30/2004 VI-5 AGREEMENT FOR HASTINGS RlVERTOWN DAYS THIS AGREEMENT made this 5th day of July '2004, by and between the City of Hastings, Minnesota, and the Hastings Area Chamber of Commerce. WHEREAS, the Hastings Area Chamber of Commerce (Chamber) has scheduled a community festival for Hastings entitled Rivertown Days, which is to be held on July 15 through July 18, 2004; and WHEREAS, in the past the City of Hastings (City) has cooperated with the Chamber in its production of Rivertown Days by providing some assistance; and WHEREAS, both parties wish to put in writing the agreement which has been made between the parties. I,: . NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed by both parties as follows: 1. CONCESSION FEES The fees for Rivertown Days participants to the Chamber are: EXHIBIT FOOD Civic/Church $75 . $150 Commercial Hastings Chamber Members Arts & Crafts Fair Booth $100 $230 $150 $325 $65 Non-Member n. SHUTTLE BUS Contact person: Pat Regan, Hastings Bus Company, 437-1888, or Marcia Rash, Wells Fargo Bank, 437- 4715. Hastings Bus Company will provide one bus to operate on a limited basis Saturday and Sunday. The shuttle will transpo.rt people ITom Pioneer Par. k to the Downtown area and Jaycee Park. On Sunday, the route will include Con Agra Park. If demand is sufficient, the Chamber will provide an additional bus for shuttle purposes. Shuttle bus hours will be ITem 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturday, July 17th and 12 - 3 p.m. on Sunday, July 18th. rn. BUTTON SALES The Chamber will be selling Rivertown Days Buttons for $2 each. Buttons will be required for admission to the Lake Rebecca and Jaycee Park areas. Proceeds ITem button sales are used to pay for the fireworks display. N. PICNIC TABLES The City will provide an adequate number of picnic tables to be detennined by the City and the Rivertown Days Committee at Jaycee, Peavey and Pioneer Parks and at the High School and Roadside Park tennis courts. Rivertown Days Committee will coordinate with Parks Department personnel. V. INSURANCE A. Certificates of Insurance The Chamber will obtain and present to the City prior to Rivertown Days certificates of insurance from each of the following: Lumberjack Show, pyrotechnician, carnival operator, Prior Lake Water Ski Club and any Rodeo group if applicable and any others the City deems necessary. Waivers of liability will be secured from all sports participants. Each certificate of insurance shall name the City of Hastings, the Hastings Area Chamber of Commerce, and the Rivertown Days Committee as Additional Insureds at no additional cost to the City of Hastings. B. Hold Harmless Agreement The Chamber agrees to indemnify the City and hold it harmless from any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, or liability for such loss or damage, injury, death, and costs and expenses incident thereto arising out of all Chamber activities connected with Rivertown Days. Prior to Rivertown Days, the City shall be furnished with an endorsement naming the City as an additional insured on the Chamber's policy. The Chamber's insurance policy shall not be canceled or its conditions altered in any manner without ten days prior written notice to the City Administrator of Hastings. VI. ELECTRICITY The City will give the rights for use of all electrical outlets in Jaycee, Lake Rebecca and Pioneer Parks. City will not charge the Chamber for use of said electricity. City will check all streetlights along the Lock and Dam Road to verify that the lights are in working order. VII. WATER The City will allow vendors access to all fire hydrants along the Lock and Dam Road. City will have connections available on Jaycee Park hydrants by July 13, 2004. The City will provide a water truck to fill the Lumberjack tank on Saturday if necessary. VII. MISCELLANEOUS A. In addition to the foregoing, the City of Hastings agrees to the following: 1. The City will provide in kind services ofthe Parks, Streets, Police and Fire Departments. 2. The City will provide trash and litter pickup before, during and after the festival, which will be coordinated with Waste Management - Hastings (This service donated by Waste Management - Hastings). The Parks Department will coordinate daily clean up. 3. Two Parks Department employees will be on duty on Saturday and Sunday, July 17th and 18th from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. 4. The City will provide barricades and snow fence where appropriate. 5. The City will provide "No Parking" and "Handicapped Parking" signs where needed. 6. Ambulance service will be provided for miscellaneous events, most importantly the Fireworks Display on Saturday, July 17, 2004. 7. The Streets or Parks Department will mark/rope the appropriate grass areas adjacent to Lock and Dam Road for public parking. 8. The Streets or Parks Department will mow the former tank farm area to accommodate parking. 9. The Parks Department will contact Mosquito Control and arrange spraying in the Jaycee and Lake Rebecca Park areas the week ofJuly 13th. 10. The City will provide adequate police protection during the festival. 11. The City will provide extra garbage barrels at Pioneer, Jaycee and Con Agra Parks and provide pickup Saturday afternoon. 12. The City will erect several temporary signs no larger than 4' X 8' (furnished by the Chamber) approximately 3-6 weeks before the event and take them down after the festival. 13. All vendors must obtain a concessions permit from the Rivertown Days Committee, in cooperation with the City of Hastings. Police will assist with removal of vendors without permits. 14. Provide the Chamber President with a list of cell phone numbers to reach Parks, Police, Fire and Streets Department staff. List will remain confidential. B. In addition to the foregoing, the Chamber agrees to the following: 1. The Chamber will work with the Police Department to arrange for adequate traffic and crowd control at each scheduled Rivertown Days event. 2. The Chamber will provide the City with a list of contact persons with phone numbers who are responsible for the various areas and events. 3. The Chamber will secure all necessary City permits and licenses required by Hastings City Ordinances for any and all activities during Rivertown Days. 4. The Chamber will provide a schedule of events for Rivertown Days (see attached). 5. The Chamber will provide and pay for all portable toilets at sanctioned Rivertown Days events where they deem necessary. 6. The Chamber will provide and pay for all off-duty police reserve officers, who shall be in uniform during the festival, where the Rivertown Days Committee deems necessary. 7. The Chamber will provide and pay for all Explorer Scout services during the festival. 8. The Chamber will coordinate all waste containers and recycling with Waste Management-Hastings. 111 VIII. SCHEDULE OF EVENTS A.) A complete schedule of events is included with this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Hastings ahd the Hastings Area Chamber of Commerce has caused this Agreement to be executed by its Mayor and City Clerk and Chair of the Board and President, respectively, each acting with full authority to bind each party to this agreement. CITY OF HASTINGS By Mike Werner, Mayor By Melanie Mesko Lee, City Clerk HASTINGS AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE By '\)r. ~ 'JA \{ __ \- Dr. Bill Parker, Chair of the Board . ) , '-.~' - ,[{(l:.A~~ ..' , , . .4 ~{ By lliG €k.:. . "'-/ /U~, Michelle J ac06s, President IV SECURITY DUTIES AT PIONEER, JAYCEE & CON AGRAPARKAREAS RNERTOWNDAYS 2004 July 16 - 18 1. Direct traffic and keep it running smoothly along Second Street. Police will monitor traffic to determine whether or not road closure is necessary. 2. Continue to direct traffic to designated parking lots filling the first lots before proceeding to the next. 3. Prevent cars from entering lots designated as areas for "permit parking" only. 4. Patrol lots to support and assist Explorers in monitoring designated parking (e.g. Handicapped Parking and Permit Parking). 5. Watch for activities that may disrupt the peace and try to prevent any illegal activities. 6. Stay in contact by cellular phone or radio with the Rivertown Days Steering Committee. 7. Assist public or direct them appropriately with any questions or problems. (There will be an information tent at the river.) 8. Alert and assist ambulance service in case of an emergency. 9. Coordinate individuals or reserves so that an adequate number are working at all times. The busiest time is Saturday evening from 6:00 p.m. until after the fireworks display and on Sunday during the parade. 10. Provide flashing warning lights at 15th and Maple and at 15th and Pine. 11. Assist with escorting non-licensed vendors off park property. 12. Other security duties as deemed appropriate by Mike McMenomy, Chief of Police. v Arts & Crafts (& inflatable games) Barbary Coast Service Bass Tournament Bingo & Bake Sale Coliseum Sports Bar & Grill Concessions & Fireworks Elvis Show/Eagles Bake Sale/65th Ann. Flea Market Garden Tractor Pull Garden Tour Just Thinking Jamboree Kiddie Parade Kitten Ball Tournament Medallion Hunt Model Airplane Flying Pancake Breakfast Papa's Hoops & Dance under Lights Parade Photography Contest Preview of LeDuc Auction Run, Walk, Stroll RTD Car Show River Events River Rumble Roller Hockey Tournament Sidewalk Sale Teen Night Tennis Tournament Tour de Hastings RIVER TOWN DAYS EVENTS Chamber Office (Claire Mathews) Our Saviour's, Marilee Anderson, Bass Wranglers, Keith Larson Senior Center, Laurie Thrush George Werner Chamber Office (Michelle Jacobs) Cathy Vinge Pat Wagner Carol & Cy Schmitz Sue Rembleski Pat Dymacek Coral Rudd GeoffMaltby Edina Realty, Sandy Becker Tom Norman Methodist Church, Marty McNunn Phil Biermaier Downtown Assn., Dolores Pemble Betty Aschenbrenner Cindy Smith Molly Kieffer Greg Kasel Chamber Office Brian Schommer Brad Stepan Barb Hollenbeck Aquatic Center, Darbie Johnson Cindy Toppin, Lisa Beytien Carlson Al Ploeger ,,; 651-437-6775 651-437-9052 612-408-2975 or 651-463-4917 651-438-0750 651-276-4521 651-437-6775 651-206-8951 651-437-4449 612-309-7234 (cell) or 651-437-8291 651-437-2436 651-438-3696 or 651-438-0304 651-437-3917 612-220-6473 (day) or 651-437-4093 (eve) 651-437-2121 651-454-2467 651-437-4398 (day) or 651-437-6817 (eve) 651-437-6303 651-437-8302 (day) or 651-437-7144 (eve) 651-480-6025 (day) or 651-480-8769 (eve) 651-480-2367 or 651-437-5304 651-480-4607 or 651-438-9239 (eve) 651-437-6400 or 651-480-2227 (eve) 651-437-6775 651-208-5361 or 651-480-8762 651-438-5963 or 651-438-0491 651-438-7949 651-480-6179 or 651-775-6766 (eve) 651-437-7753 651-438-9225 (eve) 651-437-3106 or 651-480-3008 (eve) Arts & Crafts (& inflatable games) Barbary Coast Service Bass Tournament Bingo & Bake Sale Coliseum Sports Bar & Grill Concessions & Fireworks Elvis Show/Eagles Bake Sale/65th Ann. Flea Market Garden Tractor Pull Garden Tour Just Thinking Jamboree Kiddie Parade Kitten Ball Toumarnent Medallion Hunt Model Airplane Flying Pancake Breakfast Papa's Hoops & Dance under Lights Parade Photography Contest Preview of LeDuc Auction Run, Walk, Stroll RTD Car Show River Events River Rumble Roller Hockey Tournament Sidewalk Sale Teen Night Tennis Tournament Tour de Hastings RIVERTOWN DAYS EVENTS Chamber Office (Claire Mathews) Our Saviour's, Marllee Anderson, Bass Wranglers, Keith Larson Senior Center, Laurie Thrush George Werner Chamber Office (Michelle Jacobs) Cathy Vinge Pat Wagner Carol & Cy Schntitz Sue Rembleski Pat Dymacek Coral Rudd Geoff Maltby Edina Realty, Sandy Becker Tom Norman Methodist Church, Marty McNUDIl Phil Biermaier Downtown Assn., Dolores Peroble Betty A.chenbrenner Cindy Smith Molly Kieffer Greg Kasel Chamber Office Brian Schommer Brad Stepan Barb Hollenbeck Aquatic Center, Darbie Johnson Cindy Toppin, Lisa Beytien Carlson Al Ploeger 651-437-6775 651437-9052 612-408-2975 or 651-463-4917 651-438-0750 651-276-4521 651-437-6775 651-206-8951 651-4374449 612-309-7234 (cell) or 651437-8291 651437-2436 651438-3696 or 651-438-0304 651437-3917 612-220-6473 (day) or 6514374093 (eve) 651-437-2121 651454-2467 651437-4398 (day) or 651437-6817 (eve) 651-437-6303 651437-8302 (day) or 651-437-7144 (eve) 651-480-6025 (day) or 651480-8769 (eve) 651-480-2367 or 651-437-5304 651-480-4607 or 651438-9239 (eve) 651437-6400 or 651480-2227 (eve) 651-437-6775 651-208-5361 or 651480-8762 651-438-5963 or 651438-0491 651438-7949 651-480-6179 or 651-775-6766 (eve) 651437-7753 651438-9225 (eve) 651-437-3106 or 651480-3008 (eve) VI-b' CD~ Dakota County Community Development Agency ..... ......... ........ June 28, 2004 Dave Osberg City of Hastings 101 4th Street East Hastings, MN 55033-1955 Dear Mr. Osberg: The Dakota County CDA is submitting an application for funding to develop West Village Townhomes, the second phase of our ~y ~wnhomes along South Frontage Drive in Hastings. There is an opportunity to receive funding through the Metropolitan Council's Liveable Communities Local Housing Incentive Account (LHIA). In order to be eligible for this funding, the city in which the housing is to be built must acknowledge its receptivity to such an award. If you are willing to have funds awarded for this Hastings development, please sign the enclosed form and return it to me. The first phase of these townhomes, Marketplace Townhomes, was awarded $297,600 ITom the LHIA program in 2001. We hope that this application will be as successful. If you have any questions regarding this request, the development, or our funding application please call me at (651) 675-4480. Siqcerely, lltl#4ii~~ Melissa Carnicelli Housing Finance Coordinator Enclosure 1228 Town Centre Drive. Eagan, MN 55123-1066 tel 651-675-4400 . fax 651-675-4444 Form 220 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEPTIVITY TO AN LCA FUNDING AWARD As a participant in the Livable Communities Local Housing Incentives Account Program, the City of Hastings supports the affordable and life-cycle objectives of the Livable Communities Act (LCA). Accordingly, it will accept and make available in a timely manner to Request for Proposal (RFP) applicant -Hastings West Village Family Housing Limited Partnership, through its General Partner Dakota County Community Development Agency, any LCA award to the city/township to assist the housing program or activity proposed in this application if such an award is made. By (City or Township Manager or Administrator) Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Multifamil Housin Resource lofl MHR Form 220 212003 VI-7 MEMO To: From: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor and City Council Tom Montgomery July 1,2004 Approve Glendale Heights 2nd Addition Emergency Access Trail Easement As a condition of approval, the Glendale Heights 2nd Addition was required to construct a secondary access to the developm~nt by way of an emergency access trail connecting Voyageur Trail to Enterprise -1\ ~enue by the Industrial Park water tower. Council is requested to approve dedication of a public street, utility and drainage easement across the Industrial Park property f~r this emergency access trail. Emergency Access Trail Easement , GLENOALE HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION ---l , : I I, , , III1 , : i I, ___J L___-'__ -.. ---:1----, , I · I, - ill! : i ___J L_..-=___--::/ .., -------------- ",- '," '" ,.~~. ,- il ...... I 0 .), ',. ,J IT I . i i I ~., VI-8 . Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: July 6,2004 Subject: Preliminary Land Sale\Land Credit Application - Westview Packaging - Southwest Corner of Spiral & Enterprise REQUEST Westview Packaging, LLC seeks the following approvals related to construction of a 68,000 s.f. warehouse and office building on 5.0 acres located south of Spiral Blvd and West of Enterprise Drive: 1) Preliminary approval of property sale and a $294,025 land credit ($1.35 per s.f. x 5.0 acres less $5 at closing). The action sets aside the property for the applicant for a period of time while complete plans and a development agreement are drafted and brought forward for final approval. 2) Concept approval for building construction. Formal Site Plan approval would follow at a later time. Westview has operated since 1976 as a brokerage company specializing is sales of packaging materials. During the 1990's the business leased space in the Hastings Industrial Park. In 2000 the company outgrew its space and moved to another leased facility in Farmington. Both Tom Trevis and Julie Trevis are Hastings residents. RECOMMENDATION The Economic Development Commission recommended unanimous approval of the request at the June 18, 2004 meeting. Staff has reviewed the land credit application and finds it meets state requirements for subsidy. Westview will have 90 days from preliminary approval to secure financing, site plan review, and address outstanding concerns contained in this memo. ATTACHMENTS . Land Credit Memo - John Grossman, HRA Director . Location Map . Concept Plan . Application for Land Credit BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The use conforms to the 2020 Comprehensive Plan. The subject property is classified I, Industrial. Zoning Classification The subject property is zoned 1-1, Industrial Park. Warehousing operations are a permitted use. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abuts the site: Direction North Existinq Use Spiral Blvd Vacant Vacant Quality One Twin City Container Zoninq Comp Plan East South West 1-1 - Ind. Park 1-1 - Ind. Park 1-1 - Ind. Park 1-1 -Ind. Park I - Industrial I - Industrial I - Industrial I - Industrial Existing Condition The existing site is flat and treeless. LAND SALE AND CREDIT Land Credit Program The land credit program defers the full cost of industrial park land for five years, and allows the owner to offset the cost with credits for the building value and payroll increase on the property. Analysis Staff has reviewed the request and finds it meets the City's subsidy requirements as follows: . 11 jobs would be brought to Hastings within two years. This exceeds the 2 jobs per acre goal. . Project exceeds lot coverage goal of 20 percent. 31 percent of the land would be covered with buildings. . Credits for the project appear to closely match the subsidy. The estimated credit of $274,752 (based upon 90 percent of construction costs and existing payrolls) is $19,273 less than the subsidy. If the payroll increases as expected, or the assessors Westview - Prelim Land Sale\ Land Credit Application City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 3 market value goes up faster than expected the credits may exceed the subsidy. If not, the owner will pay the City the difference in order to be released from the obligations. Please see the June 8, 2004 memo from John Grossman for further information. CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN REVIEW Proposed Building Westview proposes a 68,000 square foot building containing 60,000 square feet of warehouse and 8,000 square feet of office. The office would front on Spiral Blvd. Space for a future building addition and parking have been indicated south of the proposed building. Parking and loading areas would face east. The remaining acreage to the east would be reserved for a sale and construction for buildings facing Enterprise Avenue. Architectural Building Elevations A tip up concrete building is proposed for the warehouse area. A more finished office area is proposed. The applicant has submitted pictures of existing buildings that would be emulated. Parking The site appears to meet minimum parking requirements. Parking is provided as follows: Site 60,000 s.f. warehouse 8,000 s.f. office 68,000 s.f. Total aces Minor Subdivision The requested 5 acre sale is part of a larger 7.58 acre parcel. A minor subdivision would need to be completed prior to site plan approval. The request would likely be considered in conjunction with the Site Plan. Zoning Setbacks Setbacks in the 1-1 District are not specified. Zoning Setbacks appear acceptable and consistent with other buildings in the area. Access and Circulation Two accesses are proposed on Spiral Boulevard. The western access would ser.e a smail 7 stall parking lot. The eastern access would be the main entrance. The applicant should consider eliminating the western access and reallocating the parking stalls elsewhere; it does not appear the western entrance serves a large area. Westview - Prelim Land Sale\ Land Credit Application City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 4 Off-Street Loading Off street loading areas have been shown on the east end of the building. Future building construction along Enterprise Avenue would shield direct views from that roadway. June 8, 2004 TO: Economic Development Commission FROM: John Grossman, HRA Director RE: Westview Packaging application for land credit program The land credit program defers the full cost of industrial park land for five years, and allows the owner to offset the cost with credits for the building value and payroll increase on the property. The value of the land involved in the application qualifies it as a business subsidy under state statute. There will be a public notice and public hearing on this application before Council gives final approval. The action requested at this time is a recommendation to council for preliminary approval, which sets aside the property for the applicant for a period of time while complete plans and a development agreement are drafted for approval. Following infonnation indicates that the application meets the City's criteria for the land credit/business subsidy. AMOUNT OF LAND AND VALUE DEFERRED (SUBSIDY): 5 acres at $1.35/sq.ft. less $5.00 paid at closing: $294,025 NUMBER/AVERAGE WAGE OF NEW JOBS: 10 jobs will be transferred to the property at an average of $ 14/hour. At least one additional job will be created in 2 years. The job requirement for the business subsidy will be 11 jobs or full time equivalents in 2 years after moving in. The City nonnally expects 2 jobs per acre at $lO/hour or more. LOT COVERAGE OR EFFICIENT USE OF LAND (SUBSIDY) CONVEYED: The 68,000 sq. ft. building would cover 31 % of the 5 acres. This exceeds the 20% lot coverage typically expected. ESTIMATED CREDITS AGAINST SUBSIDY: Projecting credits in five years, based on 90% of construction costs and existing payrolls gives an estimate which is usually pretty close. The estimate is total credits of $274,752, or $19,273 less than the subsidy. If the payroll increases as expected, or the assessor's market value goes up faster than we expect, the credits may exceed the subsidy. If not, the owner will pay the City the difference in order to be released from the obligations. The estimate is not a requirement for approval, but a forecast of outcome. The owner's requirement to pay the City for the balance is expected. SITE MAP PROPERTY ID NUMBER: 19-32002-1J10.03 2004 ESTIMATED MARKET VALUES (PAYABLE 200S) FEE OWNER: CITY OF HASTINGS 101 4TH 5T E HASTINGS MN 55033-1944 126,300 126,300 toT SIZE (EXCLUDES ROAD EASEMENTS) 329,985 sa FT 7.58 ACRES LAND: BUILDING: TOTAL: PAYABLE 2004 TAXES NET TAX: 0.00 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS: 0.00 TOTAL TAX & SA: 0.00 SCHOOL DISTRICT: 200 LOCATION: SE1/4 SE1/4 SECTION 34-115.17 PAYABLE 2005 HOMESTEAD STATUS: NON HOMESTEAD PAYABLE 2005 ASMNT USAGE:EXEMPT WATERSHED DISTRICT: VERMILLION RIVER LAST QUALIFIED SALE: DATE: AMOUNT: = = ~ ~OTE: DlmensloM rounded 10 nearest toot. 2004 BUILDING INFORMATION (PAYABLE 2005): NO DATA AVAILABLE --._---- i PLAT NAME: HASTINGS INDUSTRIAL PARK NO 3 TAX DESCRIPTION: 1 3 :opyrlght 2004. Dakota County - This drawing Is neither a legally recotded map not. SlJIWY and Is not Im.nded 10 be usMt as on.. This drawing Is a co"",llatkm 01 records, infol'lTlltion and dati located In various city, county, and Ifale offlcu and other sourcu. affecting the aria ahO'M'l, and Is to be us~ lor ""erenc. purpoua >nly. c.kota County Is not I'8lponsIbI.lor II'fy InaccurKi.. "'-rain contained. It dllIC/'8panc1ea 81'11 ound, please contact Dakota County SLUVey' and land Information Department. ~ap Dal.: Jun. 3. 2004 Parcels Updated: 61112004 Aerial Photography. 1991 N j __-.nil ........ J j l :m 'DNID'()!:JVd JI.:i!IA.LSn :aw: AJJ'IIOY.i unommvA mlSOdmId T_ ,-- :1 I L-__ ~ ! id ;J, a .. ~ '" , , , , .. . .. .. . L-__ I idd i i ~dln I In!!! ...... .3A't 3'i;1~31N3 Moil ........ ........ _ ---.I\, -....._~ .. .... - II B , IIII1I.:MI.UID: ~ -:rn 'InAaa 11':) .. .. .. .. ..::,11 ,. ili~d!.::. li~iiir .: . }J!! . ....:.:':~::.......'. ..:::::::::~:::-:., -...- r~1 113 ~ ~:I ~R f':i ..,.. n - - ~ ~ 11.~ J: I _ _ --.J ---I I I I I I ~ I .~ . . I I ___..J ~ _ _ --.J I --- . - ....... ---~ _. -~ --- ... . IIII.L:IYIIIItD ~ ':IT1 'i1AOCI1r.) . ~ ~<r: I :m ':JNI:JV)!:)V d .ll.IDA.LS:iII! =HOi ..u.!'IDYoII :mr1omRlYA a:iSDdmLl ........ ~1! .>) 'I ?i t~ i ~ ~ II . v n ! \J r ~B '*~ 1: .. Ii !i~dl I~il 11 ~ I A 'i .. :..' ." - ' .. ' .. .. ..' ~ .. ~ " ' , . . ' - .' -. , .:' . ~., "" ....'... ~..., "' 'i>- ,', ' , '"",_,~_~ -,,, ) ,_" :-- ,:, '-~-,.,,-<>: .' .'_ ':"_ : _.