Loading...
2000-08-07 CC Agenda PacketALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA August 7, 2000 7:00 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER — ROLL CALL — ADOPT AGENDA 2. MINUTES (a) July 17, 2000, City Council Meeting 3. CITIZEN FORUM - (lo Minute Limit) 4. CONSENT AGENDA (a) Approve payment of claims (b) Resolution 2000-20 (A Resolution Appointing Election Judges for the Primary and General Election for the City of Albertville) (c) Approve reduction of the Letter of Credit for Cedar Creek South 4th Addition from $75,000 to $42,135 (d) Approve release of the $2,400 Letter of Credit for Cedar Creek South (e) Approve reduction of Letter of Credit for Cedar Creek South 3rd Addition from $66,500 to $48,400 5. DEPARTMENT BUSINESS a. Public Works (1) Public Works Department Report b. Planning & Zoning (1) Albert Villas Second Addition — Final Plat • Resolution #2000-23 (A Resolution of the City of Albertville, Wright County, Minnesota, to Amend the Comprehensive Plan to Change the Land Use Designation of Property Within the Project Known as Albert Villas Second Addition) • Ordinance #2000-8 (An Ordinance Amending the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Albertville to Provide for a Change in Zoning Classification) (2) Park Fee Analysis Discussion • Resolution #2000-21 (Resolution Amending the Fee Schedule for Park Dedication Effective As of August 7, 2000) (3) Resolution #2000-22 (Resolution of the Albertville City Council Approving An Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to Change the Functional Classification of Main Avenue, Barthel Industrial Drive and Part of CSAH 35) City Council Agenda August 7, 2000 Page 2 of 2 (4) Ordinance #2000-6 (An Ordinance Amending the Albertville Zoning Ordinance, Section 1000, By Adding Section 1000.24, Performance Standards for Two Family, Townhouse, Quadraminium, and Multiple Family Uses) (5) Garage and House size survey c. Engineering (1) Change Orders — Fire Hall (2) Barthel Industrial Drive project — Intersection Detail (3) Park Plan Concept — Barthel Property d. Administration (1) LeRoy Berning, Albertville Jaycees — Grading & seeding new ball field (2) Schedule joint meeting with City of Otsego on Wednesday, August 23"d at the Otsego City Hall at 7:00 PM (3) Schedule second preliminary budget meeting e. Legal • Closed Session to discuss pending litigation 6. ADJOURNMENT ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL July 17, 2000 Albertville City Hall 7:00 PM PRESENT: Mayor John Olson, Councilmembers Robert Gundersen, Keith Franklin, Gary McCormack, and John Vetsch, City Engineer Pete Carlson, City Attorney Marcus Miller, and City Administrator -Clerk Linda Goeb Mayor Olson called the regular meeting of the Albertville City Council to order. The agenda was amended by adding the following: • Item 5b — City Park Update • Item 5c(3) — Resolution #2000-19 • Item 5e(4) — Consider ordering a study on minimum house and garage size Vetsch made a motion to approve the agenda as amended. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. The minutes of the July 5, 2000, minutes were amended as follows: • Page 2, Paragraph 4 is amended to add "The Council will review the decision to block off the northwest entrance into the parking lot at City Park in six months". • Page 4, Paragraph 5 is amended to clarify that the park dedication fees will be adjusted to the lower rate if the park dedication fee is restructured. Gundersen made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 5, 2000, meeting as amended. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. Mayor Olson asked if anyone present wished to address the Council under the Citizen Forum portion of the agenda. Kim and Chris Molesky reported that their neighbor has not seeded his yard yet and wanted to know what action the Council will now take. The Council agreed to have the Public Works Department recheck the properties to determine if the seeding has been done. Gundersen made a motion to have the city attorney proceed with enforcing the terms of the Developer's Agreement relating to seeding and/or sodding yards. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. Gundersen made a motion to approve payment of Check #'s 13340-13375 as presented. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. 9`% CLAIMS LIST August 7, 2000 Check No. Vendor Amount 13402 AT & T 3.29 13403 BARTHEL, ALBERT 500.00 13404 BEACON BALLFEILDS 176.69 13405 BRIDGET MILLER 46.24 13406 BROCK WHITE CO. LLC. 604.39 13407 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC. 61,858.97 13408 COUNTRYSIDE FENCE 1,600.00 13409 COURI & MACARTHUR 5,477.15 13410 Void 13411 DELTA DENTAL 231.00 13412 DIVERSIFIED INSPECTION SERVICE 13,283.07 13413 DYS TOTAL HOME CARE CENTER 604.03 13414 DON'S AUTO & REPAIR 204.44 13415 ELECTION SYSTEMS & SOFTWARE 112.67 13416 EMERGENCY APPARATUS 529.35 13417 ESCHELONTELECOM, INC. 23.95 13418 FIRE INSTRUCTOR ASSOCIATION 206.34 13419 FIREHOUSE MAGAZINE 28.97 13420 FRONTLINE PLUS FIRE & RESCUE 3,544.00 13421 GAGNON PRINTING 213.00 13422 HARVEST PRINTING 62.20 13423 HAWKINS CHEMICAL, INC. 2,203.29 13424 INDEPENDENT TESTING TECHNOLOGI 236.00 13425 LARSON PUBLICATIONS 524.40 13426 MEDICA 3,684.50 13427 MENARDS 315.21 13428 MIDWEST ANALYTICAL SERVICES 106.00 13429 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES 24.50 13430 MILLER TRUCKING/LANDSCAPING SU 187.44 13431 iMINNEGASCO 42.10 113432 IMINNESOTA COPY SYSTEMS 1 121.28 CLAIMS LIST August 7, 2000 13433 MINNESOTA DEPT. OF REVENUE 638.49 13434 MINNESOTA UC FUND 6.16 13435 MN DEPT. OF TRADE/ECON. DEV. 49,965.26 13436 MOON MOTORS 23.16 13437 NATIONAL FIRE & RESCUE 48.00 13438 NCPER S GROUP LIFE INSURANCE 12.00 13439 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTAN 9,772.09 13440 Void 13441 NSP 3,570.98 13442 OFFICE MAX 72.05 13443 P.E.R.A 682.64 13444 PAT'S 66 48.31 13445 PITNEY BOWES 20.25 13446 PLAISTED COMPANIES 125.51 13447 RANDY KRAMER EXCAVATING, INC. 