2014-02-03 CC Agenda Packet
City of Albertville Council Agenda
Monday, February 3, 2014
City Council Chambers
7:00 PM
PUBLIC COMMENTS -The City of Albertville welcomes and encourages public input on issues listed on the agenda or of general community
interest. Citizens wishing to address the Council regarding specific agenda items, other than public hearings are invited to do so under Public
Forum and are asked to fill out a “Request to Speak Card”. Presentations are limited to five (5) minutes.
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Agendas\2014 Agendas\2014-02-03 CC Agenda.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance – Roll Call
3. Recognitions – Presentations - Introductions
4. Public Forum – (time reserved 5 minutes)
5. Amendments to the Agenda
6. Consent Agenda
All items under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by the City staff and will
be enacted by one motion. In the event an item is pulled it will be discussed in the order it
is listed on the Consent agenda following the approval of the remaining Consent items.
These items will be approved by a separate motion.
A. Approve the January 21, 2014 regular City Council meeting minutes as presented (pgs
4-10)
B. Authorize the Monday, February 3, 2014 payment of claims as presented, except bills
specifically pulled which are passed by separate motion. The claims listing has been
provided to City Council as a separate document and is available for public view at
City Hall upon request (pg 11)
C. Approve the annual permit renewal for Consumption and Display of liquor for the City
Hall building located at 5959 Main Avenue NE for the period of April 1, 2014 through
March 31, 2015 (pgs 12-13)
D. Adopt Resolution No. 2014-004 titled Resolution Regarding the Administration of the
Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (pgs 14-15)
7. Public Hearings
1). Hunters Pass 2nd Addition Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation -
Verbal Update
(Motion to close the public hearing.)
8. Department Business
A. City Council
1). Committee Updates (STMA Arena, Planning, JPWB, Parks, Fire Board, etc.)
Agenda Page 1
City of Albertville Council Agenda
Monday, February 3, 2014 Page 2 of 3
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Agendas\2014 Agendas\2014-02-03 CC Agenda.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
B. Public Works / Engineering
1). Utility Report – 2013 Year in Review (pg 16) - No action needed
2). 57th Street NE Street and Utility Improvements Proposal (pgs 17-21)
(Motion to Approve January 20, 2014 proposal from Bolton and Menk, Inc. for
preparation of plans and specifications of the 57th Street NE and St. Albert’s
Church Parking Improvements at an hourly not-to-exceed fee of $58,800.)
C. Planning/Zoning
1). Hunters Pass 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, and PUD (pgs 22-63)
• (Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2014-005 approving the Preliminary
Plat, Final Plat, and Planned Unit Development amendment for Hunters
Pass Estates 2nd Addition, Phase II.)
• (Motion to adopt Resolution No. 2014-006 Vacating All Easements within
Outlot C of Hunters Pass Estates within the City of Albertville.)
2). Mobile Food Unit Licensing and Regulation (pgs 64-77)
(Motion to Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-02 amending City Code Chapter 4
[Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants] and Section 200.2 [Definitions]
of the Zoning Ordinance, relating to mobile food unit regulation, and to
recommend use of the Mobile Food Unit Permit as provided.)
3). Home Occupations Text Amendment (pgs 78-91)
(Motion to Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-003 amending Appendix A, Zoning
Ordinance of the Albertville City Code related to changes to Section 200.2,
Definitions; Chapter 1600, Home Occupations; Chapter 3100, A-1 Agricultural
District Accessory Uses; Chapter 3200, A-2 Agricultural Transitional District
Accessory Uses; and Chapter 3250, R-1A Residential Low Density Single Family
District Permitted Uses.)
4). Goals and Priorities (pgs 92-96)
D. Finance
1). Albertville Fire Department Annual Retirement Benefit (pg 97) – Verbal
Update
(Motion to Approve Resolution 2014-007 amending the Annual Retirement
Benefit for the Albertville Fire Department effective January 1, 2014.)
E. City Clerk
1). Set Local Board of Appeals and Equalization meeting – Verbal Update
(Motion to set the Local Board of Appeals and Equalization meeting for April 23,
2014 at 5:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers.)
2). Voting Precincts (pgs 98-102) – No action needed
F. Building - None
G. Legal - None
Agenda Page 2
City of Albertville Council Agenda
Monday, February 3, 2014 Page 3 of 3
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Agendas\2014 Agendas\2014-02-03 CC Agenda.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
H. Administration
1). School Funding Letter (pgs 103-105)
(Motion to endorse editorial prepared by STMA School Board for publication in
the Star Tribune and titled “In Education, Kids are Not Treated Equally”.)
2). City Administrator’s Update (pg 106)
9. Announcements and/or Upcoming Meetings
February 10 STMA Ice Arena Board, 6:00 p.m.
February 11 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m.
February 17 Presidents’ Day, City Offices Closed
February 18 City Council, 7:00 p.m.
February 24 Joint Powers Water Board, 6:30 p.m.
Parks Committee, 8:00 p.m. (Moved from Jan. 27)
March 3 City Council, 7:00 p.m.
March 10 STMA Ice Arena Board, 6:00 p.m.
March 11 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m.
March 17 City Council, 7:00 p.m.
March 24 Joint Powers Water Board, 6:30 p.m.
Parks Committee, 8:00 p.m.
FEBRUARY
MARCH
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1
1
2 CC 3 4 5 6 7 8
2 CC 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 Ice 10
PC
11 12 13 14 15
9 Ice 10 PC 11 12 13 14 15
16 H 17 CC 18 19 20 21 22
16 CC 17 18 19 20 21 22
23
JP24PK 25 26 27 28
23 JP24PK 25 26 27 28 29
30 31
10. Adjournment
Agenda Page 3
Page 1
ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, January 21, 2014
DRAFT MINUTES
ALBERTVILLE CITY HALL 7:00 PM
1. CALL TO ORDER – PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Hendrickson called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Hendrickson and Council members Sorensen and Vetsch
Absent: Olson and Wagner
Others Present: City Administrator-PWD Adam Nafstad, City Attorney Mike Couri, Building
Official Paul Heins, City Clerk Kimberly Olson, Water/Wastewater Operator Gerald Gerads, Zack
Peterson, Lisa Peterson, and Nolan Anderson
3. RECOGNITIONS, PRESENTATIONS, INTRODUCTIONS
A. Eagle Scout Recognition – Zack Peterson and Nolan Anderson
Albertville Boy Scout Troop 547 Scout Master, Gerald Gerads, reported that both Zack and Nolan
earned their 21 merit badges, completed their service projects as well the Board of Review.
Zack reported that he built a 176 foot boardwalk west of the Fire Hall. He had to lead, organize and
fund the project himself. The boardwalk was installed on October 20, 2013.
Nolan reported that he has worked with Fire Chief Mills over the course of the last year on a
memorial for the 2008 bus crash that occurred on I-94. He stated that he coordinated the materials,
helpers and details to lay the flagstone for the memorial on May 18, 2013.
Council thanked them for their community projects and congratulated them on their achievement.
4. PUBLIC FORUM
There was no one present to speak.
Agenda Page 4
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2
Regular Meeting of January 21, 2014
5. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Clerk Olson added Item D2 set Public Hearing for Drainage and Utility Easement Vacation for
Hunters Pass.
Motioned by Sorensen, seconded by Hendrickson, to approve the agenda as amended. Ayes:
Hendrickson, Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays: None. Absent: Olson and Wagner. MOTION
DECLARED CARRIED.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
All items under the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine by City Staff and will be enacted
by one motion. In the event an item is pulled, it will be discussed in the order it is listed on the
Consent Agenda following the approval of the remaining Consent items. These items will be
approved by a separate motion.
A. Approve the January 6, 2014 regular City Council meeting minutes as presented
B. Authorize the Monday, January 21, 2014 payment of claims as presented, except bills
specifically pulled which are passed by separate motion. The claims listing has been
provided to City Council as a separate document and is available for public view at City
Hall upon request
Motioned by Vetsch, seconded by Sorensen, to approve the Consent Agenda. Ayes: Hendrickson,
Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays: None. Absent: Olson and Wagner. MOTION DECLARED
CARRIED.
7. PUBLIC HEARING – None
8. DEPARTMENT BUSINESS
A. City Council
1). Committee Updates (STMA Arena, Planning, Parks, Fire Board, JPWB, etc.)
Due to his absence from the meeting, Council member Olson submitted a letter to the
Council with the following comments:
“The first item I have a concern with is the Letter to the Editor from the
STMA School Board. While I do understand and support what they are trying
to accomplish and have changed, I do have a concern that if we sign onto this
letter, what are we saying to the residents in Albertville that do not live in the
STMA boundary? While some open enroll in STMA, they all still pay taxes
to Elk River, and I don’t want us to ignore that. While we can’t control what
Elk River charges them in school taxes, I don’t want us signing on in support
of a change in STMA that would increase Elk River taxes. So, at this time I
would strongly recommend tabling this item until we can get the school to put
together a supplemental piece of literature that would explain to us, what the
schools these changes have the most impact on what specifically does this
Agenda Page 5
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3
Regular Meeting of January 21, 2014
mean for the Elk River School District and would they have any unintended
impacts due to the changes? I would also recommend that we as a City reach
out to the Elk River School board and ask that they provide a letter to us with
their concerns or support for STMA in their pursuit of changes to the per pupil
funding in education. S, at this time, based on what was provided in our
Council packets, I would not be in favor of signing on to this letter without
further information.
The second item I have a comment on is the informational brochures that been
requested from the City Planner. I do support the brochures and think they
would be a huge benefit to staff and residents. I do feel that on top of the
brochures, we focus on getting these up online and also focus on getting all
applications, brochures, and checklists available online as well. For example,
the application for Home Businesses is not on our website, Planning and
Zoning applications and checklists for development are not online either. I
recommend we focus heavily on providing these items online as soon as
possible. If we provide a full service website with information that residents,
businesses, and developers need, we will see a decrease in the amount of time
staff spends in answering calls, responding to e-mails, and meeting with
people at City Hall in order to obtain simple documents because they are not
available on line.
The final item I have is a slight concern on is the Barthel Industrial Drive NE
and 54th Street NE drainage. Have we determined that the improvements will
have a significant improvement to the issues that are currently occurring?
Thinking back to previous meetings, I thought we see what the new study
results/recommendations prior to moving forward with the design? Also, it
appears that the City was found at fault based on a “compromised settlements”
comment for the Flood Claims in the Administrator’s Report. Are we sure
that these changes will relieve the City of future claims, or do we need to
reconsider the scope/budget of this project to avoid future claims?”
There were no other updates.
B. Building
1). Building Report
Nafstad reported 2013 was a good year for the Building Department. Total permits,
single family home construction, and commercial additions/remodels were all
increased from the previous year. The rental licensing program is ongoing.
Hendrickson stated that she has only heard positive feedback from the community.
Sorensen concurred.
Motioned by Sorensen, seconded by Hendrickson, to accept the 2013 Year End
Building Report. Ayes: Hendrickson, Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays: None.
Absent: Olson and Wagner. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.
Agenda Page 6
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4
Regular Meeting of January 21, 2014
C. Planning/Zoning
1). Planning Summary
Nafstad briefly reviewed the Planning items that will be coming before the Council
at the February 3, 2014 meeting.
Vetsch inquired about the plans for the Sunoco site. Nafstad replied that conditions
of approvals and revised site plans have not been submitted. Further, Nafstad
replied that staff is under the impression the applicant is still pursuing the
development and due diligence in ongoing.
D. City Clerk
1). Voting Precincts
Clerk Olson stated that staff had identified the possibility of splitting Albertville’s
one voting precinct into two during the 2014 budget discussions. She stated the MN
Secretary of State’s department recommends no more than 2,000 to 2,500 registered
voters per precinct and Albertville is currently just under 4,000. She stated that
even though Albertville is not the largest precinct in Wright County, it is larger than
all precincts in Hennepin, Meeker, Stearns, and Sherburne Counties. She stated that
the precincts larger than Albertville in Wright County are in much larger facilities to
accommodate voters.
Sorensen inquired if they would be looking at two separate precincts versus simply
moving the location. Clerk Olson stated that would be the goal to not only relieve
the parking and congestion issues, but will also help the election judges on Election
Day. She recommended retaining City Hall as one of the precincts. Nafstad stated
that possible buildings for another precinct will be limited and Olson added that
they were looking for Council direction prior to contacting possible options.
Clerk Olson stated that she will be meeting with Wright County and other election
staff to discuss options for additional equipment if they add a precinct; she stated
they could lease or purchase the equipment. Sorensen would like to see dollar
figures for the possible costs if they pursue this and Clerk Olson replied she could
provide those at the next meeting.
Sorensen inquired about the main factors that would require the City to establish
another precinct. Clerk Olson stated that parking is very limited at the current
location and there is quite a bit of congestion in the precinct room and halls during
the peak voting hours, stating that it was difficult for voters to distinguish the
appropriate lines to be in. Nafstad stated also that the Secretary of State’s
guidelines are based on eliminating errors on Election Day. Sorensen inquired if it
could be an option to move the precinct to the STMA Middle School East. Clerk
Olson stated that it is an option and she can put together a list of all options and
costs for the full Council at the next meeting. Hendrickson indicated that if they do
proceed in adding another precinct, she can see the benefit of having them as far
away from each other as possible.
Agenda Page 7
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5
Regular Meeting of January 21, 2014
Nafstad asked the City Attorney if there were any legal considerations. Couri
replied that it is mainly notice to the residents and Clerk Olson is aware of those.
He stated there are no issues with county commissioner boundary lines and
suggested they adhere to the timeline provided if they move forward.
2). Set Public Hearing for Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easements for Hunters
Pass 2nd Addition – Phase II
Clerk Olson stated that the City will need to hold a public hearing for this easement
vacation at the next meeting. Couri stated they would hold the hearing first and then
pass a resolution for the vacation with the adoption of the other items for Hunters
Pass. He stated the vacation of the easement is conditioned on the recording of the
Hunters Pass 2nd Addition plat, so at no time will the City’s easements be out of
place.
Motioned by Vetsch, seconded by Sorensen, to set a public hearing for vacation of
drainage and utility easements for Hunters Pass 2nd Addition. Ayes:
Hendrickson, Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays: None. Absent: Olson and Wagner.
MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.
E. Legal
1). Sewer and Water Trunk Charges
Couri reported the ordinance modifies the interest rate on the Sanitary Sewer and
Water Trunk district know as the County Rd 37 Trunk Districts. The Niemeyer
property received an interest rate decrease on its special assessment from the
Council in 2013 to be effective January 1, 2014. The rate was lowered from 6.2%
to 5.8%. The other two properties in this district did not have their trunk charges
assessed and will be required to pay interest dating back to the time of the
improvements once they connect to the sewer and water trunk. This ordinance
reduces the rate to 5.8% beginning January 1, 2014 and they will be required to pay
the 6.2% interest rate through December 31, 2013. This was a request from the
Council to make it a fair arrangement for all three properties.
Motioned by Sorensen, seconded by Hendrickson, to approve Ordinance No.
2014-01 entitled Ordinance Modifying Sanitary Sewer and Municipal Water
Trunk District Charges. Ayes: Hendrickson, Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays: None.
Absent: Olson and Wagner. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.
F. Finance – None
G. Public Works and Engineering – None
Agenda Page 8
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6
Regular Meeting of January 21, 2014
H. Administration
1). School Funding Letter
Nafstad reported that STMA School Board member Douglas Birk has drafted an
editorial on inequity of school funding for the Star Tribune newspaper. The School
District has asked St. Michael and Albertville to endorse the letter prior to publication.
The intent is to convey support from the cities regarding school equity issues. Nafstad
referred to Olson’s written comments provided to the Council above. Nafstad stated
they may want to table the item until they have a full Council to discuss the letter. He
can speak to the superintendent regarding Olson’s questions prior to the next meeting.
Motioned by Hendrickson, seconded by Vetsch, to table this issue to the next
meeting on February 3, 2014. Ayes: Hendrickson, Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays:
None. Absent: Olson and Wagner. MOTION DECLARED CARRIED.
2). City Administrator’s Update
Nafstad referred to Olson’s written comments above in regard to the 54th Street NE
and Barthel Industrial Drive NE flood claims. Nafstad replied he will have a
preliminary report in February and it will come before Council in early March. He
stated they will see a great deal of improvements once the 2014 improvement is made.
In regards to whether the City is at fault, Nafstad stated that he did not believe the City
has admitted any fault when the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust stated
they are offering a compromise settlement. Couri stated the League will review each
claim on a case-by-case basis.
Nafstad reported on the number of water main breaks the City has experienced
recently.
3). Informational Brochures
Nafstad that staff discussed putting together some brochures that are easy to read and
understand brochures for residents. They include topics such as parking, outdoor
storage and other common topics. Staff received a proposal from the City Planner for
about $1,200 and staff would like Council direction on whether to move forward.
There were no concerns from the Council and staff will move forward with the
brochures.
10. ANNOUNCEMENTS and/or UPCOMING MEETINGS
January 27 Joint Powers Water Board, 6:30 p.m.
Parks Committee, 8:00 p.m.
January 28 I-94 Coalition State of the Cities, Rogers, 11:30 a.m.
February 3 City Council, 7:00 p.m.
February 11 STMA Ice Arena Board, 6:00 p.m.
February 12 Planning Commission, 7:00 p.m.
Agenda Page 9
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7
Regular Meeting of January 21, 2014
February 17 Presidents’ Day, City Offices Closed
February 18 City Council, 7:00 p.m.
February 24 Joint Powers Water Board, 6:30 p.m.
11. ADJOURN MEETING
Motioned by Sorensen, seconded by Hendrickson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:13 p.m. Ayes:
Hendrickson, Sorensen, and Vetsch. Nays: None. Absent: Olson and Wagner. MOTION
DECLARED CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
___________________________________
Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 10
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Finance Bills Report.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 29, 2014
SUBJECT: CONSENT - FINANCE- PAYMENT OF BILLS
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and Council consider the
following:
MOTION TO: Authorize the Monday, February 3, 2014 payment of the claims that includes as
presented except the bills specifically pulled, which are passed by separate motion.
MOTION TO: Authorize the payment of all just claims received by December 31, 2013, which
would be the year-end closeout of payments of claims.
BACKGROUND: The City processes claims on a semi-monthly basis. The bills are approved
through their respective departments and administration and passed onto the City Council for
approval. The claims listing has been provided to Council as a separate document. The claims
listing is available for public viewing at City Hall upon request.
KEY ISSUES:
• Account codes starting with 810 are STMA Arena Expenses/Vendors (highlighted)
and key issues will be presented in the claims listing document.
POLICY/PRACTICES CONSIDERATIONS: It is the City’s policy to review and approve
payables on a semi-monthly basis.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: City staff has reviewed and recommends approval of
payments presented.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Mayor and Council have the authority to approve all bills
pursuant to Minnesota State Law, which requires all bills to be paid in a timely manner,
generally within 30 days unless one party determines to dispute the billing.
Responsible Person/Department: Tina Lannes, Finance Director
Reviewed by: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachment: List of Claims (under separate cover)
Agenda Page 11
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 CH Consumption & Display Renewal.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 23, 2014
SUBJECT: CONSENT – CITY CLERK – CITY HALL CONSUMPTION AND DISPLAY PERMIT
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and Council consider the
following motion:
MOTION TO: Approve the annual permit renewal for Consumption and Display of liquor for
the City Hall building located at 5959 Main Avenue NE for the period of April 1, 2014 through
March 31, 2015.
BACKGROUND: Each year the City and State of Minnesota Alcohol and Gambling
Enforcement Division must approve the renewal of liquor licenses for establishments within
Albertville. The City holds a Consumption and Display permit to allow for the consumption of
liquor at events taking place within the City Hall building. These events may include weddings
and receptions or events sponsored by local charitable groups. This license does not authorize
liquor for resale at the events. If a charitable group wishes to hold a fundraiser by selling liquor,
they must apply for a temporary liquor license through either the City or State.
KEY ISSUES:
• There are no significant issues with the approval of this permit.
POLICY/PRACTICES CONSIDERATIONS: It is the Mayor and City Council’s policy to
review and approve or deny liquor license renewals.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The fee for this permit is $250 annually and is budgeted.
Responsible Person/Department: Kimberly Olson, City Clerk
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments: MN AGED State Renewal Form
Agenda Page 12
Agenda Page 13
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\020314 RCA LGU Delegation to Staff (consent).doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 30, 2014
SUBJECT: CONSENT –ADMINISTRATION – LGU ADMINISTRATION DELEGATION
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and Council consider the
following motion regarding administrator of the City’s Local Government Unit (LGU)
responsibilities.
MOTION TO: Approve Resolution No. 2014-004, titled, Resolution Regarding the
Administration of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act.
INFORMATION: The City acts as the LGU to oversee and administer wetland applications
and decision procedures, according to the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA). The Board of
Water and Soil Resources (BWSR) has requested formal action by resolution to delegate LGU
decision making responsibilities to the appropriate city staff or Council appointed person.