<-:-,\"",t' /', .,' _~- - PAC "..y ','. .G" :::'.'''''0' , ,," , ;')""-'~:~~'--:--"~'~;~:~; . ,<.,'-:i',,'. ."",_J_. ",_ ".: )-h Westview Packaging, LLC Westview Sales Company began operation in 1976 as a sole proprietorship. Tom Trevis operated the brokerage company, specializing in sales of packaging materials to the agricultural industry, for the next twelve years. Steve Benzschawel, a packaging engineer, joined the company as a commissioned sales representative. Steve's knowledge of the corrugated box business opened new sales opportunities and changed the focus ofthe company from bags to boxes. During the 1990's the company focused on growth. Additional experienced sales representatives joined the company. A warehouse was opened in Fargo, North Dakota to support the sales effort in that region. An office, warehouse and fulfillment center were opened in Hastings, Minnesota to handle the growth created by additional sales people and our customers desire to have a JIT packaging supplier. In 1994, our core business of bags and boxes was expanded to assist customers with their need for savings in management time, space and freight. We started an assembly and fulfillment business to assist customers with display set-up, product packaging and custom glue applications. The assembly business has helped us to develop relationships with the manufacturing and engineering people responsible for testing new products and shipping methods. This relationship is a key sales tool and allows us to move quickly within our customer's organization. Our reputation in the packaging industry along with the specialized programs that we offer have given us the opportunity to serve customers such as Graco, Inc., Best Buy, United Sugars, Starkey Labs and Summit Brewing. In 2000, Westview outgrew the space we were occupying in Hastings, Minnesota and moved our warehouse to Farmington, Minnesota where we currently have approximately 40,000 square feet ofleased warehouse and office space. In September 2000, Julie Trevis became General Manager of the company with the goal of restructuring the financing and accounting programs to meet the growth of the company. During 2003 several significant events reshaped the company. A new lender reduced our interest rate and banking fees. Four additional seasoned sales people joined the team and dramatically increased sales and net income. The company was restructured into an LLC wit.~ Julie Trevis as majority owner. Westview Packaging, LLC is now loolr.ing to build a larger facility to handle the volume ofthe company. Being residents of Hastings, we are both very excited at the opportunity to bring our business back home. . 21130 Chippendale Avenue. Farmington, MN 55024 . Office (651) 463-3654 . Fax. (651) 463-3725 APPLICATION FOR LAND PURCHASE AND SUBSIDY AGREEMENT 1. Name, address, phone number of developer (the persons or entity that will be the owner of the real estate): Westview Packaging, LLC 21130 Chippendale Avenue Farmington, MN 55024 651-463-3654 2. Developers type of entity recorded with the Secretary of State: LLC 3. Developers Federal Tax ID #: 20-0122632 4. Full names and title of those signing the agreement for the developer: Thomas G. Trevis, CEO Julie A. Trevis, CFO/COO 5. Property - the acreage and legal description of the city property to be sold: Hastings Industrial Park SE1/4 SE1/4 SECTION 34-115-17 5 acres as indicted in attached drawing 6. The agreed market value of the property to be acquired: $1.35/sq. ft = $293,287.50 7. The agreed purchase price: $1.00/acre = $5.00 8. The difference between purchase price and market value of the property: $293,282.50 9. Date to which payment is deferred: August 1, 2009 10. Costs to be paid a) By City at closing: Deed Tax Conservation Fee b) By developer at closing Title update or abstract continuation Purchase price Recording fees for deed mortgage & development agreement City's attorney and consultant fees for agreements, reviews and applications (out of $2000 deposit) c) Developer's costs, paid to consultants and contractors Survey & site plan Environmental reports 11. Proposed size and market value of buildings to be constructed on the property: 67,968 Total Square Feet 60,000 Sq. Ft. Warehouse Space 7,968 Sq. Ft. Office/Assembly Space Estimated building cost = $2.2 million 12. Proposed increase in annual payroll (increase over existing) on the property in five years: We will be bringing approximately $294,000 of annual payroll into Hastings (or 10.88 job equivalents). Over the next 5 years, we expect to increase this by $54,000 (or 2 job equivalents) Note: These payroll numbers do not include owners compensation 13. Estimation of credits Construction Credit: $2,200,000/10 = $220,000 credit Jobs Credit: o Current Employment $294,000/27,000 = 10.88 job equivalents 10.88. $5400 = $58,752 credit Note: These payroll numbers do not include owners compensation 14. Job and wage goals to be reported to Minnesota Department of Trade & Economic Development to comply with Business Subsidy Act. a) Number of new jobs created by the business two years from occupancy: We will be bringing 10 jobs with us to Hastings. We expect to add one new job within the next two years and another one within the next five years. b) Hourly wage of new jobs to be no less than: $10.00/hour 15. Construction a) Building construction costs: $2,450,000 b) Approximate beginning and completion dates of construction and all site work: Start - August 2004 Finish - August 2005 16. The business which will occupy the building: a-e) See Questions 1-4 f) See attached g) Percent of building to be occupied by business: 100% h) Same as #12. 17. Recent history of the business or if new, the owner's experience in the business andlor resume: a) See attached. 18. Business References, contact person and phone number: a) Bank Vermillion State Bank Vermillion, MN 651-437-4433 John Poepl b) Supplier International Paper Minneapolis, MN 612-270-0108 Erik Olson c) Customer Graco, Inc Minneapolis, MN 612-623-6000 Tom McNearney 19. Project Finances Uses of Funds Sources of Funds Fees - $2000 Developers Cash - $100,000 Soft Costs - $40,000 Vermillion State Bank - $1,350,000 Construction - $2,400,000 SBA Loan - $1,000,000 Equipment - $50,000 20. Financing Sources: Vermillion State Bank John Poepl 651-437-4433 SBA Debby Gustafson 651-481-8081 21. List all sources and amounts of public assistance including land, government loans and grants: None 22. The developer may have to provide business financial records to a consultant hired by the City. The information will be confidential to the full extent the law provides. 23. Any lawsuits or actions pending against the developer, business(s) or partners? None 24. Has the applicant or a business owned by the applicant declared bankruptcy, when? No Name, title, signature of person representing the developer: & ~~ Thomas G. Trevis Julie A. Trevis VI-9 . Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: July 6, 2004 Subject: Order Public Hearing - Vacation of Right-of-Way #2004-36 - Forest Street adjacent to 500 2nd Street West - Robert & Heidi Langenfeld REQUEST The City Council is asked to order a public hearing to vacate the western 33 feet of the 47 feet of remaining ri~ht-of-way of Forest Street, adjacent to the Robert and Heidi Langenfeld property at 5002n Street West. The eastern 14 feet of right-of-way adjacent to the Kim and Lori Duong property would remain, and is not requested for vacation. The right-of-way is unimproved. Drainage and utility easements would be required for any public utilities. Upon approval the public hearing and final action would be held at the August 2, 2004 City Council Meeting. BACKGROUND 2003 Request for Vacation - Rick Ries In 2003, the City Council denied a request by the former property owner to vacate the entire right-of-way, and alleyway behind the home. The Council denied the request based on the following (Staff comments based on the differences between the requests are in italics): 1) Loss of access to a public water - 14 feet of right-of-way will remain 2) Loss of access to adjacent city property behind the alley - Alley vacation not requested. 3) Vacations of alleys and right-of-ways is discouraged under the Downtown Master Plan. Alley vacation not requested. Forest Street is a dead-end and has severe topographical restrictions for future extension 4) Existence of city utilities in the Forest Street right-of-way. The applicant has agreed to drainage and utility easements over the property. ATTACHMENTS . Location Map . Application N Z ... 0 en --I .' .' " ~ ,i;"'-'" .n.n..""-""-"" <.......... nonnom" ..-..' -"--..... ___mnnn...___ ___nmm., .___nom.___'___ .___..._.___..m.__ ___.m._m..__ ~n.._._.._mm.mnn' .. I._.____..._.m.__u._.. ....__n... tl ~ en 0,:'>' (') ~, S>>'TIO I' ". !:!:OO r (I) O...N en "U ;u tD cc ~ CD ~ ;:;: II> 0 5, <D ~ a II> c: CD tIIQ. CI) Co ... r 1ii '" 5' :J .... 0 ~+z '" a. CD cncn !;! '" .c - ........ o' C ::I m :e This is a request for one half(l/2) or 33' of unimproved Forest Street that lies between 500 and 418 West Second Street. Somewhere along the way, former residents at 418 West Second Street built a garage on Forest Street. Consequently they acquired 19' of Forest Street. (See attachment #1) The remaining 47' has a stone retaining wall on the 418 West side that runs approximately to the middle of the street. (See photo attachment #2) The city utilities in this section consist of a sewer hook up (curb box) for 418 W. And water and sewer curb boxes for 500 W. There are some trees and an Excel Energy pole. (See photo attachment #3) Our home is currently being built at 500 West Second Street. (See site plan attachment #4) Because one half of original Forest Street is presently being occupied by 418 West, we request that the street be officially vacated so 500 West may expand landscaping into the western half of the street. If this request is approved we will provide survey stakes to designate the property lines and agree to any easements required by the city. tt .;(O()4. - Sb LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF HASTINGS. PLANNING DEPARTMENT .. ':.. .:::~~St:-2e: =ES:: '-i2St!;j~2, !\A.t\! 55C2:: ?~::,'ls: c5~ .48C.::350 ~ax: 651.437.7082 Address of Property: . _')-00 S'T ~U e $ :r /70s 7/,,-<'1' 5' , / c Yc;..r7/-"'-I. ~ L~~ ai ;)escnp!io 01 Propery , , "". -d. Applicant.. ~ ~ () _ ~. 0(J!fner (If different Irom Applicant): Name ~. '! ~ ~,{;( ~;}3fc ~Jlc, Name Address' " " .'~ 5/ 1 Address H,.,~ 1'-1 A/ .~ ';--'0 ,q 3 Phone ":.-1. , . '''tJ-7 (.,:)1- '}<o'?,~t, ')- Phone Fax Fax Email f.it..sch.t C<.n\.Cf C.J C$, Glrw1 Emai! (J Description 01 Request (include site plan, survey, and/or plat il applicable): fJ/~ <<:;'<.-e~~- , Check applicable box(es): Final Plat Minor Sub, Rezone Spec, Use Variance Annexation EAW Prelim Plat Site Plan TOTAL: Note: All fees and escrow amounts due at time of application. $600 $500 $500 $500 $250 x.. $500 plus legal expense" $500 plus $1000 escrow $500 plus escrow: - Under 10 acres: $3000 ($500 Planning + $2500 Engineering) . Over 10 acres: $6000 (81000 Planning + $5000 Engineering) $500 plus escrow: - 0 . 5,000 s.l.: $1500 (Engineering) .5,000 - 10,000 s.I.: 52500 (5500 Planning + $2000 Engineering) .10.000,50.000 s.l.: 83250 (5750 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - 50,000 s.1. +: $4000 (81000 Planning + $3000 Engineering) Administrative Lot Split Comp Plan Amendment House Move Lot Line Adjustment Vacate ROW/Easement $50 $500 $500 $50 $400 Signature 01 Ap P / ~i9nature of Owner Da.1e (. :71("7 ~ Applicant Name and Title - Please Print Official Use File # Fee Paid Owner Name - PI:ase Print r I J /)"hJ...,..r 1_ I ~IA)"'--W''')''\~.p (" ';'t-ZJ.,: T? Z~;.J~ e""-\,,JJ Rec'd By~<5f-l~CJvv Receipt # Date Rec'd App. Complete ciJ. Of Iv---( 4/23/2003 c) bJA/oi' VI-10. HASTINGS FIRE DEPARTMENT MARK J. HOLMES, CHIEF 115 West 5th Street Hastings, Minnesota 55033-1815 Business Office (651) 4BO-6150 Fax (651) 480-6170 TO: Mayor Werner Council Members FROM: Mark J. Holmes - Fire Chie*r SUBJECT: Request for Payment DATE: July I, 2004 At the February 2, 2004 City Council meeting, bid award occurred for a replacement fire department tanker truck. The City entered into a contract with Midwest Fire Equipment and Repair Company Inc. for that purpose. The contract called for a commercial chassis to be fitted with all components necessary for our use. As required by the build contract, payment of the vehicle chassis was to take place upon delivery to the factory. The vehicle is ready for delivery to Midwest Fire Equipment and Repair Company and will take place on Tuesday July 6, 2004. ReQuested Action: City Council approval of first payment to Midwest Fire Equipment in the amount of $93,500.00. FIRE SUPPRESSION FIRE EDUCATION FIRE PREVENTION AMBULANCE SERVICE HASTINGS POLICE DEPARTMENT MEMO FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Mayor Mike Werner Hastings City Council Members Chief Mike McMenomy 1'1/tJ July 2, 2004 Consent Agenda Itemffrade In of Equipment TO: I have been approached by the governing body of the Hastings Police Reserve Auxiliary Unit with the proposal to change a piece of equipment used by the police department. This department currently has a John Deere Gator type utility vehicle that Chief Wasylik obtained in 1998. This vehicle was purchased to be utilized by the Hastings Police Reserve Unit for use in park and trail patrol programs for which the reserve unit has City approved budgeted money available. The members of the police reserve unit have been reluctant to utilize this John Deere Gator type utility vehicle as they found it to be too noisy and too restrictive due to the limited ability in taking the vehicle off the trails. I did give permission to the reserve unit governing body and members to check into the possibility of a trade-in for a 4-wheel ATV type vehicle with the understanding that the ATV would not be a high speed racing type device, but rather a low to mid-size utility type ATV. The reserve unit has checked with 61 Sales Marine and Sports on Highway 61 and did get a price of $5,000.00 for a Yamaha Kodiak 400 mid-sized performance ATV. There is a ten percent government discount making the price $4,500.00. The owner of the 61 Sales Marine and Sports did look at the Gator utility vehicle the City currently owns and would give a trade-in allowance of $3,700.00. This leaves a remaining balance of $800.00. The Hastings Police Reserve Unit has voted to and is offering to pay the difference of $800.00 out of the City line item reserve account, which contains money donated to the reserve program for the purchase of equipment and other reserve unit needs. This memo is seeking Council approval to pursue the trade-in and purchase of this A TV for use by the reserve unit in the park patrol program. I feel this type of equipment would get more reserve officers involved in the park patrol program throughout the spring, summer and fall months. The reserve unit is hoping that this transaction can be completed as soon as possible so the ATV would be available for use by the reserve members during Hastings Rivertown Days. If you have any questions concerning this request please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. MCM/mjc '.,. ..::,":' .K'4.0,.....,' '. - . ."...' .~, :'- '. '.. ,. "'. ,.'..' .,"", "",<".,:.,. ,', ',' ." '..''''.",,>-,.. ,"',0...........-..':;." ,ii;;?i '. ---- :~i~~1~~{: "1 ~U~f~ , 1\" / ,:,6QI1II!1Qrtd~ push' pHW0I4Wq ~ :i' ~[i~>eI,.tlon (jI1\ !~~~"IP!;~rb';; \:<~dds-pro'e~to~gli:'i':( ", ' .' ~:"Long~tra~QrSU&pS~iP~f.~rYe~'UP.'~. comfortable "de along wltb 'a full 9.1 Jliches of ground clearanc!t;' . A wide, thick saqdle wOFk$,Wit~thlt long-travel suspenders i()f~rt.her iso!atetheriderftumtoughterrain. . Stainless steel header: ~nd' muffler will look good and sound great for many moons. -Direct-driven front drive shaft (4WD model) eliminates U~joints. . Full-sized yet lightweight computer- designed chassis provides light, nimble handling. . Oversized tenders with inner lineu and full floorboards protectfhe "dE from unsolicited showers. . Sealed drivecase keeps water and gunk away lrom the dri'ebelt. . Hydraulic front disc bra~s and a sealed drum out hack laugh at ralr m~d,snow, tTI:C~ .lfthere'S~"yttacti~n>tf}befound the lull-size l5_io,heIHerrain tires will find it. . Wrinkle-finish front and rear stand; cargo racks can handle 264 paulK the standard trailer hitoh pulls \.lOll .2WD model weighs ~ at notmuc! more than 500 pounds - amazin: for a full-sized, lull-PDw,red AT'/. Kodiak 400 sIIownwUh Bptional winch Kodiak400isrecommendedtoru$&()fII~by ufll6l/11allandolder. Hastings Rivertown Days Parade Committee 108 East 5th Street Hastings, MN , 55033 June 20, 2004 Mr. Dave Osberg, Hastings City Administrator Hastings City Hall 101 E 4th St. Hastings, MN 55033 Dear Mr. Osberg: The Hastings Rivertown Days Parade Committee of 2004 is planning the Grand Day Parade to step-olIat 4:00 PM on July 18, 2004. This year's parade route is unchanged from that of previous years. The staging area has been changed and is indicated on the attached map. We are working with the Dakota County Highway Department, Dakota County Sheriff's Department, Hastings Police, and Public Works Department's and Regina Hospital to ensure traffic moves safely and without undue hindrance in all affected areas. :~- im Bauman 651-438-0388 Dave Pemble 651-437-7144 Logistics Co-Chairs, Hastings Rivertown Days Parade Committee jb: dmp L.. ..... c: ~, ~ ~p ~ I: j = N QJ ~ = J... = ~ = ~ o ~ J... (IIt~ ~ > ~ ;.-c ~:-- ~='" "-~ Q c: " "'" u Q) .s= () .8 Q) Q) - - ;;J ;;J 00 0:::0::: Q) ., 1:)" ~ ~ '" u !l.<( I : DOLTI '" w '" S31\J1O ;! z :J.S SV 0 '" D "- z sn!jy,j ...:..- <11 CD <11 :>. .... .... S: WI :5.... '!jQ lNVSV31d c:i 0 m '" ..- w I/) " 0.... [?J ;! ....s= z .......2' a1 <11- "- . . ~ C. m ~ .... 0 'ItJ3~' ..... Wiij = >'0 0 <11.... 1/).... ~ E <11 <11 m .... 0::.... Q,) W .,... C=s= - 0.... t-' = s=O '" ~ .... ..- r ::J c= I- = 0 0 .. I/) ~~:t:~ " ~ <11:E ,,"' ~~~~ ..... ::J 0> ~~ .~ ";:: '0... ~j;::t:~ ... .... ::t::..J '!jO N3S31S lV1I3N3~ ~ c= c= :.c::;: 0 .... (;1: ~ UF T~ U) ~ ,Q t--= 31~1 d t-= <;r t--= <;j en en en ,,- <:oJ' 0 :r: :r: ~ z l- I- <r N <0 ..... c:1 , F 31Vl~ , ~ ~ ,-;;;- ~;::: " f 3^IlOI ~S ~'" :;::i;: "1S. V Co "18 13IZV~H\ ..... ;:q ~'-'- 8 V\I~V:I en t--= c: en I I- t--= ~ en ld 18 ~ en U ..-- :r: Q) I- -C: ..q- () "~a INVSV31d Q) ""0 eo L- eo 0- c: ~ 0 ....... L- Q) > .- 0::: MEMO To: From: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor and City Council Nick Egger, Assistant City Engineer July 6, 2004 A ward Contract - Project 2004-4, lOth St. & Hwy 61 Improvements Bids were opened for the 10th S1. & Hwy 61 Improvements on Thursday afternoon, July 1, 2004. The low bid came in about $38,000 above the estimated construction cost of $550,895.00. Upon looking over the unit costs in the proposal, it is apparent that asphalt costs are much higher than originally expected. Other factors that are likely causes for higher bid prices include: short time frame for completion, difficulty of performing work amongst heavy traffic, and letting this contract in the middle of construction season. By comparison, the low bid was far closer in amount to the estimate than the second and third place bids. It is staff's recommendation that the City Council approves a resolution awarding the contract to the low bidder, Ace Blacktop, Inc. in the amount of $588,856.10. - CITY OF 1IItSTIN6S C:\Documents and Settings\MMesko LeeILocal SettingslTemporary Internet FilesIOLKFI04-4 lOth Hwy 61 ResA wardCont I.doc VIII-B-1 Eischen Cabinets 2nd Building - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 1 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: Kris Jenson, Associate Planner Date: July 6, 2004 Subject: Resolution - Eischen Cabinets - Site Plan Review #2004-32 - Construction of a Second Building - 625 Commerce Drive. REQUEST Paul Eischen of Eischen Cabinets seeks Site Plan Approval to construct an 11,400 s.f. warehouse building east of their existing building at 525 Commerce Drive in the Hastings Industrial Park. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission recommended approval of the site plan at their June 28, 2004 meeting. Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. ATTACHMENTS . Location Map . Plan Set . Engineering Review Comments - John Stewart, BDM Engineering . Application Eischen Cabinets 2nd Building - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The subject property is guided I - Industrial in the Hastings Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Classification The site is zoned 1-1 -Industrial Park. Wholesaling, and materials storage and sales are permitted uses in the district. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abuts the site: Direction North East South Existina Use Lawrence Interiors Vacant Commerce Dr APL Fabricators Eischen Cabinets Zonina 1-1 - Industrial Park 1-1 -Industrial Park Comp Plan I - Industrial I - Industrial West 1-1 - Industrial Park 1-1 - Industrial Park I - Industrial I - Industrial History Approval for the sale of land was granted by the City Council on May 3, 2003. Existing Condition The site is undeveloped and is flat and treeless. Proposal An 11,400 s.f. warehouse building is proposed. It will resemble the architectural style ofthe existing building constructed in 1998, and would be accessed directly from Commerce Dr. A stand-alone covered walkway between the two buildings is planned towards the rear of the buildings at the location of the overhead garage door, which would require the addition of an overhead door on the existing building. The applicant has been discussing this with the Building Official regarding potential code issues. The plans for the covered walkway are not included with this approval, but Staff is recommending that should the applicant decide to construct this in the future, that the plans be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director for compatibility with the buildings and site. SITE PLAN REVIEW Building Setbacks Building setbacks are determined through site plan review in the Industrial Park District. Building setbacks are acceptable, and are as follows: Eischen Cabinets 2'. Building - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - Juiy 6, 2004 Page 3 Setback Proposal Front Yard Setback - Commerce Drive 20 feet West Side Yard Setback - Eischen Cabinets 1 0 feet East Side Yard Setback - Vacant Lot 83 feet Rear Yard Setback - Lawrence Interiors 25+ feet Access and Circulation Access and circulation are acceptable. The site will be served with a single access to Commerce Drive. The parking lot will not be connected behind the buildings with the existing Eischen Cabinet building. Parking The site meets minimum parking requirements. Parking is provided as follows: Site Warehouse Building - 11,400 Total sJ. There doesn't appear to be any dedicated truck parking on the site, but the site does exceed the required number of spaces by five. All parking areas must be surrounded by concrete curb and gutter. Parking Lot Setback The parking lot meets minimum setback requirements. Pedestrian Access No new sidewalks or trails are proposed. Architectural Elevations Architectural elevations for the new building are similarto the existing building. The building is proposed to be sided primarily with taupe vertical steel siding, with yellow horizontal lap siding at the street-side of the building and a white roof. A 3' wide brick column on each side of the building separates the two different siding types. According to the applicant, this building will have the same materials and colors as the existing building at 625 Commerce Dr. Architectural Standards now require that the front fa<;:ade of industrial buildings be composed of at least 75% Class 1 or 2 materials, with Class 1 materials comprising at least 25% of the total fa<;:ade. The materials table is shown below. Eischen Cabinets 2nd Building - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 4 TABLE 10.28-1 Classes of Materials Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 . Brick . EIFS or Orivit . Industrial grade concrete . Natural Stone . Masonry Stucco precast panels . Glass (including block, . Specialty Integral Colored . Smooth concrete windows, or opaque Concrete Block (including . Scored concrete mirrored panels) textured, burnished . Ceramic . Seamless metal panels block, rock face block) . Wood (including copper) . Architecturally textured . Aluminum or Vinyl Siding . Other materials not listed concrete precast panels . Other materials not listed elsewhere as approved . Tile (masonry, stone or elsewhere as approved by the Administrative clay) by the Administrative Official . Other materials not listed Official elsewhere as approved by the Administrative Official The original building was constructed in 1998, prior to the requirement of architectural standards. Since the proposed building will be surrounded by buildings constructed prior to those requirements, Staff is willing to allow this building a little more flexibility in meeting the standard requirements. Staff is recommending the addition of a brick wainscoting 3' in height along the front portion of the building from the brick veneer column on the west side to the brick column on the east side. This would satisfy the requirement of 25% of Class 1 materials on the front as required in the Architectural Standards. Paul Eischen has stated that at this time he prefers to do the lap siding on the front, and that at some point in the future he would like to replace the lap siding on the front of both buildings with brick, stone or some type of similar treatment. Waste Disposal Waste Disposal will be handled inside the building, thus there is not a need for an exterior waste enclosure building. Landscape Plan The existing site incorporates a variety of tree and shrub plantings along the street side. The following additions are needed to comply with minimum requirements: 1) The sizes, species, and method of installation for all landscaping must be identified. 2) All landscaped areas must be irrigated. Eischen Cabinets 2nd Building. Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 5 Lighting Plan Lighting for the parking lot is not proposed. A photometric plan for any parking lot lighting must be submitted for approval by the Planning Director prior to installation. Signage The site contains an existing monument sign and two wall signs. The wall sign areas indicated on the plans show a total area of 190 square feet for wall signs. According to the sign ordinance, this building would be allowed 133 square feet of wall sign age, based on the building size. site Any signage must be approved by the Planning Department prior to being placed on the site. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans The Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans have been forwarded to BDM Engineering for review and comment. Review comments must be adequately addressed before the plan is scheduled for final review by the City Council. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control plan and Utility plan approval must be obtained by the Public Works Director as a condition of approval. There may be a need for a drainage and utility easement along the west property line, between the existing and proposed building. The grading plan does indicate that the area will be graded for drainage. Staff is waiting for a response from the Public Works Director on this issue. c~\{CS -kn~~ cab net company 6/29/04 To: Planning Commission City Council "' Re: Proposed Eischen Cabinet Company Building @ 625 Comerce dRive -' To Whom It May Concern: This is in response, and hopefully to answer the remaining outstanding information that is requested prior to City Council review. 1. The location of exterior waste enclosures is not included. We are currently handling our trash on the inside of the building, and this seems to be working great. As was discussed at the Planning Commission Meeting, on Monday June 28, we are planning on doing this same thing with the new building as well. This was asked by John Hinzman, and did not seem to be of concern. 2. The plmming commission is recommending, a modified agreement to the building finish standards, by including a three foot tall, brick wainscoting on the front of the new building. While this compromise is greatly appretiated, and in the scope of the project rather cost effective, I would choose not to be forced to comply with this for the following reasons: One, while I agree that the buildings being constructed in this town should be constructed "nicely", we are not a retail store. We are also not construction this building on the corners of two very busy, nor visible streets. Two, when we built our first building four or tlve years ago, it was built as a price conscious investment. At that time, we were a new company, only being in business for a year or so. Money, and the ability to borrow money was very tight. Since tllat time, we are still a very young company, experiencing incredible growth. mld tlnding that we are needing more space. With this in mind, we are proposing that we be allowed to construct a building that will look the same as our existing building. I believe that it is very important for the Eischen Cabinet Company building to be tl1e same. It is important that when our customers pull into our facility, that these two building look the same, and not be some mis - matched collection of buildings. 525 Commerce Drive * Hastings, MN 55033 Phone (65]) 480-3] 24 * Fax (651) 480-2539 License #94237 ~C(f title+- cahiu"t company Three, it is my intention to replace the siding on our existing building with some other fmish(s). These finishes would be of stone, brick or stucco, and probably a combination oftbem. By forcing me to comply witb your request oftbe three foot high brick wainscot, we are just "cutting off our noses to spite our faces". When the time comes, that I decide to re-do the fronts of tbese two buildings, it won't be anything as cheap, ugly and disproportionate as the three foot tall wainscot. 3. (5) full size and (10) reduced copies. The following is in response to the Recommended Action 1. yes 2. yes, grass and landscaping as noted on site plan 3. yes, lawn service 4. yes 5. no rooftop equipment 6. no exterior waste enclosure. This is addressed in number one above 7. yes, see site plan 8. (species, sizes of landscaping) See site Plan, Dwyer to spell out 9. We do intend to irrigate all areas. 10. Parking lot lighting to be included on site plan 11. yes 12. yes 13. understood 14. The proposed sign will be similar to the one that we currently have. Is this sign permit inclusive of all signs, or of signs of certain size(s). 15. understood Site Plan Review: Dwyer to show sewer and water hookups, handicapped parking spaces, parking lot lighting and site signage is already included on site plan Recommendations: I. I believe that the site plan does show contours across the site. There just aren't many, it is a flat site. 2. Dwyer to show cross section of proposed swale 3. Dwyer to direct drainage away from sanitary sewer??? 525 Commerce Drive * Hastings. MN 55033 Phone (65]) 480-3124 . Fax (651) 480-2539 License #94237 ,:1 " :... This is the recommended action list that is referred to on page 2 of the letter. RECOMMENDED ACTION Approval of the Site Plan is recommended subject to the following: 1) Adherence to the Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations as presented to the City Council. 2) All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 3) The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City's property maintenance ordinance. 4) Final approval of the development grading and utility plans by the City of Hastings. The applicant shall be liable for any costs involved in consultant review of the plans. 5) All rooftop equipment shall be screened by a parapet wall from areas facing a public right-of-way, and painted to match the building elsewhere. 6) All waste enclosures shall be enclosed on all four sides to fully screen the contents, and constructed with exterior materials to match the primary building. 7) All parking and drive aisle areas shall be constructed to city standards including concrete curb and bituminous surfacing. 8) The sizes, species, and method of installation for all landscaping must be identified. 9) All landscaped areas must be irrigated. 10) A photometric plan for any parking lot lighting must be submitted for approval by the Planning Director prior to installation. 11) Any uncompleted site work (including landscaping) must be escrowed at 125 percent of the estimated value prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 12) Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 13) Any future construction of a covered walkway between the buildings must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director for architectural compatibility prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14) Any signage on the site is required to obtain a sign permit from the Planning Department prior to beihgerected on site. 15) Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and votc/. "' ~, 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. II. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Sincerely, Paul cabinet company Dwyer to show. Is it even possible? We couldn't get this on our current building Dwyer to show handicapped parking Dwyer to show stop sign and parking entrance??? Come on Dwyer to perform storm water calculations Cross section of proposed berm Dwyer to show erosion control devise at the discharge point of storm sewer Show detail of adjoining buildings and those south of commerce drive??? We are planning on sprinkling the building Street light at the drive enterence??? Landscaped with rock and shrubs understood understood Dwyer show utility hook up No perimeter fencing will be done. -. -' 525 Commerce Drive * Hastings, MN 55033 Phone (65 J) 480-3124 . Fax (65 J) 480-2539 License #94237 HASTINGS CITY COUNCil RESOLUTION NO. 07-_"04 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS APPROVING THE SITE PLAN FOR EISCHEN CABINETS TO CONSTRUCT A BUilDING AT 625 COMMERCE DRIVE, HASTINGS, MINNESOTA Council member and moved its adoption: introduced the following Resolution WHEREAS, Eischen Cabinets, who have an approved land sale with the City of Hastings for property located at 625 Commerce Drive, have requested approval to construct a +/- 11,400 s.f. warehouse building on property legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, HASTINGS INDUSTRIAL PARK NO.6, Dakota County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2004, review was conducted before the Planning Commission of the City of Hastings, as required by state law, city charter and city ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Site Plan subject to the conditions contained herein. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCil OF THE CITY OF HASTINGS AS FOllOWS: The City Council hereby concurs with the Planning Commission and approves the site plan request subject to the following conditions: 1) Adherence to the Site Plan, Landscape Plan, and Architectural Elevations as presented to the City Council. 2) All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 3) The disturbed areas of the site shall be maintained to the requirements of the City's property maintenance ordinance. 4) Final approval of the development grading and utility plans by the City of Hastings. The applicant shall be liable for any costs involved in consultant review of the plans. 5) That a brick (or other Class 1 material) wainscoting 3' in height be added along the front portion of the building from the brick veneer column on the west side to the brick column on the east side. 6) All rooftop equipment shall be screened by a parapet wall from areas facing a public right-of-way, and painted to match the building elsewhere. 7) All parking and drive aisle areas shall be constructed to city standards including concrete curb and bituminous surfacing. 8) The sizes, species, and method of installation for all landscaping must be identified. 9) All landscaped areas must be irrigated. 10) A photometric plan for any parking lot lighting must be submitted for approval by the Planning Director prior to installation. 11) Any uncompleted site work (including landscaping) must be escrowed at 125 percent of the estimated value prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. 12) Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy. 13) Any future construction of a covered walkway between the buildings must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director for architectural compatibility prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14) Any signage on the site is required to obtain a sign permit from the Planning Department prior to being erected on site. 15) Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void Council member being put to a vote adopted by moved a second to this resolution and upon present. Ayes: _ Nays: Absent: ATTEST: Michael D. Wemer, Mayor Melanie Mesko Lee Administrative AssistanUCity Clerk I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above is a true and correct copy of resolution presented to and adopted by the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, Minnesota, on the 18th day of August, 2003, as disclosed by the records of the City of Hastings on file and of record in the office. Melanie Mesko Lee Administrative AssistanUCity Clerk (SEAL) This instrument drafted by: City of Hastings (KKJ) 101 4th 81. East Hastings, MN 55033 z S2 I- ~ ill --l ill ill ;?; --l }- I- Ir ill (l ~I {L. ~ i= <( > ill --l ill I- () --l 1 = ~. I: -I [D i I-.J I- I- L_ I'" ~ ,- L_ ,- ~ L ~ ! ~~ r L_ ,:. , Ii' g ~ @IV p I!!!!] 2jg z <( --l {L Ir () 31 ~ LL II ~ @ = @IV"; 2jgiOl I!!!!] - "" 8.. @:; @IV"" "" =", I!!!!].. .', ,[-"'~.' ,.' L..q'r)(~ r:Mr.H BtI~;!I'1 MH " ~IM rr f" '" 8.\0_59 '; [1,1\ IL[', '.826.\4 "(.'HfR .-.~__';Jc,..-. ,f f~U' STORM,.,'~_"'lS_ r (~~TI~' _ ~ wArRv~~ . ,. __" ," <;1"- .-~4%1~7;34" ~ _._1/< - ~/O. -- ...-----M=~_.-.,.-----M- ~53. ...,:.:I!. ^, jI ,"'!i -- ~ ~, '2 01 :: ,I: ~ ? ~ __~~~~_1~~~I~~r::~'-'\B1..y';-'- ...--Ss-- ~~ )''2Jl wiD'- '------------, b"" 'I _____--- I 'II _------- I I' , ill::, t : ""'1' : I~. c. ---- -. ", :' y~~ \18"~, I I,' i~ "(1\ I I 1'1: ------ ',~--I~'2-,jO,~,'" 'i 1'-'" PROPOSED :)417. ~ODIFI[D _\..- It CO,," .'URe ~:~;OSF~ __> II~ :nl~ 2 CURB _I i 1.1) II I I' fll t:r ii I 11 ~ -1 1 I , . , , PROP""rl -~ cmjcl 1 ~ SPICL ^' I '),fe. -__) . I i -I ~~ I - i ~~1: jl i3~ I ~r/<' 'I l' .. ~ ' f7~~J N / / / ~ y /1J L ,"_ 60,00 34:----- ~,~ . ,0,0 - - . 00'(:::::10 .' ~1'~ ,::~;O$ED ff0' I ~3\:) ~ _ _ _ P~POS~ -=~1J~"_ ~ I~I~;OSFD \-0) CURB --- \ '{;?l. I Y ',~ '~ROPOSE[)n TREES E)-I~ -{to. -----"\ _&_..J ~ EXISTING 10 FT. DRAINAGE I f'I - - - -- UTlUTY EASEMENT '0 24.00 'by TOP Of IRON _--..... ELEV. _ 832.1. ...... -f,;...... ~~<; -SlS,'-- ,;.~.~ .' ".--'~~:~;1Sc --7-f.r--'" / I --- <t..i'J' . " <, . ')' 'i,? .10.0 . 60.00 ~1r~" ; , " .> , ro I II II , ,I " I ~I; LOT 3 , " -f';_. q,';~ ' ., .' q.,";' .~,' 'I.". 'J;;J ,,~ it' 'I';~' '" " ~.'., 1 .,.., 'b 00 , UJ I !--... , ~o ~..f y 1:>~ o z .,~'pROI;'OSED BUILDING PROPOSED SI A~. ELE\! '" " ~, , g~. q,'?" '. g.., ------ _ 00 g 51 834.40 ~ r\-~ :'0"::0 . " . .' " . TOP Of' I!'tON ELEV. - !3J.2........ ~-- .> ., ':",,_rI ' N>PROXIMATE LOCAT1ON_-1 or POSSIBLE EXISTING TElEPHONE UNE ~o .' ~' ",' :~.~. ,;.~' 589033'33"E 153.01 , PRQ90SfD caf.lc. .' SPII~WAY L ,"" . 'b")'\.~QI . 'ii, I I ;,' ) / ~) I rJ/ 'to'.' \.,' , " " . , , . ".~) .' " /Y / . ,/ PROPOSED W'LY fL.ttRED END / ,/ ./ Of 17' CMP CUVERT. -J EXISTING BmJUINOUS ROADWAY -< tNY. ElEV. ... 831,4 ;I"'r--TOP OF IRe / ElEV. .. 8.~ "" SMII'.~I~Y SfW[R r~IM [LI"'" Jj I' IIIVE.RT f.'.' __""r>, 't,'" 0<)\' . - E.>:ISru~G '-ArCH HAS!!; RIM [lEv" "\.10.28 1'.'1 H[v .,. 825.9.\ ~ ~ ~8 UJ r--b> 0," 0\0 <0," '"1:> o z b <be,' " 'b")~ . " " " , " . " " . TOP Of IRON / ~ ELEV. _ 631.70 , I .- ,r _.' .I.~ "::'tEtEPHo~:- ~ER VA~':'w__!,E~~"':__ ,~. ~ i~ '0"">, ' . . l~;;" \~:2J BUILt! I - - -- fOP '~U' ...,,\-I< F!f\t . '-.. \ , \ ::.'1.- \0:> , - , "').. \'to '- PROPOSED E'L'f fLARED END Of 12" CMP CUVERT. INV., ELEV. .. 8.31.2 <. '0 ,. . rBBMl CONSULTING ENGINEERS, PLC File: Eischen Cabinet Company Date: June 23, 2004 To: John Hinzman, Planning Director City of Hastings From: John B Stewart P.E. Introduction: We have completed the Site Plan Review for the Green Eischen Cabinet Company site as proposed by John Dwyer. Our Comments are as follows: General Location: 1. The property; Lot 3 Block 1 Hastings Industrial Park No.6, contains approximately 0.87 acres and is located on Commerce Drive. The site has a slight tilt towards the northeast comer of the site. The applicant proposed to construct a 11,400 sq. ft. warehouse at a slab elevation of 834.40' on the west side of the lot. The proposed parking area approximately 11.500 square feet is proposed to drain to the north east corner of the site. Drainage from the west side of the buildings is shown to break about mid lot and flow towards commerce and round the north end of the building towards the mid point of the east side of the lot. 2. In a telephone conversation with John Dwyer on Friday June 18th Mr. Dwyer indicated that he proposes a berm on the north side of the property to force the drainage to flow to mid block on the east side of the site. Site Plan Review: 1. Drainage swales should ideally show a minimum grade of 2% the plan shows a grade of 1.78%. However the plan does not show a typical swale section and the drainage is proposed to flow over the top of an existing sanitary manhole in the north east corner of the site. 2. Parking lot grading should show a grade of at least 1.0% the longest flow path shows a grade of 2.3% 3. The site plan does not show proposed sewer and water hook ups to the building. 4. The site plan does not show a curb along the east side of the building nor does it show any handicapped accessible parking or site signage or lighting. Memo: Eischen Cabinet Company Site Plan June 23, 2004 5. The building detail sheet shows overhead doors and access doorways on the west side of the building, where there is a 10 foot set back. We note that the roof line shows no gutters or downspouts the 10 foot space between the building line and the property line will not be well drained or flat and will not be conducive to entrance and egress as suggested by the numerous accesses shown. Recommendations: 1. Please show proposed contours across the site. 2. Please show a cross section of the proposed swale (4:1 side slopes 3 foot wide bottom). 3. Please direct drainage away from sanitary sewer casting. 4. Show curbing 4 foot off the building on the east side show minimum drop of 6" in 10 ffet from proposed slab elevation to surrounding grade. 5. Show handicapped accessible parking. 6. Show stop sign at entrance drive. 7. Show storm water calculations and NURP pond. 8. Show cross section of proposed berm and show berm location via shading. 9. Please show an erosion control devise (riprap, at the discharge point to the storm sewer). 10. Please show detail of property to the north south and west of Lot 4 Block 1 (existing structures and topo, drainage facilities). Show entrance drives on south side of Commerce Drive. 11.ls sprinkling required for the proposed building? 12. A streetlight casting 2 lumens over the entrance drive should be provided. 13. Landscape the 4 foot area between the curb and the east side of the building. 14. The site plan should contain a statement that no changes shall be made without express written approval from the City of Hastings. 15. The plan sheet should contain a note advising that the builder call Gopher State One Call. 16. Please show details of utility hook up. 17. Show location of perimeter fencing. Page 2 of 2 Ma~ 21 04 02:17p David L Harris 651 480 8767 p.5 LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF HASTINGS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 4th Street East, Hastings, MN 55033 Phone: 651.480.2350 Fax: 651.437.7082 Address of Property: &:, 2<s" LO,/}'\ I'"' v...<.L Legal Description of Property: { OT ~ , h L-oq::.... I , P4:VL Gt'7u&r-! oS,?-" c:"".,~ ])J\... i-if\S1l -"")';' Phone <fe,;.- -;i 1-4- Fax 4<i'.>", - 2s3'1 Email ~ISc..Hc.^.~\Nl..TS.@~vS.I...J.TI::"tJJLI..La_ Applicant: Name Address Owner (If different from Applicant): Name Address Phone Fax Ema" Description of Request (include site plan, survey. and/or plat if applicable): ,,?,.fe- rl4.J <F~ AI?vJ {7,u1LDty Check applicable box(es): Note: All fees and escrow amounts due at time of application. $600 ~ $500 $500 $500 $250 $500 plus legal expenses $500 plus $1000 escrow $500 plus escrow: - Under 10 acres: $3000 ($500 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - Over 10 acres: $6000 ($1000 Planning + $5000 Engineering) Site Plan $500 plus escrow: . _ 1. WI -O-S,OOO s.f.: $1S00 (Engineering) $>= 5> .~.OOO - 10.000 sJ.: $2500 ($500 Planning + $2000 Engineering) - 10.000 - 50,000 sJ.: $3250 ($7S0 Planning + $2SOO Engineering) - 50,000 sJ. +: $4000 ($1000 Planning + $3000 Engineering) Final Plat Minor Sub. Rezone Spec. Use Variance Annexation EAW Prelim Plat r- Administrative Lot Split Comp Plan Amendment House Move Lot Line Adjustment Vacate ROWlEasement $50 $500 $500 $50 $400 Signature of Owner Date licant Name and TiUe - Please Print Owner Name - Please Print Official Use Only F:1_.&C ""-o...A _"1......, IIO"'~..I~ Fee Paid .~ Rec'd By~ Receipt # r;J? t.d v/,)/' )'1 4/2312003 Date Rec'd App. Complete VIII-B-2 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: July 6, 2004 Subject: Hastings Inn - Denial of Request to Use Former Building Setback in Construction of a New Building - 1520 Vermillion Street - Fred Tomas. REQUEST Fred Tomas of Claim Adjustment Services, Inc. seeks approval to reconstruct the buildings destroyed in the recent Hastings Inn (1520 Vermillion Street) fire at their former setbacks as follows: Building Square Setback\Adjacent Use Feet Motel-12 Room 5,434 South - 10 feet - Spin City Laundry SW Corner West - 6.4 feet - SinQle Family Homes Pool Rec Area 4,330 West - 1.1 feet - SinQe Family Homes Approvals for construction are not sought at this time. Site plan approval would still be required prior to any building construction. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to deny the request to reconstruct buildings at the former setback based upon the following: 1) The owner stated they did not object to the recommendation for denial. 2) The building would not meet minimum building code setbacks, and the setbacks from adjacent residential properties is not adequate. ATTACHMENTS . Location Map . Survey BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The subject property is guided C - Commercial in the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Classification The site is zoned C-3 - Community Regional Commerce. Lodging services including hotels and motels are identified as Permitted Uses in the C-3 District. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abuts the site: Direction North East Existinq Use Hasting Auto Service Vermillion Street Hampton Bank Spin City Laundry Single Family Homes Zoninq Comp Plan C-3 - Comm Reg. Comm. C-Commercial C-3 - Comm Reg. Comm. C-Commercial C-3 - Comm Reg. Comm. C-Commercial R-3 - Med\High Density U-I - Res 1-3 South West History The Hotel has been in operation on site since 1951. Fire destroyed 12 of the 42 rooms and the pool\rec area. The majority of motel rooms and the office were not destroyed. BUILDING SETBACK REVIEW Zoning Code Setbacks Minimum setback requirements are not stipulated in the zoning code and are determined upon site plan approval. It is unlikely that the former setbacks of the commercial building from the adjacent residential homes would be approved today. Building Code Setbacks According to the Building Official, construction of the destroyed buildings at the same location and of the same materials would not be allowed under the current building code. The building was constructed prior to the adoption of building codes and site plan review. The pool area is only 1.1 feet from the property boundary. Minimum setbacks would vary depending upon the use, building openings, and materials of construction. - en cc c: 0 - == ~.E .C ID en> me IN LO T""" ~ . 6 ~ "T "; <:' .., ,. "1 "i' ~ ~ LEE E << << << << S !:: o :;:0 as u o ...J CD - en "C 9* ~ ooooot'o~ c: >: Q) I is ~.; ~ --1 i w "S ~:N<6ZZ~!::;:~2) <:0 OOO...O~. DI I .J ........ ",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,..,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:....,,,,,,,,,,.;;,,,,,,,,,,,,..,,,,,,,....,,,,,"",........""... 'f"::'''''''''::''''''':'''''''''''\ ~r:"":::":_""~~. ...-----....,. f--.......:~-~-_....._--_.._..._---_._-_.........~.~r~ ag .~.~~~~ . ~,,".. .... '1: jr.........! - '~r--""Y" FRANK R. CARDAR^E~!&/ ,6d(- ~ - ~ ~ Land Surveyor (612}g41-30~}Jl// ~-- ~~./- UP' .. ~Praioie MN55344 f C/....~ 6J/-I,O-Z3S"o)(_. ' Qttt'titit8tt ~t ~Ut'Vtp . Survey For, He s-t!nqs Inn 1520 Vermillion Street Hasting5. Minnesota 55033 I hereby certify to Lee Hotel Group, Inc., First N~tlonal Bank, Hastings, MN, and Old Republic Title that this is a true and correct cdpy of a survey of the property of the land described on Old Republic Title Commitment No. D-DC9B0060040C dated April 28, 1998 as found on page 2~ and of the location of all buildings thereon, and all visible encroach- ments, if any, jrom or on said land. urveyed by me this 14. day o. 99B. NmES: Garage 405 sq.ft. Building 870 II " Office 2,658 Rec.Rm. 4,416 M.otel Rma14.440 22,789 43 Total Hotel Units Per Land Area; 1.88 Acres 3calt"!:1"=40' ...", '. , /.. ~note5 Iron Mon. Found ~ " a' J ':J '1' ..... ~ ~ ~ ;::: ~ ,~ -<. '" .. ~8 .., < '" ~ ,~ <;[ ~ , , ~ , , , '" .' \ ~ G ~ .J H'. --:l4.J ., , , , " , : " " 0 , ,I , " , , M , :'! ~ : , '<: I .~ i ~ ~ 'f t- , , " $nL \ , " , ., ". , ~'8L 6508 Mgmt. -- /70.6-- 98.0 .."I'..::.r,ll."-- ',.. II... ." "0 .:" .;. ~.; ....,../ 1<00""'5 (If) 73.2 {," '"-.-r-' r ; ,>~,\ ~.~ ' .- /",0-0 2Z.8 --..---.. -.:'.-1 ,')' Q ~ ~"' .' I ~,__, ..... / : . '<\,. ~ I ~ ' -< . : ,~'I' ~ ~ ~ ." ~ ~ ;C ~ ! J :......... " '; ~ "', .~ Q ,~ :~ "00 k~ "'~ '0 --~~ JJ' "," .,. '. . .~ c .. . '~.~ :U.O Fb-T."c /I ,r:. _ "0,,",5' (/2) 147,' . 'I. 7q,,? '--c?~-:'~ol E:~ Book_ Page_ File~sv / of '/7 .::;:/ If' L E. T 1- , I ,I 'I {.Jj ~ .~ ., --.--~-- '. ~:: ) " ~:i :..) f:! __1.\1" fk"i. L~r. L. ~r 3 md .~"~ t:..~,..., 'T;2'1:-~ -,. ,< " [. , I!.' ., ,- " ";. Ir'''1~'1.l(,vlC~, L.(J-r~ ., 1.2.4'7 '. ,., '_ 1()4~<;JYI,j)I.EJ.. . ,1....<1 / , !<OQ,MS (7) Q~( t:,) 04 ~ "I : '.' .' ""s_:,J..;,..;~K.'":::.i.:,~~;;;'.;;':'.."..;,.-; .~_+- .......-- .cNr.1tAN~# " / ,\ i".' .. : .E"~i.:-t...-......;.. ~.... . '> ~ ~ /5I-AN.O -,- -,- 101."':., {? ./ .,. ZJ'1a::r.E.,L" . ,.. I~I.~ f:2t2J2L:f1'5{S) ~ IlJ .2. " , ,. ~, ----~.. ~_EHTR.ANt.E ....J II PI.AHT" I !') E:XI7'.~ L ." ~ , . '" '" W'f I -~,. -t';:~ \... I'ij " -- . "'~ /. . t,-'. " :.~: C.~, " '" 1'1. ~ j ~ ;Yi t U! C( &; ..~ Z?,D 2: <) -J ..J -~ I:: Ie::: lL\ .).. ::1. J: -- ~ '. -,<, tj VIII-B-3 Memo To: Mayor Werner and City Council From: John Hinzman, Planning Director Date: July 6, 2004 Subject: Lawrence Builders - Site Plan Review #2004-21 - Two 36 unit Condominium Buildings - Whispering Lane & Crestview Drive REQUEST Lawrence Builders seeks Site Plan Approval to construct two 3 story, 36 unit condominium buildings (72 units total) and 4 garages on +/- 4.0 acres located west of the intersection of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive in Williams 181 Addition. Approval to construct 90 units on the site was approved as part of a Rezoning, Planned Residential Development and Plat approved by the City in 1986. RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission. Deny The Planning Commission voted to deny the request by a 4 - yes (Greil, Schmitt, Alongi, Mcinnis); 1 - no (Hollenbeck); 1 - abstention (Twedt) at the June 28, 2004 meeting. Commissioners voting no cited the following reasons: 1) The site plan does not meet the landscaping and berming conditions placed upon the 1986 Preliminary Plat approval. 