14,976.77 13448 S.E.H./R.C.M. 41,369.67 13449 Void 13450 SECURITY STATE BANK OF MAPLE L 4,241.71 13451 SENTRY SYSTEMS, INC. 115.90 13452 SHINGOBEE BUILDERS 10,000.00 13453 SPRINT 0.58 13454 SPRINT-UTS 601.42 13455 STRETCHER'S 27.20 13456 SUNSHINE SPRINKLER SYSTEMS 500.00 13457 TWIN CITY FLAG SOURCE 1,469.70 13458 U.S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOC 22,253.09 13459 UPBEAT, INC. 164.70 13460 VERIZON 57.34 13461 VETSCH CUSTOM CABINETS 4,172.78 13462 WASTE MANAGEMENT 94.65 13463 WEBER OIL COMPANY 71.93 13464 WELTER'S INC. 195.40 13465 WRIGHT COUNTY HIGHWAY DEPT. 117.30 13466 WRIGHT HENNEPIN ELECTRIC 23.10 13467 WRIGHT RECYCLING 1,715.00 Total Bills 263,90.61 ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL 49Z0*o# July 17, 2000 Albertville City Hall 7:00 PM PRESENT: Mayor John Olson, Councilmembers Robert Gundersen, Keith Franklin, Gary McCormack, and John Vetsch, City Engineer Pete Carlson, City Attorney Marcus Miller, and City Administrator -Clerk Linda Goeb Mayor Olson called the regular meeting of the Albertville City Council to order. The agenda was amended by adding the following: • Item 5b — City Park Update • Item 5c(3) — Resolution #2000-19 • Item 5e(4) — Consider ordering a study on minimum house and garage size Vetsch made a motion to approve the agenda as amended. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. The minutes of the July 5, 2000, minutes were amended as follows: • Page 2, Paragraph 4 is amended to add "The Council will review the decision to block off the northwest entrance into the parking lot at City Park in six months". • Page 4, Paragraph 5 is amended to clarify that the park dedication fees will be adjusted to the lower rate if the park dedication fee is restructured. Gundersen made a motion to approve the minutes of the July 5, 2000, meeting as amended. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. Mayor Olson asked if anyone present wished to address the Council under the Citizen Forum portion of the agenda. Kim and Chris Molesky reported that their neighbor has not seeded his yard yet and wanted to know what action the Council will now take. The Council agreed to have the Public Works Department recheck the properties to determine if the seeding has been done. Gundersen made a motion to have the city attorney proceed with enforcing the terms of the Developer's Agreement relating to seeding and/or sodding yards. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. Gundersen made a motion to approve payment of Check #'s 13340-13375 as presented. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. r ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL July 17, 2000 Page 2 of 4 Gundersen made a motion to approve the June Expenditure/Revenue Reports as presented. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. Gundersen made a motion to adopt ORDINANCE #2000-7 titled AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. Gundersen made a motion to approve the contract with the Wright County Assessor to perform the duties of assessor for the year 2001 at a contract price of $7.75 per parcel. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. The Council reviewed the Public Works Department Report. Because there is a sizable difference in the amounts of the two bids for installation of the sprinkler system at the new fire hall, Gundersen made a motion directing Tim to compare the bids to ensure they are for similar systems, and if so, to accept the quote from Green-R-Lawn of Maple Grove in the amount of $6,740. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. McCormack made a motion to accept the bid for re -roofing the old city hall from All -Metro Builders in the amount of $10,420.00. Gundersen seconded the motion. All voted aye. Gundersen made a motion to approve the Public Works Department Report as presented. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. Franklin made a motion to approve the Water/Wastewater Department Report as presented. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. City Engineer Pete Carlson reported that he met with Don Barthel to discuss possibly acquiring additional land for City Park expansion. Barthel is interested in pursuing an arrangement with the City that will benefit both parties. Carlson will draft several concept plans for the Barthel property and meet again with the Barthel's for their input. He will bring the information to the next Council meeting. City Attorney Marcus Miller presented the Conditional Use/Planned Unit Development Agreement for the Kollville Estates project. Section 113 of the agreement states that the units will be owner -occupied, except as is otherwise ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL July 17, 2000 Page 3 of 4 provided. Miller explained that VA and FHA mortgages require some stipulation that if the bank must repossess a unit, the bank can lease the unit until it could be resold. Councilmember Vetsch stated he wants the units to be exclusively owner - occupied with no exceptions. Gundersen made a motion to amend the CUP/PUD Agreement by limiting banks/mortgages companies from leasing repossessed townhouse units longer than ninety (90) days. Olson seconded the motion. Mayor Olson called for further discussion on the motion. Both Councilmembers McCormack and Vetsch stated they prefer a 60-day maximum lease option. McCormack asked to amend the motion to limit the lease term to 60 days. Gundersen and Olson were agreeable to amending the motion. Mayor Olson called for a vote on the amended motion. Olson, McCormack, Gundersen and Franklin voted aye. Vetsch voted no. The motion carried. McCormack made a motion to approve the CUP/PUD Agreement for the Kollville Estates project as amended. Franklin seconded the motion. Olson, McCormack, Gundersen and Franklin voted aye. Vetsch voted no. The motion carried. Miller presented the Conditional Use/Developer's Agreement for Mooney Addition. The developer