The resolution does not change the current practice of the City. The resolution is being
requested to memorialize City staff’s authority to on-behalf of the City as it relates to the WCA
functions. Typical WCA functions of the LGU include decision-making authority for
exemption, no-loss, wetland and boundary type, sequencing, replacement plan, and wetland
backing applications.
KEY ISSUES:
• Years back, the City requested to act as the LGU on its behalf.
• BWSR has requested formal appointment of the appropriate person to act on behalf of the
City.
• It is City practice for staff to receive and administer wetland related applications, and to
provide recommendations and decisions of approval or denial based on WCA regulations.
• For certain applications, the City consults with wetland specialists to act on its behalf.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Mayor and Council possess the authority to appoint and
designate officials to act on behalf of the City.
Responsible Person/Department: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments: Resolution No. 2014-004
Agenda Page 14
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-004
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE ADMINISTRATION OF
THE MINNESOTA WETLAND CONSERVATION ACT
WHEREAS, The City of Albertville has accepted the authority and
administrative responsibility to implement the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) within
the legal boundaries of the City in accordance with Minnesota Rules, Chapter 8420; and
WHEREAS, The City of Albertville is authorized by Minnesota Administrative
Rules Part 8420.0200, Subpart 2, Item C, to delegate certain functions with regard to
implementation of WCA, including the authority to make decisions on applications, with
its staff; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Albertville,
that decision-making authority for WCA applications is placed with the office of the City
Administrator or their designee.
Adopted by the Albertville City Council this 3rd day of February, 2014.
Jillian Hendrickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 15
Mayor and Council Communication
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Utility Dept Year in Review.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 30, 2014
SUBJECT: CONSENT – UTILITY DEPARTMENT – 2013 YEAR IN REVIEW
The following is a brief summary of the utility related activities in 2013:
WATER
Water Meter Reading: 2,416 meters are read every month. Meter repair was minor.
Water Leaks: Two watermain breaks and four service line leaks occurred.
Gate Valves: Several gate valves were rebuilt
Locating: 725 locates were performed.
Fire Hydrants: 88 hydrants were serviced and painted.
WASTEWATER
Flows: 475,000 gallons a day are averaged through the Wastewater Treatment Facility
Repairs: Only minor and routine repairs to the plant we needed. The ditch mixer, pressure
washer pump, and clarifier drive motor were rebuilt. The return sludge pump required new seals.
The lift station level transducer was replaced at the lift station by DJ’s Ace Hardware.
Computer upgrade: The upgrade was just recently completed.
Reed beds: Reed bed #3 was cleaned out and re-planted.
Compliance: No samples were missed and all samples met the permit requirements.
SEWER CLEANING
One third of the community is cleaned every year. A total of 69,365 feet of sewer pipe was
cleaned. Six lift stations were washed down and vacuumed out. With the purchase of the jet/vac,
we were able to complete all tasks in-house without renting any equipment.
Sewer backup: There was one sewer backup on LaSalle Circle NE in Hunters Pass. The backup
was caused by the home builder.
Responsible Person/Department: John Middendorf, Water/Wastewater Supervisor
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Agenda Page 16
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 57th Street and Church Design Proposal RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 29, 2014
SUBJECT: ENGINEERING – 57TH STREET NE AND CHURCH OF ST. ALBERT PARKING LOT
IMPROVEMENTS
RECOMMENDATION: This space on the agenda is reserved for the City Council to consider
authorizing design, preparation of plans and specifications, and cost estimates for the proposed
2014 57th Street NE and Church of St. Albert Parking Lot Improvements. It is respectfully
requested that the Mayor and Council consider the following motion:
MOTION TO: Approve the January 20, 2014 proposal from Bolton and Menk, Inc. for
preparation of plans and specifications of the 57th Street NE and Church of St. Albert Parking
Lot Improvements at an hourly not-to-exceed fee of $58,800.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
The City and Church of St. Albert have been working to develop a coordinated improvement
project for 2014. The proposed project will include reconstruction of 57th Street NE and utilities
between the Fire Hall and Main Avenue NE as well as parking lot reconstruction and expansions
to the Church and Parish Center parking facilities.
The proposed street reconstruction includes complete replacement of pavement, curb and gutter,
sidewalks, and municipal utilities (storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary sewer). The
reconstruction will include street widening to match the newer segments of 57th Street NE west
of the Fire Hall and completion/connection of the sidewalk on the north side of 57th Street NE.
Additional right-of-way will be needed from the Church and Parish Center to accommodate the
widening.
The Church-desired improvements include parking lot pavement reconstruction, expansion to
parking facilities, relocation of driveways, and parking lot striping.
It is also proposed that a connector drive be created between the westerly Church parking lot and
the adjacent City-owned lot.
KEY ISSUES:
• The Church desires to make improvements to their facilities in 2014. The two projects
are being coordinated together to reduce costs for both parties. If completed as stand-
alone projects, additional costs will be incurred as several project components would be
completed twice.
• Bolton and Menk, Inc. proposes to perform the engineering on an hourly basis for a not-
to-exceed fee of $58,800.
• Staff is currently working with the Church to negotiate right-of-way costs. The cost
associated with the right-of-way acquisition will be deducted from the Church’s share of
the project costs.
Agenda Page 17
Mayor and Council Request for Action – 57th Street NE and Church of St. Albert
Improvements
Engineering – January 29, 2014 Page 2 of 2
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 57th Street and Church Design Proposal RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
• Prior to awarding a construction contract, the City and Church will need to enter into a
cost share/right-of-way agreement.
• The City will administer the construction contract and project.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The City budgets annually for infrastructure maintenance
and improvements. The Church will be responsible for their portion of the project costs less the
amount negotiated as compensation for right-of-way acquisition. The City-related
improvements, plus costs associated with right-of-way acquisition, will be funded through the
2014 street budget, capital reserves, and water and sewer trunk funds. Engineer estimates will be
prepared along with the plans to identify costs and budget impacts prior to approving the project.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: The Mayor and Council possess the authority to authorize the
preparation of plans for all municipal improvements.
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator -PWD
Attached: Bolton and Menk – January 20, 2014 Engineering Proposal
Preliminary Cost Estimate for Improvements
On File: Concept Exhibit
Agenda Page 18
H:\ALBV\R16106732\1_Corres\106732_Proposal LTR_012014.doc
January 20, 2014
Mr. Adam Nafstad
City Administrator
City of Albertville
P.O. Box 9
Albertville, MN 55301
RE: 57th Street NE Street & Utility Improvements
City of Albertville
Project No.: R16.106732
Dear Adam:
Bolton & Menk, Inc. is pleased to provide this proposal for engineering services for Final Design and
Construction Phase Services for the 57th Street NE Street & Utility Improvements Project as well as
parking lot improvements for St. Albert’s Church and Parish Center. This proposal will define our scope
of work and provide you with an estimate of the cost of these services.
Final Design Phase
Final design phase services shall include the following:
Task I – St. Albert Church & Parish Center Parking Lot Reconstruction & Expansion:
Prepare Recommendations for Parking Improvements
Develop easement descriptions and maps for utilization in Right-of-Way acquisition
Develop final plans and specifications for parking lot improvements
Task II – Develop 57th Street & Utility Improvements Reconstruction
Develop final plans and specifications.
Conduct the utility design meeting with all private and public utility companies/agencies.
Develop easement descriptions and maps for utilization in easement acquisition.
Submit plans and specifications for staff review and comment.
Submit corrected plans and specifications for City Council approval and authorization for bids.
Develop Engineer’s opinion of construction cost.
Conduct a project open house with project stakeholders.
Administrate the project bidding process.
Assist in bid opening and bid evaluation.
Provide a recommendation for bid award.
Assemble and issue the construction contracts to the successful bidder.
Agenda Page 19
Mr. Adam Nafstad
January 20, 2014
Page 2
H:\ALBV\R16106732\1_Corres\106732_Proposal LTR_012014.doc
Construction Phase
Construction Phase services shall include the following:
Conduct the Preconstruction Conference.
Provide construction staking for the project.
Construction observation and contract administration services are not included in this proposal but can be
provided if requested.
Schedule
Our proposed schedule for the described work is as follows:
Conduct Utility Design Meeting ................................................................ February 13, 2014
Conduct Project Open House ...................................................................... TBD
Complete Final Plans and Specifications .................................................... February 25, 2014
Obtain Plan Approval and Authorization to Bid ......................................... March 3, 2014
Open Bids ................................................................................................... April 1, 2014
Conduct Project Open House ...................................................................... March 31, 2014
Award Bid ................................................................................................... April 7, 2014
Commence Construction ............................................................................. May 2014
Complete Construction ............................................................................... August 1, 2014
The schedule can be modified as needed to meet City objectives.
Fee Proposal
The following is a summary of the fees for the work described above:
Task I – St. Albert Church Parking Improvements $4,000 (Hourly Not-To-Exceed)
Task II – 57th Street & Utility Improvements $54,800 (Hourly Not-To-Exceed)
Additional Services/Plan Revisions: Hourly at our standard hourly rates
Thank you for the opportunity to provide this proposal for engineering services for this project. Should
you require additional information or wish to discuss the scope of services and fee in more detail, please
contact me or Cody Holmes.
Sincerely,
BOLTON & MENK, INC.
Kevin F. Bittner, P.E.
Principal Engineer
Ramsey Office Manager
C: Cody Holmes, Bolton & Menk
Agenda Page 20
2014 - 57TH STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTSCITY OF ALBERTVILLE, MNBMI #R16.106732DATE: 12/17/2013ITEM TOTAL UNITTOTALNO.ITEM DESCRIPTIONNOTES UNIT QUANTITY COSTCOSTQUANTITY AMOUNT QUANTITY AMOUNT1 MOBILIZATIONLUMP SUM1$20,000.00 $20,000.00 1$20,000.002 REMOVE BITUMINOUS PAVEMENTSQ YD5315$2.00 $10,630.00 5315$10,630.003 BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT RECLAMATION (10")SQ YD4382$2.50 $10,955.004382$10,955.004 COMMON EXCAVATIONCU YD3885$10.00 $38,850.00 3480$34,800.00 405$4,050.005 SELECT GRANULAR BORROWCU YD2096$15.00 $31,440.00 2096$31,440.006 AGGREGATE BASE (CV) CLASS 5CU YD1652$20.00 $33,040.00 1340$26,800.00 312$6,240.007 TYPE LV4 WEARING COURSE (B) (3")TON1781$70.00 $124,670.00 920$64,400.00 861$60,270.008 TYPE LV3 NON WEARING COURSE (B) (3")TON920$68.00 $62,560.00 920$62,560.009 BITUMINOUS PATCH - DRIVEWAY RESTORATIONSQ YD120$25.00$3,000.00 120$3,000.0010 12" - 24" RC PIPE SEWER DES 3006 CL VLIN FT800$30.00 $24,000.00 800$24,000.0011 CONSTRUCT DRAINAGE STRUCTUREEACH10$750.00$7,500.00 10$7,500.0012 8" PVC SEWER PIPE - SDR 35LIN FT475$30.00 $14,250.00 475$14,250.0013 10" PVC SEWER PIPE - SDR 35LIN FT365$40.00 $14,600.00 365$14,600.0014 CONSTRUCT 48" SANITARY MANHOLEEACH2$1,000.00$2,000.00 2$2,000.0015 HYDRANTEACH2$3,200.00$6,400.00 2$6,400.0016 6" GATE VALVE AND BOXEACH2$1,200.00$2,400.00 2$2,400.0017 8" GATE VALVE AND BOXEACH6$1,400.00$8,400.00 6$8,400.0018 6" WATERMAIN C-900 PVC WATERMAINLIN FT50$40.00$2,000.00 50$2,000.0019 8" WATERMAIN C-900 PVC WATERMAINLIN FT1050$30.00 $31,500.00 1050$31,500.0020 5" CONCRETE WALKSQ FT12100$4.00 $48,400.00 12100$48,400.0021 CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER DESIGN B618LIN FT2100$11.00 $23,100.00 2100$23,100.0022 6" CONCRETE PAVEMENTSQ YD280$45.00 $12,600.00 160$7,200.00 120$5,400.0023 TRUNCATED DOMESSQ FT64$40.00$2,560.00 64$2,560.0024 TRAFFIC CONTROLLUMP SUM1$3,000.00$3,000.00 1$3,000.0025 4" SOLID LINE YELLOW-EPOXYLIN FT3350$1.50$5,025.00 1100$1,650.00 2250$3,375.00TOTAL:$542,880.00$452,590.00$90,290.00RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION:SQ FT87108710TEMPORARY EASEMENT:SQ FT3580358010% CONTINGENCY:$54,288.00$45,259.00$9,029.00TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST:$597,168.00$497,849.00$99,319.00ENGINEERING & ADMINISTRATIVE:$106,522.13$99,569.80$6,952.33TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COST:$703,690.13$597,418.80$106,271.3357TH STREETST ALBERT PARKING LOTIMPROVEMENTSIMPROVEMENTSROADWAYROADWAYAgenda Page 21
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 16, 2014
SUBJECT: PLANNING – HUNTERS PASS ESTATES 2ND ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT, FINAL
PLAT, AND PUD AMENDMENT
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and City Council consider
the following motion:
MOTION TO:
• Adopt Resolution No. 2014-0005 approving the Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, and Planned
Unit Development amendment for Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition, Phase II.
• Adopt Resolution No. 2014-006 Vacating All Easements Within Outlot C of Hunters
Pass Estates within the City of Albertville
BACKGROUND: Tollberg Homes is requesting Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, and PUD
amendment approval of Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition, Phase II of the Hunters Pass Estates
PUD. The PUD was originally approved in 2005, but approval of the plat has since expired and
Tollberg Homes is proposing updates to the original plat which require City approval. The entire
Hunters Pass Estates development consists of 95 single family lots on 76.6 acres of land in the
northeast corner of Albertville. Sixty-three single family lots were developed in Phase I of the
development, and Tollberg Homes is proposing to develop an additional 12 lots. Plat and PUD
approval of the Hunters Pass Estates subdivision in 2005 permitted reduced lot areas and
setbacks to allow for implementation of a coved subdivision design and increased protection of
wetland areas. Phase II generally adheres to standards approved with the original plat, but
requests reduced rear yard setbacks in order to implement a wetland buffer zone exterior to plat
parcels, as recommended by the City Engineer.
The preliminary plat, final plat and PUD amendment for Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition were
brought before the Planning Commission for consideration at their January 14, 2014 meeting.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the plats and PUD amendment based on
conditions provided in the planning report dated January 9, 2014. In addition, they requested
that lot setbacks listed in Exhibit F of the planning report be established as required setbacks for
the development, and indicated that meeting City Engineer conditions provided in the
engineering memo dated January 7, 2014 be an additional condition of approval. Exhibit F
“Hunters Pass 2nd Addition – Phase II: Minimum Lot Setback Summary” and the described
engineering report have been attached for reference.
POLICY/PRACTICES CONSIDERATIONS: The low-density single-family residential land
use of the Hunters Pass neighborhood is consistent with the Albertville long range land use plan
and the policies of the City’s 2012 Vision Study. The Hunters Pass Second addition is consistent
with the preliminary plat approved in 2005, this addition will complement the existing Hunters
Pass neighborhood approval.
Agenda Page 22
Mayor and Council Request for Action – February 3, 2014
Hunters Pass 2nd Addition – Phase II Page 2 of 2
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: In accordance with Council procedures, the Mayor and City
Council has the authority to approve or deny the requested preliminary and final plats.
Responsible Person/Department: Alan Brixius, City Planner
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments:
January 14 Planning Report with Exhibits
Development Agreement
Resolution No. 2014-005
Resolution No. 2014-006
Agenda Page 23
7
PLANNING REPORT
TO: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator
FROM: Michelle Barness/Alan Brixius
DATE: January 9, 2014
RE: Albertville – Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition – Phase II
FILE: 163.06 – 13.13
BACKGROUND
Tollberg Homes has submitted an application for Preliminary and Final Plat approval of
Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition, Phase II of the Hunters Pass Estates PUD. Plat
approval for Hunters Pass Estates was originally attained by the Minnesota
Development Agency, LLC in 2005. Approval of the plat has since expired and Tollberg
Homes is proposing some updates to the original plat, so that additional review and
approval by the City is required. The entire Hunters Pass Estates development consists
of 95 single family lots on 76.6 acres of land in the northeast corner of Albertville. Sixty-
three single family lots were developed in Phase I of the development, and Tollberg
Homes is now proposing to develop an additional 12 lots. The site is located to the
west of Phase I of Hunters Pass Estates, and is bounded on the north by 70th Street, on
the south by Hunters Lake and on the west by the Towne Lakes development. The site
is zoned R-1A (PUD), and is located within the Shoreland Overlay District of Hunters
Lake.
The Hunters Pass Estates subdivision is based on a concept known as “coving.” Coved
subdivisions utilize curvilinear street patterns and varied front yard setbacks as a means
of providing more visual open space and unique streetscape appearance. Protection of
wetland areas associated with Hunters Lake is also a priority for the subdivision, and
impacts how the development approaches side and rear setback, lot area, lot width,
street right-of-way width, and street width requirements. To facilitate the coved design,
the subdivision received City approval of a PUD to grant flexibility in lot area, width and
setbacks.
Agenda Page 24
8
Attached for reference:
Exhibit A: Preliminary Plat Modification
Exhibit B: Phasing Plan
Exhibit C: Site Location Map
Exhibit D: Development Plan
Exhibit E: Final Plat
Exhibit F: Setback Worksheet
Exhibit G: City Engineer Memo dated January 7, 2014
ISSUES ANALYSIS
Existing Conditions. The site is located in the northwest corner of Albertville. Hunters
Lake isolates this site from the remainder of the City. Phase I of the Hunters Pass
Estates development has already been completed, including construction of the internal
road system. The current proposal for Phase II of development is implementing what
was approved with the original plat, with small revisions as described further on in the
report. Hunters Pass Estates Phase II consists of 21 acres of land, including significant
wetland areas. The western portion of the site, adjacent to Towne Lakes 5th Addition,
will be developed at a later date.
Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for Low Density
Residential Development, of which the proposed development is consistent. The
applicant is proposing a single family subdivision utilizing a “coving” design that
integrates with the site’s natural features. The design will require flexibility from the R-
1A District lot area, lot width, and setback standards. The Planning Commission and
City Council must make a determination as to whether the amenities received in doing a
development of this design warrant the requested PUD flexibilities.
Shoreland Regulations. With approval of the Hunters Pass Estates subdivision in
2005, the City also granted approval of a requested Conditional Use Permit Planned
Unit Development for the site. The City chose to pursue the shoreland provision for
planned unit developments (Section 4908.75) and processed the application as a
standard PUD/CUP. This allowed for flexibility in lot width, lot sizes, setbacks, etc.,
subject to the following site and design criteria:
(Section 4908.75)
A. Minimum project areas shall be as follows:
Residential: Ten (10) acres
B. The total density of the site shall not exceed that which is permitted by the
underlying zoning.
C. Individual lot coverage by impervious surfaces shall not exceed thirty percent
(30%).
D. At least fifty percent (50%) of the project area shall be preserved as open space,
public or private. Open space shall meet all the requirements of section 4908.62 of
this chapter and shall not include roads, sidewalks, parking areas or building
footprint areas. At least one-half (1/2 ) of the preserved open space required by this
Agenda Page 25
9
chapter must be in tier 1 of the shoreland area defined in section 4908.41 of this
chapter.
E. Density may be transferred among the tiers and/or structure and parking setbacks
may be reduced to a minimum of seventy five feet (75') from the ordinary high
water level; provided, that all of the following mitigating measures are completed:
1. A natural undisturbed vegetative buffer at least thirty feet (30') in width is
maintained adjacent to the wetland/water's edge of OHW, whichever extends
further landward.
2. A planting plan be designed and implemented that enhances or restores the
natural buffer with a combination of grasses, shrubs, and trees appropriate to
complement the natural habitat.
3. Permanent markers shall be installed and maintained indicating the buffer
edge along the entire shoreland boundary.
4. A homeowners' association document shall be created and recorded that
includes provisions for maintenance of the shoreland markers, prohibits the
use of fertilizers containing phosphorous in rear yards, and that provides a
mandatory penalty for violations of the homeowners' association and
provisions of this chapter.
Project Area and Open Space Coverage. The 2nd Addition project area is 21 acres
total, and will consist of 12 single family lots, Outlot A, and Outlot B. Though only a
portion of that area is currently proposed for development, the proposed subdivision in
its entirety appears to meet the minimum project area requirement of 10 acres.
Wetlands and buffers are open space, protected as outlots and easements over the
entire plat. More than 50% of the entire plat (including the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Additions) will
be preserved as permanent open space. The individual lot coverage by impervious
surface requirement shall be met upon completion of construction of homes on lots.