2) Increase in traffic from the development would cause a negative effect on the neighborhood. Staff - Approve Staff recommends approval of the Site Plan subject to the conditions enclosed in the memorandum. Staff contends the landscaping proposed meets site plan requirements and provides greater tree planting sizes (3" caliper, instead of 1.5") The applicant has also designated native planting areas consisting of shrub and understory vegetation. The increased landscaping was required in lieu of berming. Because the site is higher in elevation than surrounding areas, berming would have a minimal effect on screening. The 2003 traffic study for the area was revised to include High School traffic; all streets and Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 2 intersections operated at an acceptable level of service during am peak, pm peak and average daily traffic (operating at Level B or better). The proposed 72 units is less than the 90 units approved for the property. Staff will draft a resolution for final action upon direction by the City Council. ATTACHMENTS . Location Map . Plan Set · Updated Traffic Study Memo - Benshoof and Associates. . Traffic Count Reports - 4th Street and Comparable Roads · Letter from Foster & Brever, Attorneys - June 28, 2004 · Property Value Comparison - Whispering Lane Area - submitted by Larry Christianson 275 Whispering Lane · Letter from Jan Hanson - Neighboring Resident · "Objections to Proposed Project on Whispering Lane" - Larry Christianson 275 Whispering Lane . Application MEETING HISTORY The following meetings have taken place since application submittal: May 19, 2004 - Neighborhood Meeting On May 19, 2004 a neighborhood meeting was held to present the plan to the public. Approximately 20 people attended the meeting. June 14, 2004 - Planning Commission Meeting The Planning Commission discussed the request at the June 14, 2004 meeting, however no formal action was taken by the Commission at that time. Several residents spoke in opposition to the request. Commissioners directed staff to provide further information on the following: . Sidewalks and trails . Parking . Verify timing of Traffic Study to ensure inclusion of High School. . Architecture . Tree Preservation June 28, 2004 - Planning Commission Meeting The Planning Commission voted to deny the request. Staff provided the following Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 3 information based upon the June 14th meeting requests. . Sidewalks and Trails in the Neighborhood - Whispering Lane is not part of the sidewalk and trail plan. The sidewalk and trail policy calls for placement only along collector roads and highways, or to provide links to community amenities (schools, parks, etc.). Whispering Lane is 36 feet wide (curb face to curb face); wider than the 32 foot standard currently in place, providing additional width for bikes and pedestrians. . Parking - Adequacy On Site and On Street - Parking meets the 2 space per unit minimum requirement (144 spaces) of the Zoning Ordinance. Parking is allowed on both sides of Whispering Lane in the area. Whispering Lane is 36 feet wide (curb face to curb face); wider than the 32 foot standard currently in place. The City has just enacted changes to the parking code to limit on street parking to no more than 24 hours. Any change to restrict parking could be approved by the City Council after review by the Public Works Director. · Architectural Issues - The applicant's architect David Harris has submitted additional information including a color rendering of the building and analysis of conformance to the City's Architectural Standards. He has also included property information and pictures of adjacent residences. · Traffic Study - Benshoof and Associates, author of the original Traffic Study in July, 2003 has re-analyzed traffic along Featherstone, 4th Street, and Whispering Lane to include traffic from generated by the High School. They have concluded that their original projections on level of service are unchanged even with the school traffic. Please see attached memo for further information. Traffic Count reports for 4th Street and other comparable streets have also been included for comparison. · Tree Preservation Plan - The grading plan has been modified to include preservation of nine significant trees at the northwest corner of the property. The City Forester has reviewed the plans and they have addressed the comments of his previous reviews. He notes that given the density previously approved on the property (prior to Tree Preservation Standards) it is virtually impossible to meet all of today's tree preservation guidelines with the approved density. Comments from Neighbors The following comments have been voiced during various meetings: · Incompatibility with the neighborhood. . Increase of traffic on Whispering Lane, Featherstone Road, and 4th Street. . Affect on property values . Will units be owned or rented . Can city services, fire, police, utilizes serve the site adequately. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 4 . Positioning of driveway entrances facing homes on Whispering Lane. · The area has changed since the original approval in 1986. . Sidewalks and trails . Parking . Have other housing options been examined for the site? . What about upscale town homes? BACKGROUND INFORMATION Comprehensive Plan Classification The subject property is guided U-II- Urban Residence (4-8 units per acre) in the Hastings Comprehensive Plan. Williams 151 Addition was approved as a Planned Residential Development allowing for density on individual lots to exceed that of the plan, provided the entire development is within the required density. Overall density for Williams 151 Addition (including Hillcrest Townhomes, and excluding the church) is 5.9 units per acre and consistent the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Classification The site is zoned R-3 - Medium High Density Residence. Multiple Family residential structures are a permitted as part of a Planned Residential Development in the district. Adjacent Zoning and Land Use The following land uses abuts the site: Direction North East Existina Use Single Family Res Whispering Lane Single Family Homes Potential 30 Units Townhomes Zonina A-Ag\R-3 Comp Plan U-II- Res 4-8 South West R-3 - Med\High R-3 - Med\High R-3 - Med\High U-II - Res 4-8 U-II - Res 4-8 U-II- Res 4-8 History Williams 1st Addition was originally platted in 1986 as mixed use development including 177 residential units. 90 units were originally approved for the subject property. The original plan has been modified over the years as follows: . Twin home units originally platted along the east side of Whispering Lane were replaced by Single Family Homes. The revision eliminated 7 of 14 planned units. . Lots 1-3, Block 3 (south end of development between Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive) were replatted as Hillcrest Townhomes. The revision eliminated 4 of 22 planned units. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 5 . Site Plan approval to construct a 30 unit building was granted by the City Council on July 21,2003. It does not appear that the developer, Jon Whitcomb, will construct the 30 unit building, and may seek approval for a lower density town home development. Existing Condition The existing site is forested. The site slopes approximately 25 feet west to east. Proposal Two 36 unit, 3 story buildings, and four 18 stall garages are proposed. The entire site would be graded resulting in a great loss of trees. SITE PLAN REVIEW Tree Preservation Plan The site is forested with native trees including oaks, basswoods, and cedars. 65 significant trees (6" deciduous or greater, 12" coniferous or greater) have been identified on the site. The applicant proposed to save nine significant trees at the northwest corner of the site. The City Forester has reviewed the plans and they have addressed the comments of his previous reviews. He notes that given the density previously approved on the property (prior to Tree Preservation Standards) it is virtually impossible to meet all of today's tree preservation guidelines with the approved density. Building Setbacks Building setbacks are determined through site plan review for Planned Residential Development projects. Building setbacks are acceptable, and are as follows: Direction Minimum Proposed Setback Front Yard Setback - WhisDerina Lane 35 feet North Side Yard Setback - Sinqle Familv 30 feet South Side Yard Setback - Future 30 units? 30 feet Rear Yard Setback - Summit Point Townhomes 30 feet Condo Buildings The condo buildings have been positioned to present the shortest sides to Summit Point residents to the west, and Whispering Lane residents to the East. Each building would contain 36 condominium units ranging from 1-2 bedrooms and 783 - 1,426 s.f. Garage Placement Four, 18 stall garages are proposed. The garages are located in close proximity to one another, but are separate buildings. Their placement creates a long 15' wide space Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 6 between the garages which is difficult to maintain, and could be become and attractive nuisance. The following change should be made: 1) The separation between the four garage buildings must be modified in one of the following ways: a) eliminate the space by combining buildings. b) Access and drainage behind and between buildings must be eliminated in such a way to be architecturally compatible with the buildings at the discretion of the Planning Director. Staff strongly recommends combination of the garage buildings to avoid this A~h underground parking would be preferable to avoid tree loss and increase green space, the bedrock in the area just below the surface adds additional expense. Access and Circulation Two entrances are proposed on Whispering Lane. Access and circulation is acceptable with the following modification: 1) The driveway entrances must be placed to avoid headlight interference on existing homes and to achieve a minimum 150 foot setback from intersection if at all possible. Transportation Study - 2004 Update Benshoof and Associates, author of the original Traffic Study in July, 2003 has re-analyzed traffic along Featherstone, 4th Street, and Whispering Lane to include traffic from generated by the High School. They have concluded that their original projections on level of service are unchanged even with the school traffic. Original Traffic Study A transportation study was conducted by Benshoof and Associates as part of the 30 unit Williams Addition Site Plan last year. The evaluation included impacts of the 30 unit building, 90 unit building, and potential future development on the following intersections: . 4th Street & Whispering Lane . Featherstone Road & Whispering Lane . Site Access & Whispering Lane Capacity analysis was presented in terms of Level of Service (LOS), which ranges from A to F. LOS A represents the best intersection operation, with very little delay for each vehicle using the intersection. LOS F represents the worst intersection operation with excessive delay. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 7 The study concluded that all intersections will operate a LOS of B or better under all traffic scenarios during both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Therefore the proposed development will not create any serious negative impacts on level of service at the subject intersections. Parking The site meets minimum parking requirements. Parking is provided as follows: Site 72 Condo Units Pro osed S aces 144 Total Spaces 72 Garage Spaces 72 Surface Parkin S aces Parking Lot Setback The Parking lot meets minimum setback requirements. A retaining wall along the west end would lower the parking lot 3-6 feet below the existing grade of the Summit Point homes to minimize traffic and noise interference. Pedestrian Access No new sidewalks or trails are proposed. Architectural Elevations Architectural elevations meet the City's Architectural Standards. The building incorporates both brick and lap siding. The longer, front and rear portions of the building incorporate brick below the first floor window. The vertical height is segmented by aluminum trim. Windows would incorporate decorative shutters. The horizontal plane of the front and rear is broken by decks. The plane is offset at the building corners. The sides of the building adjacent to Whispering Lane and Summit Point incorporate a much higher percentage of brick. The garage buildings incorporate similar materials with brick on the sides facing public view. Waste Enclosure Two waste enclosure buildings are proposed between each of the garages. The enclosures must be enclosed on all four sides. Their proximity abutting the garage buildings may trigger additional fire rating separation. Landscape Plan The Landscape plan provides for a variety of plantings adjacent to building and throughout the site. Planting beds have been incorporated into the building design and along the top of the western retaining wall. The plan appears acceptable, however additional trees may need to be planted per the Tree Preservation policy to offset those removed. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 8 Lighting Plan A photometric lighting plan has been submitted. Lighting levels at the perimeter of the site are acceptable. All lighting must be downcast and shielded towards parking areas Signage Signage is not proposed. One monument sign not to exceed 50 square feet is allowed under the zoning district, subject to sign permit approval. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans The Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control, and Utility Plans have been forwarded to BDM Engineering for review and comment. Review comments must be adequately addressed before the plan is scheduled for final review by the City Council. Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control plan and Utility plan approval must be obtained by the Public Works Director as a condition of approval. Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Approvals for the site in 1986 triggered a mandatory EAW to assess environmental impacts. The City Council reviewed the EAW and determined that the project would cause no significant impacts, and did not warrant a more comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to be completed. The EAW required creation and adherence to an erosion control plan (now required by all developments). The applicant shall adhere to the EAW in construction of the site. RECOMMENDATION Approval of the Site Plan request is recommended subject to the following conditions: 1) The applicant must work with the City Forester prior to site construction to evaluate areas for tree preservation. 2) Any significant trees removed must be replaced per the City's Tree Preservation Policy as determined by the City Forester. 3) The separation between the four garage buildings must be modified in one of the following ways: a) eliminate the space by combining buildings. b) Access and drainage behind and between buildings must be eliminated in such a way to be architecturally compatible with the buildings at the discretion of the Planning Director. 4) The driveway entrances must be placed to avoid headlight interference on existing homes and to achieve a minimum 150 foot setback from intersection if at all possible. Lawrence - Williams Addition 72 Units - Site Plan Review City Council Memo - July 6, 2004 Page 9 5) All disturbed areas on this property shall be stabilized with rooting vegetative cover to eliminate erosion problems. 6) Final approval of the grading, drainage and utility plans by the Public Works Director, and reimbursement for any fees incurred in review of the development. The owner assumes all risks associated with the grading and utility placement prior to formal approvals. 7) An orange snow fence must be installed around all trees identified for preservation on the Tree Inventory prior to commencement of any grading on site, and shall be maintained until final grade. The fence shall be installed out to the drip line of all trees marked for preservation. 8) An escrow account must be established for all uncompleted site items (including landscaping) prior to certificate of occupancy. 9) All landscaped areas must be irrigated. 1 O)AII waste enclosures shall be enclosed on all four sides to fully screen the contents, and constructed with exterior materials to match the primary building. 11 )Submission of an electronic copy of all plan sets (TIF, PDF, or similar format) prior to recording of the Final Plat mylars. 12)Approval is subject to a one year Sunset Clause; if significant progress is not made towards construction of the proposal within one year of City Council approval, the approval is null and void In ... t/) C!)C) :E't:J .-- ::::Jln In_ .- C!)C U:::) C(D fM ~ . caN ..J :i~;!~d3~:! _N -r~ ~ v s............ "" ~ 0.10....10. WO " ~ ~ 0> . CD.!! .tI Do. ...J E g,g. ::; Iii a.. ii a ~ B ~ . w o 8 " U) s: "" _ N '1 ... ~ 0( ..:. s: ;I ~ D!: a: d: OrA 0 ~ ~ . Ii ~ 0 ~ ~O.@ WOOO . ,.' ~ z+~ j .... Q) - U5 I~ , :! / . I '"0 ~i '10 CT, ri ~ ,\)O M3!1,lS3 ~J ~ ~, " . II '"' o 0 " CIJPL, if ':ii J..... 0- il:' " ;!~ '" d51M G~' =JAC'" " '" ~NI>!3 '" 6 'Vl <i? !'~ W", 10'['1-'" '&_'&~ I t}() ~~ ~ p. ~ :i'~ <>: , 0 ::0 gs ct:1 n :>< wi ~:i E-< '"' Z ~ I~ (JJ - ~ F,I '" '-' 8 ;;: w " "I ~ '"0 << 9 0:; t: I~ I ~ '" ~ I '" (Jj N ::; ~ ~ (JjZ ,,::; - Z _ :.: ~~;...:I ~3~ :I: 0 I r..U N o ro ~b e-. ...~ 0 -ro--' u~ . ! n, I ~ I u 2S ~'j i?' ~ ~! "d 'j /7"9 !, "d -, ! I ~! i 'I .s ~ '1'1 " c 'I! hi *Ii I: :!!!IIII M!I' li:i ~ " _rtlJ 3 1(11 ~ 'Ps 1m !~ · 'f .~ ~ .~ :. f >~ ~l ~ ,~ g" ; ~~ ~~ I Ii; i! i~ iil il i! ~~!i II!{ 1:1; ~'~ 'I~!' .;t ~i!'; ~ei i~.I~ !;lliU~ I ~M'I~!I I i~!:i ~~i i ~Illi~~ . " ~ ' !:!. j; if ~~ ~ . o ~ "- , , ........, '- --- '\ l . i ( i .---~ , ' , ' \1 o z " " ~~ >" ~" t;;~ " ~. I~ 00 0" ~~ u~ !::~ z ~ . ~ - - ~ II I , I I I: I I I I ' !i~ .Be . ~~;I <j "'. ;I:. .~ 0')0 "" c-" <0 ~<>: _E-< <z Z <>:00 Ou - E-< cjZ Z ZO 0 aU) <( < 0 +' p::P:: '" C ~ - '" ::ii < - -" -" ~ I ",Z c::ii Z - -~::G E-< +' ;..:I ~~I'Q :r:5 r.,u I 0," '" >-<6 E-< ,,-,< S - '" uo ~ . ! ~ ! ~ III .. '2.~~ Ii Qj>.... ii ~~8 " '~3.!! ~i ~rnll. .f~ <J z 0" P9 " "d f' ~!I ! j , . J!( II; I~ !I , I', !j1i!'I' "'1 II lil;I' I"i' _(~I j ~ , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,/ " ,< , , / ' , ' , , , , , , , , , , , , " 1 "1 r, \ ", I " I 1 -x-x I I I: I: 1 gO I: " I : ..~tl2.:YO..w .11 \ _,!/I.J:lj f1Q:!I!...2~ , - " I ..c,,_~1 ", x I " 1 ''''... I ~I 't>.: L ~.i... -~~ '" /b . ' " ~ / ;- ... 1f/ I~ '~J. !~ " : ......" , ""'g" , <> : fi:~ : ~~ : ~ . ! III~ \ ".,cj , ,~ , 0 , 00 , O~ , 5~ \ ubi \ ~~ \ ~...., --......."... ----~-~- , , , , , , I \~ ( r I, W D < ~ D ~ < U ~ , ~ ~I IHi I' w ~I " II ~ / I ~ ' i ---1 ~, ~! , , , , , I:! / ., j' 'T w w D D < < ~ .. ~ (\ < D ~ ~ .. < U U ~ ~ , , , , "'''''''' / _/ ...-...--",...- '-- i1- ------ !"'..,.-. , , i'. 1 ',,,, q{p* ~..AI ..1:.t_~~ -~...qpt / d~J ' 10 / ~~ ~ // ..ot c ! ,/,/ II!!~ // I'll j' / 1!!111111 OII!I' Ii ~ 11:1 r ; - ' -~ , -- , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , " ,( /' - , , , , , , , , g , 9 I 510 f lJJui r ~~ ' ~~ ' o ' 1-> I ~w ' ..,ijj/ , ~, 8~' Z~ /~~ / ~ ~ ~ / --------------- ---l r /1 /1 / 1 ,/ I / 1 , I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 1 1 I I I I .J j JIg a= 101 S" ;' "'..; . '51 : ~ W h. I'il r! 5; Ji~ i" '3s" Ii iii !?I~ '.; I':!' '119 ~;;i! !h '3~ -'''': ., , . , ~ ~ . ~. t! ~ ,- c ' , , , , , , , , , , , , , ' " , ' I "'''''''' , , , , , , z ~I jz fIj" ~< U)1!i ....1 "P- ?:iz 0>0 <E=: z P-u 0 _y;:J ~ '"'0 p:: t: >-<~ ~ .... v, ~ ::1Z <X; ~o .... U +' ~ ~ g@ <X; 3 ~ m;Z; ,,::S Z ~>. ~ 1: ~ :I:i5 r..,U 1 0", CIl ~+' E=:] E-< ~ '" :3 UQ ... . . . ! '" .g.5~ Ii! III>..... j, ~ &! I=: iii ._" .J:: P t\O::I..... :iI~ .zl'l]o.. d Ii 0.- P'9 ,I "=' " ~!I J~.~. · ....~"\'~.. !i! ,.""",. ! .,,,,~~ ~ 1fl ~ ;~1" i '.%';~'~\-D ~ .... !U i" tW ilil': ~ ili~ iii~ ~fi:h i~h g.-d, ''I' i'!W d!I!1 i'." ni'Q I ~ d . . n . . ; i ~ii ~'-' .'0. :I!~ ;~II e ~!h I !!i! .....0... ... \ \ ~d~ z :1 ..:'" Q~ !Z:j. ~ Il. fJi~ z.... j~ 1l.::O ~~ Z Il.j 8 <0... a ~0i1 Q QP:: <>: ~[j ., .~p:: ~ .... OJ ::0 ..: ::J ....1 ~ "'z ,,::0 ... Z . ->,::.:: ....., ....1 ~31:Q :r: 0 I ""U 0",'" >- b E-< ......>: 0 _ '" ....1 UQ ~ . ! . ~ . hi ~bDtI.C '""011 ~'>'.~ n ~ ~ 2 ,~ ...l-ttG h ~J5D: i! '" u z d" ~i Ii'" 9 " "'=:! '. " ~!i i I ' . ~ i ... i " :1 .! I III. I 11!1i! : il!.!1 II "ii' If-I' 'il 1I:lr I .. E~E ~~~ ~~~~ . '~~"~'~~~;'~I"aj"B~"~~E~Bo~j"~B~~j~ 8a888888~h8a" ~!'~J'i.~h 'H8~ 1-1- i &1.....1- ~m 18 I- V'lo:II:V'I III ~ ~~ .~~~ ~ ~~~..~~. ~~~~. ~~ N-' "",,,g"C-C"U. ...!n'...... . -... . '" ~~2~~~~~~~~~~~~~OO~O~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~i;~~;~*~~~~~~~~~~~~~$~~S~~ ~~E~~~E~~e~ e ~~wwowwwow ow_" ~____ __ ~~ ~ ~~JJJJjljjlllfIBJ~~~~B~~33ji388j V'lV'lIIIIIIV'I<nIllVlIIIIIIIII \II ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~ ~bbb~~bb~~~~bbb~b~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ '^ / "- / "- ',/ "'-' / "- ./ x_ / / //~ 7' " / /' /' / '~-:-~:-@~ I . I il~~i @ @ -I@ I i i I - I II I @ I ~Q I 11 I: @ ~i@~~ ~ I ih: ==- -@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ~~ g~ i!~ ., o. ,. ~~ .. . ... >< :1 .. P gj~ P:: ;:> CI) P< 0 f-<-'< 0 - '" '""' UQ ~ , ! . . , I I I .. ils "2 ~~ n 01).>...... ,!.,L ~ ~ an ...J-oIII U ~r75C: d "' \;1 0.j ~ii ,I ~!! i .. . ...- :J; c f.t ~i.sj ;'~ii! ;t . z.. ... ~:o.; . - ~j ! ~ n ~ - ..!~ :: ~~i- .e ~'81i ~ ~~ll ~ .Ii + ! ! ~Hj ~~.c .......t'... ~~tj ~~aa ~;;:~:2 @ @ @ e -0 "-':~l- I I I I I I e 6 o @ ~e @ e @IJ;/W @ @ @) @ @ 'dl,l <1 ~ ~i 'I" I!!II :i!ili ii!!I~ II:!! _tl. - ~ ':T~~ ~~~ ~"-~ 'Zj '<> I' "- "'*' ~ ~ uv ~~ *- f':' I. '..~' :. (~ '. ':. 1:5 CD ..... ,- ..c: :;; u~ L...'" <(1: '" C/)~ -t:: :1 L..." CtI~ I2 . Q -JIL ~ "C " '> ~ CtI~ Ol (!!ii) @ @): ~"" @"" '" @~ "" '" (!1:1!]'" @::i: ~~ (!1:1!]"" '" @S.. ~~ ES"" '" ='Ji!" L&'~~~t~~~~&~,~~L~~~~.~~.!..ft.".~""h'h""""'" _. __. ,. , €€0SS "NJ.J 'S9NlllitV'H Zqt Xoa 'ad LgaI~0e"'1.;;9 'Hod pel!4:::>J'v' 'SPJBH '1 p!ABa '0011 'uooauw~ un uaM~~@UOOIi ~@@Iiil@@ ~@Iiil~~li'\i\W'iJ .-: z W 1[ 0 ,--, <Ow zz'-: L W f-> ~!j!<[w<O ~ I Zw --Wz ~D OCw-IW f- Of-wf-<O lLf-<OIw 0 wD lLOOC\')W <OlL<[f-~D:3 Z OC W' DZwzOC wo' '--"0<[ <[ :J<O >-w 3-(LwZ :::J <0<0 0- GO f- W Z IW <Of-Z\')OIOC Z W(L OC~<OD\')Wf-I <!)fu2~oOCw 0 WN<[w<i)3f-3 , <i) OCo (L W f- w'z <[ f- 0 -I\JgJDocO~ >-OC OZ~~DOI<[W <[z --' O1L <0 f-(L OCW -I'<i)f-I> ZO-lSWI L \Jw (L:liW<o!jtOCwf-O 2\J:'z101i!~:p ~ I f- OCw W-IZOC Offi8!j!~~~ Lf-f-C Z'!i<[LO>010(L \J :::J>-z W 30 <[t=(L LOC f-\JW ~ f::01w \JI<[If->-f-<[<[ W<[>-lLWI\') Z L <[>-Z OCZ<Of- WWLO(Lf-~ Z rD(L 'f-:::JWO<[OC\JW I-IOW<OIDci Z 0~3 DOCOCi!IWww01 f-\J OCW!::):W <[ f-\Jw <[WO <o<oD(LD W<[f-:::JOC30OC --' 0... lL OCZX (L 0<[> ~ODO~O:::JWS f- OCf- OC- <[f-O<[j\') :::J w(L~ OCOC~W~D>-wO OCZ(Lz<[z(L(5 W <OL lLo... ~~Z-I-I3 W - W I <[<o(L-Iz(L~OC f- O~D NWt-[lt-- o...w:::J<[_W ~t.2DDf-id<[z I o...-IW WOC<OOC<oWDw f- 0--,<0 -WZZZO&ZW <O(LZ:::JD'!LOCOC 0 OC<[O Oji)<i).Q<[ZwJSt o -f- z<[<[ 01 (L:::J(L f-Oz\JOC-Df- f-<OO L:::Jrf-<<1-1(L<[O f-OW<[WZ<o f- ' z):OC W<O g~=' W-I ~ ,t=!::DOC<[w <of- -Z .j W<o(L lLWOCOC-3WOCw z~<[I~<[f-3 <ow LWW OIWf-Z>-01<[> 001~\J <0 <OL Z' f-j=!:<oWWO W -<[ OC:J)OCDD <[(L _W o...-I 0<0 Of-f- Df--ZWI<owD f- 0<[ OOZ -10 -10 OC 0<[W03f--I>W <[='lLWtjjzO<[ -Iw>- --'-I -(L '5!(L01 OIW\Jti;W<[<[I ~~~I-WI:O -W :::JOC --'f-OCf-01W If- 3> 01:::J wOo lLZW<O f-D 0<[ f-\Jf-OC<[ ow D(L <[-3wf-f--1Df- lL -IDwXO DOCw - -:::J-I<[ ZW<[ IW01w wD WlL lL(Lf- \')f-<O-I='LO:::JI -L~~f-\')IW QD ~O Of-\J ZSOCOC:::JLIOf- Dt=\JZ<oZ\')i! >w (L~z~m~ ill -\J0<[010<03<o W <[<[ -- 0<0 d) ~U:01WW\Jf-OCD IWlLIDDW>- OCO 0_<[ \JL \JI \JW--'Z--, OCf---,<o<[_ 0 lL I W ,OC 0 - W OC <[f-W WSWZ (L(L d) (L<[(Ljjz,>- <Oi3~I~OW~<[ f-zQf-~01IO zO lL~W<[~-I (l >- wf- 0--' 0 f-->O f- OOC I- O-l(L(L -I ~ ~!jtZf-<OI010z <[cioZW!j!<oW -0... f- 10 \')(L<[~OC~ -IOW~OCoc<[>-;:! WWOCW>-f-Dffi <[W zX\J\JO<o ::J <[LIf-!j!ODf-<o Ijjz(L>;:!OCWI LI - -W<O lL- (l f- f-01ZOC f-f-0~<[OW3 ocf- I ffi---DDZ> <OWDZOI<[W>- O\') -II 0 f-(Lf- \')Wf- WlL~\') X Z 0<0 IL <[f-Zt=W~<OO\} Z -OC lLZ ~<O<[~t=~ <0 <[<[IWOCOC t=~D<o\')Dw~ Z- W 0 _f- !::--' <[f- OjIl\Lf-ZW(LlL Z Z- Wf-D W<[ !jt!QD\3~OC (L<[<\)OClL<[O 0 wI<[<OO<O\J-I I:::J IL IW- W Z ~<o~OO>-s!j!<o <0- >-w:::J - I-....J 0 <OX<Of-o(L w,f--Iz<o<[:::J , <[ 0 (L-W~-I01>-f-i3 OC<l) \J<[\')--,lL 01 f-> :OW):<!)lL~ WWZ <[Z <[W - wf-Z W\J---' --'o\J (L:::J'<[<i) _W j=!:~ W f-lL <[-(L I- lLZZ<o<[f-f- X <1)0 - I OCO~f---' '<( OOiOl!:' ,\J\J~w ~<I)I!:'<I)wOCOf- --I <[wO<l)<[\') o<J'1Ww - -Owz W-I :J Z <1)<0>- <!),&OCZ 5;;f0...i!<I)~<[\') (L- I-lWt-O wIf-<O<J'10 - 0\J a oc::J\J\Jt=<I) '<( (L <0- W t=:::JDlL<[Lo<o OZW<oO >-f-<i)wzocw(LO zt&Of---,OCW IS W '5!!j!<[ot=o --I f-oiZ<I)-(L(LOw W<[Of-\J-I<[O >-0 I (l ocw<O-w<o--,z f- w<[o- L\J O\J~OC;:!I ~wD<[~oc-w~ ZlLo...-I, <0 0 \J<oW 0...<0 (L X w~wwt;;t=<!)~i3 - 0:::J0 Z <0>- >-woci3oc~<[j -f- d) ...... W IOII<J'1ZIOO Li!(LOC(L<[~<[ !::\J I- I-I-_WI- , a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ k ~. . . ._ . . . .'. . .. .. .. . . . . . . . <J) ~ <J) Z Q Q ~ '<I ....J ~ :::::J ID r: :n :::::J <J) Z ~ r: :n () '<I Q :I Z .. () Q 0 & I- Z <J) :::::J ':!t w Q ~ oc <J) '" Q '<I 3 t- W U <J) s: w !l': t- -. d) ~ ill w Q OC U ....J iii & :::::J w ID z ~ ill '<I --1 <J) l) \!J i z z '<I ill OC 0... !l': w 6 :3 IL "<t ~ U :I ....J 3 . 'O:€@qS 'f'4.,I'~tJ.SV'H ~9t xoe "ad lI3I2'Z'OOt'I'39"He! 'U '~~oo~un un ~OO~OO~~~au @@@!m@@ ~@!m~OOfj'/j\W'j] pa~!4:JJY spJeH "1 P!^eo ~ . ~ ~ N '" }- }- " " tY z z J: ~ ~ J: '!i w !!! " ~ ~ - ~ " ~ w - - ~ - (j w (j ::; n. ::; w ~ ~ w w n. w n. u ~ u r: x u u x 0 w U w u i ~ ~ z z oc w w oc i oc 0 r: r: oc 0, 00-' ~t:: I!! I!! 00-' ~ .~ ~ ..