has requested that Paragraph 2A be amended to allow off - site improvements to be installed no later than January 31, 2001 and that park dedication fees can be held in escrow rather than a Letter of Credit. Vetsch made a motion to approve the Conditional Use/Developer's Agreement for Mooney Addition with the amendments requested by the developer incorporated into the agreement. Franklin seconded the motion. All voted aye. Gundersen made a motion to approve RESOLUTION #2000-19 titled DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY relating to the Southwest Lift Station Project. McCormack seconded the motion. All voted aye. Mike Kranz, representing Shingobee Builders, reported that the saw cutting and removal of the apparatus bay floor has been completed and is scheduled to be poured ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL July 17, 2000 Page 4 of 4 by the end of this week. The schedule for completion is now estimated to be August 28th The Council agreed to discuss the Change Orders on the fire hall project that have been on hold at the next meeting. Assistant Fire Chief Scott Black reported the Fire Department still have concerns regarding the outlet mall. Black stated that more "No Parking" signs need to be installed and that the striping of the no parking areas should be yellow, rather than white. The Council directed the Fire Department to put their concerns in a letter to the property manager. The Fire Department was not prepared to discuss purchasing a grass rig at this time. The Council is unable to meet jointly with the City of Otsego on July 26th or July 271h as suggested by Otsego. The Council agreed to propose either August 16th or August 23rd as dates to meet with the City of Otsego. The Council agreed to delay meeting with the City of St. Michael until November. Councilmember Vetsch asked that a study showing maximum garage size and minimum house sizes in surrounding communities be prepared for the next Council meeting. McCormack made a motion to adjourn at 8:30 PM. Gundersen seconded the motion. All voted aye. John A. Olson, Mayor Linda Goeb, City Administrator CITY OF ALBERTVILLE RESOLUTION # 2000-20 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING ELECTION JUDGES FOR THE PRIMARY AND GENERAL ELECTION FOR THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE WHEREAS, the Albertville City Council is desirous of appointing election judges to serve in the Primary and General Elections scheduled in 2000; and WHEREAS, the Albertville City Council is appointing election judges to serve the Primary Election to be held on September 12, 2000, and the General Election to be held on November 7, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Albertville hereby appoints the following persons to serve in the capacity of election judges at an hourly rate of $8.00. Jeanne Vetsch Denise Beaudry Melissa Janzen Marian Yager Virgil Werner Douglas Potter Sharon Anderson Janet Berning Judy Roden Kathy Phillips ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE THIS 7th DAY OF August, 2000. John Olson, Mayor Linda Goeb, City Administrator MEMO 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 320.229.4300 800.572.0617 TO: Linda Goeb, Administrator City of Albertville, MN FROM: Peter J. Carlson, P.E. City Engineer DATE: August 1, 2000 RE: Letter of Credit Reduction Cedar Creek South 4th Addition Albertville, MN SEH No. A-ALBEV0011.00 14 C 320.229.4301 FAX I reviewed the work completed to date and recommend the LOC for Cedar Creek South 4th Addition be reduced from $75,000 to $42,135. This amount represents 5 percent of the utility construction cost and 100 percent of the street construction cost for this project. Please call me if you have any questions sl c: Mike Couri, City Attorney Don Jensen, Pilot Land Development Meyer-Rohlin Wayne Stark, SEH Mike Czech, SEH \\sehsc1\sccv\a1bev\001 Acoa\i128a00-m.doc Short Elliott Henddckson Inc. Offices located throughout the Upper Midwest • Equal Opportunity Employer We helpyou plan, design, and achieve 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302.1717 TO: Linda Goeb, Administrator City of Albertville, MN FROM: Peter J. Carlson, P.E. City Engineer DATE: August 1, 2000 RE: Letter of Credit Reduction 1998 Cedar Creek South Albertville, MN SEH No. A-ALBEV9806.00 14 MEM 320.229.4300 800,572.0617 //0/ 320.229.4301 FAA I reviewed the work completed to date and recommend final acceptance of Cedar Creek South, and the LOC be reduced from $2,400 to $0. Please call me if you have any questions sl c: Mike Couri, City Attorney Don Jensen, Pilot Land Development Meyer-Rohlin Wayne Stark, SEH Mike Czech, SEH \\sehsc I\sccv\albev\9806\core\j128a00-m.doc Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Offices located throughout the Upper Midwest Equal Opportunity Employer We help you plan, design, and achieve 1200 25th Avenue South, P.O. Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 TO: Linda Goeb, Administrator City of Albertville, MN FROM: Peter J. Carlson, P.E. City Engineer DATE: August 1, 2000 RE: Letter of Credit Reduction 1999 Cedar Creek South 3rd Addition SEH No. A-ALBEV9909.00 14 MEMC 320.229.4300 800.572.0617 O%two 320.229.4301 FAX I reviewed the work completed to date and recommend the LOC for Cedar Creek South 3rd Addition be reduced from $66,500 to $48,400. This amount represents 5 percent of the utility construction cost and 100 percent of the street construction cost remaining for this project. Please call me if you have any questions sl c: Mike Couri, City Attorney Don Jensen, Pilot Land Development Meyer-Rohlin Wayne Stark, SEH Mike Czech, SEH \\sehscI\sccv\albev\9909\corr\j128a00-m.doc Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Offices located throughout the Upper Midwest Equal Opportunity Employer We helpyou plan, design, and achieve CITY OF ALBERTVILLE MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Tim Guimont, Public Works Supervisor DATE: August 