Wetland Buffer. How the project addresses the required wetland buffer has changed
from Phase I of development. The City Engineer is recommending that lots in Blocks 2
and 3 of Hunters Pass Estates Phase II be reduced in size from that approved with the
original plat, to allow space for the required 20 foot wetland buffer area to be external to
lots and within Outlot A. The goal here is to increase the likelihood of the buffer being
protected and maintained over time. Lots in Hunters Pass Estates Phase I contain an
easement for wetland buffer areas interior to lots. However, the City has experienced
difficulty in enforcing the protection of these buffer areas, due to the fact that the
location within lots is difficult to determine over time as locational signs are removed,
and the buffer itself is mowed by residents who do not wish to maintain it. The
designation of the required wetland buffer area to Outlot A in the current proposal
means that mowing or removal of the buffer becomes a trespass issue, which is more
enforceable by the City. The applicant is requesting that the City permit reduced lot
size, reduced rear setbacks, and small adjustments to house pad locations from that
approved with the original plat in order to implement the wetland buffer in Outlot A.
Exhibit A “Preliminary Plat Modification” demonstrates lot areas approved in the original
plat, in addition to reduced lot areas currently being proposed. In addition, Exhibit F
details front, side and rear setbacks for Phase II lots.
Agenda Page 26
10
Zoning. The site is zoned R-1A (PUD), and is located within the Shoreland Overlay
District of Hunters Lake. Hunters Lake is designated as a Natural Environment Lake.
The following setback and lot standards are applicable to developments within the R1-
A, PUD and Shoreland Management Overlay District:
R-1A District Requirement PUD Proposed
Minimum Lot Area 15,000 square feet 8,220 – 14,510
Average 10,725
Minimum Lot Width (Interior) 100 feet 61 - 93 feet *
Minimum Lot Width (Corner) 120 feet N/A
Front Setback 30 feet 30 - 58 feet
Side (Interior) Setback 10 feet 10 feet (house side)
5 feet (garage side) **
Side (Corner) Setback 30 feet 30 feet
Rear Principal Setback 25 feet 10 – 30 feet ***
Rear Accessory Setback 10 feet Shall meet requirement
Maximum Building Height 35 feet Shall meet requirement
Maximum Building Lot Coverage 25% Shall meet requirement
Maximum Units per Acre 2.9 units per acre 4.1 units per acre
Shoreland Overlay District (PUD)
Structure Setback from OHWL 75 feet Minimum 80 feet
Lot Coverage by Impervious Surface Maximum 30% Shall meet requirement
Project Area Open Space Coverage Minimum 50% Shall meet requirement
Wetland Buffer 30 feet Shall meet requirement
*As measured from the adjusted front yard setback
**Planned unit developments as outlined in subsection 4908.75E, may have reduced structure setbacks
when mitigating measures are completed. Hunters Pass Estates PUD approval allowed for reduced side,
front and rear setbacks, as described in the report.
***10 foot rear yard setback shall apply only to Lots 1 – 4 Block 3, and Lots 1 – 2 Block 2, of Hunters
Pass Estates 2nd Addition.
Plat and PUD approval of the Hunters Pass Estates subdivision in 2005 allowed for
reduced lot areas and setbacks to allow for implementation of the coved subdivision
design and increased protection of wetland areas. Approval at that time permitted side
yard setbacks of 5 feet on the garage side and 10 feet on the living space side (interior
lots), 30 foot side yard setbacks on corners, front yard setbacks of a minimum of 30 feet
variably to larger setbacks, and rear setbacks of a minimum of 30 feet.
As demonstrated in Exhibit F, setbacks for Hunters Pass Estates Phase II lots coincide
with setbacks approved in the original plat, with the exception of rear setbacks. Upon
recommendation from the City Engineer, lots in Blocks 2 and 3 have been reduced in
size to provide for a wetland buffer area exterior to subdivided parcels. This reduction
in rear setbacks is tied to a reduction in rear lot depth on wetland lots. To allow for a
wetland buffer area external to lots, the rear property lines on wetland lots have been
moved in 20 feet, resulting in a reduced rear yard. With a minimum 10 foot rear setback
and a 20 foot wetland buffer external to lots, require homes to be placed at least 30 feet
from the wetland boundary. This is the same wetland setback required in Phase I,
however it is attained by allowing reduced rear setbacks within lots, which provides for a
protected wetland buffer area external to lots. With the final plat, the applicant shall
Agenda Page 27
11
provide a table outlining the required setbacks for each lot in Hunters Pass Estates 2nd
Addition. The final recommended PUD setbacks are outlined in Exhibit F.
All homes shall be designed to allow decks and porches to fit within the required
adopted building setbacks. This provision shall be included within the Hunters Pass
Estates Architectural Guidelines and PUD Agreement.
Lot Design.
Low Floor Elevation. Low floor elevations for parcels on lakes must be a minimum of
three feet above the Ordinary High Water Level (OHWL). The OHWL for Hunters Lake
is 947.3, in which case the minimum low floor elevation is 950.3 feet. All building pads
in the proposed development must maintain the described minimum floor elevation.
Steep Slopes. The site contains areas of steep slopes exceeding a 12% grade,
particularly in lots abutting Hunters Lake. The City Engineer must evaluate possible soil
erosion impacts and development visibility from public waters before issuing a permit for
construction of roads, driveways, structures, or their improvements on steep slopes.
When determined necessary, conditions must be attached to issued permits to prevent
erosion and to preserve existing vegetation screening of structures, vehicles, and other
facilities as viewed from the surface of public waters, assuming summer, leaf-on
vegetation. The applicant must adhere to any recommendations the City Engineer
makes in these regards.
Circulation/Access/Street Design. The applicants are proposing to extend 69th Street
Circle NE from the existing Hunters Pass Estates subdivision into the proposed
subdivision expansion. The street will culminate in a cul-de-sac. No additional access
to 70th Street is proposed, but residents will gain access via LaSalle Circle, which
connects with both 69th Street Circle and 70th Street. The applicants are proposing to
construct the 69th Street Circle extension to match right of way width and curb to curb
width as previously approved for the street in Phase I of development (50 feet right of
way, and 28 feet curb to curb). The final street design is subject to the review and
approval of the City Engineer.
Grading and Drainage. The applicant has submitted grading, drainage, and utility
plans which are subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer.
Wetland Mitigation. The applicant has delineated the wetlands on the site. Proposed
lots are located outside of the existing wetland boundary, and wetland areas have been
designated as Outlot A, which will be maintained as a permanent drainage and utility
easement. The applicant shall install signs along the side and rear property lines of the
2nd Addition demarking the edge of the wetland buffer. The sign design and sign
locations shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
Landscaping. The applicant has not provided a landscaping plan. The Zoning
Ordinance requires that one shade or evergreen tree be planted per residential lot,
which will be required as part of the development agreement. Additionally, all lots
backing onto 70th Street must contain a minimum 20 foot in depth vegetative buffer
Agenda Page 28
12
consisting of staggered planting that meet the City’s screening requirements. This is of
particular importance given the expectation of the City that traffic volumes on this road
will continue to increase in the future. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan
indicating the location of the described buffer planting. The planting plan for Phase II
should otherwise adhere to the landscape plan submitted and approved with the final
plat for the Hunters Pass Estates PUD in 2005.
Park Dedication. According to Ordinance Section 11-7-8-2 of City Code, the applicant
is required to dedicate to the City for park, playground, and public open space purposes
a minimum amount of land or cash, or a combination of the two. Phase I park land
dedication was accomplished with the creation of a park on the north portion of Hunters
Pass Estates, just south of 70th Street. A cash dedication of $3,300 per single family lot
will be required for Phase II of development.
The applicant has requested to pay the park dedication fees at time of building permit.
In discussion with City staff, we cannot recommend this payment option. To provide
some up front relief, we can recommend a staged payment of the park dedication under
the following terms:
1. The applicant shall pay the park dedication in increments of four lots. The first
payment shall be collected with the recording of the final plat. Subsequent
payments shall occur prior to building out of the fourth lot.
2. No transfer of title or issuance for building permit shall occur for lots that have not
paid park dedication.
3. The letter of credit shall secure payment of outstanding park dedication.
4. These terms and arrangements shall be incorporated into the Hunters Pass 2nd
Addition PUD development agreement.
Homeowners Association. All property owners in the Hunters Pass Estates 1st
Addition are part of the Hunters Pass Estates Homeowners Association (HOA). The
HOA adopted a set of architectural guidelines to guide Phase 1 lot and subdivision
design. Phase II of development must follow architectural guidelines provided in Phase
I of development, and all Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition homeowners must join and
adhere to standards provided by the Hunters Pass Estates HOA.
City Engineer Comments. The City Engineer has reviewed the Preliminary and Final
Plat and offers recommendations in the January 7, 2014 memo (Exhibit G). The
recommendations shall be incorporated into the plat approvals.
Agenda Page 29
13
RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the proposed Preliminary and Final Plat for Hunters Pass Estates 2nd
Addition, it is staffs view that the proposed 12 single family lots are consistent with the
intent of the comprehensive plan for the subject area. The Planning Commission and
the City Council must determine if the requested flexibilities area acceptable. Staff
recommends approval of the proposed plats subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall install and maintain wetland demarcation signage at the
boundaries of the wetland buffer. The sign design and sign location shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
2. The applicant shall provide a landscape plan illustrating a vegetative buffer
planting along the northern border of the site, between Phase II lots and 70th
Street. In addition, one shade or evergreen tree must be planted per residential
lot, which will be required as part of the development agreement. All other
plantings shall adhere to the landscape plan approved with the final plat for the
Hunters Pass Estates PUD in 2005.
3. Provide a park dedication fee totaling $3,300 per individual lot, to be paid in three
installments per the conditions outlined in this report.
4. The applicant shall adhere to established architectural standards (design
guidelines) for the Hunters Pass subdivision, as adopted by the Hunters Pass
Estates Homeowners Association. The architectural guidelines shall be
amended to stipulate that all decks and/or porches shall be designed to fit within
the approved PUD building setbacks.
5. Following final plat approval, the entire plat shall be brought into the Hunters
Pass Estates HOA at the time of recording, and the developer and Phase II
homeowners shall adhere to the HOA declaration, bylaws, and rules, and any
addendums to said standards.
6. The applicant is required to enter into a PUD agreement that demonstrates that
Hunters Pass Estates Phase II will implement and adhere to all conditions
provided in the original Hunters Pass Estates PUD agreement and the conditions
of this report.
7. All homes must be constructed at least three feet above Hunters Lake’s OHWL
of 947.3, low floor elevation for all homes in the proposed development must be
at 950.3 feet in elevation or higher.
8. The applicant shall comply with the recommendation of the January 7, 2014 City
Engineer memo (attached as Exhibit G).
Agenda Page 30
14
c: Sue Schwalbe
Kim Olson
Paul Heins
Mike Couri
Scott Dahlke, Applicant’s Engineer
Nathan Jones, Tollberg Homes, 1428 5th Avenue, Anoka, MN 55303
Agenda Page 31
EXHIBIT A15Agenda Page 32
EXHIBIT B16Agenda Page 33
EXHIBIT C
17Agenda Page 34
EXHIBIT D
18Agenda Page 35
EXHIBIT E
19Agenda Page 36
Hunters Pass 2nd Addition – Phase II
Minimum Lot Setback Summary
Minimum
Front Setback
Minimum Side
Setback –
House Side
Minimum Side
Setback –
Garage Side
Minimum Rear
Setback
Block 1
Lot 1 58 10 5 30
Lot 2 46 10 5 30
Lot 3 35 10 5 30
Lot 4 30 10 5 30
Lot 5 30 10 5 30
Lot 6 30 10 5 30
Block 2
Lot 1 30 10 5 10
Lot 2 30 10 5 10
Block 3
Lot 1 38 10 5 10
Lot 2 46 10 5 10
Lot 3 38 10 5 10
Lot 4 38 10 5 10
EXHIBIT F
20Agenda Page 37
Albertville City Hall ● 5959 Main Avenue NE, PO Box 9 ● Albertville, MN 55301 ● (763) 497-3384
M E M O R A N D U M
Date: January 7, 2014
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council
Cc: Al Brixius - City Planner
Michael Couri - City Attorney
Scott Dahlke, Civil Engineering Site Design (Tollberg Homes)
From: Adam Nafstad, P.E., City Engineer
Subject: Hunters Pass Estates – Second Addition
Civil Plan Review
I have reviewed the submitted plat and civil plan set for the above referenced project, prepared
by Civil Engineering Site Design, and dated 11/12/13.
Civil plan improvements generally consist of the following:
Municipal Improvements – Street and sidewalk construction of 69th Circle NE, rear-yard
storm sewer construction, minor utility adjustments, and wetland demarcation.
On- and Off-Site Improvements – Minor grading, erosion and sediment control, and topsoil
and turf restoration.
Mass grading, utility installation, wetland mitigation and other related work was completed
in 2006 in conjunction with the first addition.
Based on the review of the plans, it is recommended that the plans be approved subject to the
following conditions:
1. The Applicant secures the NPDES permit (storm water) and a WCA No loss/No Impact
permit (wetlands) prior to commencing work.
2. All Improvements are constructed in accordance with the latest edition of CEAM’s Standard
Utility Specifications and Albertville City Standards.
3. Record drawings of all site improvements, as described by the City’s As-Built Checklist, are
required prior to release of surety.
4. Applicant shall submit a wetland demarcation signage plan for City review and shall install
signage as directed by the City.
5. Street lighting, and private utility (electric, gas, phone) plans shall be submitted for review.
6. The storm sewer/forcemain crossing shall be insulated, as specified by the City.
7. The irrigation service lines in the cul-de-sac shall be repaired or replaced as required.
8. The proposed B612 curb for the cul-de-sac island shall be revised to 28-inch surmountable.
9. Outlot A shall be deeded to the City.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
EXHIBIT G
21Agenda Page 38
1
DRAFT DATED JANUARY 29, 2014
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
CONDITIONAL USE /PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
HUNTERS PASS ESTATES SECOND ADDITION
THIS AGREEMENT, entered into this ______ day of February, 2014 by and
between Tollberg Homes, LLC, a Minnesota Limited Liability Company referred to
herein as “Developer”; and the CITY OF ALBERTVILLE, County of Wright, State
of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as “City”;
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Developer is the fee owner and developer of the real property
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, which
real property is proposed to be subdivided and platted for development and which
real property is subject to the provisions of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Developer is proposing to subdivide a portion of Outlot C of
Hunters Pass Estates into 12 single-family residential lots and 2 Outlots, which are
described on the attached Exhibit A. Said subdivision which is to be governed by
this Agreement is intended to bear the name “Hunters Pass Estates Second Addition”
and shall be hereinafter referred to in its entirety as “Said Plat” or “Subject
Property”; and
WHEREAS, the City has given final approval of Developer’s plat of Hunters
Pass Estates Second Addition (attached hereto as Exhibit B) contingent upon
compliance with certain City requirements including, but not limited to, matters set
forth herein; and
WHEREAS, the City requires that certain public improvements including,
but not limited to bituminous street, sidewalk, trail(s), curb and gutter, grading,
sanitary sewer, municipal water, storm sewer and drainage ponds (hereafter
Agenda Page 39
2
“Municipal Improvements”) be installed to serve the Development, to be installed
and financed by Developer; and
WHEREAS, the City further requires that certain on- and off-site
improvements be installed by the Developer within Said Plat, which improvements
consist of boulevards, top soil and sod, grading control per lot, bituminous or
concrete driveways, parking lot, drainage swales, berming, street signs, street lights,
street cleanup during project development, erosion control, landscaping, and other
site-related items; and
WHEREAS, this Agreement is entered into for the purpose of setting forth
and memorializing for the parties and subsequent owners, the understandings and
covenants of the parties concerning the development of Said Plat and the conditions
imposed thereon; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer’s predecessor in title have previously
entered into a Developer’s Agreement titled “City of Albertville Conditional Use/
Planned Unit Development Agreement Hunters Pass Estates” dated August 12, 2005
and recorded as document number 984963 at the Wright County Recorder’s Office
(“Master Agreement”) under which the City granted preliminary plat approval to the
plan for the area covered by said Master Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Said Plat is governed by the Master Agreement, except as may
be explicitly modified herein; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to supplement the Master
Agreement with the site specific details applicable to Hunters Pass Estates Second
Addition, as evidenced by the execution of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City and Developer desire to have this Agreement and the
Master Agreement read together as if the entire Master Agreement were recited
herein, with any conflicts between the two documents being resolved in favor of the
language set forth in this document;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AND HEREIN MUTUALLY
AGREED, in consideration of each party’s promises and considerations herein set
forth, as follows:
1. Preliminary Plat Master Agreement.
A. That certain Developer’s Agreement entitled “City of Albertville
Conditional Use/ Planned Unit Development Agreement Hunters Pass
Estates” (“Master Agreement”) between Hunters Development, LLC
Agenda Page 40
3
and the City of Albertville, dated August 12, 2005 and recorded in the
Wright County Recorder’s Office as document number 984963 along
with any recorded amendments is hereby incorporated herein the same
as if the text of said Agreement were contained within this document.
B. It is the intent of the parties that this Developer’s Agreement
(“Developer’s Agreement”) supplement the Master Agreement as to
the specific development issues related to Hunters Pass Estates Second
Addition, and that these two documents be read together to determine
the rights and obligations of the parties with respect to the property
contained within the Hunters Pass Estates Second Addition. In the
event of a conflict between the terms of the Master Agreement and this
Developer’s Agreement, the terms of this Developer’s Agreement
shall control with respect to any conflicting issues within Hunters Pass
Estates Second Addition, but any such conflicts shall not alter the
terms of the Master Agreement as they apply to other plats, now
existing or to be platted in the future, within the remaining land area
subject to the Master Agreement.
2. Planned Unit Development. The Development is hereby allowed to be
developed as a Planned Unit Development with flexibility from the strict
requirements of the City’s Shoreline Regulations and Zoning Ordinance in
relation to selected items detailed in this paragraph.
A. Developer agrees that setbacks shall be consistent with the templates
provided by Developer, which are attached hereto as Exhibit C.
B. All lots within the plat shall be subject to the Master Homeowners’
Association as currently established for Hunters Pass Estates entitled
“Amended And Restated Declaration For Hunters Pass Estates” and
recorded in the Wright County Recorder’s Office as document number
A1057150. The Developer shall file covenant documents subjecting all
lots within the plat to the terms and conditions of the Master
Homeowners’ Association, subject to review and approval by the City
Attorney, which shall be recorded on the property records of the lots.
Said covenant documents shall be recorded at the Wright County
Recorder’s Office with the final plat. In addition, the documents
placing all lots in Said Plat under the terms of the Master
Homeowners’ Association shall also require all lots in Said Plat to 1)
maintain shoreland and wetland markers, and 2) prohibit the use of
fertilizers containing phosphorous in rear yards, and 3) provide a
mandatory penalty for violations of the applicable Homeowners’
Association documents.
Agenda Page 41
4
C. Developer shall install trees, shrubs, berms and screening as shown on
the landscape plan attached as Exhibit D and as shown on the
landscape plan attached to the Master Agreement as that plan affects
the property on Said Plat. The Developer shall guarantee that all new
trees and shrubs shall survive for two full years from the time planting
has been completed or will be replaced at the expense of the
Developer.
D. Developer shall require as a condition of sale of any lots within Said
Plat that purchasers plant at least one shade or evergreen tree to be
planted within the residential lot.
E. Developer shall install and maintain wetland demarcation signage at
the boundaries of the wetland buffer. The sign design and sign
locations shall be approved by the City Engineer.
F. All buildings constructed on Said Plat shall adhere to established
architectural standards (design guidelines) for the Hunters Pass
subdivision, as adopted by the Hunters Pass Estates Homeowners
Association. All decks and/or porches shall be designed to fit within
the approved building setbacks set out in this Agreement.
G. All buildings constructed on Said Plat must be constructed at least
three feet above Hunters Lake’s ordinary high water level of 947.3
feet above sea level. The lowest floor elevation for all homes in the
proposed development must be at an elevation of at least 950.3 feet
above sea level or higher.
H. Developer shall deed Outlot A of Said Plat to the City of Albertville
upon the recording of the final plat.
3. Construction of Municipal Improvements.
A. The Developer shall construct those Municipal Improvements located
on and off Said Plat as detailed in the Plans and Specifications for
Hunters Pass Estates Second Addition, as prepared by Civil
Engineering Site Design dated __________ 2013 and on file with the
City Clerk, said improvements to include installation of bituminous
street, curb and gutter, sidewalks, water mains, sanitary and storm
sewers, storm water ponding and site grading, and trails. All such
improvements shall be constructed according to the standards adopted
Agenda Page 42
5
by the City, along with all items required by the City Engineer. Unless
the City Engineer specifies a later date, said improvements shall be
installed by October 31, 2014, except that the wear course of
bituminous pavement may be installed anytime before September 15,
2015.
B. The Developer shall provide the City with record drawings for all
Municipal Improvements, consistent with City requirements and
subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Record drawings
shall be certified by a registered land surveyor or engineer that all
ponds, swales, emergency overflows, and Municipal Improvements
have been constructed on public easements.
C. The Developer warrants to the City for a period of two years from the
date the City accepts the finished Municipal Improvements that all
such improvements have been constructed to City standards and shall
suffer no significant impairments, either to the structure or to the
surface or other usable areas due to improper construction, said
warranty to apply both to poor materials and faulty workmanship.
Acceptance shall be by City Council motion or resolution.