~ 5\~ 8 8- j-- e- . ' I> ' ~ 5\~ 5\~ "'~ " t: i'" x", I!! ~ z'" XN <; -~ ,,~ 0 0 -'" ,,!!) r:~ r:~ z z L~' r:.. a '" ~ 0-' 0-' 0-' 0-' 0-' 0-' Ii ILl!! 0-' Ii 0-' 0-' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (j ~" ~ ;;; ~ ~ (j (j ~ (j (j ~ w (j ~ " ~ " ~ " a ~ '" ~ '" '" ~ "' N '" N I> "'~ (j '" ~ '" N '" N '" ~, '" ~. '" '" <i ~ "'- "'0 ~ "'- " '" '" '" '" '" o!!~ ~ N N N :I, N . W . W . . wo-' - '" (jo-' - '" (j,c - '" ~wo-' - '" (j~ '" " ,,~ " " ",,: " " "~": " :B ~~ ~ " ~' ~ " ~~ " " " " " ~~ " " " ~ " " " ..~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ <t~<J) ~ ~ ~.. u u "' I> I> I> I> '" I> I\) I\) e !!! c ~ !" e c ~ ;;, '" ~ . w i!! .. '" i!! ;, ~ ~ " }- }- }- }- }- }- }- . }- ~ " " " " " " " " w Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ ~ f f f f f f f w w f ~ ~ ~ " " " " " " '" '" '" '" ;;; ;;; " " ~f Q (j (j (j (j (j w Q w (j !!! ~ w w w w w w ~ w ~ ~ ~ w 0' " w w w w w w w w .z ~ U ~ ~ u ~ ~ u f5 .. .. u 3 2~ x x x '" ~ x w w w w w w U w U '" .. w " ~a ~ .. '" <lJIi oct:: oc ! (j'= N N '" >- 0 \\!?; w 0(1 o ' *t:: ~~ ~ ;;, ~ "I!! .~ ~(j " ;;, 0-' ;;, 0-' ~ N n. t~ 1\)", '" ~ '" ;;, " "'.. ," I: &OC N '! N '! N N z-O x", <; ..5> ~ fill -~ ,,~ ,., ;- r:~ r:", U(j '" 0-' a '" ",u. w X " 0-' 0-' ~ ",,, ~ ~ " w "''' 0-' 0-' r: U (j Si ~ 0-' ~ ;;; " .. 'I\) ~ ~ ;;, ;;, .i;> i;> ;;, ~ x_ " (j (j w ~ ;;, n. 0"'- (j a ~ '" ~ '" " " '" '" '" '" '" N " OC'" .. :8. " ~ N Z N o...~ "'. '" '" I\) ~ f ~ n.u iP <ij '" ~- '" "" " '" " w G n. " ~ N ~ s:~ U ~ . d d z " w, - '" ,,(j ~ ~ ~ w OCoc (j =>" (j~ '" " z w oc g~ z w oc ~ oc Ii: if" {! t~~ ",,: '" " ~~ 0 " ~ " " .. u" " .. }- u" oc (j JIi (j w w w ':1 0 w r:w ~ w,,(j "" ~ ~ ~ N -u ~ "I ~ <i5 "I ~ <i5 oc ~ " ~ ~ <i5 ~" -'" ~Q1fi ~~ U U <i5 "Ii< ,,~ w w> ;!& "w ~zoc ~" z ~o ruB ~ "'~ w " " ~w 0 8;:; ~oc "w "0 0 <Oz "'~ '" n. ;n(j ~ 8" <1:J)o... w~ . . . . . ._ A . . . a a L * . . ._ ~ . ~ ~.. . . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ . . . . _ . Ef<2l..e 'f\&.I'~ll9'9'H l'Slt xoe 'O'd L'a<2lt"0eY'I,,'S"Hd 'OOIIJ 'UOOHun un @OOHOOM~DOOIl @@@]OO@@ m@OOmfM]Li!\\WII pat!LI~J'v' SPJBH "1 p!ABa o m ~ ill W }- W 11) ~ 3}- ~ 11) 11) I!z~ dJ~ b: dJO W xlit;!;!ocw/,:,:Ouw/,:, ~ WOCI1)OOo...<{WI-LU I Z\9i'10y::R~00.Wj;;r~1- '-' <(Wo...' dJ "-dJZ 31-Z00dJ ZO/,:,WWLOW Oz dJO ,,::JdJ-n L . -1wi=W<{I-i=v-10}-,,-o...o -1d)<{2=}-dJ<{~~2=-1~OW ~1it~L!z<{~:O'<t}-<io...uJg wo...OO::JWOZQ-1iiSw).-1 IWLLOCO!:::LLOQZ_IWU I-OC~LLUd)~\jNO).I-O~ !I09g399..,.. - A.!.::J ..,.. l.C7.*'9"Q ~ N'9"1c1 ;"3~ ~ C ~j i '~~i "... Q I .gi I.'-d'h h!! s ~ 1i...8~~! tI) !GI..IifD .6 -s] -s] &] i: Ui U. U! 10 I , I Ii i ' i ! "1! ! ! I 1 I.. .- .. I 8 ~f j j ~' II ~"!J j~ t- ~.)! ~i ,g I f , .. .E B'~ .! i:i:' ~ ~g ~.I ca" " ..:! 0 D::i ~ b:J g ~ I:~ g.:::I " ,,8 o ~ OJ (.) ~] l! 3: o ... .. c ~-, ~ ~ -=1 t " OO'~" ....,. 5: t: ~ ~ s;;; ~ Sjil.H ~i '-' ....!!81~! &!m...o 6 -s] -s] &J ill--'I, [.... 1.... '~ Ii ,[, h LJ ' i ji" ~. , ~I 11 ~ ,,' ~ ~ ~ ]. . '" .~ ;'~:'~." IT .ii'mo.. c ~lt'II S c.'j'" l! ~, ..~ ,f w, ,_ -:';5 'U! h -g I:t:t ~.. .' ~~ ~I ~ C2! 0::::1 " "&i8 o _ ~ (.) ~'i J5 .' ... .. c ~~ '~ ~ C '51 i H ~ Sjjl.!) ..., ....c3I~! .:IdE _IIII'D ~ ':; IT .5 .!i l! .n~ -. h D:i ~~ 5! o (J l! o ... .. c }1 it'.iJ .., . ~ ?; ~ 0 o , &j 8 - . Jj ~ c..\....~':../ , * '. '. . , ". . ''..... ,.. .. " \ " ./ .;: ". .\.. ')'>/~ .. ."'. .,(".' \ .-'\77 ..-. ~ \ . ..;.. . ,....' ,/ /<~~. '~ . .. .'V " '-f \ "',#:" .r/ "lii 'v~?' /:.../ ;t, /',y " .... /.....-:..~... '';':'..':;:',l@l: ,.. ,.. ..,.,......" //./ "";:.t; ~/' '. ~ .6 -s] -s] '&I 'i~ [' [' [" .) 1! : i I ~i H ! i. : l!J!~ , : i , . ~ ,,' .: ! 8~ m ~ . 6.s 5 ~ z' J: )/ a: ~\ ) \'\\....y..\ // \ ... ..;}' '- . . ..".;" /~ Y.-:7' ,,//' ~. '-''?''~fIa / . ~./ //~-;! , ./ .-./ di ~~ ,/ ..t< ,/".' , ~ ~.-/~ '~ - ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 " ~ " z " NW :;~ ~~ ~ O~ Z MfiI " ;v "1 '" (J) ~ ~ ~1-1:~", a: "::r i51 ~' 1 ij"1 " ~, 8 M ,,; m. :;:" "0 ~N ~~ g ~~; ~ ~j ~I~~ iii Q) "" ~m >:c gm.... ~~oN~'" Uj~~J5~c(ia51 ~18~-m:slffil ~i~i~~~I~! " M Z ~ " :g .Sf~ z O~ ::Ii 9~ .; o " ~8 ~ ;V~I '" mOO <: ~ ~~~, ~I:gi~~ ll.ic(....JO: ~_.....~a...~.,..~A,A...~~.A.........._~~~.._~___~ ~ ~ 'W ~ ~ -II ; .... "I:! _ '" _ ~ 5a.. & ~ .!'hb~) 'L8'~! ~1i.1..IID ~ S IT 5 .. i! n~ -. il l;>. ;8 o () S o ... " C ! , --:-_._J ~ ~ ~--- = ~ ~ . ~! ! el Qla.. C ~ .!'h IIH It...JJi!i!~ d!B_IiJBlO ~ c ~" Co ; ":'., ~ ... c..J: .. ~.i! In"" -Ie eLl U~ .!.! " ..~ 13 II]! 't:I ~i ~ ~ \ oJ.!! c.!: } ;~ ~.9 - :I .!! IU ) J!:8 ! 3: .,/ ) , . ~ --, ~ . ~E"o2I';<a N-I'~ll.;'\1H !,~ xoa "ad Lg/2lZ"0e'I>'IS..., 'Hd pal!l.j~J'v' spJeH "1 p!Aea ~! !l iIf r ~~' J'" . , f m ; ; . " , ~ z ~ ~ c: 1"'~" C"~ it 8 N !il ~N 8..!!! ~ i! ; H :I~~m: ~1",~ ~-~.., ~I-ltl~c(:f:. .....Mr--IO]i iU 8~a~~~' " M Z 1) ;;: ~ M~ ~ ~!;!2 :Ii ~~ ~ 0", Z M(;Ij F ~~, ~ ~1~1~.iiI o..,<~ul 1 ~ ;~' c ~ o o w :oj.., :::1\ ;..;jO ",N g~~ N.N ~ro~ ~]:::i::\1 . O1>~~ciU'), ~1D'<T<Dm >15g(O.... .... SN ~:=I 1fJ1-~<(~. '"I'M (lliii.... 88.:~1. NNo..jl~ "M ZM _0 0:"' MW"' 9"-Z o!Q:E: "-~ ' o '" ~ >'! !~ II "I ~ .. < II:: ~ '!Ioo.::I ,g b- .,".II a. c: C8 08 is ]....1. () J! S o ... .. C ~ 'S IT .5 = ~ -; ":',' ~ .. c: .r:. S ~'~ .n~ ~. &1 ii i ~! l ~ ;~ ~ .9 ,9., Qj.i! _ '" 0 s !i o ... " C c ~ ~ ~ '001I 'nOO!An~ ~oon nn~~~@DWII ~@@Im@@ ~@Im~OOfj'/j\W'j] ~ . ",t ~ 1!., :.! e! ~ !. 1: SIlls:! J lm...a I~ ~ ~ Ii ['''''. [','.. --', ." l' h : ' I !~' : h, i J.,' ..' ; - "" !II , f ~ ~, t: 0 't7 Z ..:z:: ~ c:: ~ . " :Ii ;;; .. ,ID 1Ii 1r c >- o o w ~. m .., ;;;~ ~I~i~ N'OI"C .!! ~~ ~^.,- i.~1:i Q..:;! >1,8 1I)~~ld fa,-"1\ .~~. >11iI~ m~ ~1'~I:1JIJ1~1 '<1''''!!II-I...I 80 ~l!!11d1 ,0.,0,. NINIQ.I-. . ... aa a -..... _. . . ~ . .' ~ .. .. ~ ~ ~ ~. _ _ . ~ . _ _, _ _ _. _ . _ _ _ _n ,-- l.-_-,: , I ;y " / " ",;/~ \', J ~---, -,.j, -.--) 9 F, J E' ,,'. I ~ ';':''''...... \.........-~I ..-... '-~~ 'I t-,.:" - .'. ~~''-,-, ~ A~, t-J ""-0~ ~ -, ---- << '-~:::::--::~ . u' "E . ~ c b1 ,I ~ ~ ~ it U.... L-.'. [I.. .8 , : : !~ : ; ; ii ",' iIi' , 8 - </I! <! ~ e ' 0'5 5 ~ ::i ::I: <( a: ~ ,\ ,", ~ . .- '" , .. 5,1! ~ ~ ii! Sj 1 I. H ....8"=~ &!mI.Ii1I1D ,1"'8] ~ ~ H [i ['.. [" )8 . , . I . . ~ I . I -!!: ' J. .. .. , ,- :; ta i . e . :::I "'C :Z ~ ::t is: . 'i!1 ., "gi b11 L, ,L_- \-' j"'L_-" , .- , \ -i7' , ------'I~ .J , 'I ,', I _.\ r-~- .' ~ ~~ ~i ---<< ~II----~ . u' ~ . " :] cO) ttI ~ ~ ~ 8 "- 0; "-, N- ~gl ~N, 8.!![1\ ~tg 1iI&lo. I . ';;"1::: 0..:::1,,,10 _ ><IN g:~~i~~ 1d.911~IOOm >I.o!ol.- .....: ~!N. ~:!:ii <II' III! WI (,,)1'5: W!I-i1S;<(aJ: ;g'8i~]Ht ~!~I~!~i~ "M ZM ;;::;; MW~ 9"-z o!:2::E ~;!: 0; 0':" o~Z <",)Ni= ~~,(,I) m ~i< ...... ~,J: ~':g:~ Q .0 ? ~1I1 ~ ':~II i ~i~1> c: -81 Q. - -'!1 .! c.~ S ~!! ..~ 11 :i! w.... 13 ii 5 '0 "J! c a::{ ~ l':'~ i, ~ S! i'li o ...II ~ "':~ I o "" '" C ~E"'SS"NJ...J 'S~11SV'H ~9Z >C08 'Od Lgalt'egy-19"i' "Hd pa~!LI:)JV' spJeH '1 p!Aea e <J ~ . 1~ J ~ I II. . " "::;j! i.. "1 .:~.~~ !m.IUIO i"il &] '&J II [ [ [I,' I" ~ .. ..... 1/1 , ! III ~ : t & "C Z ~ ~ a:: 8 .. ;i ..' ;;~ ;:1 ~ ",..c ~ .' <!; :Jj1U r-.. roo.. .',,<-' .. ~ "-~ ",:g ~~ ~Iom "I'" <! ~gg >..c Ot'tl.... ~I~~~~'ul <![81:g af]g ffi g:g;~~~1 [ I ~,~ c ~ ~ ~'.~~; " ""rl 0" c, .5 ~: ~ ~~ ! ~ '--,~ w... _ ~ -5 13 '"J! ~ &! - fij i a ~::) ~ ~ c~ 8" 5 :sa ..... 8 o ~ IV o rJ.J:g S ;t o "" '" C = <J ~ . 'g1 ! 1!~ ~a.. '" ~ .!h I.!! 1f'...8'10!& Im.III'I1IO "i II II }l .. [" l"'" '. ' '['1 l~ ; . I ~!!I ; : I t!~ ; , f !~ ; i : '"l!! : I I Wi ~ ~ i ~~ ~ ~ ~ :J: ~ "- i'~ ~C1i. :l'J ! n: ~ii, -!I, c' B: ~, ~'~I ti~ - !1 I ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ I ~ ij j " i ~ ,::1 .2 ~c ! gc '0 8 j I Ie ~ 1i1rJ M '" M "- g N'" ~ 9:i z 0:; " ~:::I r.,; dV,) C) 0_ z ~N ~ en ~i ~ ~1~lgs61 ~ 'U 'nOOOAn~ ~n~ ~ooooom~@ou @@@][II]@@ ~@[II]~OOti%WlJ li"8l II II 01"91 f H ~I H [". [" [1 ~ Jht.H ~ H ; . i \W' .....~IO!& 11.. .. , .:!'rn..IID .., 1/1 ' i . . , ~ ~ ~ .,' ~ ::i ~ . ~ :Ii ~ .. .~ ~ u: o :< ..; m.. ;;~ 0INI ~i~l: ~i~~ m,n.I' >I-rl'l ~i~'I:~ ";i;'~~cio ..:!IW'<T ai:8 ~1:CigJij!1'I ~,i~I'C\j 11'11=" ~i~,~~~, C!;18i~]gI' 0:0: III! 0 <vi C\j'NO-II-)-o1 M b:g "'~ 9:eZ 0,,:; ~::> - ~C/)~ o~z ~~i= ~,~ o.i:!'I ~,~;", ~!:gl.~ O-.IUt ~ ~ ", ~ <6' ..~ ("'Q!: ,;/" i! , ,jj c ~ " ]~ 1 H ~h I.!! 'II'..d.~! d!m..mro .i 11 ftl II ~t [,. ['.' [--1 !! i : , l' . ; i ~& .' I~ ; . : .. : ! : Ii .. ..' j. ~. m ~ ; fI 5 ~ z :r < a:: o o .. .. c;J),.:...;J ;;81 ;;;TN o !bIN 'gJ:QiO'! .... 15 ~~ 1116:IN" . m'W1Mco . "-"'I~"o , 4!~ 1'1:I00). -ffi1.!!!1'~ M~: >~ 1'1-' .....,I~!~ Q).:!:i! Uji~~~I~I.~I' ~181tt11~lffil' ~1~1&J~I~i OO~,I, ~; 8!! j ~ .. o ~ a: ~ 'S 0" .E .s S L:l~ -. '"j ~i ];0' c' ,,~ o (J S o "" '" Q M ",M ,,-0 N",:R 9-Z g~" I'I=>V'- 8~~ ~~,f; ch :!J:~ ;:~i~ 0:'-01(3, ~ . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . . . . ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ., .. .. M ~" ~. ~~ .. .. .. _ _ _ . ~,~s 'M.! '~ll9'!rH Z9Z X08' 'O"d LOO,iH1>"ISOSl 'He:! P8J!4:::>J';f spJeH "1 p!Aea '001II 'Uoouun ~iin UDn~@DOOIII @@@!HI@@ ~@!HI~OOI1W'j) e ~ & . 1! ! ",! u. 0 !h 1.!J w..c3li2'& lGl.IIIID d&l~~ ill' [, L! ~~ : , ",I i~ " " I' I' ,,' " ... . .f! !II ~ ' 6<< ~ :s z' J: ...-; Ii: Ii -g, ;\1 ~ :; CT :; ~ ~ ~~ -. ~l >0" -. ;8 o ) . 5 . . ~ ~i't ~. c . c i~ ~ :9 .. .. S J! ,. 4i #III.'Oi f ". ~!.. ~ 5~ ~ ~i2' "EI tf./! j' 1 i ~ "'i! ;:~~ l ~ _..81iii!:! VI .!m.iJIID .;:&l 2i1 S>l H 'f:'[-"1"I 1[=-: '''II[''Ij, ~ 15 I ! I ~~ I ! i H ' i ' ", ! , I J ":it ., I ~~ m ~ i E 5 :g z :r '" a:: ~' . " '''' ~ -I CD - ....1 ~ ~ ~ ~ · ~ 1\ " u... _ Ci iiB ~ 11 i 16 ,I, ;",'~ '! :; ~ I], ~) ~li '5. 'E: '/, /-;' _ o:s :. ~~~ ,8 - 8 I'"'. ) ~ q~ ) .... '" 0 ! ~ ) , I , / t'-. .. ~/ " " ,/ f ~ ~ ,-~, .:'>:..,. .....- --. - - - - - - - - - - - i ~i ~ ,1;1. ,F: ~ ~~ ~~I !j a ;i1r i~~.~ >-g ~IC\JN J1~~_;~~~1 ~81~ 1II]jlffil ~~~~~I~I M b: ~ ~~ ~ ~:!: ::E (0')::1 (J) g~ t!) ~g ~ r-... U) ~,~I ~, ~i:git;~ ~ .0 '~... '~ii ~ i! 10.1- i! ", M f-M 0.15 Nf-~ ,,-z o~:E =" . eW~ In~~ '::'~I~ mo", ~I~~' _"'C._ 0. " C & . ~~ 11 ! ~I 'E th.. 0 ~ . ~ If ,", -g "'~!h:~ ;\1 ",...8. ! !rnlllfllO is &l &l %I H l~: l~i, UI. I' ' , , i~ ' ; : , ' , ~ i ; I ~", ,,' " ! .. 0 ' . ~ I j ~ ~ .. Ii 0 "0 ~ '" -< 0. ~ :; CT .5 .. - .. - ~~ -. h 0::.. l:'" c~ " o u J! o ... .. Q .. - .. .. .. .. ... .. .. ... .. ... ... _ a ... ... ... .. _ ~. ~iJii ~ ~,~ o o ~ N;....:; :I~I g~~, ~ N. . = "~:jl ~11~_0, ..:! IV v,wlg. ~:C! Oim!N' ....J Wio~II!:!I~: ~:~:~_~!~:ciJ! . ~1(""Ji...... ~1"'iii'I'-" 0010 ><_ t'lJi ~i~-~&i~!~~ M f- M 0. 15 Nf- ~ '9:!E Z 0::; ::; ~::I (Ii 8~ ~ ~- - ~~ ~'" I <I)' ..... ~ ~r ...'-1 .. ?:!:g'I-~ Q..:<C()U II! , ~~0SS 'NIoI'~I.Li'V'H t'3'~ xoa 'ad LgQl:Qit"li9"Hcj 'UJ 'nW~Anoo uw~ ~w~oom~@~OOIll ~@@II!I@@ ~@II!I~OOIi1A\WIl P6l!4:::>J\;( SPJBH '1 p!ABa ~ ....I ~ il w 0- eD ~ d\ ~ w ~ ....I ~ il ~ eD ~ d\ Q ... ~ ....I ~ il w 0- eD ~ d\ Q rt\ w ~ ....I ~ il w 0- eD ~ d\ ,... ... ..........~~~-.*.*~.~~~a.....A_AAA~A6A_A~~.~ , €'i:I2I'iN 'NJ,.J '~IJ!i1V'H ~"Z xoe "Jd LOO'~rHi9 "Hd '001II 'nOODUWOO nn @ooum~~~DOOII @@@IiiI@~ ~~IiiI~lliJ,I\WlJ pa~!4:::>JV SPJBH '1 P!^ea ~ '~':';',-;:' .:'~'s~~..:,-:,:/,. >- '" !!/ ~ '!1 !:: ~ 5 ~ u ~ w :3 ~ 6 ~ :I ~ ~ i I- > ','''''.!.,'' J:.'t.:< >- '" !!/ ~ '!1 ~ ~ f -' 1: >- ::] };j <D ~ ~ Q w <D '" W Q G ~ :I ~ ~ i I- > ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. . . ~.. e. e.. ........ . ~ . A .. ~ ~ A ~, . ~ . ~ ~ ~ A,n w BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES, INC. TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 10417 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, SUITE TWO / HOPKINS, MN 55343/ (952) 238-1667 / FAA (952) 238-1671 June 25, 2004 Refer to File: 03-44 MEMORANDUM TO: John Hinzman, City of Hastings FROM: Edward F. Terhaar RE: Results of Updated Traffic Study for Proposed Residential Development in Hastings, MN As requested, we have updated the traffic study as presented in our July 8, 2003 report to account for the following two items: (1) traffic volume adjustments to account for traffic generated by the nearby High School and (2) trip generation adjustments to account for changes in development size. The resultant updated volumes were then used to update the Level of Service analysis for each intersection reviewed in the original study. Traffic volumes on both Featherstone Road and 4th Street were adjusted to account for traffic generated by the nearby High School. Traffic volumes as presented in the High School Traffic Impact Study dated March 4, 1999 were used for our adjustments. This report assumed the school would contain 2,000 students and 175 staff persons. The weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes presented in our report were increased by the amounts presented in the High School report. The development trip generation as presented in our original report was adjusted to account for the smaller size of the proposed development. In our original repot, we had assumed a development consisting of90 condominium units. The current proposal consists of 72 condominium units. This adjustment resulted in a trip generation reduction of approximately 20 percent for this development. The resultant volumes were then used to update the Level of Service analyses presented in the original report. The updated analysis indicated that all levels of service as presented in the original report remain unchanged using the updated volumes. Therefore, the analysis intersections will operate at acceptable levels of service as presented in the original report. Traffc Count Recorts -+ Street Name Location Time Date Total # of Vehicles 4th Street 100ft West of Pleasant Dr 48 hours 6/8/04 to 6/10/04 5900 4th Street 100ft East of General Sieben Dr. 48 hours 6/14/04 to 6/16/04 5630 4th Street 100ft West of Vermillion (61) 48 hours 6/16/04 to 6/18/04 8500 Pleasant Drive 100ft North of 15th St 48 hours 6/22/04 to 6/24/04 14500 Pleasant Drive 100ft South of 15th St 48 hours 6/16/04 to 6/18/04 0 11900 15th Street 100ft East of Westview Dr. 48 hours 6/14/04 to 6/16/04 15500 15th Street 100ft East of General Sieben Dr. 48 hours 6/7/04 to 6/9/04 3500 Pine Street 100ft South of Hwy 55 48 hours .6/15/04 to 6/17/04 10100 "'-___ o. n_______ ----------- --------- - ; Pine Street 100ft South of 2nd Street 48 hours --618/04 to 6/10/04 5200 Traffic Count ReDor! Sheet ~_. &1 I FOSTER & BREVER, PLLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW THOMAS E. BREVER RU~EKT j. FUSTI:I< ERIC BREVER, LAW CLERK .... DATE: TO: FROM: RE: MONDA Y, JUNE 28, 2004 ROBERT FOSTER LUCIANA ZAMITH CITY OF HASTINGS -R-3 ZONING APT COMPLEX " 1. Should a Condominium Building, such as Lawrence Condos, be built in Block I, Lot 2 of Williams First Addition? FACTUAL BACKGROUND Block I, Lot 2 of Williams First Addition is located in a R-3 zone, otherwise known as a Medium- Density Residence Zone. The intent of this zone is to recognize "the growing demand for rental housing in Hastings" and to allow "increaSed 'design flexibility' and a more compatible land use development pattern." . Art. 10.14, subd.l. However, as with any zoning area, subdivision of land, otherwise known as platting, must comply with "good overall design." As Mr. Tom Harmening, City Planner, recognized in his memorandum of January 24, 1986, it is important for city development to use "transition uses," thereby creating "good overall design" that "could blend. . . well with the existing land use in the area." Building a Condominium Building in Block I Lot 2 does'not comply with the requirement of a "good overall design." At the time Schumacher Realty first moved for a rezoning of the area known as Williams First Addition, from AG land use, to R-3 zone, city council rejected its initial proposal, due to a "need to re-organize the site plan to provide high quality design which is required by the P.R.D. Procedure." Memorandum From Tom . Loucks to City Council (Dec. 30, 1985). Among the reasons for its denial, Mr. Tom Loucks recommended that "a row of duplexes be located east of proposed Whispering Lane (Block 3, Lots 2-7] in order to serve as a transition between the m~lti-family housing units and proposed single family units on the western part of the site." Concerned with the "good overall design" of the Williams First Addition, and the need for the use of land that "could blend. . . well with the existing land in the area," Mr. Tom Harmening stated in his Memorandum of January 24, 1986 that "[i]fthe city approves the rezoning and preliminary plat the developer will still be . required to receive site and building plan approval at the time of an actual construction proposal. Therefore, approval at this time is by no means approval of a final site plan." Concern for final approval is echoed in Ch. II Subdivision Regulation (Platting). A further illustration of the city's concern for the need of "transition uses"Ts contained under the recommendation of Mr. Harmening, which states, "[i]t is recommended that approval be subject to the following conditions or understandings being implemented: I. That the park land, single family homes, duplexes, townhouses, and apartment units be located on their respective lots as proposed Suite 200 . 2855 Anthony Lane South. SI. Anthony, MN 55418 Telephone: (612) 789-1331 www.fosterbrever.com >l0:u! t/J7f/OC( cd p C jv1+/ 2004 in the preliminary plat/development proposal." Memorandum From Tom Loucks to City Council (Dec. 30, 1985). The concern for "transitional uses" and "good overall design" was made binding at the February 3, 1986 City Council meeting, when the City of Hastings approved the rezoning of Williams First Addition to R-3,use, subject to the condition recommended by Mr. Harmenings, that is, "[t]hat the park land, single family homes, duplexes, townhouses, and apartment units be located on'their respective lots as proposed in the preliminary plat/development proposal." ~. Yet, despite the conditions set forth at the February 3,1986 City Council meeting, on November 10, 1986, the city amended its development agreement, and changed the use of Lots 4-7, Block 3, trom two family residential structures to single family residential structures. This change in land use Undermined the goals of the City to maintain a "transitional use" and "good overall design" of the Willir.ms First Addition. No longer was there a buffer zone between single family units and multi-family plats. However, even after the amendment of the development agreement, concern remained to keep a "good overall design" in Williams First Addition. In fact, on a June 3, 1987 memorandum by Mr. Harmening, in response to a request to change the status of Block 2, Lots I and 2, which were previously designated for the development of two duplex structures, Mr. Harmening stated, It would appear that one of the primary reasons for proposing duplexes on the subject lot was to provide a buffer between the high density multi family development to the west and the single family homes to the east. Although staff has concerns with the placement of singlefamily homes adjacent to a multi family development these concerns are somewhat lessened due to the fact that the subject lots would not appear to be affected by the multi family development as much as the other duplex lots along Whispering Lane. Memorandum From Tom Harmening to Hastings Planning Commission (June 3, 1987) (emphasis added). In recommending the change of use in Lots I and 2, Block 2, Mr. Harmening specifically stated, "Due to the fact that the development of single family homes on the -subject lot would not be directly affected as much as the other duplex lots along Whispering Lane a recommendation is made for approval subject to the consideration of the above stated suggestions." Even if the concerns were fewer than if the proposal had been to change the land use in the duplex lots along Whispering Lane, the city still decided to implement techniques to lessen the absence of a buffer zone. Among these techniques was the "installation of berming, tree plantings and other screening devices on the multi family lot adjacent to the single family homes." Concerns for the elimination of the buffer zone is also echoed in Mr. Harmening's memorandum of March 17, 1988 to the Mayor and City Council. In this memorandum, Mr. Harmening states that __ "[i]t would appear that one of the original reasons for proposing duplexes on [lots 4,5,6 & 7, Block 3] would be to provide a buffer between the multi family development to the west and the single family homes located to the east. From a basic planning principle this design made sense. . . A concern which staff has pertains to the placement of single family homes adjacent to a multi family development. Ordinarily this type of situation is not overly desirable. J might add that the Hastings planned residential development requirements, which the multi-family project . 2004 , would be bound to, does address situations where multi-family units are adjacent to single family homes." Also in this memorandum, Mr. Harmening recommends that if the. city decides to grant this change;-it should require the installation of techniques such as berming, trees and other screening devices on the multi- . familylot. It specifically states that "[these techniques] should be taken into consideration at the time of site plan approval for the multi family project." ~ ANALYSIS When considering whether a development plan should be ap~roved, the following factors are considered: 1. The density of the area, where construction is proposed; 2. The impact of transportation on existing traffic; 3. The minimization of small roads leading up to larger streets. Further, "[even i]f the city approves the rezoning and preliminary plat the developer will still be required to receive site and building plan approval at the time of an actual construction proposal. . Therefore, approval at this time is by no means approval of a final site plan." Memorandum from Tom Harmening (January 24, 1986). Concern for final approval is echoed in Ch. 11 Subdivision Regulation (Platting). The Condominium plans proposed by Lawrence Condos should not be built based on, the considerations stated below. On February 3, 1986, the City Council adopted the following requirement: that "[t]he final site plan proposals to be in conformance with city regulations. Specific attention to be paid to setbacks, screening and landscaping, fire protection systems, screening of waste disposal systems, lighting, etc." The Lawrence Condos do not meet such standard. I. The Building does not meet the condition that "berming, tree plantings and other screening devices [be installed] on the multi family lot adjacent to the single family homes." According to the Construction Plan submitted by Lawrence Condos, the building fails to satisfy the requirement that bermings be erected as a buffer between the condos, and the single-family homes located across the street. The only berming proposed to be erected is located on the bottom right comer of the plan. The center and northern edges of Lot 2 fail to adopt any techniques to seclude the buildings from the single- family homes. -- Further, the Building does not have enough trees to screen the property. Section 11.06 of the City Code requires that "[a] street/boulevard tree shall be required for every 50 linear ft of street frontage in a subdivision. One front yard tree shall also be required for every lot in the subdivision, The subdivider shall submit a tree plan indicating the location and species of trees. Only those varieties of trees approved by the City Forester will be used. The minimum size shall measure 1-1/2 inches in diamder at ground line. No trees shall be planted 2004 within 30 feet of the intersection of curb lines on corner lots." Even if this requirement is satisfied, it is not enough to screen the property properly. The Building is three stories high and it is located on top of a hill. It is unlikely that the trees proposed in the Construction Plan will be enough to screen the property from the view of the adjacent single family homes. '" No other screening devices have been proposed by Lawrence Condos to seclude the Buildings from the view of the single-family homes. If built, this building will serve as a wall, since it is located on top of a hill,-' and it is three stories in height. Such building will not confonn to the layout of the Williams First Addition. II. The Construction of Lawrence Condos will Cause a Nuisance to the Neighborhood. As illustrated above, the construction of the Building will be inconsistent with the layout of the neighborhood. However, even more seriously, Lawrence Condos threaten to become a nuisance to the Williams First Addition. The following are some of the problems that would result from the building of Lawrence Condos: 1. Because the building stands so tall on top of the hill, the lights shinning from the parking lots and edges of the buildings, will point directly down towards the houses near the property. 2. Increase in the amount of traffic' flowing onto Whispering Lane, Featherstone Road, and 4th Street will result in longer commutes for the present residents of Williams First Addition. 3. An increase in the population in the area, would adversely impact city services.. 