3, 2000 SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS REPORT Fire Hall: • The sprinkler system and the landscaping are in the process of being installed. Loader: • Bill Greelry from St. Joseph equipment will be at the meeting to explain leasing options on the loader. Parks: • We have enlarged the Safety Zone on the playground at Four Seasons Park by adding new timbers and more sand. The ball field at Oakside Park is finished, complete with backstop and bases. Wastewater Treatment Plant: • The contractors will be starting to move the sludge around in Pond #3. There may be some additional odor because of this. TG:bmm FROM DATE RE. - FILE NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CON INC `r COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN ' MARKL, MING REPORT Albertville Mayor and City Council Linda Goeb, City Administrator Deb Garross, Senior Planner 13 July 2000 Albertville - Albert Villas Second Addition • PUD Final Plan Final Plat Adopt Resolution 2000 -;t3 Changing the Comp. Plan Agricultural/Rural to Low Density Residential Adopt Ordinance 2000 - - Rezoning the site from A-1 163.06 — 00.21 BACKGROUND Land Use from to R-1 A Edina Development corporation Inc., has submitted the final plat and PUD final plan of "Albert Villas Second Addition." The current submittal represents the second stage of development for the Albert Villas. PUD, which was approved by the City Council on January 18, 2000 for development of 136 acres of land into 170 single, family lots. The final plat of phase one consisted of 41 lots located in the northwest part of the PUD project area. The final plat of the Second Addition contains 78 lots and is located directly south of Albert. Villas and contiguous CSAH 18. This phase of the PUD will provide for a loop road connection between s to Avenue and 52"d Street. Kahl The original approval for the overall project included rezoning and a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the designation of the site from agricultural/rural to low density residential. The implementation of the rezoning and. Comprehensive Plan amendment is to take place at the time of final plat. Therefore, an Ordinance rezoning the site and a Resolution implementing the Comprehensive Plan amendment have been included for City Council formal adoption in addition to the final plat/PUD final plan. See Exhibits B and C of the attached City Council Findings of Fact for reference to the Resolution and Ordinance implement nthe rezoning and Comprehensive Plan amendment. g 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MIN.NESOTA 5541 6 PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2- - 595 9837 Attachments: Site Location Map Draft Findings of Fact and Recommendation Exhibit A — Site Legal Description Exhibit B — Resolution implementing the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Exhibit C — Ordinance implementing the rezoning Exhibit D — Table indicating the lot area, setback and dimension flexibility applicable to the final plat Exhibit E — Letter from NSP dated October 18, 1999 Final Plat Maps EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Council approved the Comprehensive Plan amendment, rezoning, CUP/PUD and preliminary plat of Albert Villas on January 18, 2000 subject to a number of conditions outlined in the Findings of Fact and approval. A CUP/PUD amendment and preliminary plat for Albert Villas East was approved by the City Council on May 1, 2000. The final plat/PUD of Albert Villas Second Addition has been reviewed based upon the applicable Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance requirements as well as the conditions of approval from January 18, 2000 and May 1, 2000. The requested approvals of the final plat and final PUD plan, require the City Council to consider the applications in relation to established Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance review criteria and Comprehensive Plan policies. The decision to approve or deny the final plat/PUD is viewed as a policy decision to be made by the City Council. Should the Council find the submitted plans acceptable, it is recommended that the following conditions be imposed. Submittal of all items listed as conditions of approval for Albert Villas Second Addition. The City will not accept future phases for this PUD until such a time as all of the items and conditions identified herein are submitted and found to be acceptable to the City Planner, City Engineer and City Attorney. 2. All final transportation, grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. All easements are dedicated and/or given to the City subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 4. A street lighting plan is submitted specifying the style, height, strength/wattage and distribution of lights proposed within the development. Said lighting plan and the location of lights shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Albert Villas Second Addition Planning Report Page 2 5. All required driveway, utility, trail and other permits required by the City Engineer and/or Wright County shall be obtained by the applicant. 6. A temporary turn -around facility and roadway easement is provided at the west end of 52nd Street, at the southern end of Kahl Avenue (between Blocks 2 and 3), at the southern end of Kahl Avenue (between Blocks 3 and 6) and at the eastern end of 51 st Street, conforming to the cul-de-sac requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and acceptable to the City Engineer. 7. Block 4 shall be labeled on the final plat. 8. Area calculations shall be submitted for all outlots, lots, rights -of -way, wetlands/ponds. 