D. Developer shall provide the City with lien waivers from all contractors
and subcontractors engaged to construct said improvements on Said
Plat. Should Developer fail to provide the City with all applicable lien
waivers, the City reserves the right to draw upon Developer's surety
after providing Developer with 30 days written notice and pay any
contractors who performed work on any Municipal Improvements and
whom Developer has failed to fully pay for the performance of said
work.
E. The City shall, at its option, have the City Engineer present on Said
Plat for inspection purposes at all times (or such times as the City may
deem necessary) during the construction and installation of said
Municipal Improvements. Developer agrees to pay for all costs
incurred by the City during said inspections.
F. The Developer shall construct an extension of 69th Street Circle NE
from the existing Hunters Pass Estates subdivision into the proposed
subdivision expansion, terminating in a cul-de-sac in a location
acceptable to the City Engineer. Prior to constructing the extension of
69th Street Circle NE, Developer shall submit plans and specifications
for said extension to the City Engineer for his approval.
Agenda Page 43
6
4. Construction of On- and Off-Site Improvements.
A. Developer shall construct all on- and off-site improvements including
installation of paved streets, curb and gutter, boulevards, street signs,
traffic signs, yard top soil, sod and seed in all yards, landscaping,
grading control per lot, bituminous or concrete driveways, drainage
swales, berming, and like items as necessary, street cleanup during
project development, and erosion control, all as required by City
ordinance, this Agreement and the Master Agreement. Front, side and
portions of the back yards of residential lots shall be sodded in
accordance with the Residential Development Standards as on file
with the City Administrator’s Office. Those portions of the yards not
required to be sodded may be seeded with grass seed or sodded. In all
cases permanent turf or grass must be established over all areas of the
lot not covered by a hard or impervious surface. The Developer shall
guarantee that all new plantings shall survive for two full years from
the time the planting has been completed or will be replaced at the
expense of the Developer. Said on- and off-site improvements shall be
installed no later than October 31, 2015, with the exception of erosion
control, drainage swales and berming, which shall be installed upon
initial grading of Said Plat, and except that the driveways and sod need
not be installed in a lot until that lot is developed (provided adequate
ground cover has been established prior to the development of such
lot).
B. Developer shall, at its own expense, be responsible to ensure following
items are installed within the development, all such items to be
installed under ground, within the street right of way or such other
location as may be approved by the City Engineer, accessible to all lots
and in compliance with all applicable state and local regulations:
i. Electrical power supply, to be provided by Wright-Hennepin or
other such carrier;
ii. Natural gas supply, to be provided by Center Point Energy or
other such carrier;
iii. Telephone service, to be provided by Century Link Telephone
Company or other such carrier;
iv. Cable TV service, to be provided by a local carrier;
Agenda Page 44
7
In addition, the Developer shall, at its own expense, cause streetlights
and street signs to be of such type and to be installed at such locations
as required by the City Engineer and in conformance with the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The Developer shall be
responsible for streetlight operational expense until such time as the
City accepts the Municipal Improvements.
C. Developer shall maintain erosion control measures in accordance with
MPCA’s Best Management Practices along the back of all curbing
within 7 days after said curbing is installed, or after the “small
utilities” (gas, phone, electrical and cable television) have been
installed, whichever occurs sooner. Developer shall be allowed to
substitute hay bales or a rock surface acceptable to the City Engineer
for a 22-foot section of silt fencing on each lot for the purpose of
allowing construction vehicles to pass from the street to each lot. No
construction vehicles shall pass from the street to the lots except
through such designated 22-foot section of hay bales. Developer shall
remove all hay bales and silt fencing from each lot as sod is installed
upon said lot. As an alternative to installing silt fencing in back of all
curbing as required by this subparagraph, Developer may, at its
expense, install sod no less than three feet in width in back of all
curbing, provided that if, in the judgment of the City Engineer, the
installation of silt fencing in one or more places is needed, the
Developer shall install such silt fencing at its expense upon request by
the City Engineer.
D. Notwithstanding the requirements of subparagraphs 2C, 2D and 4A
above and except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, the
Developer shall be responsible to ensure that the on- and off-site
improvements are installed to the City's satisfaction for each lot or
parcel prior to the date that a certificate of occupancy (temporary or
permanent) is issued by the City for a building located on the lot,
unless the certificate of occupancy is issued after October 1st and
before March 30th in any given year, in which case a certificate of
occupancy shall be issued with the requirement that the Developer be
required to install said on-and off-site items for such lot by the
following June 30th.
E. Developer shall install storm water retention/water quality ponds and
basins upon Said Plat as shown on the Grading, Drainage and Erosion
Control Plan attached as Exhibit E. Said ponds and basins shall be
dedicated to the City, and Developer shall provide the City with
Agenda Page 45
8
perpetual drainage easements over such ponds. Said retention ponds
and basins shall be installed prior to the installation of utilities
5. Intended Use of Subdivision Lots. It is the Developer's and City's intent that
a total of 12 single family units be constructed on Said Plat, with one single
family home on each lot as well as any accessory structures permitted under
the City’s zoning ordinance, this Agreement or the Master Agreement.
6. Surety Requirements.
A. Developer will provide the City with an irrevocable letter of credit (or
other surety as approved by the City Attorney) as security that the
obligations of the Developer under this contract shall be performed.
Said letter of credit or surety shall be in the amount of $______
representing the sum of 100% of the estimated cost of the Municipal
Improvements ($_______), 50% of the on and off-site improvements
($________), and 150% of the estimated cost for
landscaping/screening materials ($_______) and $1,500 per acre for
erosion control. Said letter of credit or surety must meet the approval
of the City attorney as to form and issuing bank (the issuing bank must
be an FDIC insured bank located within 100 miles of the City of
Albertville), and must be available in its entirety to fulfill the
obligations of the Developer under this Agreement. The letter of
credit to the City shall contain language requiring its automatic
renewal prior to December 31 of each calendar year, unless
cancellation of the letter of credit is specifically approved in writing by
the City.
B. The City may draw on said letter of credit or surety after required
written notice to complete work not performed by Developer
(including but not limited to on- and off-site improvements, Municipal
Improvements described above, erosion control, and other such
measures), to pay liens on property to be dedicated to the City, to
reimburse itself for costs incurred in the drafting, execution,
administration or enforcement of this Agreement, to repair or correct
deficiencies or other problems which occur to the Municipal
Improvements during the warranty period, or to otherwise fulfill the
obligations of Developer under this Agreement. Said letter of credit
must be maintained by Developer at all times at the level provided in
paragraph 6A above or a lesser amount authorized by the City Council
pursuant to paragraph 7B below.
Agenda Page 46
9
C. In the event that any cash, irrevocable letter of credit, or other surety
referred to herein is ever utilized and found to be deficient in amount
to pay or reimburse the City in total as required herein, the Developer
agrees that upon being billed by the City, Developer will pay within
thirty (30) days of the mailing of said billing, the said deficient
amount. If there should be an overage in the amount of utilized
security, the City will, upon making said determination, refund to the
Developer any monies which the City has in its possession which are
in excess of the actual costs of the project as paid by the City.
D. Developer hereby agrees to allow the City to specially assess
Developer's property for any and all reasonable costs incurred by the
City in enforcing any of the terms of this agreement should
Developer's letter of credit or surety prove insufficient or should
Developer fail to maintain said letter of credit or surety in the amount
required above within 30 days of mailing of written request by the
City.
E. That portion of said cash, irrevocable letter of credit or other surety
with respect to the performance of Site Improvements shall be released
upon certification of the City Engineer and approval of the City
Council that all such items are satisfactorily completed pursuant to this
Agreement.
F. In the event a surety referred to herein is in the form of an irrevocable
letter of credit, which by its terms may become null and void prior to
the time at which all monetary or other obligations of the Developer
are paid or satisfied, it is agreed that the Developer shall provide the
City with a new letter of credit or other surety, acceptable to the City,
at least forty-five (45) days prior to the expiration of the original letter
of credit. If a new letter of credit is not received as required above, the
City may without notice to Developer declare a default in the terms of
this Agreement and thence draw in part or in total, at the City's
discretion, upon the expiring letter of credit to avoid the loss of surety
for the continued obligation. The form of any irrevocable letter of
credit or other surety must be approved by the City Attorney prior to
its issuance.
G. In the event the Developer files bankruptcy or in the event a
bankruptcy proceeding is filed against Developer by others and is not
dismissed within 60 days, or in the event a court appoints a receiver
for the Developer, the City may draw on its letter of credit or surety in
its full amount to secure its surety position. The City shall then release
Agenda Page 47
10
the remainder of said letter of credit or surety to the bankruptcy court
or receiver in the same manner that it would be required to release the
letter of credit under this Agreement.
7. Surety Release.
A. Periodically, as payments are made by the Developer for the
completion of portions of the Municipal Improvements and/or on- and
off-site Improvements, and/or landscaping improvements, and when it
is reasonably prudent, the Developer may request of the City that the
surety be proportionately reduced for that portion of the Municipal
Improvements and on- and off-site improvements and landscaping
improvements which have been fully completed and payment made
therefor. All such decisions shall be at the discretion of the City
Council. The City's cost for processing reduction request(s) shall be
billed to the Developer. Such cost shall be paid to the City within
thirty (30) days of the date of mailing of the billing.
B. The Developer may request of the City a reduction or release of any
surety as follows:
i. When another acceptable letter of credit or surety is furnished
to the City to replace a prior letter of credit or surety.
ii. When all or a portion of the Municipal Improvements or the on-
and off-site improvements have been installed, the letter of
credit or surety may be reduced by the dollar amount
attributable to that portion of improvements so installed, except
that the City shall retain the letter of credit or surety in the
amount of 10% of the estimated construction price of the
Municipal Improvements during the first year of the warranty
period and 5% of the estimated construction price of the
Municipal Improvements during the second year of the
warranty period. Developer may substitute a warranty bond
acceptable to the City Attorney for the warranty letter of credit
in the same amounts and duration as required for the warranty
letter of credit.
iii. When all or a portion of the landscaping improvements have
been installed pursuant to the Landscaping Plat attached as
Exhibit D, the letter of credit or surety may be reduced by the
dollar amount attributable to that portion of such landscaping
improvements installed, except the City shall retain the letter of
Agenda Page 48
11
credit or surety in the amount of 25% of the estimated
Landscaping Improvement costs for two years from the time of
the installation of said landscaping materials.
iii. As to all requests brought under this paragraph, the City
Council shall have complete discretion whether to reduce or not
to reduce said letter of credit or surety.
C. The costs incurred by the City in processing any reduction request
shall be billed to the Developer and paid to the City within thirty (30)
days of billing.
8. Abandonment of Project - Costs and Expenses.
In the event Developer should abandon the proposed development of the said
Plat, the City’s costs and expenses related to attorney’s fees, professional
review, drafting of this Agreement, preparation of the feasibility report, plans
and specifications, and any other expenses undertaken in reliance upon
Developer’s various assertions shall be paid by said Developer within thirty
(30) days after receipt of a bill for such costs from the City. In addition, in the
event the Developer abandons the project, in whole or in part, ceases
substantial field work for more than nine (9) months, fails to provide
sufficient ground-cover to prevent continuing soil erosion from Said Plat, or
fails to leave the abandoned property in a condition which can be mowed
using conventional lawn mowing equipment, Developer agrees to pay all
costs the City may incur in taking whatever action is reasonably necessary to
provide ground-cover and otherwise restore Said Plat to the point where
undeveloped grounds are level and covered with permanent vegetation
sufficient to prevent continuing soil erosion from Said Plat and to facilitate
mowing of Said Plat. In the event that said costs are not paid, the City may
withdraw funds from the above-mentioned surety for the purpose of paying
the costs referred to in this paragraph.
9. Developer to Pay City's Costs and Expenses.
It is understood and agreed that the Developer will reimburse the City for all
reasonable administrative, legal, planning, engineering and other professional
costs incurred in the creation, administration, enforcement or execution of this
Agreement and the approval of Said Plat, as well as all reasonable
engineering expenses incurred by the City in designing, approving, installing,
and inspecting said Improvements described above. Developer agrees to pay
all such costs within 30 days of billing by the City. If Developer fails to pay
said amounts, Developer agrees to allow the City to reimburse itself from said
Agenda Page 49
12
surety and/or assess the amount owed against any or all of Said Plat without
objection. Developer has the right to request time sheets or work records to
verify said billing prior to payment.
10. Sanitary Sewer and Water Trunk Line Fees.
Developer agrees that the City's Sanitary Sewer Trunk Line Fee Ordinance
and Water Trunk Line Fee Ordinance currently requires the Developer to pay
$2,055.00 per acre and $1,925.00 per acre respectively, upon development of
said Plat. There are _______ acres in said Plat to which the Trunk Charges
apply, which received final plat approval. Therefore, the Sanitary Sewer and
Water Trunk Line Fees for the numbered receiving final plat approval are
$___________ ($________ in sanitary sewer trunk line fees calculated as
$2,055.00 x _____ acres and $___________ in water fees calculated as
$1,925.00 x _____ acres).
11. Erosion and Siltation Control.
Before any grading is started on any site, all erosion control measures as
shown on the approved Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan attached
as Exhibit E shall be strictly complied with. Developer shall also install all
erosion control measures deemed necessary by the City Engineer should the
erosion control plan prove inadequate in any respect.
12. Ditch Cleaning.
Developer shall comply with all requirements set forth for drainage into any
county ditch or other ditch through which water from Said Plat may drain,
and shall make any necessary improvements or go through any necessary
procedures to ensure compliance with any federal, state, county or city
requirements, all at Developer's expense.
13. Maintain Public Property Damaged or Cluttered During Construction.
Developer agrees to assume full financial responsibility for any damage or
repairs which may occur to public property including but not limited to
streets, street sub- base, base, bituminous surface, curb, utility system
including but not limited to watermain, sanitary sewer or storm sewer when
said damage occurs as a result of the construction activity which takes place
during the development of Said Plat, including the initial construction of
homes on the lots. The Developer further agrees to pay all costs required to
repair the streets, utility systems and other public property damaged or
Agenda Page 50
13
cluttered with debris when occurring as a direct or indirect result of said
construction that takes place in Said Plat.
Developer agrees to clean the streets on a daily basis if required by the
City. Developer further agrees that any damage to public property occurring
as a result of construction activity on Said Plat will be repaired immediately
if deemed to be an emergency by the City. Developer further agrees that
any damage to public property as a result of construction activity on Said
Plat will be repaired within 14 days if not deemed to be an emergency by
the City.
If Developer fails to so clean the streets or repair or maintain said public
property, the City may immediately undertake making or causing it to be
cleaned up, repaired or maintained. When the City undertakes such activity,
the Developer shall reimburse the City for all of its expenses within thirty
(30) days of its billing to the Developer. If the Developer fails to pay said bill
within thirty (30) days, then the City may specially assess such costs against
the lots within Said Plat and/or take necessary legal action to recover such
costs and the Developer agrees that the City shall be entitled to attorney’s fees
incurred by the City as a result of such legal action.
14. Temporary Easement Rights.
Developer shall provide access to Said Plat at all reasonable times to the City
or its representatives for purposes of inspection or to accomplish any
necessary work pursuant to this Agreement.
15. Miscellaneous.
A. Developer agrees that all construction items required under this
Agreement are items for which Developer is responsible for
completing and all work shall be done at Developer's expense.
B. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph or
phrase of this Contract is for any reason held invalid by a Court of
competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion of this Contract.
C. If building permits are issued prior to the completion and acceptance
of public improvements, the Developer assumes all liability and the
costs resulting in delays in completion of public improvements and
damage to public improvements caused by the City, Developer, its
Agenda Page 51
14
contractors, subcontractors, materialmen, employees, agents, or third
parties.
D. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or
amendment to the provisions of this Contract. To be binding,
amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed by the parties and
approved by written resolution of the City Council. The City's failure
to promptly take legal action to enforce this Contract shall not be a
waiver or release.
E. This Contract shall run with the land and shall be recorded against the
title to the property.
F. The Developer represents to the City that Said Plat complies with all
City, county, state and federal laws and regulations, including but not
limited to: subdivision ordinances, zoning ordinances, and
environmental regulations. If the City determines that Said Plat does
not comply, the City may, at its option, refuse to allow construction or
development work in the plat until the Developer so complies. Upon
the City's demand, the Developer shall cease work until there is
compliance.
G. Prior to the execution of this Agreement and prior to the start of any
construction on Said Plat, Developer shall provide the City with
evidence of good and marketable title to all of Said Plat. Evidence of
good and marketable title shall consist of a Title Insurance Policy or
Commitment from a national title insurance company, or an abstract of
title updated by an abstract company registered under the laws of the
State of Minnesota.
H. Developer shall comply with all water, ponding and wetland related
restrictions, if any, required by the Wright County Soil and Water
Conservation District and/or the City and any applicable provisions of
State or Federal law or regulations.
I. The Albertville City Council reserves the right to allocate wastewater
treatment capacity in a manner it finds to be in the best interests of the
public health, safety and welfare.
J. Developer shall obtain all required driveway, utility and other permits
as required by either the City Engineer, Wright County and/or the
State of Minnesota for the construction of the Municipal
Improvements and the On- and Off-Site Improvements.
Agenda Page 52
15
16. Violation of Agreement.
A. In the case of default by the Developer, its successors or assigns, of
any of the covenants and agreements herein contained, the City shall
give Developer thirty (30) days mailed notice thereof (via certified
mail), and if such default is not cured within said thirty (30) day
period, the City is hereby granted the right and the privilege to declare
any deficiencies governed by this Agreement due and payable to the
City in full. The thirty (30) day notice period shall be deemed to run
from the date of deposit in the United States Mail. Upon failure to
cure by Developer, the City may thence immediately and without
notice or consent complete some or all of the Developer's obligations
under this Agreement, and bring legal action against the Developer to
collect any sums due to the City pursuant to this Agreement, plus all
costs and attorney's fees incurred in enforcing this agreement. The
City may also specially assess all said costs incurred upon default
against the properties in Said Plat pursuant to the terms of this
agreement.
B. Notwithstanding the 30-day notice period provided for in paragraph
16(A) above, in the event that a default by Developer will reasonably
result in irreparable harm to the environment or to public property, or
result in an imminent and serious public safety hazard, the City may
immediately exercise all remedies available to it under this agreement
in an effort to prevent, reduce or otherwise mitigate such irreparable
harm or safety hazard, provided that the City makes good-faith,
reasonable efforts to notify the Developer as soon as is practicable of
the default, the projected irreparable harm or safety hazard, and the
intended actions of the City to remedy said harm.
C. Paragraph 16A of this section shall not apply to any acts or rights of
the City under the preceding paragraph 6F, and no notice need be
given to the Developer as a condition precedent to the City declaring a
default or drawing upon the expiring irrevocable letter of credit as
therein authorized. The City may elect to give notice to Developer of
the City's intent to draw upon the surety without waiving the City's
right to draw upon the surety at a future time without notice to the
Developer.
D. Breach of any of the terms of this Contract by the Developer shall be
grounds for denial of building permits.
Agenda Page 53
16
17. Dedications to the City.
A. Municipal Improvement Dedications.
The Developer, upon presentation to the City of evidence of good and
marketable title to Said Plat, and upon completion of all construction
work and certification of completion by the City Engineer, shall
dedicate all roads, road and trail right-of-ways, sidewalks, curbs,
drainage and utility easements, gutters, ponds, sewers and water mains
to the City. Upon acceptance of dedication, Developer shall provide to
the City “As-Builts” of all sewers, water mains. Acceptance by City
of any dedication shall occur upon passage of a resolution to such
effect by the City Council.
B. Park, Trail and Outlot Dedications.
i. Developer agrees that the City’s Code currently requires that
the Developer to pay $3,300 per single-family lot to the City
upon development of Said Plat. There are 12 single-family lots
within Said Plat. Therefore, the park dedication fees for the
development of Said Plat is $39,600 (12 single-family lots x
$3,300).
ii. Developer shall deed Outlot A to the City.
18. Administrative Fee. A fee for City administration of this project shall be
paid prior to the City executing the Plat and this Agreement. Said fee shall
be 3.5% of the estimated construction costs of the Municipal Improvements
within the Plat. The administrative fee for this Plat is $______.
19. Phased Development. As said Plat is a phase of a multi-phased preliminary
plat, Developer agrees that the City may refuse to approve final plats of
subsequent phases until public improvements for all prior phases have been
satisfactorily completed. Development of subsequent phases may not proceed
until the City approves Development Contracts for such phases. Approval of
this phase of the Development shall not be construed as approval of future
phases nor shall approval of this phase bind the City to approve future
Development phases. The Master Agreement, the City’s Comprehensive
Plan, Zoning ordinance, Subdivision ordinance, and other ordinances shall
govern all future Development phases in effect at the time such future
Development phases are approved by the City.
Agenda Page 54
17
20 Indemnity. Developer shall hold the City and its officers and employees
harmless from claims made by Developer and third parties for damages
sustained or costs incurred resulting from Said Plat approval and
development. The Developer shall indemnify the City and its officers and
employees for all costs, damages or expenses that the City may pay or incur
in consequence of such claims, including attorney's fees. Third parties shall
have no recourse against the City under this contract.