4. The increase in the amount of traffic flowing on Whispering Lane will endanger the traffic conditions on that road, as there are a number of drivewaysstemrning from Whispering Lane, and an increase in traffic would increase the likelihood of accidents For these and other reasons, the construction of Lawrence Condos will cause a nuisance to the rest of the neighborhood. At a minimum, it will cause a decrease in the value of the single-family property. Therefore, the City Council should not approve the construction of Lawrence Condos. Property Value Comparison - Whispering Lane Area - Lyn Way Area I was asked by the Commission to document similar circumstances where condominiums were introduced into mature neighborhoods, and from that show impact on property values. ... There is no equivalent circumstance that I could find. Condominium development has always been on the edge of new development on major roads, or surrounded by commercial or park land. ~, But, one can look at property values in the most similar case. I compared the Whispering Lane neighborhood to the Lyn Way neighborhood where there is recent condominium development. In the case ofLyn Way, the most recent condo development is about 2 blocks from established houses; with the Whispering Lane development, it is immediately adjacent. I researched property values through Dakota County Tax Accessor records. I developed maps and spreadsheets which show the affected properties. The first map shows the homes and values nearest to the 800 Lyn Way condos, the nearest new construction. The second map shows the 800 Lyn Way condos and their value (value is the appraised value or last sale price). The third map similarly shows the prqperties adjacent to the proposed Whispering Lane development. The average home price on Lyn Way is $182,281. The average condo price at 880 Lyn Way is $125,655. The condo is priced at 69% ofa single family home in the neighborhood. The average home price in the Whispering Lane neighborhood is $248,375, including townhouses. At 875 Bahls Drive is a condo which is substantially similar to the Whispering Lane proposal; these units are priced from $129,900 (but there is little variation in price). This represents 52% of a nearby home. To reach price equivalence the condos would have to be priced at $171,396, a difference of $41 ,496. I believe that a price significantly lower than this would depress property values in the neighborhood (separating this from all of the other issues and objections raised). Substantial upgrades to these condominiums are necessary to reflect any semblance of fitting in with the established neighborhood. Meeting minimum standards is not acceptable in this case. I believe that the current design is at variance with surrounding structures and can be refused based on the Planning Commission's duties as the Board of Design Control (sec 205, subv. 5). >f(4~ f~f(laf Address Land Building 2004 Value Lot Size Yr Built Homestead Finished 1101 Park Lane 42,000 168,500 210,500 0.21 1971 Y 2452 1107 Park Lane 40,700 122,600 163,300 0.20 1969 Y 1844 1111 Park Lane 40,700 133,700 174,400 0.20 1970 y 1238 1119 Park Lane 40,700 126,900 167,600 0.20 1969 y 1693 1121 Park Lane 40,700 137,700 178,400 0.20 1970 Y 1649 1201 Park Lane 40,700 139,800 180,500 0.20 1970 Y 2152 1100 Lyn Way 40,700 110,400 151,100 0.21 1968 Y 1118 1106 Lyn Way 42,000 142,200 184,200 0.20 1968 y 1253 1112 Lyn Way 42,000 172,200 214,200 0.20 1970 y 2303 1118 Lyn Way 42,400 195,200 237,600 0.20 1967 Y 2572 1202 Lyn Way 42,000 132,000 174,000 0.20 1967 Y 1596 1206 Lyn Way 42,000 130,700 172,700 0.20 1967 y 2088 1101 Lyn Way 38,600 142,800 181,400 0.27 1969 Y 2148 1107 Lyn Way 38,600 134,400 173,000 0.27 1968 Y 1830 1111 Lyn Way 39,500 143,500 183,000 0.27 1970 y 2093 1117 Lyn Way 38,600 145,000 183,600 0.27 1968 Y 2018 1121 Lyn Way 49,500 148,000 197,500 0.38 1969 Y 1980 Total 3,127,000 Avg Price 182,281 2004 Appraised Last Sale Peak Address Land Building Value Amount Yr Built Homestead Value 880 Lyn Way #101 10,000 115,900 125,900 123,055 2003 N 125,900 102 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 103 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 104 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 N 122,900 10S 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 106 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 107 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,200 2003 Y 126,200 10B 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 109 10,000 115,900 125,900 125,000 2003 N 125,900 110 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,900 2003 N 130,900 201 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 202 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 203 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 204 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 20S 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 206 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 207 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,400 2003 Y 126,400 20B 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 209 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 210 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 301 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,400 2003 Y 130,400 302 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 303 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 304 10,000 106,300 116,300 124,900 2003 Y 124,900 30S 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,200 2003 Y 126,200 306 10,000 106,300 116,300 125,900 2003 N 125,900 307 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,400 2003 y 126,400 30B 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 309 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 310 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,900 2003 Y 130,900 Total 3,769,900 2004 Appraised Last Sale Address Land Building Value Amount YrBuilt Homestead Finished Peak Value 397 Whispering Lane 34,000 222,400 256,400 264,000 2002 Y 1732 264,000 393 Whispering Lane 30,600 223,100 253,700 276,837 2002 Y 1732 276,837 389 Whispering Lane 30,600 222,300 252,900 181,000 1999 Y 1724 252,900 377 Whispering Lane 34,000 172,200 206,200 183,000 1996 Y 1624 206,200 373 Whispering Lane 30,600 175,900 206,500 220,000 1996 Y 1624 220,000 369 Whispering Lane 30,600 174,300 204,900 177,500 1996 Y 1624 204,900 365 Whispering lane 34,000 175,900 209,900 193,900 1996 Y 1624 209,900 355 Whispering lane 72,900 217,300 290,200 380,115 2003 Y 1754 380,115 325 Whispering Lane 66,200 213,500 279,700 1993 Y 1804 279,700 305 Whispering Lane 66,200 238,000 304,200 184,846 1996 Y 2965 304,200 275 Whispering Lane 68,100 254,500 322,600 304,871 1995 Y 3064 322,600 225 Whispering Lane 69,500 237,400 306,900 - 178,000 1987 Y 3404 306,900 205 Whispering Lane 68,100 231,200 299,300 - 260,000 1989 Y 2578 299,300 250 Crestview Drive 69,500 263,700 333,200 180,000 1998 Y 3332 333,200 283 Summit Pt Dr 28,400 165,600 194,000 186,900 2000 Y 1632 194,000 271 Summit Pt Dr 25,500 165,700 191,200 196,164 2000 Y 1660 196,164 259 Summit Pt Dr 25,500 167,400 192,900 193,900 2000 Y 1732 193,900 247 Summit Pt Dr 28,400 165,700 194,100 156,000 2000 Y 1660 194,100 235 Summit Pt Dr 28,400 166,000 194,400 163,750 1999 Y 1710 194,400 223 Summit Pt Dr 26,700 156,000 182,700 164,000 1999 Y 1710 182,700 211 Summit pt Or 28,400 165,600 194,000- 177,900 2000 Y 1632 194,000 209 Summit Pt Dr 28,400 167,200 195,600_ 208,000 2000 Y 1632 208,000 353 Summit pt Ct 31,200 194,200 225,400 185,930 1999 Y 1710 225,400 341 Summit pt Ct 29,300 241,100 270,400 233,198 1999 Y 3020 270,400 339 Summit Pt Ct 31,200 234,000 265,200 266,128 2000 Y 2738 266,126 327 Summit Pt Ct 25,500 219,300 244,800 222,900 2000 Y 2430 244,600 315 Summit Pt Ct 25,500 196,300 221,800 222,765 2000 Y 1634 222,765 303 Summit Pt Ct 28,400 232,300 260,700 307,000 2000 Y 2710 307,000 Total 6,954,509 Avg price 248,375 To: Hastings Planning Commission From: Jan Hanson Date: 6/4/04 Re: Proposed Development Whispering Lane & Crestview I am writing with concern about the proposed development of condominiums at Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive. I was informed about a meeting of the Planning Commission for 5/24/04 and this would be a time to voice concerns. Upon arrival I was told this project was not going to be discussed. I have received information from other concerned neighbors and I would like to share my opinion. Since our property value will be directly impacted by this development, I would like to request the planning commission seriously consider changing the zoning to only allow single family homes on the remaining property at this site. There is enough high density housing in this area along with the school and business developments. It would be appropriate for the planning commission to take a serious look at how the high density zoning and development is no longer appropriate for this area. Yes, I knew of this zoning when we chose to live here. I do believe, however, there are situations that require considering the impact of this type of development no longer being appropriate. I am aware of proposed development along Pleasant Drive near the hospital area which will also increase traffic and density to this area. That also should be taken into consideration and also support the fact that on our street, single family homes would most appropriate. I appreciate the city council following the process of informing residents and allowing residents to share concerns. However, I don't think the opinions of the residents are always taken seriously. I have recently been informed that there is a possibility this project will be on the June 14th agenda. It would be important to know prior to arrival as to whether this will be discussed. Thank you for your consideration to this neighborhood. Sincerely, Jan Hanson ftuJ b(~ Idj " ~, Objections to Proposed Project on Whispering Lane June 14,2004 Larry Christianson 275 Whispering Lane 437-8082 Background I am the homeowner that lives at 275 Whispering Lane, the house directly across from the eastern driveway of the proposed condo/apartment building. I designed and built my home in 1996. I live there with my wife, daughter and father-in-law for whom we provide care. My home was recently appraised as being worth $350,000, which is about 10% more than its building cost 8 years ago. The. lot price was $40,000 when we built. This year's property taxes were nearly $4000 on a tax- appraised value of$315,000. I mention this only in support of the potential fInancial impact that this project. will have on me and my neighbors. ..." The statements here are my own, and are, to the best of my knowledge correct. Naturally, I have an opinion about this project or I wouldn't be bothering with this; but I am trying to stay factual and to avoid hyperbole. Neighborhood History The bulk of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive were developed in the 1980s and 1990s. Most of the homes were in place for many years before we built in 1996. These are predominantly upscale, single-family homes. A few twin homes were added in 2002 on the lower end of Whispering Lane; these also are upscale. On the west side of the proposed development site are Summit Point Drive and Glenlou Way. This area has been developed in high-quality twin homes in the last few years (townhouses?). My understanding is that all this property was owned by a single owner who resided in Edina. Originally, the area plan called for townhouses and higher density housing. Apparently the city signed a contract with the owner of the property in 1985 which allows higher density housing (up to 90 units) on the lots in question. Why this was done, and whether this was proper, I don't know; it is not appropriate now in light of how the neighborhood evolved. The area's demand was for single-family homes. Over the years the large lots were re-platted and sold for single-family homes. The buyers were typically told that the neighborhood was to be single-family homes and townhouses. Although the zoning was still R-3, the universal expectation was that high-density wouldn't come because it is so vastly different than what existed. Now, the only remaining undeveloped land is the lot in question and smaller adjoining plots. The Whispering Lane/Crestview neighborhood was particularly unique in that these lots were independent of any particular builder. As a result, there has been a wide variety of designs, but of consistent quality and taste. The neighborhood is unique in its variety of styles, it is eclectic in a very good way. General Objections to the Project . The project doesn't fit the neighborhood. This neighborhood in nearly fully developed and consists of high-end single family and townhouses. Many homes have been in existence for over 10 years. The neighborhood is stable, turnover of housing is low and neighbors know neighbors. Consistent and appropriate development would consist of more homes of a similar nature. It is not fair to the existing residents to impose such a dramatic change of land use and population to the neighborhood. " . The developer says condominiums, but is it really? _' A owner-occupied is more desirable than rental units because of the stability of the residents. But, there is no way to prevent the developer from declaring this to be apartments, or rental condominiums, or owner-rented condominiums. As you know, the City Council recently called for a moratorium on multi- unit developments to have time to sort this out; this is a recognized problem. . The area will not bear the traffic generated by 70-100+ new units. There is no quick access to a major road. All traffic will be put onto Whispering Lane. The nearest cross-streets are Featherstone Road and 4th Street which are feeder streets. To reach Highway 55, Pleasant A venue and General Sieben Drive all require passing through multiple stop signs. A traffic study was done for a 30 unit building which was proposed for the adjoining lot. The road was found to be adequate, but I feel the study was flawed. The study was conducted at a time oflow traffic; during the summer when the high school was out and people would be on vacation. This project is over twice as large as the one for which the study was made. If this 72 unit project is allowed, almost certainly an addition 30-36 unit building will be put on the adjacent lot for a total of 102-108 units. If each unit has 2 cars, which might be a low estimate, it will introduce 200-250 cars (trucks, moving vans, etc.) into a street which previously had about 25 cars using it for residential access. Whether this increase will necessitate street improvements, I don't know, but it is not fair to the existing residents to bear the cost. of improvements to a road which already suits their needs. . The road is already difficult. Whispering Lane and Crestview both curve and rise sharply to the top, peaking at the intersection of Whispering Lane and Crestview. Visibility is limited and sometimes hazardous. I often have difficulty exiting my driveway, which is adjacent to this intersection, because of the lack of visibility. To add a 4th and 5th intersection to an already problematic comer is bad planning. See the attached photos for reference, and come and take a look. Featherstone Road is a sharp incline, the top of which is about 100 feet west of the intersection with Whispering Lane. There is already a 'Blind Intersection' sign posted there. Featherstone Road is a main feeder to this area, this intersection will be truly hazardous if the volume of traffic is expanded by 5x or more. There are a lot of children in the area. They like to ride their bikes and some play in the street. In particular, the lower portion of Whispering Lane (south of 4th Street which connects to Pleasant) often has street hockey and ad hoc baseball games going on. Sure, they shouldn't play in the street, but this is what makes a neighborhood. I believe that there is the significant risk of someone being hit if traffic volume is high. . Parking will be problematic. The plan calls for 72 garages (one per unit) and approximately 72 lot spots. One can reasonably expect that many of the garages will be used for storage units and the cars will be stored outside. If there are more than 2 cars per unit, which is a reasonable expectation, they will spill out into the street. Cars permanently parked in the street is unsafe and unsightly. No doubt the residents of the building will have guests too, adding to the congestion. The street is a normal width, but it feels very full now any time that there are cars parked on both sides. It is not fair or safe to the existing residents to put up with this and to potentially take away parking.for their guests. In addition, emergency vehicles could be impaired with the congestion. . , There may be a strain on basic services. There are times of day when I notice a drop in water pressure. Will the addition of 72-1 00+ households in one small area make service levels sub-standard? Has any study been made to check that appropriate quantity and quality of water will be available to serve the area? The City Council, on June 7th, directed the city engineer to hire an outside consulting firm to plan water requirements for near and long-term needs in Hastings. " Will sidewalks now be necessary? Should the existing residents, who have lived without, now have to pay an assessment in order to satisfy this extraordinary influx of residents? Will fire and police coverage for the area be impacted? High-density housing usually also demands above average attention ITom these services. . This will have a negative impact on property values. I have been told that I can expect a 10 to 30% decrease in property value depending upon the use and execution of the project. Residents who are closest will suffer the most, those who live on non- connecting streets can expect about a 5% decline in value. If one takes the 5% figure and applies it to the surrounding 110 properties and allows an average home value of $250,000 you derive an equity loss to the neighborhood of $1,375,000. This figure is probably low, it certainly is in my case where I can expect to lose around $100,000. I'm sure my property tax will go down (sarcasm). It is not fair to transfer the hard work of long-term residents to developers and non-residents. . The people of the area do not want this project. They see it as destructive to the neighborhood and completely undesirable., Opposition to last year's 30 unit proposal was strong, but too late. It was only good fortune that it did not happen. Opposition to this project has been even stronger based on responses I received. I have had calls ITom about 70 different households opposing this project and supporting my efforts to stop it. Many were prepared to attend the last Planning Commission meeting, but when this project was pulled ITom the agenda did not (as appropriate). Even after trying to spread the word around that the project was pulled, I talked to over 20 people in the hall to explain the situation. I hope that a good turnout will be at the meeting, that they get the word and are not put off by the 'false alarm' of the last meeting. . . . . . . You may be impacting a future historic neighborhood. This neighborhood, especially on Whispering Lane and Crestview, are some of the best and most unique homes built in Hastings in the past 20 years. The homes are all individuals and indicators of the style of the decade in which they were built. This is not tract housing where they are all the same with differing veneer; they were built to fit the needs and personalities of the residents. In 50 years time, these homes could be examples of the best of the late 20th century. History has a starting point and the neighborhood has driven its stake down in time. Contrast this with the proposed apartment buildings. What kind of care and interest will these buildip.gs engender? Probably not much, perhaps they will be viewed as what was wrong with large scale development. -' Specific Objections to this Project . It is ugly. There is nothing of architectural interest in the plan. The facade is plain and uninteresting. It is completely maximized and utilitarian. It screams apartment building, not home. It is nothing more than a warehouse for people, a barracks. It is far too large. It fills the lot and will tower over the neighborhood. It is located on some of the highest land in Dakota county. It will be like having the Government Center in our yards. It is out of scale to its surroundings, and would be more appropriate adjacent to commercial property. The current residents will have no privacy. They will be in constant view of the new buildings. This effectively takes away the use of their yards unless they are exhibitionists. These buildings will dominate the view ITom the neighborhood and will be visible ITom throughout the city. Is this what people want to see? Parking is inadequate. I know I mentioned this before, but it bears repeating. 72 garages and 72 parking stalls won't even begin to serve the residents. It will overflow into the street and be a detriment and hazard. This goes to the 2nd point, this project is too big for its space. What about water run-oft'! Approximately 70% of the lot is developed or paved. The water run-off will be tremendous. There is no provision for capturing or draining the water except into the street. Will the sewer system be able to handle this? This project is at the top of a hill, will adjacent properties be flooded? Will 4th Street be flooded? Landscaping is minimal. Although the current plan shows the lot packed with trees Gust throw them in to show they're doing something), it is just putting lipstick on a pig. No amount of trees or shrubbery will make the property more attractive or less noticeable. From my ITont window I will now have a direct view of36 garage/storage units. There is no recreational space. There is no play yard, pool, tennis courts, or even just a plain yard. A home has a place where one can enj oy being outdoors. Here there is a slab of asphalt and a green space which is so full of trees as to unusable for any purpose (if grass will even grow there). Are the children who live there going to play in the streets (if the street isn't full of cars)? . This project won't be the last Whatever is established here will carryover into tbe adj acent lot. 111ere are 72 units being proposed now, there will be 100+. That is what is really being proposed. Personal Objections . The driveway points directly into my front window and is adjacent to my driveway. It's hard enough to get out witbout tbe introduction of a new major traffic source. I don't want lights in my front windows all night. I can only speculate on car horns, stereos, people shouting and talking; it's possible to sleep , -' witb tbe windows open now, I doubt if it will be when this is built. . My view will be maximum ugly. I get to look right into tbe garage and parking area. Surely sometbing could be done about this. . I will take a huge hit in property value, probably in excess of $70-1 00,000. I saved and worked hard to get my home. To transfer its value to someone else is manifestly unfair. What can be done? . This is the wrong project for tbe neighborhood. Deny this prpject on its own merits. It is a flawed design and will have strong negative impact on its surrounding area. . Order studies to support tbe questions of support. Traffic, safety, utility use, drainage, access to emergency services are all real concerns. . Resolve tbe legal question. The city has made agreement witb a previous owner oftbe land to allow up to 90 units on tbis property. Can tbis be challenged? I'm not a lawyer, but I tbink tbis agreement can be challenged or modified. Direct tbe city legal counsel to investigate legal remedies or negotiate to rescind tbe contract. . The neighborhood is vastly different tban originally planned. The original plan and agreement are null and void (tbe original owner didn't follow tbe plan when tbe lots were sold helter-skelter for single family homes). . The agreement was witb tbe original owner and not transferrable (maybe). . Development in this manner will have a significant monetary impact on long-standing residents. It amounts to a 'taking' if tbis development is permitted. . Services can not be supported in this area for a development this large. Impossibility is a valid reason to void a contract. . Re-zone tl1e lots (including tbe one to tbe soutb) to appropriate use. R-I or R-2. Adjacent lots were just re-zoned to R-2. This reflects tbe nature oftbe neighborhood. You could re-zone and condemn my house to be a park if you wanted to, it is not impossible. . Direct tbat existing residents be compensated for tbeir loss in property value and loss of use of tbeir property. . Look at tbe attached low density plat proposals. These are viable alternatives which show what could be done to keep tl1e neighborhood intact. The Bigger Picture - what can be done . Really plan, and stick to it. Be sure that all new developments fully disclose the use of land around them. The recent Pulte development is a good example. Simply allowing big contractors to buy large plots and fill them in is not the way to go. . Is more high-density housing desirable for Hastings? It seems to be being developed in several areas right now. I don't think it is just market forces at work here. There needs to be a balance to provide, step-up opportunities in housing. . Keep apartment buildings in buffer areas. Keep them adjacent to appropriate roads and in scale with their surroundings. ~. . Don't allow higher density housing to go into established areas. Ifhomes have been present in the immediate area for (e.g.) 5+ years, the residents have a right to expect consistency in their neighborhood. There needs tQ be a policy which protects the existing residents. Allow new neighborhoods go grow up around the high-density and commercial, rather than the other way around. Lead with it, don't follow with it. An Appeal to the Developer I've said a lot of disparaging things about this project, but it's not personal, the project is just a very bad idea. I don't think you want to be known as the company which forces itself down everyone's throat for the sake of a buck. It is much better to have the reputation of a company concerned with quality and value. There are good alternatives in low-density housing. The existing lot could be platted into 20-24 single family home plots; the adjacent lot a dozen more. There is a great opportunity to complete a desirable, upscale neighborhood with houses the owners would be proud to have, and neighbors the neighborhood would be glad to welcome. I don't know the price of the lot involved, but I would think that a profit of 1 Ok per lot and a profit of 25k per house is probably in line. Over 24 houses that's 850k profit, that and the valuable intangible of doing the right thing. \ 1,_____~_L:::~.