9. The Circle/court shown within Block 3 shall contain a street name. 10. The developer satisfies park dedication requirements as specified in the PUD development agreement: a. An asphalt trail is constructed along the south side of CSAH 18 (within the right-of- way), subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Wright County. b. A sidewalk is constructed on the west side of Kahl Avenue right-of-way (for the westerly section of Kahl Avenue that will be constructed with this phase). A sidewalk is constructed on the east side of Kahl Avenue (for the easterly section of Kahl Avenue that will be constructed with this phase). A sidewalk is constructed along the north side of 52nd Street. A sidewalk is constructed along the north side of 51 st Court (adjacent to Lots 5, 6, and 7, Block 4. c. Cash dedication associated with the second phase of the development is paid prior to release of the final plat mylars. 11. The developer submits a sidewalk and trail exhibit showing the location of the required improvements. Said exhibit shall be on a sheet no larger than 11 x 17" and shall be attached to the development agreement. 12. Deed restrictions, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney are filed with the Wright County Recorder of Deeds for all lots adjacent to or containing NSP easement indicating that no structures can be built within the easement areas or within 20 feet of wetlands, storm water ponds or County Ditch #9. 13. The applicant provides the City with the proposed means to disclose the location of all parks, sidewalks, trails and easements to future, prospective lot owners. Albert Villas Second Addition Planning Report Page 3 14. A property maintenance agreement and property owners association covenants are prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City Attorney for review and approval subject to the requirements of Sections 1100 and 2700 of the City Zoning Ordinance. The agreements, covenants, and restrictions are to be filed with the Wright County Recorder's office as a deed restriction against the title of each lot, at the time of final plat. 15. The developer indicates the proposed use of model homes consistent with Section 2200 of the Zoning Ordinance. 16. The future intended use of Outlot B shall be specified within the development agreement. 17. A landscape plan is submitted showing planting locations, species, planting instructions and addressing the following conditions of PUD approval: a. The screening consisting of a berm and staggered rows of evergreen trees on the northerly side of Block 5, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, Block 4 shall be planted/constructed. b. The developer submits a berm and screening exhibit showing the location of the required improvements/plantings. Said exhibit shall be on a sheet no larger than 11 x 17" and shall be attached to the development agreement. c. The front and side yards (and/or any other yard which abuts a public street) of all lots shall be sodded. Rear yards that do not abut a public street may be seeded and mulched. d. A minimum of one shade tree or evergreen tree, conforming to the minimum size and species requirements of the Albertville Zoning Ordinance shall be planted prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for each lot within the final plat. e. An escrow for the landscape/screening materials in the amount equal to 150% of the estimated cost for said materials, is provided to assure installation and survivability of all required plantings. (All new plants shall be guaranteed for two full years from the time the planting has been completed). A cost estimate for plant materials and installation of screening shall be provided by the developer for the purposes of calculating the required escrow. 18.If a subdivision identification sign is desired by the developer to identify the Albert Villas development, a sign plan is submitted for review and approval of the City Planner. Deed restrictions or other appropriate documentation shall be provided to identify that the private homeowners association shall be responsible for the maintenance of the grounds as well as the subdivision sign in perpetuity. Said documents shall also provide a clause allowing the City to remove the sign in the event that it is not maintained. The written Albert Villas Second Addition Planning Report Page 4 documentation shall be subject to review and approval of the City Attorney and filed with Wright County. 19. The developer shall enter into a Planned Unit Development agreement, which includes all development plans and specifications, and specific land use and performance standards that must be adhered to throughout the life of the PUD. Said document will set forth the schedule, required financial security, amount and method of payment to satisfy payment of park dedication and other fees for the final plat. The PUD agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney. 20. The developer shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Control Plan and escrow consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 21. The conditions outlined in the NSP letter (October 18, 1999) are satisfied by the developer and are incorporated into deed restrictions to be filed against Lots 1 through 7, Block 2. 22. A current title opinion or commitment of title insurance is submitted acceptable to the City Attorney. 23. The developer shall provide the City with a reproducible copy of the recorded final plat, either chronoflex or its equivalent, and two (2) prints prior to issuance of building permits for the plat. 24. All fees associated with this project shall be paid prior to the release of the final plat mylars to the applicant. 