21. Assignment of Contract. The Developer can assign the obligations of the
Developer under this Contract. However, the Developer shall not be released
from its obligations under this contract without the express written consent of
the City Council through Council resolution.
22. Limited Approval. Approval of this Agreement by the City Council in no
way constitutes approval of anything other than that which is explicitly
specified in this Agreement.
23. Professional Fees. The Developer will pay all reasonable professional fees
incurred by the City as a result of City efforts to enforce the terms of this
Agreement. Said fees include attorney’s fees, engineer’s fees, planner’s fees,
and any other professional fees incurred by the City in attempting to enforce
the terms of this Agreement. The Developer will also pay all reasonable
attorneys and professional fees incurred by the City in the event an action is
brought upon a letter of credit or other surety furnished by the Developer as
provided herein.
24. Plans Attached as Exhibits. All plans attached to this Agreement as
Exhibits are incorporated into this Agreement by reference as they appear.
Unless otherwise specified in this agreement, Developer is bound by said
plans and responsible for implementation of said plans as herein incorporated.
25. Integration Clause, Modification by Written Agreement Only. This
Agreement represents the full and complete understanding of the parties and
neither party is relying on any prior agreement or statement(s), whether oral
or written. Modification of this Agreement may occur only if in writing and
signed by a duly authorized agent of both parties.
26. Notification Information. Any notices to the parties herein shall be in
writing, delivered by hand (to the City Clerk for the City) or registered mail
addressed as follows to the following parties:
City of Albertville
c/o City Clerk
Agenda Page 55
18
P.O. Box 9
Albertville, MN 55301
Telephone: (763) 497-3384
Tollberg Homes, LLC
Attn: Wade Tollefson
1428 5th Avenue
Anoka, MN 55303
Telephone: (763) 205-2037
27. Agreement Effect.
This Agreement shall be binding upon and extend to the representatives,
heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE,
By_______________________
It’s Mayor
By_______________________
It’s Clerk
TOLLBERG HOMES, LLC
By _______________________
Wade Tollefson
It’s President
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF WRIGHT )
Agenda Page 56
19
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ______ day of
________________, 2014, by Jillian Hendrickson as Mayor of the City of
Albertville, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the city and pursuant to
the authority of the City Council.
___________________________________
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF WRIGHT )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of
________________, 2014, by Kimberly Olson, as Clerk of the City of Albertville, a
Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the city and pursuant to the authority
of the City Council.
___________________________________
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF WRIGHT )
Wade Tollefson, as President of Tollberg Homes, LLC, acknowledged the foregoing
instrument before me this _____ day of ___________________, 2014.
___________________________________
Notary Public
DRAFTED BY:
Couri & Ruppe P.L.L.P.
P.O. Box 369
705 Central Avenue East
St. Michael, MN 55376
(763) 497-1930
Agenda Page 57
20
EXHIBIT A TO DEVELOPER’S AGREEMENT
The legal description of the Plat to which this Developer’s Agreement applies is as
follows:
Lots 1-6, Block 1
Lots 1-2, Block 2
Lots 1-4, Block 3
Outlot A
Outlot B
All said property is located in Hunters Pass Estates Second Addition, City of
Albertville, County of Wright, State of Minnesota.
Agenda Page 58
21
EXHIBIT B
Final Plat
EXHIBIT C
Setback Requirements
EXHIBIT D
Landscape Plan
EXHIBIT E
Grading, Drainage and Erosion Control Plan
Agenda Page 59
Page 1
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-005
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE HUNTERS PASS ESTATES 2ND ADDITION
PRELIMINARY PLA, FINAL PLAT, AND PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
AMENDMENT, OF THE HUNTERS PASS ESTATES PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE.
WHEREAS, Tollberg Homes has submitted the Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition
Preliminary and Final Plat for City approval; and
WHEREAS, City Staff has reviewed the submitted plats and associated development
plans, and the planning report dated January 9, 2014 has been prepared by Northwest Associated
Consultants, and the engineering report dated January 7, 2014 has been prepared by the City
Engineer, outlining staff findings and recommendations; and
WHEREAS, the Albertville Planning Commission met and held a public hearing on
January 14, 2014 to consider the application; and
WHEREAS, upon review of the application, staff reports and hearing public testimony,
the Planning and Zoning Commission closed the public hearing and recommended that the City
Council approve the preliminary plat, final plat, and PUD amendment for Hunters Pass Estates
2nd Addition, with the conditions outlined in the January 9, 2014 planning report and January 7,
2014 engineering report, and the additional condition that lot setbacks listed in Exhibit F of the
planning report be established as required setbacks for the development; and
WHEREAS, the Albertville City Council met on February 3, 2014 to consider the
Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat request; and
WHEREAS, the Albertville City Council has reviewed the application, City staff reports,
and the Planning Commission recommendations and agrees with the findings and
recommendations of the Planning Commission; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of Albertville,
Minnesota hereby approves the Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition Preliminary and Final Plat and
PUD amendment subject to the attached Findings of Fact and Decisions.
Findings of Fact: Based on review of the application and evidence received, the City Council
now makes the following findings of fact and decision:
A. The site is legally described as Outlot C of Hunters Pass Estates.
B. The planning report dated January 9, 2014 from Northwest Associated Consultants is
incorporated herein.
C. The Hunters Pass Estates PUD was approved in October 2004, and the original Hunters
Pass Estates plat was approved in 2005, with Phase I of development implemented soon
after.
Agenda Page 60
City of Albertville
Resolution No. 2014-005
Page 2
D. The Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition plat can be accommodated with existing public
services and will not overburden the City’s service capacity.
E. Traffic generation by the proposed plat is within the capabilities of streets serving the
property as proposed.
F. The requirements of the Albertville Zoning Ordinance have been reviewed in relation to
the proposed plat.
G. The proposed actions have been considered in relation to the specific policies and
provisions of the City and have been found to be consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
H. The proposed development will be compatible with present and future land uses of the
area.
I. The proposed use conforms to approved planned unit development standards.
J. The proposed plat will not tend to or actually depreciate the area in which it is proposed.
Decision: Based on the foregoing information and applicable ordinances, the City Council
Approves the Hunters Pass Estates 2nd Addition Preliminary Plat, Final Plat, and PUD
amendment based on the plans dated November 12, 2013 and information received to date
subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall install and maintain wetland demarcation signage at the boundaries of
the wetland buffer. The sign design and sign location shall be approved by the City
Engineer.
2. The applicant shall provide a landscape plan illustrating a vegetative buffer planting
along the northern border of the site, between Phase II lots and 70th Street NE. In
addition, one shade or evergreen tree must be planted per residential lot, which will be
required as part of the development agreement. All other plantings shall adhere to the
landscape plan approved with the final plat for the Hunters Pass Estates PUD in 2005.
3. The applicant shall provide a park dedication fee totaling $3,300 per individual lot, to be
paid in three installments per the conditions outlined in this report.
4. The applicant shall adhere to established architectural standards (design guidelines) for
the Hunters Pass subdivision, as adopted by the Hunters Pass Estates Homeowners
Association. The architectural guidelines shall be amended to stipulate that all decks
and/or porches shall be designed to fit within the approved PUD building setbacks.
5. Following final plat approval, the entire plat shall be brought into the Hunters Pass
Estates HOA at the time of recording, and the developer and Phase II homeowners shall
adhere to the HOA declaration, bylaws, and rules, and any addendums to said standards.
6. The applicant is required to enter into a PUD agreement that demonstrates that Hunters
Pass Estates Phase II will implement and adhere to all conditions provided in the original
Hunters Pass Estates PUD agreement and the conditions of the January 9, 2014 planning
report.
Agenda Page 61
City of Albertville
Resolution No. 2014-005
Page 3
7. All homes must be constructed at least three feet above Hunters Lake’s OHWL of 947.3,
low floor elevation for all homes in the proposed development must be at 950.3 feet in
elevation or higher.
8. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations of the January 7, 2014 City
Engineer memo, as follows:
a) The Applicant secures the NPDES permit (storm water) and a WCA No loss/No
Impact permit (wetlands) prior to commencing work.
b) All Improvements are constructed in accordance with the latest edition of CEAM’s
Standard Utility Specifications and Albertville City Standards.
c) Record drawings of all site improvements, as described by the City’s As-Built
Checklist, are required prior to release of surety.
d) Applicant shall submit a wetland demarcation signage plan for City review and shall
install signage as directed by the City.
e) Street lighting, and private utility (electric, gas, phone) plans shall be submitted for
review.
f) The storm sewer/forcemain crossing shall be insulated, as specified by the City.
g) The irrigation service lines in the cul-de-sac shall be repaired or replaced as required.
h) The proposed B612 curb for the cul-de-sac island shall be revised to 28-inch
surmountable.
i) Outlot A shall be deeded to the City.
9. The lot setbacks provided in Exhibit F of the planning report dated January 9, 2014 shall
be established as required setbacks for the development.
Adopted by the Albertville City Council this 3rd day of February 2014.
Jillian Hendrickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 62
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-006
RESOLUTION VACATING ALL EASEMENTS WITHIN OUTLOT C
OF HUNTERS PASS ESTATES WITHIN THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
WHEREAS, the City Council, upon the request of the owner of Outlot C of Hunters
Pass Estates, did hold a public hearing on February 3, 2014 at 7 p.m. at the Albertville City
Hall. At said time and place the City Council heard all interested parties on whether to
vacate all drainage and utility easements on Outlot C of Hunters Pass Estates as recorded in
the Office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, all notice requirements of Minnesota Statute §412.851 have been
satisfied; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds and determines that it is in the public interest to vacate
all drainage and utility easements on said Outlot C of Hunters Pass Estates, effective upon the
recording of the plat of Hunters Pass Estates Second Addition, as such easements will no longer be
required by the City upon the recording of Hunters Pass Estates Second Addition.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of City of Albertville,
Wright County, Minnesota does hereby order as follows:
1. All drainage and utility easements located on Outlot C of Hunters Pass Estates as
recorded in the Office of the County Recorder, Wright County, Minnesota shall
be vacated upon the filing of the plat known as Hunters Pass Estates Second
Addition with the Wright County Recorders Office, Wright County, Minnesota.
2. The City Clerk is directed to file a certified copy of this Order in the records of
the City and a “Notice of Completion of Proceeding” with the Office of the
Wright County Auditor and Recorder.
Adopted by the Albertville City Council on the 3rd day of February, 2014.
________________________________
Jillian Hendrickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 63
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Mobile Food Unit Licensing Regulation RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 16, 2014
SUBJECT: PLANNING – MOBILE FOOD UNIT LICENSING AND REGULATION
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and City Council consider
the following motion:
MOTION TO: Adopt Ordinance No. 2014-02 amending City Code Chapter 4 (Peddlers,
Solicitors and Transient Merchants) and Section 200.2 (Definitions) of the Zoning Ordinance,
relating to mobile food unit regulation, and to recommend use of the Mobile Food Unit Permit as
provided.
BACKGROUND: The City of Albertville has recently experienced requests from food truck
vendors to be able to operate in the community. City Ordinance does not currently provide
standards specific to the regulation of food trucks, which have thus far been allowed to operate
under a transient merchant license and a temporary outdoor seasonal sales permit. In the past, the
City has recommended pursuing opportunities for more restaurants; however, the transient nature
of food trucks poses concerns regarding competition with established food related businesses.
Should the City deem this kind of competition appropriate, they will need to establish regulations
for the unique style of operation associated with mobile food vendors.
A draft ordinance amendment providing new regulations for mobile food units in City Code Ch.
4 Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants and a definition for this use in Zoning Ordinance
Section 200.2 Definitions, in addition to a Mobile Food Unit permit, were presented to the
Planning Commission for consideration at their January 14, 2014 meeting. The Planning
Commission voted 3:1 to approve the ordinance amendment and mobile food unit permit, with
one member absent. The dissenting vote had concerns about whether Albertville should
accommodate mobile food units, given the fact that they may compete against established
restaurant businesses. The votes for approval were based on support of analysis and
recommendations on the issue as provided in the planners report dated January 9, 2014. In
addition, approval was based on the determination that allowing mobile food units would meet
the City’s goal of promoting a wider variety of food options in the community, and the belief that
mobile food units may further add to the City’s commercial base by transforming into
established food service businesses in the future.
Small revisions to the draft ordinance amendment and permit were required by the Planning
Commission, and a current version of these documents is being provided to the City Council for
review and approval.
POLICY/PRACTICES CONSIDERATIONS: In amending the City Code, the Council is
establishing policy and ordinance to allow the transient food vendors to come into the City and
operate. The planning report outlines the pros and cons of this use and the Planning Commission
and ultimately the City Council will make the policy decision as to if and how this use will be
regulated.
Agenda Page 64
Mayor and Council Request for Action – February 3, 2014
Mobile Food Unit Licensing and Regulation Page 2 of 2
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Mobile Food Unit Licensing Regulation RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: In accordance with Council procedures, the Mayor and City
Council has the authority to approve or deny the draft ordinance amendment.
Submitted Through: Alan Brixius, City Planner
Responsible Person/Department: Alan Brixius, City Planner
Attachments: Planners Report Dated January 9, 2014
Ordinance No. 2014-02
Mobile Food Unit Permit
Agenda Page 65
22
MEMORANDUM
TO: Adam Nafstad
FROM: Alan Brixius/Michelle Barness
DATE: January 9, 2014
RE: Albertville – Food Truck Licensing and Regulation
FILE: 163.05 – 13.16
BACKGROUND
The City of Albertville has recently experienced requests from food truck vendors to be able to
operate in the community. City Ordinance does not currently provide standards specific to the
regulation of food trucks, which have thus far been allowed to operate under a transient
merchant license and a temporary outdoor seasonal sales permit. Currently food trucks are
operating at the Outlet Mall, where food options are currently limited, at public and semi-public
events, including the farmers market and Friendly City Days, and at the local hardware store,
an independent business.
The operation of food trucks in the community raises some questions. In the past, the City has
recommended pursuing opportunities for more restaurants, however the transient nature of
food trucks poses concerns with regards to potential impacts on other food related businesses.
Food trucks are not required to rent or purchase property to conduct their sales, but will
compete against established taxpaying restaurants that have invested in real estate. Should
the City deem this kind of competition appropriate, they will need to establish regulations for
the unique style of operation associated with mobile food vendors. An analysis of local and
regional standards pertaining to food trucks follows. The report goes on to provide
recommendations for adapting the City Ordinance to better regulate these uses in the
community.
ANALYSIS
Existing Local Regulation for Mobile Food Trucks. The City of Albertville currently
regulates the operation of mobile food trucks by requiring interested parties to attain a transient
merchant license (City Code Chapter 4) and a temporary outdoor seasonal sales permit
(Zoning Ordinance Section 1000.22). Neither City Code Chapter 4 nor Zoning Ordinance
Agenda Page 66
23
Section 1000.22 directly refers to the regulation of mobile food trucks, however mobile food
trucks can fall within the purview of the definitions provided for transient merchants and
temporary outdoor seasonal sales, which are as follows:
Transient Merchant: Any person, whether as principal, employee or agent, who
engages in, does, or transacts any temporary or transient business in the city, either in
one locality or traveling from place to place in the city selling goods, wares, and
merchandise, and who, for the purpose of carrying on such business, hires, leases,
occupies or uses a building, structure, vehicle, property, or other place for the
exhibition and sale of such goods, wares, and merchandise. (Ord. 2004-14) (Chapter
4, Section 4-4-2 Definitions)
Temporary Outdoor Seasonal Sales: The temporary sale of agricultural produce,
Christmas trees, flowers and the like sold and conducted by the operators of a
legitimate, established business within the appropriate zoning district in the city.
(Zoning Ordinance Section 200.2 Definitions)
Regulations for transient merchants and those addressing temporary outdoor seasonal sales
generally overlap, and include standards addressing the time and duration of sales, operation
location, and parking and traffic circulation provisions. Transient merchant regulations also
define noise level expectations and overnight storage limitations. Outdoor seasonal sale
regulations also address maintenance and presentation of the outdoor seasonal sale site.
Both the license and the permit require permission from the affected property owner, if different
than the applicant.
Food truck sales may be ongoing throughout the year, and are mobile in nature. As such,
regulation of the use via the transient merchant license alone should be appropriate. On the
other hand, the temporary outdoor seasonal sales permit is directed at short term sales, often
associated with a permanent business, in which case the regulation of food trucks does not
clearly apply. In moving ahead with adapting the Ordinance for the regulation of food trucks,
staff recommends focusing on the transient merchant code and not outdoor seasonal sales.
State Regulation of Mobile Food Trucks.
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 157 Food, Beverage, and Lodging Establishments
According to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 157 Food, Beverage, and Lodging Establishments, a
license is required annually for anyone engaged in the business of conducting a food and
beverage service establishment. To acquire a license, applicants must make application, pay
the required licensure fee, and receive approval for their operation, including plan review
approval. Food truck licensure in Wright County is provided by the Minnesota Health
Department.
State Statutes directly address regulation of mobile food trucks, which the State refers to as
“mobile food units,” or MFUs. MN Statutes Chapter 157 provides the following definition for
food establishments of a temporary or mobile nature, from Section 157.15 Definitions:
Agenda Page 67
24
Food cart. A food and beverage service establishment that is a non-motorized vehicle
self-propelled by the operator.
Mobile food unit. A food and beverage service establishment that is a vehicle
mounted unit, either:
(1) motorized or trailered, operating no more than 21 days annually at any one place,
or operating more than 21 days annually at any one place with the approval of the
regulatory authority as defined in Minnesota Rules, part 4626.0020, subpart 70; or
(2) operated in conjunction with a permanent business licensed under this chapter or
chapter 28A at the site of the permanent business by the same individual or company,
and readily movable, without disassembling, for transport to another location.
Seasonal permanent food stand. A food and beverage service establishment which is
a permanent food service stand or building, but which operates no more than 21 days
annually.
Seasonal temporary food stand. A food and beverage service establishment that is a
food stand which is disassembled and moved from location to location, but which
operates no more than 21 days annually at any one location.
Minnesota Food Code, from Minnesota Rules Chapter 4626
The Minnesota Food Code contains the minimum design, installation, construction, operation
and maintenance requirements for all food establishments in Minnesota. These rules are the
standards with which food establishments must comply in the handling, storing, preparation
and service of food to the retail food consumer. Chapter 4626 defines a “food establishment”
as including an operation that is conducted in a “mobile, stationary, temporary, or permanent
facility, location, or cart, regardless of whether consumption is on or off the premises.”
MN Food Code Chapter 4626 provides very specific regulation of mobile food establishments,
as described in Section 4626.1860 Mobile Food Establishments; Seasonal Temporary Food
Stands; Seasonal Permanent Food Stands. This section of State code regulates different
aspects of food truck operation, including mechanical systems, water supply and disposal,
washing and sanitation facilities, waste disposal, food preparation and cooking areas, and food
preservation/refrigeration. A complete list of state standards can be found in Section
4626.1860.
Minnesota Department of Health
As indicated earlier, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is the agency responsible for
plan review and licensing for mobile food units in Wright County. The MDH enforces
regulations provided for Mobile Food Units (MFUs) in MN Statutes Chapter157 and MN Food
Code Chapter 4626. The MDH requires individuals or groups interested in operating an MFU
to submit a “Temporary/Seasonal Plan Review Application” and required fees at least 30 days
prior to beginning new construction or remodeling of an MFU. .
Agenda Page 68
25
The MDH plan review process follows these steps:
1. Applicants submit the plan review application, required information and appropriate fee.
2. MDH plan review staff reviews plans in the order they are received.
3. MDH plan review staff calls or emails applicants when review starts, and to request any
needed additional information.
4. When review is complete, applicants receive a letter reporting the findings of the review
(approval or denial). Plan approval letters will include a license application.
5. Applicants begin construction after approval to avoid costly corrections and delayed
openings.
6. Applicants submit the license application and appropriate fee.
7. Applicants contact MDH to request a preoperational inspection.
Plan submission must include the following:
• A completed plan review application with the required fees.
• Intended menu.
• Description of how food will be prepared.
• Easily readable floor plan layout indicating the location of all equipment (e.g., cooking
equipment, hood, refrigerators, food prep counters, hand washing sink(s), three-
compartment sink, and food prep sink).
• Finish schedule for floors, walls and ceilings.
• Manufacturer’s equipment specifications sheets for all equipment, including sinks.
• Size of water heater, and fresh water and wastewater holding tanks.
• Finishes for counters and cabinetry.
• Commissary agreement, if required.
• List of intended, scheduled events or areas of operation if known.
In addition, the MDH requires that all plans address the following:
• All food and beverage equipment must meet the standards of NSF International and
have an identifiable marking indicating that it meets these standards.
• A ventilation hood and mechanical exhaust system that meets the standards of NSF
International must be provided for cooking equipment that produces grease laden
vapors, smoke, fumes or condensation.
• A three-compartment sink required for sanitizing utensils, dishes and equipment. The
sink must be supplied with hot and cold running water.