}::::J.!__::::-l_-_--(:::':::~J"^"1:U~~~\T~N. ~:R~D. -~---..____L. I' I .F~+.fl~F\~ v E ----___....... __ I " I' .. I' " .. ,. .' "t " " , , ..; I,," '--- , - . ) " -.. .., -. , , , , , , I \ , \ \ \ , " '--1'------ \ '~ . I 1----- " (j' . I 1_ ---- _I -f.'----, I I f :---, : 1- -----: ~ '"\ B ~ : I I 1 I ,~, \ I 1- _, I .... , , ~ ---___ I ~, , , I I I \ \ , ~ -----_..... II.. ______OP..l L,'________________.....__l \..b............--__J t~ _______ ... + ~ ----------------------------------~ ----------- -r-:-"""-r--j .......... r ~'\Io-:l.~':Ioo, ,____...............______., ~----___"': :'....____~-... I' 'I' \ - \ \ , J' ,) ..- 1--" '. ~ .' II~ " ,f I ._\. t .J....... _ I ''''----1 ... -. '-- ""---' I--.; I--; ~.,. ,. ~.,::.-\. .'.' ....\ Note: Map is out of date, approximately from 1994. Virtually all lots are filled except subject property. "' ~" , " ,. I , I I , ; I , ! I I I I , .WW ., ~ ..... j\ j . r K j Letters indicate position and direction that photos illustrate. ~ ~, A) Whispering Lane. View towards south and proposed driveway. Note curve and downward slope. " ~. B) Whispering Lane. View towards Crestview Drive. Curved and sloped C) Corner of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive, towards Whispering Lane and Featherstone Drive and 2nd driveway.. D) View from 275 Whispering Lane towards proposed driveway and garages. " " E) Corner of Whispering Lane and Crestview Drive towards Crestview Drive. F) Corner of Whispering Lane and Crestview down Whispering Lane J) View up Whispering Lane towards project. Note upward slope. . "' -' K) View towards project and comer of Whispering Lane and Crestview L) View towards project and Summit Point Drive _. I NW-. cor. of NWl/4 of NE1/4. Sec. 29. Twp. 115. Rge. 11~: N line of NI (Da=ount~ Cast 1~0==~~_~"__ . L2.~ L3 !40TH ~ I 275.62 m ~ ,- FIHST ... L23 24..1 L- I 12.aoi I I RRST. STREET ~o.-oo 01 1 I 0 0 W 0 <(I ~ 0 z I '" '" <t T2.6Q ~ ~ ...J '" ~I:= ~g 0 1.0 o 1-'0. g,.,o',ii0 I 10 ..J, '0 ~ }- I 0 . :::Ji en 0' , 111 II \ ~ ~ I o o I f .. - ~ '" '" - 0 ...r.._ - ~ '" '" - 0 0 c:r c ~ ,;, C\ ~ ~ 0_ .~~ '" .; '" u ~, . 0 ~~ ~ ~ ~ c .~ ~-o' I- C c . 0 "'... '" .. ~ C 0 c e VI c C .0 ...'" - C ~ I w 0 '" .:: ;\ - ot: ... 0 _u .~ ~ "p " 0 C 0 ~ - c ? 0 0 u ~I ., 0 '" '" '" 60 I{ POINT AT A RIG t.JltE O'P S. linE . of NW1. 3 3 &f (, S 89'53'51"W 439.65 SC~.i Ut..A/l.C !'1E:;:~ 3r~i) t\DD;T1Gf.j C-Vc:'n..,..lf""Il\l '. ~, -NW. cor. at NW1/4 at NEl/4, Sec, 29, Two, 115, Rge. 17 (Dakota County Cast Iron Monum'Rt Found In Plac.,) ~N' T1n.cot NWI/4 of NEI/4 HE. cor. of NWl/4 of HE --------- -------- L2 ~ L3 [40TH STHE~. :<l L2'" IN _275 62 . 13 ~ \---- '='Ii:;~ . ---2.2.31.00-....:..=-- ....J " ___2_4..1 L-- ! I ,...... i n.60j, FIRST _ STREET 60.00 011 )1 -'0 w <10 z 0 I n~~~ ~S~! C?, I 3: ::: 60 UJ g ~g ~ "" 0 o:.r . 1.0 C>1 ~'(!) ~ {I) g 7r= ~g .0 - 0 Z o. (') ~ 0 !I 0 ~ g ~ 1ij ~ I -.J \ '0 '0 W 0 1-1 0 0 Q... 0 :J J UJ ~ f,I1 01 I :r: '1 I ! I I ."" I 'j I ",.>- 72.60 N ....J ~ . " 8 /{ POINT "11.00 FEET (AS MEASlUR;ED'" AT" A RIGHT ANGLE) WEST OF THE"EAS ...." UNE O"F SAI"D:N.W. 1/4 OF THE H.E! 1 S. line of N. 3"33.00 ft. - of NWl/4 of NEI/4-; ---N89'43'3EI"E 871.3 I I I "' ~ 1'/ ').Ao "'1 ;).,.. ....\ 6 "' '" OJ "' o o o 00 , ~ /0 17 1(. DRIVE 15 /0( - ~...J /"". 1 S 't I~ ,. S 8 10 "}"."t" 5 !/ 3 '- 6 . : " 407. If 3 .... 5 o o -. N , t 7 L ~ '0 II- S 88'53'5'''W 439.65 \ ~t 0_ o o o o o ~ I, NORTH LINE OF THE SouTH 33' r OF THE. NW 1/4 OF THE.NE 1/4 _..JL _~___-L~~W~G~ - ~I _ _ ~ -~644 61 ',\/,:".:;1' __.J .. . 1"1 N'BS"SS'51"E ~ --- APft-.-:=.-:-:V<- 7"" I!<>'---) i.i.! .~' . '/0' / :;,': ;,I'" (" 0 ....). ::::.ChUf,A.ACHE:F{ ! ; , , . , , , . , -~ N ~ ~ .'3HD ~. ~ ;: ~ ~ ,L\DDiT!Oj'.j 60 , . w} ? C g L " C O( z, EXEPTION 6'0.00 1323.66 F:.::UE.TH -~ , f--~- / - -NW. cor. of NW1/4 of NE1/4, See, 29, Two, 115, Rge. 17 (Dakota County Cast Iron Monument Found In Place,) ~N' line.of NW1/4 of NE1/4 _________ ___-~r~wl/4 of NE1/~ L2 i L3 !4GTH STEE~7 ~ t.; I - _ia75.B2' ~:;; r .=\>:#::::' _":"_221H.OO__=-- ..J L2:3 I _~j...J L-- I! ''''N'I I 72.601, I FIRST STREET SO.oo I \ I :1 a '0 W 0 ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ \ E&OI ~ ~ .-J ~ \ g 60 l ril~ f ~. o iri\8 0 ~ ~'(!) ~ ;:; ,; ~. \0 ? . 0 z 0 . o .,1-- 10 0 '<f 0 - 0 '<f 1'1< Olio ......<'1 c:: (11...... I -.J\ '0 '0 W '0 t-l 0 0 a.. c ~1 z ~ w 0' I s: " I' I re:;: - I :1 .03- ...J :] " If. POINT 911.00 FEET (AS MEAs..UR.EO' AT A RIGHT ANGLE) VlEST O'F THE "EAS;i';" UNE O'F SAI"D: W.W. 1/4 OF THE. N.e~ './<1 -' S. line of N. 33'3.00 ft. . of NW1/4 of NEl/4; -'--N 8S" 43' 36'''E B7~ .38 I ,- , I U1 ~ " " '" w € 0 0 ~ ~102.13---, ~so.OO-'!J: ;}, I;, I.. 01'1 ON ~. o. 3 ore 4 g~ 5 '. C;:;-d..,f . ~... :J. h.iJ.J..... " 11 ,?~ ::.. I;. j Of :3 oz.... ...;.~'f m . " ~ 1 t 7 L Ii' ., to ". S B9'53'51"W 439.65 I J\ o o SC'Hur,Aj.~Ci'1!::F~ . o ;\ I' LNORTH LINE OF THE souTH ~3' OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE,NE 1/4 it- ____-- ~~W~G~ ~ . ..,._.....,." i."i.',:lIF,.Ti..<, ___ 1<1 --644 61-- 'ot""; ;:.~:~ I . --...-I - "'-= ., .-=~_~~~_~__~S'5'~j"E i'r'~--- \ . - / '~~:J / ".; , ; , , . . , , , o .~ '" ~ " :3F<D .. ~ .f::.,DD;T101'.1 EXEPTION f m o . o o o z , LAND USE APPLICATION CITY OF HASTINGS - PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 4th Street East, Hastings, MN 55033 Phone: 651.480.2350 Fax: 651.437.7082 Address of Property: W\..\~UG.. L~(; Legal Description of Property: lOT ~ ?JLDC...\L L W\l.L~/A~ I~i~OOt\IOIL.\ Applicant: Name Address Owner (If different from Applicant): LJ'~,v(2.GIIJCt: ?::V\LOEQ~ IUC, Name ~~~f~~~ M;; OE-Ut ~(; U?I@AA~U. ('~ Email Phone Fax Email Description of Request (include site plan, survey, and/or plat if applicable): t2E&gE:?i ~\;5; PL~ ^~~~ 'Z. '?~~ ~IUIT C.DIU On. IAJ. 10 ~ }ILlJl 0 \ & eJT/::)L . h - P.:.vtLDlIUG? , . Check applicable box(es): Final Plat Minor Sub. Rezone Spec. Use Variance Annexation EAW Prelim Plat x Site Plan y. TOTAL: Signature of Applicant Note: All fees and escrow amounts due at time of application. $600 $500 $500 $500 $250 $500 plus legal expenses $500 plus $1000 escrow $500 plus escrow: - Under 10 acres: $3000 ($500 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - Over 10 acres: $6000 ($1000 Planning + $5000 Engineering) $500 plus escrow: - 0 - 5,000 s.f.: $1500 (Engineering) - 5,000 - 10,000 s.f.: $2500 ($500 Planning + $2000 Engineering) - 10,060 - 50,000 s.f.: $3250 ($750 Planning + $2500 Engineering) - 50,000 s.f. +: $4000 ($1000 Planning + $3000 Engineering) Administrative Lot Split Comp Plan Amendment House Move Lot Line Adjustment Vacate ROW/Easement $50 $500 $500. $50 $400 Date Signature of Owner Date ~N: IJ. ;::: L (' t 1("e..vtc....~ &..( /Z 7 h'-l , I and Title - Please Print ..-;;7 Official se Only. File # 2004 -2-1 Fee Paid tflil-JOO, iJD Owner Name - Please Print t; e..\ . Rec'd By: Ib Receipt # .~ t,r0 Date Rec'd ~ I ;jt] I 0 ~ App. Complete 4/23/2003 Opposition to The Whispering Lane Condominium Development Introduction and History Economic Impact Societal and Safety Impact Legal Considerations Political Consideration Changes to Plan Summary Attachments RECEIVED JUL 0 6 2004 2 4 6 9 11 12 14 1 Introduction and History In question is the land of Williams First Addition and the condominium project proposed by Lawrence Construction. This 4 acre lot, and adjoining 2 acre lot, is in the midst of an otherwise fully developed neighborhood. The lot is bordered single-family homes on Whispering Lane near the intersection of Crestview Drive; the western border is bordered by town homes (quads) on Summit Point Drive. The property falls under a development contract first approved in November 1985. This contract called for single-family homes on Crestview, a buffer of twin homes on Whispering Lane, and apartments or condominiums on the subject lot and the adjoining 2 acre lot. The original proposal was that a retirement home was to be built on this land. Over the years there have been modifications made to the contract; these have been initiated by the landowner in order to maximize his profit. These modification were accepted over the warnings and concerns of the city plauner of that time. Block 2, lots 1 and 2 (across Whispering Lane on the northeast side) were switched ITom duplexes to single family homes in June of 1987. The city planner had concerns (attachment A), but felt this was less of a problem in that home positioning and landscaping could mitigate impact on the homes when the property was developed. Even this was violated, when the home on Lot 2, Block 1 was built against recommendations. Block 3, lots 4 through 7 were changed in March of 1988 from duplexes to single-family homes. Again, the city planner voiced objections, to wit "A concern which staff has pertains to the placement of single family homes adjacent to a multi family development. Ordinarily this type of situation is not overly desirable..." (attachment C). Also, specific recommendations for screening were made at this time. These lots were developed into single family homes, mostly from 1988 to 1996. The final quads were built on the lower portion of Whispering Lane in 2001-2002. A last few homes were built last year; one empty lot remains. For 18 years, the lots which should have led development in the area sat idle while homeowners created a neighborhood of quality and diversity. In 2003, the adjoining 2 acre lot was purchased (block 1, lot 1) was purchased by Wesley Investments for condominium development. A site plan was approved that included underground parking, substantial landscaping and upgrades to the building appearance. Wesley Investments has decided not to build this condominium, and has expressed interest to a neighborhood resident in developing lots for single-family and townhouses depending upon the development of the 4 acre lot. This brings us to current time. Lawrence Builders wants to build 72 condominium units and has submitted a site plan which has been opposed by the neighborhood and voted 'to deny' by the Planning Commission on June 28tll. 2 The Planning Commission has rejected this plan on cause, and the City Council can likewise reject it. In the Hastings Comprehensive Plan, under Housing Policies (page II), is the following paragraph: 'Hastings will continue to evaluate site plans and building plans for multi-family residential development to ensure that new development compliments existing residential development and fits appropriately within the natural environment and historical context of the immediate neighborhood." This development does not compliment existing residential development, nor does it tit within the natural environment, nor does it tit the historical context of the immediate neighborhood. The introduction of such a large high-density development into an established neighborhood is unprecedented in Hastings; previously all had been bordered by commercial land, park land, buffered residential and major road access. Also in the Hastings Comprehensive Plan, under Implementation Strategies (Intill and Redevelopment, p. 17), is the following: "New development should be compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. One site may be difficult to develop but is an attractive natural and private setting suitable for new and imaginative housing designs." Although this passage is in the context of school land redevelopment, it applies here; this neighborhood is established with this hole in the development, it begs for development of this sort. The neighborhood opposes this plan on a wide variety of causes. These causes include economic concerns, societal concerns, safety concerns, legal concerns and (for lack of a better term) political concerns. The following pages outlines and documents our position. 3 Economic Impact One criteria which can be used to evaluate the appropriateness of a proj ect is its impact on neighboring properties per Sec. 2.05 , Subdivisions 5, 7. Another consideration is the fiducial responsibility of the Council to create and maintain an optimal tax base through development and maintenance of the tax base. It is incumbent upon the Council that they do no harm to the established residents. Impact on home values It is difficult to quantify impact on home values. Real estate agents are unwilling to commit to value declines because they a) are highly variable and dependant upon many factors; b )may be trying to sell the homes involved; c) may be trying to sell the condos being built; d) have to do business with the builders and the city. Off-the-record, I have been told by real estate agents to expect impacts of 5% to 30% depending upon proximity. A 5% impact on the properties within the blocks adjacent to condo development amounts to $1.45M dollars (see attached spreadsheet). A 5% impact on the properties immediately adjacent to the development amounts to $348,000; but this percentage is probably low and could easily be doubled or more. It is a maxim in real estate to not build the most expensive house in a neighborhood; the house will be pulled down by its surroundings and conversely the surrounding properties will be pulled up. In this case, we are looking at the inverse of that maxim, i.e. the introduction of 72 units of the lowest priced housing into a mature neighborhood. It is bound to have a depressing effect on home sales and values. Although introduction of this type of development into an established neighborhood is unprecedented, one can look at the most similar case. This is the condo development in the Lyn Way/Sahl's Drive area, although the condos in question are 2+ blocks away and buffered by park space. The average home value on Lyn Way and Park Lane is about $182,000. The recent condo development at 880 Lyn Way has an average property value of about 125,600 (see spreadsheet). The condo represents about 69% of the value of a home in the nearest neighborhood. The proposed condo development on Whispering Lane is very similar to 880 Lyn Way; if these units are priced similarly, it represents only 49% of the value of nearby homes. To be comparable to the Lyn Way neighborhood, the condos will have to be priced at about $177,000. This is a difference of$51,400; a very substantial difference and quite likely to impact home values. (Attachment D 1-3) Although the Council cannot dictate the price of units being developed, it can consider the economic impact on its surroundings, and it can dictate necessary improvements to a plan which will make a property more compatible with its surroundings. 4 Impact on county and city revenues It is fair to look at the revenue which will be gained or lost by this development. It is in the interest of the city and council to maximize income through effective development. Using the 880 Lyn Way example, the average condo pays taxes of $923. For 72 units, this is tax generation of 72 x 923 = $66,456 The average town-home (quad) in the Whispering Lane area pays taxes of $2,504. The average single-family home on Whispering Lane pays taxes of $3,700. If the same 4 acres, on which the condos are proposed, were used for quad development there would be room for 50 quad units. This projects to a revenue generation of 50 x $2,504 = $125,200. Similarly, there would be room for 24 single-family homes on Y. acre lots. These 24 homes would generate 24 x $3700 = $88,000. Thus, quads would generate $58,744 more (188%) revenue than condo development; single homes would generate $21,544 more (132%) revenue. The figures above do not account for the potential decrease in revenues due to decline in property values. If a 5% decline ($1.45M) is felt throughout the neighborhood, revenue lost will be on the order of$18,000, and in the immediate neighbor hood of$4,000. In total, depending upon what is built represents a potential revenue shift of $76,000 per year. It is incumbent upon the council to be fiscally responsible, and to wisely develop in order to minimize taxes to the public. Development other than condos is in the interest of the county, the city and its citizens. 5 Societal and Safety Impact Societal Concerns In short, the neighborhood does not want this type of development. It is substantially late in the area's development, and quite different than what has proceeded it. This development is so massive and so different from the surrounding neighborhood that it will be a disruptive force. It will break the sense of community which has been established over the past 18 years This is a cookie cutter development put into the midst of a unique neighborhood. The single family homes on Whispering Lane are all different. These were some of the few 'independent' lots which were available in Hastings in the' 80s and '90s. As a result, the homes were all independently designed and built, many by their owners. They reflect high standards of design and execution. The introduction of high-density housing at this late stage is fundamentally unfair to the existing residents. This housing should have lead the development efforts in the area. Instead, the land owner has waited for the existing residents to increase his property value by manipulating the development plan at the current resident's expense. The buffer area which is required of high-density development has been eliminated on the land owner's request. This buffer of twin homes was deemed important and highly desirable in the original plan; its elimination was frowned upon by the city planner of the time (attachment C 1). The purchaser's of these buffer lots, were not told of the proposed development across the road. Indeed, many were misled by developers, real estate agents and the land owner himself. They were told that the balance of the land would be developed in town homes and single-family homes; this seemed reasonable and logical. Although City Hall was aware of the plan, none of the residents inquired; the likelihood of the city allowing a condominium development was unthinkable and unreasonable. There was no effort by the landowner, who sold the lots to the residents, to comply with the city planner's admonition that "future homeowners should be aware of the fact that a multi-family project will be constructed across the street" (attachment C 2) In the City Planner's notes related to the development of lots 4-7, and in the original development contract are words which at least imply that purchasers of these lots should be made aware of the plans for development (attachment C2). This seems more active than simply relying upon the purchasers to seek information. None of us in these homes were given any indication that a condominium development was to happen. This order of development, and the elimination of the transition lots, can be seen with a cynical eye. The land owner has allowed and encouraged the full development of the neighborhood with upscale homes. He has waited until the property is completely landlocked with properties of greater worth before acting to develop the remaining lots. 6 While maximizing profits is a good thing in a capitalist society, it is unethical to do this at the expense ofthe neighborhood. One of the criteria of allowing development projects is 'consistent use in the neighborhood'. This is not consistent use; it is radically different. The development contract also calls for phasing of development. It is not reasonable that the construction of the largest impact units be held to the end. That is not phasing nor is it orderly development. Safety Concerns The neighborhood has great concerns about traffic and safety. In 2003, a traffic study was done to estimate impact. In 2004, that study was updated to show additional traffic flow to the high school. I do not have a copy of the updated study; the numbers quoted below are from the original. The neighborhood still contends that the traffic study is flawed and inaccurate for the following reasons: . The study was done in the summer (near the 4th of July). Although it has been extrapolated to account for High School traffic, there were probably residents (and government workers) on vacation and measured levels were probably low. . The study shows an overall peak morning flow of 53 vehicles. This is unreasonably low allowing for the approximately 274 vehicles which will live on this road (72 x 2 + 30 x 2 + 15 x 2). This implies that only 20% have ajob to go to in the morning; a statistic which is not born out by the neighborhood demographics. A more realistic number would be 40-50%, 93-137 vehicles; a vehicle every 25-35 seconds. . The report's conclusion states that only 13 of these vehicles (an employment rate of 13%) will be from the condos. This is unreasonably low. . Their intersection flow page shows only 35 vehicles leaving Whispering Lane in any direction in contrast with their previously stated 53 vehicles. I don't lmow why this is, but surely an increase of 50% (by their own numbers) would impact upon the letter grade given the intersection. . The study inadequately accounts for grade and sight lines. The road is curved, there is a significant grade. I live next to the 3-way intersection, and already it is difficult to safely exit the driveway. Cars fly into view abruptly coming up and around from any direction; others have the same problem. . The study doesn't account for the location of the condo complex's driveways. Their placement is crucial for safe operation; the introduction of 2 new intersections into the hilled and curved road will be hazardous. . The study doesn't allow for the presence of parked cars. Parking on the street will be common as the site plan only allows for a minimum of resident parking and, as far as I can tell, no visitor parking. Although the road is theoretically wide enough, that width is more appropriate for flat land. People parking on hills and curves do not park tight with the curb. 7 · The study doesn't account for snow effects. Whispering Lane is not plowed from curb to curb, this is not possible due to the severe curves and grade. In the winter, it is typical to lose 6 feet or more of roadway width. · This will be aggravated by parked cars as condo residents take to the street while their lot is plowed. This will narrow the road further. · This road is already an adventure in the winter; it is sloped, curved and slippery. To narrow it with semi-permanent obstacles, i.e. parked cars, will make it genuinely hazardous. · The report does not allow for the fact that the corner of Whispering Lane and Featherstone is a blind intersection. Traffic coming over the hill on Featherstone is coming fast and there is no way to see it. . The addition of the YMCA will increase traffic on Featherstone beyond what has been measured. · The study inaccurately portrays traffic flow. The majority of southbound traffic on Whispering Lane continues through the lower part of Whispering Lane, it doesn't turn. This is the fastest access to Pleasant A venue and to Highway 55. This is important to the next point. · The lower portion of Whispering Lane is heavily populated with families with young children. A good estimate is that about 50 children live on the lower part of Whispering Lane. They commonly play in the street; bikes, baseball, skateboards, and wait for school busses; all the things that make up a neighborhood. Already, extreme care is needed when passing through here; the doubling or tripling of traffic here is asking for trouble. Other Concerns People have a fundamental expectation of privacy. The introduction of a 3 story building, looming over residents, essentially takes away their privacy and the enjoyment of their property. No fence, landscaping or berming can hide this hulk from the neighborhood, nor the neighborhood from the condos. People are concerned that utilities will be impacted. The effective doubling of population in a small area will probably have an effect. Even now, there are times during the day where water pressure is low. Citizens are entitled to adequate services. The condo development is approximately 40% hard surface according to the architect. This amounts to 1.6 acres. During a recent downpour of about I" of rain, water was high in the gutter and pooling for a short time at the low point of 4th Street. This conditi on will be greatly aggravated by the introduction oflarge parking lots. One last note; the condos will be located on some of the highest ground in Hastings. They will tower over their surroundings and be visible from throughout the city, effectively becoming a new landmark. Is this what we want for 'Historic Hastings'? 