25. The final plat, developer's agreement and all pertinent documents must be filed with Wright County within 120 days from the date of City Council approval of the final plat. Failure to record the documents within the required time line will render the final plat null and void. 26. Any other conditions as set forth by the City Council, City staff, City Consultants or other agency responsible for review of this application. DISCUSSION The final plat/PUD for Albert Villas Second Addition has been found by our review, to be in substantial compliance with the preliminary plat/PUD. The subject site contains a number of lots that have restricted building envelopes and the City Council intended that the developer be responsible to notify future buyers of the various easements and wetland setbacks. To ensure that prospective buyers are aware of the building restrictions, conditions of approval require the developer to submit deed restrictions that will be filed with Wright County for each lot. Additionally, the developer is required to provide the City with copies of sales literature Albert Villas Second Addition Planning Report Page 5 identifying the location of the easements as well as all of the future park, trail and sidewalk improvements associated with the project. RECOMMENDATION To assist the City Council in formulating its recommendation, a draft Findings of Fact and Decision document has been prepared outlining the suggested conditions of approval for this project. The decision to approve or deny the requested preliminary and final plat of Albert Villas Second Addition is viewed as a policy decision to be made by the City Council. The Executive Summary of this report outlines recommended conditions of approval should the decisions be made in favor of the developer. ACTIONS REQUESTED 1. A motion to approve, deny or conditionally approve the PUD final stage plan of Albert Villas Second Addition pursuant to the conditions of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. 2. A motion to approve, deny or conditionally approve the final plat of Albert Villas Second Addition pursuant to the conditions of the attached Findings of Fact and Decision. 3. A motion to adopt Resolution 2000-_ (Exhibit B of Finding of Fact) implementing the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use of the site from Agricultural/Rural to Low Density Residential. 4. A motion to adopt Ordinance 2000-_ (Exhibit C of Findings of Fact) implementing the rezoning to change the zoning of the site from A-1 to R-1A. (A CUP/PUD is also approved for the site allowing for lot area, setback and width flexibility pursuant to the Council approval granted on January 18, 2000). pc: Mike Couri, Pete Carlson, Wayne Stark, Kevin Mealhouse, Chad Cichos, Denise Johnson, Matt Davich and Gary Rudy. Albert Villas Second Addition Planning Report Page 6 Albert Villas Second Addition Site Location Map m Albert Villas Second Addition Subject Site l CITY OF ALBERTVILLE City Council Findings of Fact & Decision - Final Plat - PUD Final Plan Applicant's Name: Albert Villas — Edina Development Corporation Inc. Request: Edina Development Corporation Inc., has submitted the final plat and PUD final plan plans for a 78 lot, single family subdivision to be known as Albert Villas Second Addition. The final plat is the second phase of development for the Albert Villas PUD that was approved by the City Council on January 18, 2000 for development of 170 single-family lots. The subject site is located south and east of Albert Villas (first phase) and is zoned R-1A with an approved CUP/PUD which allows for lot area, width and setback flexibility. City Council Meeting Date: August 7, 2000 Findings of Fact: Based on review of the application and evidence received, the City Council now makes the following finding of fact and decision: A. The legal description of the subject property is attached as Exhibit A. B. The Planning Report dated July 28, 2000 is incorporated herein. C. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan designation of the subject site is changed from Agricultural/Rural to Low Density Residential pursuant to City Council Resolution 2000-_. (Exhibit B) D. The Zoning District designation for the subject site is changed from A-1, Agricultural/Rural to R-1A, Low. Density Single Family pursuant to City of Albertville Ordinance 2000-_. (Exhibit C). E. Approval of a CUP/PUD for the subject site was granted by the City Council subject to the provisions and flexibility considerations outlined in the Findings of Fact and Decision dated 1-18-2000. F. The PUD lot area, setback and dimension standards, which are applicable to the final plat, are attached as Exhibit D. G. The conditions of the NSP letter (October 18, 1999) attached as Exhibit E are complied to by the developer. 1 Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fad & Decision H. The final plat of Albert Villas Second Addition (with the conditions of approval outlined herein) is in substantial compliance with the approved CUP/PUD and preliminary plat. Decision: Based on the foregoing considerations and applicable ordinances, the final plat and PUD final plan of Albert Villas Second Addition is approved based on the most current plans and information received to date, subject to the following conditions: 1. Submittal of all items listed as conditions of approval for Albert Villas Second Addition. The City will not accept future phases for this PUD until such a time as all of the items and conditions identified herein are submitted and found to be acceptable to the City Planner, City Engineer and City Attorney. 2. All final transportation, grading, drainage, and utility plans are subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 3. All easements are dedicated and/or given to the City subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 4. A street lighting plan is submitted specifying the style, height, strength/wattage and distribution of lights proposed within the development. Said lighting plan and the location of lights shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 5. All required driveway, utility, trail and other permits required by the City Engineer and/or Wright County shall be obtained by the applicant. 6. A temporary turn -around facility and roadway easement is provided at the west end of 52nd Street, at the southern end of Kahl Avenue (between Blocks 2 and 3), at the southern end of Kahl Avenue (between Blocks 3 and 6) and at the eastern end of 51st Street, conforming to the cul-de-sac requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and acceptable to the City Engineer. 