• A separate hand washing sink is required and must be supplied with hot and cold
running water, soap and paper towels.
• The flooring must be noncorrosive metal or vinyl flooring or equivalent.
• The interior wall and ceiling surfaces must be smooth, nonabsorbent and easily
cleanable.
Once plans are approved by the MDH and construction or renovation of the MFU is completed,
applicants need to follow the following steps to get licensed:
1. Apply for a license. With the MHD plan approval letter, applicants will receive a license
application. The license fee is separate from the plan review fee. Applicants submit the
Agenda Page 69
26
completed license application and required license fee before contacting MDH to request
a preoperational inspection. They should contact MDH 14 days in advance to schedule a
preoperational inspection.
2. Have the MF unit inspected. Applicants bring the MFU or STF to an agreed public
location (e.g., MDH office) for the preoperational inspection. MDH staff cannot conduct
inspections at a private residence. All equipment should be present (with the exception of
food, which should not be brought into the MFU or STF until MDH approves the unit for
operation).
3. Post the license and decal during operation. MDH issues a license and permanent decal
after approval. Applicants post the original license and permanent decal in the unit at all
times. The license is valid for one calendar year (January 1 through December 31), and
must be renewed annually.
The MHD publication “Mobile Food Unit and Seasonal Temporary Food Stand Construction
Guide” provides specific information on equipment and operations regulations for MFUs, which
are in line with requirements as provided in MN Food Code Chapter 4626, described earlier in
the report.
DISCUSSION
Considerations for Updating the Albertville City Code for Mobile Food Units
The existing Ordinance addresses the transient or temporary nature of operations in a general
way. For example, the temporary sale of Christmas trees at a permanent location year after
year is currently lumped in with retail food sales from a mobile food truck found throughout the
community. As described earlier in the report, the State regulates mobile food units in a
specific way, with special attention to managing the health and sanitation aspects of the use in
line with how a restaurant would be regulated. It would be difficult for Albertville to incorporate
detailed food regulations in the licensure for transient merchants, because as indicated, not all
transient merchants have food operations. However, the City Ordinance can be updated to
define and identify mobile food units as a separate transient use requiring licensure from the
City. The City may wish to group other food related transient uses (food trailers and food
carts) in with the mobile food unit transient use license. This will allow the City to provide
additional regulations specific to these uses in the Ordinance. In addition, once mobile food
units have been clearly defined as a transient use in the Ordinance, the requirement for State
licensure and regulation can be directly referenced in the City’s licensure requirements.
As the temporary outdoor seasonal sales permit is intended to regulate one time, consecutive
day outdoor sales, Mobile Food Unit (MFU) regulation would be better served in combination
with transient merchant regulations provided in Chapter 4 of the City Code, which cater to
ongoing and transient outdoor operations. Concerns that should be addressed in amending
Chapter 4 for mobile food unit licensure include verifying that MFUs have been licensed
through the MN Health Department, requiring evidence that the property owner has given
permission for MFU operations to proceed, controlling location of MFUs on a property so that
they are not located within public right of ways or required parking stalls, and don’t otherwise
obstruct site circulation, establishing guidelines for appropriate setup and maintenance of MFU
Agenda Page 70
27
sites, and providing for a buffer between MFUs and established restaurants or coffee shops.
In addition, the hours of operation for MFUs should be amended to provide extended hours of
operation from that currently allowed transient merchants. Code requires transient operations
to cease by 4:00 PM, but MFUs can better serve food retail needs over both the lunch and
dinner hours, in which case hours of operation should extend into the evening.
The operation of MFUs is appropriate in commercial, industrial, or public/institutional districts,
which should be identified in Chapter 4 licensing regulations for MFUs. In addition, mobile
food units and food carts should be defined in Zoning Ordinance Chapter 0200 Rules and
Definitions.
Finally, the City may need to integrate regulations specific to ice cream trucks in the food truck
transient merchant license. These trucks serve pre-packaged food as opposed to prepared
food and are located in a greater variety of zoning districts, and as such require less stringent
regulatory conditions.
RECOMMENDATION
Albertville City Code Chapter 4 Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants should be
amended to provide a definition for mobile food units (under Section 4-4-2 Definitions), and to
establish additional specific regulations for mobile food units applying for a transient merchant
license (under Section 4-4-6 Additional Restrictions for Transient Merchants). Mobile food
units should adhere to all general transient merchant regulations provided in Chapter 4.
Additional requirements specific to mobile food units have been provided in a draft ordinance
amendment attached to this report.
c: Sue Schwalbe
Kim Olson
Paul Heins
Mike Couri
Agenda Page 71
Page 1
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2014 - 02
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 4
(PEDDLERS, SOLICITORS AND TRANSIENT MERCHANTS), AND SECTION 200.2
(DEFINITIONS) OF CHAPTER 0200 (RULES AND DEFINITIONS) IN APPENDIX A
(ZONING ORDINANCE), OF THE 2005 ALBERTVILLE MUNICIPAL CITY CODE,
RELATING TO MOBILE FOOD UNIT (FOOD TRUCK) REGULATIONS
Section 1. Section 4-4-2 (Definitions) of Chapter 4 (Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient
Merchants) is hereby amended as follows:
4-4-2 DEFINITIONS
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this chapter, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
CANVASSER: Any person canvassing for funds door-to-door in the City on behalf of a
charitable, religious or nonprofit organization as defined in Internal Revenue Service Code
Section 501(c)(3).
MOBILE FOOD UNIT: A food and beverage service establishment that is a vehicle mounted
unit, such as:
(1) Motorized or trailered, operating no more than twenty-one (21) days annually at any one
place, or operating more than twenty-one (21) days annually at any one place with the approval
of the regulatory authority as defined in Minnesota Rules, part 4626.0020, subpart 70.
(2) Operated in conjunction with a permanent business licensed under Chapter 157 or Chapter
128A of the Minnesota State Statutes at the site of the permanent business by the same individual
or company, and readily movable, without disassembling, for transport to another location.
(3) Food Cart: A food and beverage service establishment that is a non-motorized vehicle self-
propelled by the operator.
(4) Ice Cream Truck: A motor vehicle utilized as the point of retail sales of pre-wrapped or
prepackaged ice cream, frozen yogurt, frozen custard, flavored frozen water or similar frozen
dessert products.
Agenda Page 72
City of Albertville
Ordinance 2014-02
Page 2
PEDDLER: Any person with no fixed place of business dealing in the City who travels around
from place to place, or street to street, carrying or transporting goods, or soliciting for all manner
of wares, services and merchandise, offering such wares, service or merchandise for sale or
making sales and delivering articles to purchasers.
SOLICITOR: Any person who goes from place to place and/or house to house soliciting or
taking or attempting to take orders for the purchase of any food, wares or merchandise, including
magazines, books, periodicals or personal property of any nature whatsoever for delivery in the
future, or orders for the performance of a service in or about the home or place of business, such
as furnace cleaning, roof repair or blacktopping.
TRANSIENT MERCHANT: Any person, whether as principal, employee or agent, who engages
in, does, or transacts any temporary or transient business in the City, either in one locality or
traveling from place to place in the City selling goods, wares, and merchandise, and who, for the
purpose of carrying on such business, hires, leases, occupies or uses a building, structure,
vehicle, property, or other place for the exhibition and sale of such goods, wares, and
merchandise. (Ord. 2004-14)
Section 2. Section 4-4-6 (Additional Restrictions for Transient Merchants) of Chapter 4
(Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants) is hereby amended as follows:
4-4-6 ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS FOR TRANSIENT MERCHANTS
F. Mobile food units (MFUs) and food carts are required to meet the additional following
standards:
1. MFUs must be licensed by the Minnesota Health Department, and must adhere to State
regulations for food trucks as provided in Food Code Chapter 4626.1860 Mobile Food
Establishments; Seasonal Temporary Food Stands; Seasonal Permanent Food Stands.
Evidence of the State license must be provided to the City as part of the local license
application.
2. MFUs operations are limited to the business, industrial, and public/institutional districts,
and are not permitted between the hours of ten o’clock (10:00) P.M. and eight o’clock
(8:00) A.M. Ice cream truck vendors may operate in all zoning districts, but must adhere
to the described hours of operation.
3. MFU sites shall be kept in a neat and orderly manner, and shall adhere to the following
site requirements:
Agenda Page 73
City of Albertville
Ordinance 2014-02
Page 3
a. Trash and/or recycling collection and cleanup must be provided.
b. MFUs must provide independent power supply which is screened from view.
Generators are permitted.
c. MFUs may not maintain or use outside sound amplifying equipment, televisions
or other similar visual entertainment devices, lights or noisemakers such as bells,
horns or whistles. Ice cream trucks traveling through a residential district may
have outdoor music or noise-making devices to announce their presence.
d. MFUs cannot obstruct the movement of pedestrians or vehicles or pose a hazard
to public safety.
e. MFUs shall be located on an asphalt or concrete surface.
f. MFUs may not be located within two hundred (200) feet of existing restaurants or
coffee shops, as measured from the MFU to the food service building.
g. MFUs must close during adverse weather conditions when shelter is not provided.
4. MFUs must be located on private property, and the applicant must provide written
consent from the property owner. However, MFUs may be located in a public park with
approval from the City, and ice cream trucks are allowed to operate within the public
right-of-way in residential districts.
5. Ice cream truck vendors are required to undergo a criminal background check prior to
operating in the community, at the cost of the applicant.
6. If MFU sites are found to be in non-compliance with any conditions as provided in
Chapter 4 of the Ordinance, the City reserves the right to revoke the MFU transient
merchant license.
Section 3. Section 200.2 (Definitions) of Chapter 0200 (Rules and Definitions) of Appendix A
(Zoning Ordinance) is hereby amended as follows:
200.2: DEFINITIONS:
TEMPORARY OUTDOOR SEASONAL SALES: The temporary sale of agricultural produce,
Christmas trees, flowers and the like sold and conducted by the operators of a legitimate,
established business within the appropriate zoning district in the city. City licensed mobile food
units and food carts as defined in Section 4-4-2 of this code do not fall within this definition, and
are exempt from temporary outdoor seasonal sale requirements as provided in Section 1000.22 of
the ordinance.
Agenda Page 74
City of Albertville
Ordinance 2014-02
Page 4
THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY
FOLLOWING ITS PASSAGE AND PUBLICATION.
Adopted by the Albertville City Council this3rd day of February 2014.
__________________________
Jillian Hendrickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 75
Page 1
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
MOBILE FOOD UNIT PERMIT NO. ____________
The City of Albertville Issues a Mobile Food Unit (MFU) Permit to
_____________________________________________
Provided the Following Conditions are Met and Satisfied:
1. This permit shall run for the calendar year _________ and will expire without further
action by the City of Albertville on ______________________.
2. The permit holder must provide property owner permission for mobile food unit
operations, for the property located at _____________________________________.
3. MFUs must be licensed by the Minnesota Health Department, and must adhere to State
regulations for food trucks as provided in Food Code Chapter 4626.1860 Mobile Food
Establishments; Seasonal Temporary Food Stands; Seasonal Permanent Food Stands.
4. MFU operations are limited to the business, industrial, and public/institutional districts,
and are not permitted between the hours of ten o’clock (10:00) P.M. and eight o’clock
(8:00) A.M. Ice cream truck vendors may operate in all zoning districts, but must adhere
to the described hours of operation.
5. MFU sites shall be kept in a neat and orderly manner, and shall adhere to the following
site requirements:
a. Trash and/or recycling collection and cleanup must be provided.
b. MFUs must provide independent power supply which is screened from view.
Generators are permitted.
c. MFUs may not maintain or use outside sound amplifying equipment, televisions
or other similar visual entertainment devices, lights or noisemakers such as bells,
horns or whistles. Ice cream trucks traveling through a residential zoning district
may have outdoor music or noise-making devices to announce their presence.
d. MFUs cannot obstruct the movement of pedestrians or vehicles or pose a hazard
to public safety.
e. MFUs shall be located on an asphalt or concrete surface.
f. MFUs may not be located within two hundred (200) feet of existing restaurants or
coffee shops, as measured from the MFU to the food service building.
g. MFUs must close during adverse weather conditions when shelter is not provided.
Agenda Page 76
Page 2
6. MFUs must be located on private property, and the applicant must provide written
consent from the property owner. However, MFUs may be located in a public park with
approval from the City, and ice cream trucks are allowed to operate within the public
right-of-way in residential districts.
7. Ice cream truck vendors are required to undergo a criminal background check prior to
operating in the community, at the cost of the applicant.
8. MFUs must adhere to all other applicable regulations provided in Chapter 4 of the
Albertville City Code.
9. Upon granting the Mobile Food Unit license, if the MFU site is found to be in non-
compliance with the conditions of this permit or mobile food unit regulations as provided
in Chapter 4 of the Albertville City Code, the MFU must meet criteria provided by the
City agent in order to become compliant, or the City reserves the right to revoke said
license.
In providing my signature, I agree to meet the criteria for mobile food unit licensing and
operations as described in the Mobile Food Unit Permit and Chapter 4 of the Albertville City
Code.
_________________________________________ Date:_____________________
Signature of MFU Operator
_________________________________________
Print Name
_________________________________________ Date:______________________
Kimberly A. Olson, Albertville City Clerk
Agenda Page 77
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Home Occupations Text Amendment.docx
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 30, 2014
SUBJECT: PLANNING - HOME OCCUPATION TEXT AMENDMENTS
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and Council consider the
following:
MOTION TO: Adopt Ordinance 2014-03 amending Appendix A, Zoning Ordinance of the
Albertville City Code related to changes to Section 200.2, Definitions; Chapter 1600, Home
Occupations; Chapter 3100, A-1 Agricultural District Accessory Uses; Chapter 3200, A-2
Agricultural Transitional District Accessory Uses; and Chapter 3250, R-1A Residential Low
Density Single Family District Permitted Uses
BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission met and held a public hearing on January 14,
2014, to consider proposed text amendments relating to the regulation of home occupations in
Albertville with a particular focus on the provision of in-home residential daycare.
A review of the ordinance found inconsistencies between ordinance sections as they relate to
residential daycare. Daycare facilities serving 12 or fewer persons in a single family dwelling
are a permitted use in all residential districts. However, residential daycare is also regulated
under Home Occupations (Chapter 1600) and requires a permit or license; this chapter is not
referenced in the residential district section noted above.
A list of State licensed daycare providers in Wright County found that approximately 40
residential daycare providers are currently licensed in Albertville. It is unlikely that any have
obtained home occupation permits or special home occupation licenses from the City.
Further review of the treatment of home occupations in the ordinance resulted in recommended
changes to apply to other low-intensity enterprises in residential districts. Permit fee changes for
home occupations were also recommended by the Planning Commission; these fee changes have
been adopted by the City Council.
KEY ISSUES: Given that there are approximately 40 residential daycare providers in
Albertville and the Zoning Ordinance contains conflicts regarding the regulation of this use, the
Planning Commission has recommended that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to accomplish
the following:
• Add language to the definition of “daycare facilities” to reference State rule definitions
for added clarity.
• Allow state licensed daycare facilities serving 14 or fewer persons in a single family
dwelling as a permitted accessory use in all residential districts (including A-1 and A-2),
subject to the standards outlined in Section 1600.4.A and B. This will provide for
Agenda Page 78
Mayor and Council Request for Action – February 3, 2014
Home Occupations Text Amendment Page 2 of 2
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Home Occupations Text Amendment.docx
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
congruence with State licensure capacity standards and address potential land use impacts
in residential neighborhoods. State licensing of residential daycare facilities does not
permit more than 14 children and a license at that capacity requires two caregivers.
Daycare facilities serving more than 14 children are considered center-based child care
by the State and would be required to be located in commercial districts in the City.
• Allow all other listed permitted home occupations as permitted accessory uses in all
residential districts, without requiring a permit or fee, subject to the standards outlined in
Section 1600.4.A. and B. These very low intensity uses include: art studio, dressmaking,
secretarial services, foster care, professional offices and teaching with musical, dancing
and other instructions which consists of no more than one pupil at a time, and similar
uses. These uses do not seem to rise to the level of needing a permit with administrative
review.
• Remove the requirement for a conditional use permit for special home occupations in
Section 1600.3.B and issue permits for these uses administratively with a $30 license fee.
The uses identified as special home occupations (barber and beauty services, daycare-
group nursery, photography studio, group lessons, saw sharpening, small appliances,
small engine repair, and other enterprises that may utilize an outside employee) may have
greater impacts on adjacent properties and should be subject to staff review, but do not
rise to the level of requiring Planning Commission and City Council review and higher
permit fees.
POLICY/PRACTICES CONSIDERATIONS: These changes will allow for existing home
occupation uses (including home daycare) to continue and be subject to performance standards,
reduce the requirements for home occupations that have little or no impact on adjacent
properties, and provide for additional regulatory oversight for home occupations that may have a
greater land use impact in residential neighborhoods.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The reduced permit/license fees are considered to be
sufficient to cover the cost of administrative review of special home occupation applications.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: None known.
Responsible Person/Department: Alan Brixius, City Planner
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments: Planning Report dated January 9, 2014
Ordinance 2014-03
Agenda Page 79
34
MEMORANDUM
TO: Adam Nafstad
FROM: Emily Shively/Alan Brixius
DATE: January 9, 2014
RE: Albertville – Residential Daycare Providers and Home Occupation
Permitting
FILE: 163.05 - 13.12
BACKGROUND
A complaint was received in mid-October regarding a daycare being run out of a
residential property located at 11600 52nd Street NE. The complainant stated that there
was excessive noise coming from the property and inquired as to the regulation of home
daycare and whether there were any conditions related to noise impact on adjoining
properties.
REGULATION OF HOME DAYCARE
State Licensure. Home daycare facilities are licensed by the state. Licensing and
regulation is delegated to county human services departments that are responsible for
issuing licenses, ensuring compliance with regulations, and handling complaints. The
licensing process includes a home visit by the county human services licensor.
Licensees are required to comply with all local ordinances.
The Minnesota Administrative Rule also identifies care providers who are exempt from
licensure (9502.0325 Subp.3). These include:
A. Day care provided by a relative to only related children; or
B. Day care provided to children from a single, unrelated family, for any length of
time; or
C. Day care provided for a cumulative total of less than 30 days in any 12-month
period; or
D. The exclusions contained in items A and B are mutually exclusive.
Agenda Page 80
35
Zoning Ordinance. A review of the ordinance found inconsistencies between
ordinance sections as they relate to residential daycare. Daycare facilities serving 12 or
fewer persons in a single family dwelling are a permitted use in all residential districts.
However, residential daycare is also regulated under Home Occupations (Chapter
1600) and requires a permit or license; this chapter is not referenced in the residential
district section noted above.
Chapter 1600 distinguishes between “family day care” which is a permitted home
occupation and requires a home occupation permit ($30 fee and administrative
issuance) and “daycare - group nursery” which requires a special home occupation
license “which shall be applied for, reviewed and disposed of in accordance with the
provisions of Chapter 400 of this Ordinance.” The special home occupation license fee
ranges from $300/$1,000; Chapter 400 outlines the conditional use permit process and
review standards, including Planning Commission and City Council review.
Definitions. The Zoning Ordinance does not provide definitions for either family
daycare or daycare group nursery; however, Minnesota Administrative Rules Chapter
9502, Licensing of Day Care Facilities provides the following related definitions:
Family day care. "Family day care" means day care for no more than ten
children at one time of which no more than six are under school age. The
licensed capacity must include all children of any caregiver when the children are
present in the residence.
Group family day care. "Group family day care" means day care for no more
than 14 children at any one time. The total number of children includes all
children of any caregiver when the children are present in the residence.
These State definitions appear to correlate with the intended differentiation in the
Chapter 1600 of the Zoning Ordinance. However, they are still inconsistent with the “12
or fewer persons” reference in the residential district section. Further, the definition for
“Daycare Facility” in Chapter 200 of the Zoning Ordinance does not reference number
at all:
DAYCARE FACILITY: Any state licensed facility, public or private, which, for gain
or otherwise, regularly provides one or more persons with care, training,
supervision, habilitation, rehabilitation, or developmental guidance on a regular
basis, for periods of less than twenty four (24) hours per day, in a place other
than the person's own home. "Daycare facilities" include, but are not limited to:
family daycare homes, group family daycare homes, daycare centers, day
nurseries, nursery schools, daytime activity centers, day treatment programs,
and day services.
Zoning Ordinance Requirements and General Provisions. Section 1600.4 lists
conditions that all home occupations must comply with and provides a framework for
ensuring that home occupation activities do not have a detrimental impact on adjoining
properties. The provisions address noise and nuisance issues, hours of operation, and
Agenda Page 81
36
parking along with other standards that relate to compatibility of the use with the
surrounding neighborhood.
COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION
A list of licensed home daycare providers can be found online at the MN Department of
Human Services website (Exhibit A). The property where the complaint was generated
is listed as currently licensed. The DHS online report notes that the initial effective date
for the license at this address was June 19, 2006 and the current license was issued on
June 1, 2013 and will expire on June 1, 2015. The licensee has a capacity of 12
children (10 years of age and younger) at this property. This particular license is for
Group Family Day Care (C2) which requires one adult caregiver and allows up to 10
children under kindergarten age of which no more than one may be an infant and one
may be a toddler (Exhibit B).