8 Legal Considerations This development violates the Hastings Comprehensive Plan at 4 points o This development does not compliment the existing residential development. It insults the unique homes and neighborhood which has long preceded it. o This development does not fit appropriately within the natural environment. It essentially lays bare the land and paves it. Alternate plans could better use the existing vegetation. o This development does not fit the historical context of the immediate neighborhood. Certainly this isn't an old neighborhood, but its heritage of unique homes is very different than other development of the 1980s and 1990s. This area has great future historical interest as examples of architecture which is harmonious without repetition. o The development ignores the Plan's admonition that new development should be compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods. The plan fails to satisfy Sec. 2.05, subdivisions 5&7 in that this project is "so dissimilar in exterior design, appearance and function" as to cause material depreciation to surrounding properties. There are significant safety concerns for motorists and pedestrians. The unique topography doesn't show well in a traffic study, but its impact is felt daily by the residents. Multiple blind spots, due to curves and rises, are hazardous; the introduction of 2 more high volume intersections adjacent to a problem intersection is asking for trouble. The land owner has created this problem by eliminating the buffer zone. The Planning Commission and Council have gone along with this against recommendation of the City Planner of the time. The developer has failed to provide the additional screening set forth by the City Planner when the Whispering Lane plots were changed to single family homes. The developer has not been responsive to changes requested by citizens or the City Planner in accommodating this requirement. The land owner (and other parties) failed to inform the purchasers of the Whispering Lane plots of the nature of the development across the street per the March, 1988 memo (Attachment C2) The Planning Commission has denied this development. The Council must have a compelling reason to allow it. 9 It is common practice to have a reasonable time frame to execute a development plan. It is not reasonable to allow a project to be fully developed, then introduce the most detrimental aspect of it. The fear of a lawsuit is different than facing a lawsuit. I have not heard any indication that a suit is forthcoming; nor that any attempt at mediation or compromise has been attempted. If a suit is forthcoming, damages should not be great and might be worth the price. The land is believed to be more valuable broken up than intact. Current county appraisals on V. acre lots (single family homes) is about $68,000; on .08 acre lots (quads) about $28,400. The 4 acres could be split into 24 V. acre lots, or 50 .08 acre lots. This represents the following values: 24 x 68,000 = $1,632,000 50 x 28,400 = $1,420,000 The last sale price of the adjoining 2 acre lot was $330,000 (2003), and has a current asking price of $450,000. Presuming that 4 acres is worth twice what 2 acres is worth (with twice the development), that places this parcels value at $660,000- 900,000; well below its worth developed as low density. 10 Political Considerations The issue of appropriate development is in the forefront of Hastings political thought. . There is the moratorium on condominium development. This development is an extreme example of why this moratorium was created. . Downtown redevelopment is hinging on condominium development and its opposition. It seems that Hastings is becoming a town of condominiums. While these may be profitable for the builder, they are not an all-desirable answer to housing needs in Hastings. There is need for single-family homes which isn't being met due to the way large tracts of land are being developed. The Whispering Lane neighborhood is unique in the last 20 years in that it has grown, neighbor by neighbor, not block by block. Every home, every family, has its own character. This is the best stuff from which neighborhoods and towns are made and should be encouraged. The neighbors have voiced their opinion, quantified their objections and steadfastly opposed this project. At each of the Planning Commission meetings, over 50 residents showed up to oppose this project. As mentioned before, 77 families signed up to support legal representation in this fight. Ofthe 110 households in the immediate area of this development, none have expressed anything but disdain for this project. In the Hastings codes dealing with city officials are the following: 2.81 Subd. 4 a - 'loyal to the political objectives expressed by the electorate and the programs developed to attain those objectives' 2.81 Subd. 2 - 'responsible to the people' Certainly, your responsibility is to a greater Hastings than just this neighborhood. But, taking this responsibility can start here. Use your wits, persuasive capabilities and powers granted by the people to find a suitable resolution to this problem. It is reaching a point where our motto 'Historic Hastings' is just a sad reminder of what was. We must not allow Hastings to just become a town of replicated homes, condos and businesses as to make it indistinguishable from any other bedroom community. The Planning Commission has already turned the project down on concerns of safety and neighborhood fit, these are valid causes. If you allow this to pass, you must document why you have overridden the Commission and the wishes of the citizens 11 Changes to plan In consideration that the Council may approve the plan, I include this section to spell out the changes which the neighborhood has suggested. To this point, the developer has been unreceptive in changing the plan to satisfy neighborhood concerns. It appears that the developer has a single plan which he uses repeatedly with only the most modest of changes. Indeed, the developer even denied the City Planner's recommendation that the garages be merged into a single structure in order to avoid garbage collecting between the buildings (although they did offer to put up screens to make it difficult to access). The developer has consistently stated that they meet, or in some cases exceed, minimum standards. It is the neighborhood's position that the standards are too low, an opinion which was echoed by Planning Commission member Greg Schmitt (Planning Commission Meeting, June 28). Although the neighborhood finds this project undesirable for all the reasons stated above, the following recommendations are made in order to improve the neighborhood fit. . Underground parking. This is not cost prohibitive per Wesley Investments, the owner of the adjacent property, and was part of their site plan (estimated at $10,000 per unit). It would do much to remove the eyesore of the garage complex and increase green-space on the property. . Use of brick over much of the building. Although the developer claims that they exceed minimums, this building will be so dominant as to command the view throughout the neighborhood and even the city. More effort is needed to make this building attractive. · Increased architectural interest. This building is largely a copy of what has already been executed in other locations in the city. More variation in decks, balconies, roof lines and other features could increase its attractiveness. · More extensive landscaping is needed. Use larger trees to replace some which are being removed, additional berming to reduce view (and comply with planner's recommendations), high quality and attractive fencing, more green-space, etc. · Attractive and shielded lighting such that the property doesn't light up the neighborhood · Repositioning of driveways such that they are safer and less invasive. A single outlet positioned at the corner of Whispering Lane and Crestview should serve and is consistent with the original plan of 1985. · Require a snow removal plan which does not require condo residents to move their cars to the street (which is commonly done in similar circumstances). Parking on the street after a snowfall is hazardous and unsafe. · More variance in unit size and finish. Raise the value of all units, but have some premium units in the building such that this isn't all entry-level housing. · Minimal signage. This is a residential neighborhood, not a commercial district. 12 . Enforce ownership standards. Require a condo association which dictates owner occupation. . Increase green-space and provide recreational area for residents and resident's children. The neighborhood population doesn't mandate sidewalks, and we don't want children playing in the street for their safety. . If sidewalks are deemed necessary, require the developer to pay for them (now or in the future) and that they be positioned on the condo property. . Provide on-site run-off water ponding. A lot of water will be coming off this site. . Provide for visitor parking. Two stalls per unit will be inadequate and long-term parking on the street is unsafe and unsightly. . Provide restrictions on on-street parking, the street is not a parking lot. . Add stop signs to the corner of Whispering Lane and 4th Street. . Add stop sign(s) to the corner of Whispering Lane and Featherstone Drive. This is a blind intersection and is already hazardous. It should be noted that the site plan for the adjacent site (Wesley Investments, 2003) had many of these features. Although the neighborhood was opposed to that development, it is considered to be far superior for fit in the neighborhood (although safety and impact concerns remain). 13 Summary This project is wrong on many levels. . It is in direct conflict with the Hastings Comprehensive Plan. . Its introduction into a mature neighborhood is unprecedented. . There will be economic impact to the neighborhood, the city and the county. . The project is "so dissimilar in exterior design, appearance and function" as to cause material depreciation to surrounding properties. . There are significant safety concerns with traffic flows, entrances, sight-lines, grade and pedestrian traffic. . There are concerns of utilities in water, sewer, and storm sewer impact . The neighborhood is unanimously and adamantly opposed to the project. Their wishes must be considered. . There are good alternatives for this property which better suit the neighborhood. You can deny this project for cause. It substantially undershot appropriate use for the neighborhood. Its introduction at this time deprives long-standing citizens of their property value, their privacy, their safety and peace of mind. If a condominium project is 'required', it doesn't have to be this project. Try to work with landowner to revise the development contract to reflect how the neighborhood has grown. The neighborhood requested this last year with the Wesley Development project, was this ever done? Revisit standards for development such that the standards are high enough to be compatible with the neighborhood Show some courage to support your constituents, not lowest-common denominator developers and absentee landowners. Make a statement that Hastings is more than a bedroom community with cookie cutter homes and businesses; that neighborhoods matter. Mediocrity and uniformity is not acceptable, excellence and harmony is a worthy goal. The future history of 'Historic Hastings' is being written, and built, now. See that the legacy of this generation is one offoresight and quality. 14 /J~b,c t die vl It' MEMO Date: June 3, 1987 To: Hastings Planning Commission From: Tom Harmening, City Planner Re:Wllllams 1st Addition - Development change - Lots 1 8. 2. Block 2 Pursuant to the Development Agreement for the Williams First AddltionPlat Lots 1 and 2, Block 2 have been Identified for the development of two duplex structures. The City has been requested to change this status to allow ,two single family homes to be constructed rather than the duplexes. The ap proved deve I opment p I an for the property surrou nd I ng thes ubJect lots Is as fol lows (see attached development plan): North - existing single family home. ThIs property was not Included' In the plat. South - single family homes. East - single famIly homes. West - 90 units of multi fami Iy housing. It would appear that one of the primary reasons for proposing duplexes on 'the subject lot was to provide a buffer between the high density'multi family development to the west and the single family homes to the east. Although staff has concerns with the placement of single famIly homes adjacent to a multi family development these concerns are somewhat lessened due to the fact that the subject lots would not appear to be affected by the multi family development as much as the other duplex jots along Whispering Lane. Staff concerns could also be resolved If cert~tn other techniques were Implemented. Suggestions Include: 'A. Installation of bermlng, tree plantings and other screening devices on the multi family lot adjacent to the single family homes. This item should be taken Into consideration at the time of site plan approval for the multi family project. B. Build the proposed home on Lot 2, Block 1 such that It faces south towards Crestview Drive rather than west towards the multi family deve I opment. ReCaT1me ndet I on, Due to the fact that the development of single family homes on The subject lot would not be directly affected, as much as the other duplex lots along Whispering Lane a recommendation Is made for approval subject to the consideration of the above stated suggestions end that the Development Agreement be amended to take into consideration the proposed change In usage. L)+t-C>c~lVle.J B March 7, 1988 City of Hastings 100 Sibley Street Ha~tings, MN 55033 Attn: ~~rn' Harmening DE!ar Torn: In your letter to me dated 2/25/88 you had a few questions regardin'@l:..:t;he redesignation of Lots 4,5,6, & 7, Block.i 3 Williams First Addition. The reason fdr the proposed redesignation is that the addition single family lots would be in"ithe.1h,est.::interest of the total project as well as a direct benefit to the homeowners who are already living in':1t!hisarea. As for the development of the other properties in Williams First Addition which are designated for multi-family, town- homes or townhouses, I am mo,longe'!:' fee owner of these ptoperties and of thi s date are still as approved. In regard to the development agreement for Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 this agreement was given to Kooros Reja1i,president of Sinta Co~p. and is being adrlressed through Mr. Rejali attorney and the .'.Msistant City Attorney office. I will ask Mr. Rejafi to send you a copy for recording purposes. I AS for ahplan single family construction. of the single Block 3. for buffering between the multi family units and the homes th~s could be addressed at the time ot their However Mr. Rejali has no objection to the construe family homes being constructed on Lots 4,5,6,&7, Therefore, I am requesting that this request be submitted to the Planning Commission and City Council for their review. Sincerely, 4'\1"\ ;,\ (\ '~ I f\ 'i1 nn ' I ;1 \ l w-\~\ . UU UU(l G..-r'V1<J; Michael J. Wil iams . - l11-bc~\ WJ~(l. i/~ V 1l1~5" ME~40 Date: March 17, 1988 To: Mayor and City Coune! J From: Tom HarmenIng, Planning Director Re: Williams 1st Addition - Development Change Pursuant to the Development Agreement for the Williams I st AdditIon Plat, Lots 4,5,6 & 7, Block 3 have been Identified for the development of duplex structures. The city has been requested to change thIs status to allow four single fam Ily homes to be constructed rather than four duplex structures. Attached are letters from the applicant requesting the changL . As most members of the City Council may recall, approximately 10 months ago the developer requested and received approval of a development change to Lots 1 & 2, Block 2 to allow single family homes to be constructed rather than duplexes. The approved. development plan adjacent to the subject property Is as follows {see attached development plan): North - single family homes. South - duplexes. East - single family homes. West - 120 units of multi fam! Iy housI ng. It would appear that one of the origInal reasons for proposing duplexes on the subject lots would be to provide a buffer between the multr. family development to the west and the single family homes 10cateU to the east. From a basic planning prlclple this design made sense. 1+ appears that a primary reason that the developer is r-equestlng the proposed change Is due to the fact that single family homes are ~ow more marketable than two family homes. The developer has also indIcated that the redesignation of the subject lots to single family status would be in the best interest of the total project as well as have a direct benefIt to the homeowners who are already Jiving In the area. A concern which staff has pertains to the placement of single family homes adjacent to a multi family development. Ordinarily this type of situation Is riot overly desirable. I might add that. the Hastings planned residential development requirements, which the multi-family project would be bound to, does address situatIons where multi-family units are adjacent to single family homes. Staff concerns could be somewhat resolved if certain techniques were Implemented as a part of the construction of the multi family units. Suggestions include: r A. Installation of berming, tree plantlngs and other screening devices on the multi fam! Iy lot adjacent to the single family homes. Th is Item ~hnltlrl hp. t:=tkpn in+i'I ,-.....ndrlol""':::I+T......n :.+ +h,o, ~;........... .....~ _f4-.... ...1...... A~-b0~,JC ilv The City Counci I should al so be aware that a development agreement was entered into between the developer and City and recorded aga Inst the lots in Williams 1st Addition which indicates the location of the multi-family developme,nt. Therefore, future homeowners should be aware of the fact that a multi-family project will be constructed across the street. ' RA~ommAnrlotion: In light of the aforementIoned points the Planning Commission recommended that consideration be g'lven to allowing the developer to build single family homes on Lots 4,5,6 & 7, Block 3, Williams 1st AdditIon. If approval Is given the developer should be required to tie together the two water services runnIng Into each lot by using both curb valves to form one water service. The homeowner would be responsible for b'oth lines to the watermaln. Furthermore, the existIng development agreement should be amended to take the proposed change Into consIderatIon. Jt 4<Ht,ch,.,~ 0 Address Land Building 2004 Value Lot Size Yr Built Homestead Finished 1101 Park Lane 42,000 168,500 210,500 0.21 1971 Y 2452 1107 Park Lane 40,700 122,600 163,300 0.20 1969 Y 1844 1111 Park Lane 40,700 133,700 174,400 0.20 1970 Y 1238 1119 Park Lane 40,700 126,900 167,600 0.20 1969 Y 1693 1121 Park Lane 40,700 137,700 178,400 0.20 1970 Y 1649 1201 Park Lane 40,700 139,800 180,500 0.20 1970 y 2152 1100 Lyn Way 40,700 110,400 151,100 0.21 1968 y 1118 1106 Lyn Way 42,000 142,200 184,200 0.20 1968 Y 1253 1112 Lyn Way 42,000 172,200 214,200 0.20 1970 Y 2303 1118 Lyn Way 42,400 195,200 237,600 0.20 1967 y 2572 1202 Lyn Way 42,000 132,000 174,000 0.20 1967 Y 1596 1206 Lyn Way 42,000 130,700 172,700 0.20 1967 Y 2088 1101 Lyn Way 38,600 142,800 181,400 0.27 1969 y 2148 1107 Lyn Way 38,600 134,400 173,000 0.27 1968 Y 1830 1111 Lyn Way 39,500 143,500 183,000 0.27 1970 Y 2093 1117 Lyn Way 38,600 145,000 183,600 0.27 1968 Y 2018 1121 Lyn Way 49,500 148,000 197,500 0.38 1969 Y 1980 Total 3,127,000 Avg Price 182,281 fJ+-fc;(;'~f/IIJ D 2./:5 2004 Appraised last Sale Peak Address land Building Value Amount Yr Built Homestead Value 880 Lyn Way #101 10,000 115,900 125,900 123,055 2003 N 125,900 102 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 y 126,900 103 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 104 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 N 122,900 105 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 106 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 107 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,200 2003 Y 126,200 106 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 109 10,000 115,900 125,900 125,000 2003 N 125,900 110 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,900 2003 N 130,900 201 10,ODO 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 202 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 203 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 204 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 205 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 206 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 207 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,400 2003 Y 126,400 206 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 209 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 Y 130,500 210 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 301 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,400 2003 Y 130,400 302 10,000 115,900 125,900 126,900 2003 Y 126,900 303 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 304 10,000 106,300 116,300 124,900 2003 Y 124,900 305 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,200 2003 Y 126,200 306 10,000 106,300 116,300 125,900 2003 N 125,900 307 10,000 106,300 116,300 126,400 2003 Y 126,400 308 10,000 106,300 116,300 122,900 2003 Y 122,900 309 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,500 2003 y 130,500 310 10,000 115,900 125,900 130,900 2003 Y 130,900 Total 3,769,900 Avg 125,655 BII!I!!I!t~~iIiiiiiiiiiiij} Copyright ~ 2004, 'Dakota Cou' . : f",:' ,."" "",:: '" Address 397 Whispering Lane 393 Whispering Lane 389 Whispering Lane 377 Whispering Lane 373 Whispering lane 369 Whispering lane 365 Whispering Lane 355 Whispering Lane 325 Whispering lane 305 Whispering lane 275 Whispering Lane 225 Whispering Lane 205 Whispering Lane 250 Crestview Drive 283 Summit Pt Dr 271 Summit Pt Dr 259 Summit pt Dr 247 Summit Pt Dr 235 Summit pt Dr 223 Summit pt Dr 211 Summit Pt Dr 209 Summit Pt Dr 353 Summit Pt Ct 341 Summit pt Ct 339 Summit Pt Ct 327 Summit Pt Ct 315 Summit pt Ct 303 Summit Pt Ct Land 34,000 30.600 30,600 34,000 30,600 30,600 34,000 72.900 66,200 66.200 68,100 69,500 68,100 69,500 28,400 25,500 25,500 28,400 28,400 26,700 28,400 28,400 31,200 29,300 31,200 25,500 25,500 28,400 Building 222,400 223,100 222,300 172,200 175,900 174,300 175,900 217,300 213,500 238,000 254,500 237,400 231,200 263,700 165,600 G iQ 165,70P"\, 167,400 165,700 166,000 156,000 165,600 167,200 194,200 241,100 234,000 219,300 196,300 232,300 2004 Appraised Value 256,400 253,700 252,900 206,200 206,500 204,900 209,900 290,200 2Y;;lQij 304,200 ~O- ,~, 306;900 299;30'0 333,200 t...;uw 191,200 192,900 194,100 194,400 182,700 194,000 195,600 225,400 270AOO 265,200 244,800 221,800 260,700 Last Sale Amount 264,000 276,837 181,000 183,000 220,000 177,500 193,900 380,115 YrBuilt 2002 2002 1999 1996 1996 1996 1996 2003 1993 1996 1995 1987 1989 1998 2000 2000 2000 2000 1999 1999 2000 2000 1999 1999 2000 2000 2000 2000 184,846 304,871 178,000 260,000 180,000 186,900 196,164 193,900 156,000 163,750 164,000 177,900 208,000 185,930 233,198 266,128 222,900 222,765 307,000 Homestead y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y y Finished Peak Value 1732 1732 1724 1624 1624 1624 1624 1754 1804 2965 3064 3404 2578 3332 1632 1660 1732 1660 1710 1710 1632 1632 1710 3020 2738 2430 1634 2710 Total Avg price 264,000 276,837 252,900 206,200 220,000 204,900 209,900 380,115 279,700 304,200 322,600 306,900 299,300 333,200 194,000 196,164 193,900 194,100 194,400 182,700 194,000 208,000 225,400 270AOO 266,128 244,800 222,765 307,000 6,954,509 248,375 VIII-C-1 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Dave Osberg, City Administrator July 1,2004 Schedule Special City Council Meeting Recommended Citv Council Action It is recommended that the City Council take action scheduling a special City Council meeting for Monday July 12, 2004 at 7:00 PM for purposes of discussing the Downtown Riverfront Development Project. Backaround On Monday June 28, 2004 a public open house and presentation was conducted regarding the concept plan currently under consideration by Sherman and Associates for the Downtown Riverfront Development Project. I n order to review some of the issues and questions associated with the current draft of the concept plan, the special meeting to be conducted by the City Council would also include the members of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority and the two "at-large" members of the Downtown Riverfront Development Committee; Pam Holzem and Laurel Cox. All members of the City Council, HRA and Committee need an opportunity to address questions with the representatives from Sherman and Associates, and equally as important, provide some direction and opinions to Sherman and Associates on their current concept plan. With the direction and guidance from the City Council, HRA and Committee members, Sherman and Associates would then be in a position to take that information, combining it with that which was heard during the open house on June 28, 2004 and begin the formal process of the City review and approval process. David M. Osberg City Administr r VIII-C-2 Dave Osberg, From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Ron Craft [oldemain@earthlink.net] Thursday, July 01,200411:14 AM Dave Osberg Chris Viken; Daryl; Pam Thorsen; Karen Jung; tom Jung; Debbie Petition, request. Dave, Enclosed are the items we wish to present tothe city council Tuesday, July 6th. #1 the petition which reads as follows. We, the downtown business people, building owners, and citizens of Hastings are concerned about appropriate land use in the downtown Iriverfront area. We are requesting the river front area between Sibley and Ramsey streets not be developed but remain as a public park or parking area. We feel that a revolving tourist clientele and Hastings citizens would be attracted by a hotel and retail shops. We are requesting that a development of this type be constructed between Ramsey and Tyler streets. The positioning of a hotel complex in that area would greatly enhance the economic health of the downtown businesses and the city of Hastings. land use must respect the historic nature of the downtown area, keeping with the scale and prominence of what it has been since the 1800's. #2 We are requesting that we, the Committee( Friends of The HastingsHistoric River Front), have equal representation on the current DowntownRedevelopment Advisory Committee. *Note this committee represents over 1100 people made up of prominent Hastingscitizens, including themajority of downtown property and business owners. Ron Craft, Member oITheFriends of The HastingsHistoric River FrontCommittee 1