7. Block 4 shall be labeled on the final plat. 8. Area calculations shall be submitted for all outlots, lots, rights -of -way, wetlands/ponds. 9. The Circle/court shown within Block 3 shall contain a street name. 10. The developer satisfies park dedication requirements as specified in the PUD development agreement: a. An asphalt trail is constructed along the south side of CSAH 18 (within the right-of- way), subject to the approval of the City Engineer and Wright County. b. A sidewalk is constructed on the west side of Kahl Avenue right-of-way (for the 2 Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fact & Decision westerly section of Kahl Avenue that will be constructed with this phase). A sidewalk is constructed on the east side of Kahl Avenue (for the easterly section of Kahl Avenue that will be constructed with this phase). A sidewalk is constructed along the north side of 52"d Street. A sidewalk is constructed along the north side of 51 st Court (adjacent to Lots 5, 6, and 7, Block 4. c. Cash dedication associated with the second phase of the development is paid prior to release of the final plat mylars. 11. The developer submits a sidewalk and trail exhibit showing the location of the required improvements. Said exhibit shall be on a sheet no larger than 11 x 17" and shall be attached to the development agreement. 12. Deed restrictions, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney are filed with the Wright County Recorder of Deeds for all lots adjacent to or containing NSP easement indicating that no structures can be built within the easement areas or within 20 feet of wetlands, storm water ponds or County Ditch #9. 13. The applicant provides the City with the proposed means to disclose the location of all parks, sidewalks, trails and easements to future, prospective lot owners. 14. A property maintenance agreement and property owners association covenants are prepared by the applicant and submitted to the City Attorney for review and approval subject to the requirements of Sections 1100 and 2700 of the City Zoning Ordinance. The agreements, covenants, and restrictions are to be filed with the Wright County Recorder's office as a deed restriction against the title of each lot, at the time of final plat. 15. The developer indicates the proposed use of model homes consistent with Section 2200 of the Zoning Ordinance. 16. The future intended use of Outlot B shall be specified within the development agreement. 17.A landscape plan is submitted showing planting locations, species, planting instructions and addressing the following conditions of PUD approval: a. The screening consisting of a berm and staggered rows of evergreen trees on the northerly side of Block 5, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7, Block 4 shall be planted/constructed. b. The developer submits a berm and screening exhibit showing the location of the required improvements/plantings. Said exhibit shall be on a sheet no larger than 11 x 17" and shall be attached to the development agreement. c. The front and side yards (and/or any other yard which abuts a public street) of all 3 Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fact & Decision lots shall be sodded. Rear yards that do not abut a public street may be seeded and mulched. d. A minimum of one shade tree or evergreen tree, conforming to the minimum size and species requirements of the Albertville Zoning Ordinance shall be planted prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for each lot within the final plat. e. An escrow for the landscape/screening materials in the amount equal to 150% of the estimated cost for said materials, is provided to assure installation and survivability of all required plantings. (All new plants shall be guaranteed for two full years from the time the planting has been completed). A cost estimate for plant materials and installation of screening shall be provided by the developer for the purposes of calculating the required escrow. 18. If a subdivision identification sign is desired by the developer to identify the Albert Villas development, a sign plan is submitted for review and approval of the City Planner. Deed restrictions or other appropriate documentation shall be provided to identify that the private homeowners association shall be responsible for the maintenance of the grounds as well as the subdivision sign in perpetuity. Said documents shall also provide a clause allowing the City to remove the sign in the event that it is not maintained. The written documentation shall be subject to review and approval of the City Attorney and filed with Wright County. 19. The developer shall enter into a Planned Unit Development agreement, which includes all development plans and specifications, and specific land use and performance standards that must be adhered to throughout the life of the PUD. Said document will set forth the schedule, required financial security, amount and method of payment to satisfy payment of park dedication and other fees for the final plat. The PUD agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney. 20. The developer shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Control Plan and escrow consistent with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. 21. The conditions outlined in the NSP letter (October 18, 1999) are satisfied by the developer and are incorporated into deed restrictions to be filed against Lots 1 through 7, Block 2. 22. A current title opinion or commitment of title insurance is submitted acceptable to the City Attorney. 23. The developer shall provide the City with a reproducible copy of the recorded final plat, either chronoflex or its equivalent, and two (2) prints prior to issuance of building permits for the plat. 4 Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fad & Decision 24. All fees associated with this project shall be paid prior to the release of the final plat mylars to the applicant. 