There is no record of a home occupation permit being issued by the City for this
address; however, the licensed capacity at this residence is permitted under the
residential district standards.
A review of State licensed providers in Wright County found that 40 residential daycare
providers are currently licensed in Albertville. It is unlikely that any have obtained home
occupation permits or special home occupation licenses from the City.
Complaints regarding licensed (or illegal, un-licensed providers) are handled by Wright
County Human Services Child Care Licensing (763-682-7485 or via e-mail
to dclicensing@co.wright.mn.us). The intake social worker will gather relevant
information and pass it on to a licensing inspector. Complainant information is kept
confidential.
In this case, the complaint is regarding a noise/nuisance issue that is regulated by the
City’s Zoning Ordinance (either under Chapter 5 or Chapter 1600). However, as the
proprietor has not received a City permit, enforcement proceedings are not entirely
straightforward. Furthermore, due to the inconsistencies in the Zoning Ordinance, it is
unclear whether or not the provider is even required to have a home occupation permit.
RECOMMENDATION
Regarding the specific complaint, the care provider at 11600 52nd Street NE could be
contacted and made aware that a noise complaint has been made. This could be
handled in the same or similar manner for any noise complaint under Chapter 5. The
complainant may be advised that the home in question is a licensed daycare provider
and this type of home daycare is a permitted use in the residential district. Any further
issues or concerns should be addressed to Wright County Human Services.
Agenda Page 82
37
Given that there are currently 40 residential daycare providers in Albertville and the
Zoning Ordinance contains conflicts regarding this use, the City needs to determine how
to proceed with permitting requirements for residential daycare providers. The City may
choose to bring existing providers into compliance with the home occupation
requirements of the ordinance and dedicate sufficient staff resources to that effort, or
pursue an ordinance amendment that describes different terms and conditions for
providing residential daycare services in the City.
We are recommending that the Zoning Ordinance be amended to accomplish the
following:
• Add language to the definition of “daycare facilities” to reference State rule
definitions for added clarity.
• Allow state licensed daycare facilities serving 14 or fewer persons in a single family
dwelling as a permitted accessory use in all residential districts (including A-1 and A-
2), subject to the standards outlined in Section 1600.4.A and B (this section should
be amended to allow hours of operation to begin at 6:00 AM to allow for early drop-
off times). This will provide for congruence with State licensure capacity standards
and address potential land use impacts in residential neighborhoods. State licensing
of residential daycare facilities does not permit more than 14 children and a license
at that capacity requires two caregivers. Daycare facilities serving more than 14
children are considered center based child care by the State and would be required
to be located in commercial districts in the City.
• Allow all other listed permitted home occupations as permitted accessory uses in
all residential districts, without requiring a permit or fee, subject to the standards
outlined in Section 1600.4.A. and B. These very low intensity uses include: art
studio, dressmaking, secretarial services, foster care, professional offices and
teaching with musical, dancing and other instructions which consists of no more than
one pupil at a time, and similar uses. These uses do not seem to rise to the level of
needing a permit with administrative review.
• Remove the requirement for a conditional use permit for special home
occupations in Section 1600.3.B and issue permits for these uses
administratively with a $30 license fee. The uses identified as special home
occupations (barber and beauty services, daycare-group nursery, photography
studio, group lessons, saw sharpening, small appliances and small engine repair)
may have greater impacts on adjacent properties and should be subject to staff
review, but do not rise to the level of requiring Planning Commission and City
Council review and higher permit fees.
These changes will allow for existing home occupation uses (including home daycare)
to continue and be subject to performance standards, reduce the requirements for home
occupations that have little or no impact on adjacent properties, and provide for
additional regulatory oversight for home occupations that may have a greater land use
impact in residential neighborhoods. The proposed text amendments are attached for
Planning Commission consideration.
Agenda Page 83
38
Attachment A Chapter 1600: Home Occupations (with proposed amendments)
Attachment B Draft Ordinance Amendments
c: Sue Schwalbe
Kim Olson
Paul Heins
Mike Couri
Agenda Page 84
39 Attachment A
Chapter 1600: HOME OCCUPATIONS
Proposed Amendments
1600.1: PURPOSE:
The purpose of this chapter is to prevent unfair competition with business districts and to provide
a means through the establishment of specific standards and procedures by which home
occupations can be conducted in residential neighborhoods without jeopardizing the health,
safety and general welfare of the surrounding neighborhood. In addition, this chapter is intended
to provide a mechanism enabling the distinction between permitted home occupations and
special or customarily "more sensitive" home occupations so that permitted home occupations
may be allowed through an administrative process rather than a legislative hearing process. (Ord.
1988-12, 12-19-1988)
1600.2: APPLICATION:
Subject to the nonconforming use provisions of this ordinance, all occupations conducted in the
home shall comply with the provisions of this chapter. This chapter shall not be construed,
however, to apply to home occupations accessory to farming. (Ord. 1988-12, 12-19-1988)
1600.3: PROCEDURES AND PERMITS:
A. Permitted Home Occupation: Any permitted home occupation, as defined in this chapter,
shall be a permitted accessory use without requiring the issuance of a city license provided they
comply with the requirements of Sections 1600.4.A. and 1600.4.B. of this ordinance. shall
require a permitted home occupation license. Such license shall be issued subject to the
conditions of this chapter, other applicable city regulations and state law. This license may be
issued by the zoning administrator or his agent based upon proof of compliance with the
provisions of this chapter. Application for the permitted home occupation license shall be
accompanied by a fee established by section 100.10 of this ordinance. If the administrator denies
a permitted home occupation license to an applicant, the applicant may appeal the decision to the
board of adjustment and appeals, which shall make the final decision. The license shall remain in
force and effect until such time as there has been a change in conditions or until such time as the
provisions of this chapter have been changed. At such time as the city has reason to believe that
either event has taken place, a public hearing shall be held before the planning commission. The
council shall make a final decision on whether or not the permit holder is entitled to the license.
B. Special Home Occupation: Any home occupation which does not meet the specific
requirements for a permitted home occupation, as defined in this chapter, shall require a special
home occupation license which shall be applied for, reviewed and disposed of in accordance
with the provisions of chapter 400 of this ordinance. Such license shall be issued subject to the
conditions of this chapter, other applicable city regulations and state law. This license may be
issued by the zoning administrator or his agent based upon proof of compliance with the
provisions of this chapter. Application for the permitted home occupation license shall be
accompanied by a fee established by section 100.10 of this ordinance. If the administrator denies
a special home occupation license to an applicant, the applicant may appeal the decision to the
city council, which shall make the final decision. The license shall remain in force and effect
Agenda Page 85
40 Attachment A
until such time as there has been a change in conditions, a violation of the terms of the license,
sale of the house, or until such time as the provisions of this chapter have been changed. At such
time as the city has reason to believe that either event has taken place, a public hearing shall be
held before the planning commission. The council shall make a final decision on whether or not
the permit holder is entitled to retain the license.
C. Declaration Of Conditions: The planning commission and the councilzoning
administrator may impose such conditions of the granting of a special home occupation license
as may be necessary to carry out the purpose and provisions of this chapter.
D. Effect Of License: A special home occupation license may be issued for a period of one
year, after which the license may be renewed for periods of up to three (3) years each. Each
application for license renewal shall, however, be processed in accordance with the procedural
requirements of the initial special home occupation license.
E. Lapse Of Special Home Occupation License By Nonuse: Whenever, within one year after
granting a license, the use as permitted by the license shall not have been initiated, then such
license shall become null and void unless a petition for extension of time in which to complete
the work has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing and filed
with the zoning administrator at least thirty (30) days before the expiration of the original
license. There shall be no charge for the filing of such petition. The request for extension shall
state facts showing a good faith attempt to initiate the use. Such petition shall be presented to the
planning commission for a recommendation and to the council for a decision.
F. Reconsideration: Whenever an application for a license has been considered and denied
by the citycouncil, a similar application for a license affecting substantially the same property
shall not be considered again by the planning commission or council for at least six (6) months
from the date of its denial unless a decision to reconsider such matter is made by not less than
four-fifths (4/5) vote of the entire city council.
G. Reiteration Of License: An applicant shall not have a vested right to a license renewal by
reason of having obtained a previous license. In applying for and accepting a license, the license
holder agrees that his monetary investment in the home occupation will be fully amortized over
the life of the license and that a license renewal will not be needed to amortize the investment.
Each application for the renewal of a license will be reviewed without taking into consideration
that a previous license has been granted. The previous granting or renewal of a license shall not
constitute a precedent or basis for the renewal of a license. (Ord. 1988-12, 12-19-1988; amd.
2005 Code)
1600.4: REQUIREMENTS; GENERAL PROVISIONS:
All home occupations shall comply with the following general provisions and, according to
definition, the applicable requirement provisions.
A. General Provisions:
1. No home occupation shall produce light glare, noise, odor or vibration that will in
any way have an objectionable effect upon adjacent or nearby property.
Agenda Page 86
41 Attachment A
2. No equipment shall be used in the home occupation which will create electrical
interference to surrounding properties.
3. Any home occupation shall be clearly incidental and secondary to the residential
use of the premises, should not change the residential character thereof, and shall result in
no incompatibility or disturbance to the surrounding residential uses.
4. No home occupation shall require internal or external alterations or involve
construction features not customarily found in dwellings except where required to
comply with local and state fire and police recommendations.
5. There shall be no exterior storage of equipment or materials used in the home
occupation, except personal automobiles used in the home occupation may be parked on
the site.
6. The home occupation shall meet all applicable fire and building codes.
7. There shall be no exterior display or exterior signs or interior display or interior
signs which are visible from outside the dwelling with the exception of directional and
identification/business signs to the extent authorized by the provisions of the city code
relating to signs.
8. All home occupations shall comply with all Albertville city regulations.
9. No home occupation shall be conducted between the hours of ten o'clock (10:00)
P.M. and seven six o'clock (76:00) A.M. unless said occupation is contained entirely
within the principal building and will not require any on street parking facilities.
10. Home occupations shall not create a parking demand in excess of that which can
be accommodated in an existing driveway, where no vehicle is parking closer than fifteen
feet (15') from the curb line or edge of paved surface.
B. Requirements; Permitted Home Occupation:
1. No person other than those who customarily reside on the premises shall be
employed.
2. All permitted home occupations shall be conducted entirely within the principal
building and may not be conducted in an accessory building.
3. Permitted home occupations include, and are limited to: art studio, dressmaking,
secretarial services, state licensed in home daycare facilities serving fourteen (14) or
fewer childrenfamily daycare, foster care, professional offices and teaching with musical,
dancing and other instructions which consists of no more than one pupil at a time, and
similar uses.
Agenda Page 87
42 Attachment A
4. The home occupation shall not involve any of the following: repair service or
manufacturing which requires equipment other than found in a home; teaching which
customarily consists of more than one pupil at a time; over the counter sale of
merchandise produced off the premises.
C. Requirements; Special Home Occupation:
1. No person, other than a resident, shall conduct the special home occupation,
except where the applicant can satisfactorily prove unusual or unique conditions or need
for nonresident assistance and that this exception would not compromise the intent of this
ordinance.
2. Examples of special home occupations include: barber and beauty services, state
licensed daycare facilities serving 14 or fewer children with two or more
employeesdaycare-group nursery, photography studio, group lessons, saw sharpening,
small appliances and small engine repair and the like.
3. The special home occupation may involve any of the following: stock in trade
incidental to the performance of the service, repair service or manufacturing which
requires equipment other than customarily found in a home, the teaching with musical,
dancing and other instruction of more than one pupil at a time.
4. Special home occupations may be allowed to accommodate their parking demand
through utilization of on street parking. In such case where on street parking facilities are
necessary, however, the council shall maintain the right to establish the maximum
number of on street spaces permitted and increase or decrease that maximum number
when and where changing conditions require additional review. (Ord. 1988-12, 12-19-
1988; amd. 2005 Code)
1600.5: NONCONFORMING USE:
Existing home occupations lawfully existing on the effective date hereof may continue as
nonconforming uses. They shall, however, be required to obtain licenses for their continued
operation. Any existing home occupation that is discontinued for a period of more than one
hundred eighty (180) days, or is in violation of the provisions of this ordinance under which it
was initially established, shall be brought into conformity with the provisions of this chapter.
(Ord. 1988-12, 12-19-1988)
1600.6: INSPECTION:
The city hereby reserves the right upon issuing any home occupation license to inspect the
premises in which the occupation is being conducted to ensure compliance with the provisions of
this chapter or any conditions additionally imposed. (Ord. 1988-12, 12-19-1988)
Agenda Page 88
Page 1
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO. 2014-03
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING APPENDIX A – ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE
ALBERTVILLE CITY CODE RELATED TO CHANGES TO SECTION 200.2,
DEFINITIONS; CHAPTER 1600, HOME OCCUPATIONS; CHAPTER 3100, A-1
AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT ACCESSORY USES; CHAPTER 3200, A-2
AGRICULTURAL TRANSITIONAL DISTRICT ACCESSORY USES; AND CHAPTER
3250, R-1A, RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY SINGLE-FAMILY DISTRICT
PERMITTED USES
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE ORDAINS:
Section 1. Chapter 0200 Rules and Definitions, Section 200.2 Definitions of the Albertville
City Code is hereby amended to add the following underlined text:
DAYCARE FACILITY: Any state licensed facility, public or private, which, for gain or
otherwise, regularly provides one or more persons with care, training, supervision,
habilitation, rehabilitation, or developmental guidance on a regular basis, for periods of
less than twenty four (24) hours per day, in a place other than the person's own home.
"Daycare facilities" include, but are not limited to: family daycare homes, group family
daycare homes, daycare centers, day nurseries, nursery schools, daytime activity centers,
day treatment programs, and day services as further defined by the state.
Section 2. Chapter 1600 Home Occupations, Section 1600.3. Procedures and Permits of the
Albertville City Code is hereby amended to repeal the strikeouts and add the following
underlined text:
A. Permitted Home Occupation: Any permitted home occupation, as defined in this
chapter, shall be a permitted accessory use without requiring the issuance of a city license
provided they comply with the performance standards of Section 1600.4.A. and 1600.4.B
of this ordinance shall require a permitted home occupation license. Such license shall be
issued subject to the conditions of this chapter, other applicable city regulations and state
law. This license may be issued by the zoning administrator or his agent based upon
proof of compliance with the provisions of this chapter. Application for the permitted
home occupation license shall be accompanied by a fee established by section 100.10 of
this ordinance. If the administrator denies a permitted home occupation license to an
applicant, the applicant may appeal the decision to the board of adjustment and appeals,
which shall make the final decision. The license shall remain in force and effect until
such time as there has been a change in conditions or until such time as the provisions of
this chapter have been changed. At such time as the city has reason to believe that either
Agenda Page 89
City of Albertville
Ordinance 2014-03
Page 2
event has taken place, a public hearing shall be held before the planning commission. The
council shall make a final decision on whether or not the permit holder is entitled to the
license.
B. Special Home Occupation: Any home occupation which does not meet the specific
requirements for a permitted home occupation, as defined in this chapter, shall require a
special home occupation license which shall be applied for, reviewed and disposed of in
accordance with the provisions of chapter 400 of this ordinance. Such license shall be
issued subject to the conditions of this chapter, other applicable city regulations and state
law. This license may be issued by the zoning administrator or his agent based upon
proof of compliance with the provisions of this chapter. Application for the permitted
home occupation license shall be accompanied by a fee established by section 100.10 of
this ordinance. If the administrator denies a special home occupation license to an
applicant, the applicant may appeal the decision to the city council, which shall make the
final decision. The license shall remain in force and effect until such time as there has
been a change in conditions or until such time as the provisions of this chapter have been
changed. At such time as the city has reason to believe that either event has taken place, a
public hearing shall be held before the planning commission. The council shall make a
final decision on whether or not the permit holder is entitled to the license.
C. Declaration Of Conditions: The planning commission and the council zoning
administrator may impose such conditions of the granting of a special home occupation
license as may be necessary to carry out the purpose and provisions of this chapter.
Section 3. Chapter 1600 Home Occupations, Section 1600.4.A. Requirements; General
Provisions of the Albertville City Code is hereby amended to repeal the strikeouts and add the
following underlined text:
9. No home occupation shall be conducted between the hours of ten o'clock (10:00) P.M.
and seven o'clock (7:00) six o’clock (6:00) A.M. unless said occupation is contained
entirely within the principal building and will not require any on street parking facilities.
Section 4. Chapter 1600 Home Occupations, Section 1600.4.B. Requirements; Permitted Home
Occupation of the Albertville City Code is hereby amended to repeal the strikeouts and add the
following underlined text:
3. Permitted home occupations include, and are limited to: art studio, dressmaking,
secretarial services, state licensed daycare facilities serving 14 or fewer children family
daycare, foster care, professional offices and teaching with musical, dancing and other
instructions which consists of no more than one pupil at a time, and similar uses.
Section 5. Chapter 1600 Home Occupations, Section 1600.4.C. Requirements; Special Home
Occupation of the Albertville City Code is hereby amended to repeal the strikeouts and add the
following underlined text:
Agenda Page 90
City of Albertville
Ordinance 2014-03
Page 3
2. Examples of special home occupations include: barber and beauty services, state
licensed daycare facilities serving 14 or fewer children with two or more employees
daycare-group nursery, photography studio, group lessons, saw sharpening, small
appliances and small engine repair and the like.
Section 6. Chapter 3250 R-1A Residential Low Density Single-Family District, Section
3250.2 Permitted Uses of the Albertville City Code is hereby amended to repeal the strikeouts:
Daycare facilities serving twelve (12) or fewer persons in a single-family dwelling.
Section 7. Chapter 3100 A-1 Agricultural Rural District, Section 3100.3 Accessory Uses of
the Albertville City Code is hereby amended to add the following underlined text:
Home occupations as regulated by chapter 1600 of this ordinance. This includes state
licensed daycare facilities serving fourteen (14) or fewer persons in a single-family
dwelling provided they comply with the performance standards outlined in Section
1600.4.A. and 1600.4.B.
Section 8. Chapter 3200 A-2 Agricultural Transitional District, Section 3200.3 Accessory
Uses of the Albertville City Code is hereby amended to add the following underlined text:
Home occupations as regulated by Chapter 1600 of this ordinance. This includes state
licensed daycare facilities serving fourteen (14) or fewer persons in a single-family
dwelling provided they comply with the performance standards outlined in Section
1600.4.A. and 1600.4.B.
Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon passage and publication.
Adopted by the Albertville City Council this 3rd day of February 2014.
________________________________
Jillian Hendrickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Kimberly Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 91
Mayor and Council Communication
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Goals Priorities RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 30, 2014
SUBJECT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT – 2012 VISIONING STUDY – GOALS AND PRIORITIES
IMPLEMENTATION
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and City Council consider
the following: 2012 Visioning goals and priorities and outline your priorities for 2014, providing
direction to staff.
BACKGROUND: The 2012 Visioning Study addressed issues and opportunities in the
community, and identified goals, priorities, and strategies to address each issue. The study was
intended to provide direction to the City in its planning, administration, and investment efforts
over the next 20 to 30 years. In 2013 City staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council
addressed a number of these project priorities, and a number of issues will still need to be
addressed in the future. Planning staff would like the Council to review priorities from the 2012
Visioning Study and progress made on those priorities through 2013, to provide a
recommendation of renewal of stated priorities. The Council should also make recommendations
for any changes to stated goals and priorities, reflective of new issues and opportunities that have
arisen over the last year.
2012 Vision Study Goal Statements:
Small Town Atmosphere:
Goal 1: Maintain and protect Albertville’s small town atmosphere and identity through long
range planning.
Pace of Growth:
Goal 1: Manage growth that provides quality development and does not fiscally burden the
community.
Residential:
Goal 1: Maintain and build attractive residential neighborhoods.
Goal 2: Provide a variety of housing options to meet the life cycle needs of Albertville residents.
Commercial:
Goal 1: Promote commercial development by taking advantage of the City’s access to
Interchange 94, and the growing population of Albertville and its adjoining communities.
Industrial:
Goal 1: Promote continued industrial development in order to expand local employment
opportunities and the City’s tax base.
Agenda Page 92
Mayor and Council Request for Action – February 3, 2014
Goals and Priorities Page 2 of 3
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Goals Priorities RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
Economic Development:
Goal 1: The Vision Committee identified commercial and industrial growth as a priority for the
community. The City will become more aggressive in its economic development promotion
efforts.
Public Facilities:
Goal 1: Ensure public facilities are designed and constructed to address the City’s long range
needs, facilitate development, and contribute to the quality of life in Albertville.
Finance:
Goal 1: Maintain Albertville as a financially sound, self-sustaining community.
2012 Vision Study Project Priorities (listed according to community support, as identified
in a May 2012 Visioning Study workshop):
• Complete I-94/County Road 19 freeway access Phases I and II (Phase I Complete 2012)
• Extension of water under County Road 18 to the golf course (Complete 2013)
• Develop senior housing with services (2013 Approval/2014 Construction)
• Maintain small town character of Albertville (on-going)
• Keep guided commercial and industrial land use patterns and zoning as is
• Clean up yards and outdoor storage in residential neighborhoods (on-going)
• Redevelop Main Avenue NE homes north of 57th Street NE to commercial uses
• Maintain high standards for commercial buildings through architecture, site design,
landscaping and screening
• Upgrade County Road 19 between the Outlet Mall and 70th Street NE
• Construct a trail along County Road 18 between Kahl Avenue NE and Jason Avenue NE
to provide access to the High School (Complete 2013)
• Upgrade Albertville wastewater treatment facility to address phosphorous removal
• Investigate programs or ordinances to maintain aging housing stock
• Investigate means to reduce SAC/WAC charges to promote economic development of
hospitality businesses
Planning Commission Recommendations:
After consideration of the 2012 Vision Study Goal Statements, 2012 Vision Study Project
Priorities, and the list of completed tasks from 2013, the Planning Commission recommends the
following project priorities for 2014:
1. Improve pedestrian connections and access to the outlet malls on either side of County
Road 19. Explore the possibility of a pedestrian bridge crossing CR 19.
2. Investigate changes to ordinance to allow for microbreweries and taprooms in the
community.
3. Look into the possibility of a community swimming pool in Albertville.
Agenda Page 93
Mayor and Council Request for Action – February 3, 2014
Goals and Priorities Page 3 of 3
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Goals Priorities RCA.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
POLICY/PRACTICES CONSIDERATIONS: The City Council should provide
recommendations on goals and priorities to guide administration, planning, and legal activities in
the coming year.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS: None.
Responsible Person/Department: Alan Brixius, City Planner
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments:
Issues Identification Map
Proposed Land Use Plan
Agenda Page 94
!!9470THLABEAUX37JASON
60THMAIN 65TH57TH61STMACIVER 67TH50THKALIKAHL49TH
51ST62NDKALDER
KALLAND
KARSTON
63RD58TH52NDMASON
LANDER
69TH55THLANSING
KAHLER 64THLAMBERT
MARLOWE BARTHEL INDUSTRIALKALENDA
MAYELIN 54THMAYER
KASSE
L
KAMA KADLERJANSEN
56THMARX
LINWOOD47TH
5
3RD
LAKE
LACHMAN48TH 68TH71ST
KYLER
KAISER
541/2MACKENZIE
MARSHALL LAKETOWNELASALLE66THMACKENZEKAGANMARTIN
LANGE
LA
K
E
W
O
O
DLABEAUXAVENETO WBI9460TH STNETOWB I94
LACENTRE KAITLINTERRACEKARMEN
WESTLAKETOWNELANNON
60THSTNE TOEBI94LAK
E
V
IEW
LARGE 59THLYDIAEBI94 TO60THSTNELAMONT
WB I94 TO 60TH ST NE
LANE
L
A
M
P
L
I
G
H
TEB I94TOLABEAUXAVENE1ST
MANCHESTER
KAELIN
EA
ST
LA
KE
SH
O
R
E
LAN
C
AS
TE
R
LILAC
LOCUSTSUMERLINLARABEELARKLIND
E
N
KAHLER BAY
IVORYMARTIN
F
ARMS54THMARLOWETERRACE48THKALE
N
DA
67TH
KAS
S
EL
LANDER56T
H60TH54TH64TH69TH58TH58TH61STLARGE
KALI
LASALLE61ST51ST48TH62NDKALILARGE
K
A
IS
E
R
52NDMASON50TH53RDKALLANDKALI
LAMBERT49TH
47TH67TH47THJASONLIN
W
OO
D
63RDKAL
E
N
D
A
65TH47TH48THKAHLER47THLARGE57THJANSEN59TH56THLACHMAN 94KALI JASON53RDLASALLE 60THMACIVER
LANNON
66TH49THKAHLKAGAN 63RD55TH53RD51ST65THLANSING64TH37MASONKAISER50TH62ND52NDKALENDA
49TH51STKALE
ND
A
63RD69TH53RD67THLAKE
L
A
N
N
O
N Infill DevelopmentDitch Improvement NeededInfill DevelopmentInfill DevelopmentMore SeniorHousing NeededPhysical BarrierPhysical BarrierPhysical BarrierAccess IssueImprove CR 19Infill CommercialInfill CommercialInfill CommercialAccess IssuesAccess IssuesStrong SchoolsStrong SchoolsPhysical BarrierFuture Plant CapacityPhysical BarrierInfill IndustrialInfill IndustrialNeed Utility Expansion50th StreetCounty ImprovementsGolf Courseis an AssetFuture Land UseResidential InfillDitch ImprovementsAccess IssuesAccess IssuesCR-19/I-94RampFuture CommercialIndustrial DevelopmentFuture CommercialIndustrial DevelopmentPhysical BarrierExisting Land UseDraft 2012Draft: April 11, 2012Source: Wright County Parcel Data00.40.2MilesCity Limit BoundaryRailroadWetland OverlayMedium Density ResidentialLow Density ResidentialHigh Density ResidentialCommercialIndustrialSemi Public/PublicPark/Open SpaceAgriculture/VacantIssuesScattered & PoorHousing ConditionsStreet ConnectionDrainage Problem!Traffic VolumesIndustrial/ResidentialProtection DistrictDowntown RedevelopmentAgenda Page 95
-04,000 8,0002,000FeetSources: Northwest Associated Consultants, DNR, Wright County, City of Albertville.Note: For planning purposes only. January 18, 2010.City of AlbertvilleProposed Land Use PlanProposed Land Use PlanAgriculture/RuralLow Density ResidentialMedium Density ResidentialHigh Density ResidentialCommercialBusiness ParkIndustrialPublic/Semi-PublicPark/Open SpaceGolf CourseparcelsAlbertville City LimitsWaterMUDLAKESCHOOLLAKESWAMPLAKEAgenda Page 96
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE
COUNTY OF WRIGHT
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2014-007
A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE
ANNUAL RETIREMENT BENEFIT FOR THE
ALBERTVILLE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2014
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Albertville is desirous of increasing the
annual retirement benefit for the Albertville Fire Department effective January 1, 2014, and;
WHEREAS, the City Council is committed to contribute $1,855 as the 2014 municipal
contribution to the Albertville Fire Relief Association.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Albertville
hereby establishes the retirement benefit of the Albertville Fire Relief Association at $1,855 per
year of service for all members based on their years of service as active Fire Department
members.
Adopted by the Albertville City Council this 3rd day of February 2014.
___________________________
Jillian Hendrickson, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Agenda Page 97
Mayor and Council Communication
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Voting Precincts.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 30, 2014
SUBJECT: CITY CLERK – VOTING PRECINCTS DISCUSSION (NO ACTION REQUIRED)
RECOMMENDATION: This item is included on the agenda for the purpose of discussion and
feedback from the Council.
BACKGROUND: In budget discussions and workshops for the 2014 budget, staff identified the
need to address the size of Albertville’s precinct by possibly creating an additional voting
precinct/polling location. This topic was mentioned to the Council during the State redistricting
process in 2010, but was not pursued at that time.
Albertville’s precinct size exceeds the recommendations of the MN Secretary of State’s Office.
The Secretary is the chief elections officer in Minnesota and works closely with county and local
election officials to administer elections. Albertville has 3,979 registered voters in its precinct
and the SOS recommends a maximum of 2,000 registered voters per precinct. Their
recommendation is based on the difficulty of election administration and higher error potential in
precincts larger than this size. A staff representative of the SOS’s office pulled together a
sampling of cities similar in size to Albertville to show their number of precincts.
NAME
2010 CENSUS
POPULATION
# OF
PRECINCTS
2014
REGISTERED
VOTERS
AVG.
REGISTERED
VOTERSPER
PRECINCT
AVG.
POPULATION
PER
PRECINCT
Corcoran 5379 2 3573 1787 2690
Minnetrista 6384 4 4269 1067 1596
Spring Lake Park 6412 4 3840 960 1603
St. Joseph 6534 2 3866 1933 3267
Waite Park 6715 4 3560 890 1679
Litchfield 6726 5 3550 710 1345
Baldwin Township 6739 2 3803 1902 3370
Albertville 7044 1 3979 3979 7044
St. Francis 7218 3 4063 1354 2406
Shorewood 7307 4 5007 1252 1827
Victoria 7345 3 4973 1658 2448
Big Lake Township 7386 4 4617 1154 1847
Orono 7437 4 5410 1353 1859
Baxter 7610 4 4876 1219 1903
Mahtomedi 7676 2 5427 2714 3838
Crookston 7891 6 3665 611 1315
Oak Grove 8031 4 5370 1343 2008
Lake Elmo 8069 2 5374 2687 4035
Cambridge 8111 2 4520 2260 4056
Little Falls 8343 3 4581 1527 2781
Thief River Falls 8573 7 4172 596 1225
East Grand Forks 8601 5 4150 830 1720
AVERAGES 7332 3 4374 1325 2892
Agenda Page 98
Mayor and Council Communication – February 3, 2014
Voting Precincts Page 2 of 5
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Voting Precincts.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
In a meeting with the Wright County Elections Department, they encouraged City staff to pursue
splitting the precinct into two and indicated they would also like to see other large precincts in
the County do the same.
KEY ISSUES:
• Albertville’s precinct is one of the largest in Wright County and is larger than all
precincts in Hennepin, Meeker, Sherburne, and Stearns Counties.
• Many of our elections judges are seniors in the community and it has been difficult to
recruit election judges due to the pressures of such a large precinct. In 2012, many
judges that worked the morning shift also stayed for the evening shift as they realized the
help that was needed for such a busy precinct. This amounted to a work day in excess of
14 hours which is difficult for the seniors, increased risk of mistakes, fatigue, and leads to
a decrease in returning election judges.
• Parking is an issue at City Hall on Election Day.
• The Community Room and halls cannot accommodate the number of voters, especially
during the peak morning and evening hours. Minnesota Election Rules require the
availability of chairs to elderly voters and voters with disabilities while waiting in line to
vote. The halls in City Hall are overcrowded and it is difficult to provide this
accommodation during peak hours.
• Crowded conditions lead to voters in the wrong registration lines and may lead to
mistakes on the part of election judges.
• If the precinct is split into two, the work for the election judges after the polls close to
finalize the results will be reduced in half, leading to less errors and quicker results.
• Elections are closely scrutinized each year and having adequate space and conditions
helps to ensure a successful election.
Potional options available to the City:
PLAN A: Move the precinct to another building
PLAN B: Split the precinct and have two voting locations
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: Since 2010, the City has been putting aside any unused,
budgeted amounts for elections into the capital reserves in preparation of purchase or
replacement of equipment and/or an additional precinct.
The City has the option to either lease or purchase voting equipment from the City’s vendor.
Wright County has suggested that the City lease the equipment for now as election officials
monitor how new models of the vote tabulators are working in other counties. Cities in Wright
County may want to purchase the new tabulator models within the next two or three election
cycles.
Both plans above will require additional tabulators for the precinct to help move the voting lines
along and for the absentee ballots. Additional voting booths and election judges will be needed
Agenda Page 99
Mayor and Council Communication – February 3, 2014
Voting Precincts Page 3 of 5
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 Voting Precincts.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
as well. Replacement of the cardboard table top voting booths is recommended. Staff purchased
new, hard-plastic, standing booths during the last election and received positive feedback from
both voters and election judges. Ideally small numbers of these booths could be purchased each
election until the old booths are eliminated. Estimated costs are outlined below:
Additional
Tabulators
(lease)
AutoMark for
Disabled Voters
(purchase)
Additional
Election
Judges
Absentee
Ballot Board
Judges
Voting
Booths
(purchase) Total Cost
PLAN A $3,040.00 $2,140.00 $4,000.00 $2,000.00 $1,950.00 $13,130.00
PLAN B $3,040.00 $2,140.00 $6,000.00 $2,000.00 $3,900.00 $17,080.00
The costs above are in addition to the usual $9,000 spent for each election.
RECOMMENDED ACTION/TIMELINE: Based on the State’s recommendations and the
request of Wright County, it is recommended the Council proceed with establishing two
precincts within Albertville. Below is a suggested timeline for actions needed:
Bolded items will need Council action:
Mar. 3 Approve Resolution Establishing Precinct Boundaries
Mar. 4-31 Notification to Wright County Auditor and Secretary of State
File Base Map to County and State
Mar.-Apr. Mail Notice to Residents of Polling Location/Changes
Mar. 17 or Apr.7 Council Approval of Equipment Lease/Purchase
Apr. 1-7 Article in City Newsletter
July Utility Bill Insert identifying precinct and poll locations
Oct. 1-7 Article in City Newsletter
POLICY/PROCEDURES: The Mayor and City Council have the authority to adjust and
establish precinct boundaries as needed anytime after the two years following redistricting.
Responsible Person/Department: Kimberly A. Olson, City Clerk
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments:
Proposed Precinct Boundary Lines (if split)
Excerpts from the Presidential Commission on Election Administration (published Jan. 2014)
Agenda Page 100
Proposed Precinct Boundary Lines
2506
4538
Agenda Page 101
(EXCERPT)
The American Voting Experience:
Report and Recommendations of the Presidential
Commission on Election Administration
President Obama issued an Executive Order (13639) which established the Presidential
Commission on Election Administration. The Commission conducted a six-month examination
of how elections are conducted throughout the United States and published their findings in
January 2014. The Commission worked with state and local election officials, academic experts,
and organizations and associations involved with voting or election administration. The
Commission concluded the problems that hinder election administration of elections can be
identified and solved. The report sets forth recommendations and best practices for election
administration.
Below are some of the findings:
Addressing Long Lines:
No voter should wait more than half an hour in order to vote.
Assuring Accessible Polling Locations:
Within the polling place, elderly voters and voters with disabilities waiting their turn to
vote must have access to chairs while waiting and then when their turn comes, to
machinery.
Polling Location and Design:
A polling place must:
1. Have room to comfortably accommodate voters
2. Provide accessibility for voters with disabilities
3. Have adequate infrastructure such as the capacity for appropriate levels of
internet and telephone connection
4. Offer adequate parking
5. Be located in a reasonable proximity to the population of voters it is intended to
serve
Recruitment of Poll Workers:
Jurisdictions should recruit public and private sector employees, as well as high school
and college students, to become poll workers. Jurisdictions should diversify the
population poll from which they draw poll workers.
Schools should be used as polling places:
The testimony received from state and local election administrators identified schools as
the preferred venue for polling places. States should take steps necessary to address
legitimate security concerns.
Agenda Page 102
Mayor and Council Request for Action
M:\Public Data\City Council\Council Packet information\2014\020314\2014-02-03 School Funding Letter.doc
Meeting Date: February 3, 2014
January 30, 2014
SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATION – SUPPORT OF SCHOOL FUNDING EDITORIAL FOR STAR
TRIBUNE NEWSPAPER
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully requested that the Mayor and Council consider the
following:
MOTION TO: Endorse editorial prepared by STMA School Board for publication in the Star
Tribune and titled “In Education, Kids are Not Treated Equally”.
INFORMATION: STMA School Superintendant, Dr. Behle, is requesting permission from the
cities of Albertville and St. Michael to endorse the attached editorial prepared by School Board
Member Birk. Inequity in education funding has been a longtime discussion in our area and was
recently discussed at our joint governments meeting this past fall.
This item was tabled at the January 21, 2014 City Council meeting due to limited council
members present at the meeting.
If endorsed by the City Council, the publication will read as such: “Supported by Albertville
City Council.
Submitted Through: Adam Nafstad, City Administrator-PWD
Attachments: School Funding Letter
Agenda Page 103
To: School Board and Dr. James Behle
From: Doug Birk
Re: Proposed Star Tribune Editorial
Word count: 750 (maximum: 750)
IN EDUCATION, KIDS ARE NOT TREATED EQUALLY
When it comes to school finance reform, Minnesota can do better.
Today, similar children in similar school districts throughout Minnesota receive vastly different
sums of per pupil education spending based on where their parents choose to live. Our state’s
current policy for funding public education is grossly inequitable, irrational, and inexplicable.
No other legislative issue has a greater potential impact on the long-term quality of life and
economic vitality of Minnesota. Every biennium Minnesota spends nearly $14 billion dollars on
education- roughly 50% of the state’s budget. How that money is allocated affects educational
competitiveness, innovation, the vibrancy of local economies that remain intimately tied to the
success of our local public schools, and the state’s ongoing bipartisan consensus to equip each
child the basic tools needed to succeed.
In 2014, the projected disparity in annual general education revenue per pupil between school
districts is $1800. This statewide opportunity gap is further exacerbated by the increasing
reliance on local property taxes to fund education resulting in spectacular benefits to school
districts with greater commercial property wealth. When you add in local levies, the overall
range in per pupil annual spending between districts is nearly $7000.
Sadly, the bulk of this inequity is not generated by student need, but greed. The sheer
complexity of Minnesota’s existing school finance framework has insulated the system from
much pressure for reform. And you don’t need to be a political scientist to identify the
tangential connection between the state’s wealthiest school districts and communities of
greater statewide political and economic affluence. In the absence of any vocal dissent,
individual legislators representing wealthier school districts, regardless of party, have not been
motivated to significantly change a system benefiting their constituents.
Despite these obstacles, the state legislature finally passed legislation in the last session
partially aimed at closing the education spending gap. While a positive step, the legislature can
do better. The reforms only slightly narrowed the overall spending gap between the very
wealthiest and very poorest districts- districts previously unable to pass a local levy- and the
majority of districts in the bottom 15% in per pupil spending did not fare much better than
before.
Agenda Page 104
This reality has prompted several prominent educational organizations to continue the call for
more finance reform including the Minnesota School Board Association, Schools for Equity in
Education, and the Minnesota Association of School Administrators.
So how do you solve it? First, we need to put a greater emphasis on the basic funding formula
and re-examine the myriad of categorical state formula designations that are often unrelated to
any rational need. Second, we need to increase state equalization of property taxes in districts
where the commercial property base is low. Otherwise, identical local levies will continue to
cost residential taxpayers substantially more in commercially poorer areas. Finally, we need to
recognize that this is not a partisan issue.
Of course, it won’t be a perfectly level playing field- not all school districts should receive an
exactly equal or proportional share of general fund tax dollars. There is a broad spectrum of
tangible educational need that decidedly impacts some school districts more than others. As a
matter of state policy, these unique student challenges that vary between districts should
continue be addressed.
But these substantive needs do not account for the current spending gap between the
wealthiest and poorest school districts. This gap is pitting half of the state’s districts against the
other half and affecting the ability of disadvantaged districts to attract and retain quality
teachers, provide competitive course offerings, and continue to innovate.
In the current system of winners and losers, we all eventually lose. In the long run, Minnesota
simply cannot create a 21st century state economy under an educational rubric where half of its
children and their communities are left behind.
This is a critical moment. After nearly a decade of belt tightening, the State now has a near
billion dollar surplus. This surplus is creating great political momentum at the capital to finally
invest significant state funds in special education after decades of imposing significant costs on
school districts through unfunded federal and state mandates- an admirable objective.
However, alleviating the gross inequity in public education funding is equally important.
If the state legislature does not seize upon this unique moment to address the significant
inequity in per pupil education spending and at least attempt to close the gap it never will. The
legislature’s work is not done. Considering this issue affects opportunity for thousands of
children throughout the state, failing to take any action would be unconscionable. Our kids
deserve better.
Agenda Page 105
City Administrator’s Update
January 30, 2014
GENERAL ADMINISTRATION
STMA Arena: The dehumidification and insulation improvement project is currently out for bid.
Bids will be opened on February 18. If bids prove favorable, the Council will be asked to award
a contract at their first meeting in March.
57th Street NE/Church of St. Albert Improvement Project: Staff is working with the Church to
negotiate right-of-way. I believe the two parties are very close on price and will be able to
come to an agreement soon. I will update the Council on the status of the discussions at the
meeting on February 3.
FTTH Communications: The City recently learned that Velocity Communications will be or has
acquired FTTH Communications. Staff will be meeting with Velocity to review franchise
requirements the week of February 3.
ENGINEERING/PUBLIC WORKS
Public Building Interconnect: The phone/voice upgrades are 95% complete. All public
buildings are currently on fiber.
Barthel Industrial Drive NE and 54th Street NE Drainage: The drainage report and
improvement design is underway. I expect to have both documents by the end of February.
Municipal State Aid: The City’s annual certification of miles and system revisions request has
been submitted.
WWTP Facility Plan Update: We have requested preliminary effluent limits for the Albertville
Wastewater Treatment facility at 3 locations: the existing discharge to the lake, the stream that
leaves the lake, and to the Mississippi River from the MPCA. Once the limits are assigned, the
Consultants will be able to evaluate the impact and options for the City. Right now, the lake is
what is driving the stringent limits Albertville is facing. Relocation of the discharge may put the
City on common ground with surrounding communities; however, it may have an adverse effect
on the lake. In terms of schedule, preliminary effluent requests have had significant variation
on response times. Our request was submitted in November.
Agenda Page 106