25. The final plat, developer's agreement and all pertinent documents must be filed with Wright County within 120 days from the date of City Council approval of the final plat. Failure to record the documents within the required time line will render the final plat null and void. 26. Any other conditions as set forth by the City Council, City staff, City Consultants or other agency responsible for review of this application. Adopted by the Albertville City Council this 7th day of August 2000. Attest: A City of Albertville Linda Goeb, City Administrator John A. Olson, Mayor pc: Linda Goeb, Kevin Mealhouse, Mike Couri, Pete Carlson, Wayne Stark, Chad Cichos, Denise Johnson, Edina Development Corporation Inc. and Matt Davich. 5 Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fad & Decision EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Outlot A, ALBERT VILLAS, Wright County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. And Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Meadow View, Wright County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. 6 EXHIBIT A Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fad & Decision CITY OF ALBERTVILLE RESOLUTION # 2000 23 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE PROJECT KNOWN AS ALBERT VILLAS SECOND ADDITION. WHEREAS, the project commonly known as Albert Villas PUD (a 170 lot, single family development located northerly of County Ditch #9 and southerly of CSAH 18), was reviewed at seven public meetings held on 14 September 1999, 12 October 1999, 9 November 1999 and 14 December 1999; 3 January 2000, 11 January 2000; and 18 January 2000; and WHEREAS, a public hearing to consider the proposal to change the land use designation of the136.75 acre subject site from Agricultural/Rural to Low Density Residential was held by the Planning Commission on September 14, 1999, October 12, 1999, November 9, 1999 and December 14, 1999; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing on said motion was duly published and posted in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes and persons attending were afforded the opportunity to comment on said amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, the City Council held public meetings on 3 January 2000, 18 January 2000 to consider the Comprehensive Plan amendment and persons attending were afforded the opportunity to comment on said amendment, and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2000 the City Council of Albertville approved the Comprehensive Plan amendment (pursuant to the conditions of the Findings of Fact and Decision dated 1-18-00), and WHEREAS, the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan land use designation changes are to occur at the time of final plat for each phase of the development, and WHEREAS, the final plat of the second phase of the development to be known as "Albert Villas Second Addition", was considered and approved by the City Council on August 7, 2000. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Albertville, Wright County, Minnesota that the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use 7 EXHIBIT B Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fact & Decision designation of the subject site "Albert Villas" final plat, to Low Density Residential is hereby approved. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that upon adoption, this resolution shall be filed with the Wright County Recorder's Office. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE THIS 7th day of August 2000. ATTEST: Linda Goeb, City Administrator CITY OF ALBERTVILLE M. John A. Olson, Mayor 8 EXHIBIT B Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fad & Decision CITY OF ALBERTVILLE WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 2000- 9 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE TO PROVIDE FOR A CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE HEREBY ORDAINS: SECTION 1. SECTION 300 ADMINISTRATION -AMENDMENTS (TEXT AND MAP) OF THE ALBERTVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE IS HEREBY AMENDED TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF THE FOLLOWING LEGALLY DESCRIBED PROPERTY. LEGAL DESCRIPTION Outlot A, ALBERT VILLAS, Wright County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. 1 Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Meadow View, Wright County, Minnesota, according to the recorded plat thereof. SECTION 2. THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS HEREBY REZONED FROM A-1, AGRICULTURAL RURAL TO R-1A, LOW DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY. SECTION 3. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO MAKE THE APPROPRIATE CHANGE TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE TO REFLECT THE CHANGE IN ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS SET FORTH ABOVE. SECTION 4. THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UPON ITS PASSAGE AND PUBLICATION. 9 EXHIBIT C Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fact & Decision ADOPTED by the Albertville City Council this 7th day of August 2000. ATTEST: AM Linda Goeb, City Administrator CITY OF ALBERTVILLE John A. Olson, Mayor 10 EXHIBIT C Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fad & Decision Lot Area, Setback, Height and Coverage Requirements. RI -A District Required Original Proposal Revised Proposal Density (Units per Acre) 2.9 1.34 1.30 Minimum Lot Area 15,000 sf 80 lots (44%) 12,524 sq. ft. Range of Lot Sizes 15,000 sf 12,505 — 35,647 sf 12,524 — 36,671 sq. ft. Required Minimum Useable 12,000 sf 30 lots (16% < 12,000 Upland lot area above O-H- 12,000) W (80% of required lot area must be above O-H-W) Lot Width 100 feet 80 —150 feet (143 or 85 feet minimum 79% of the lots are 95.04 feet average less than 100' wide) Lot Width Comer Lot 120 feet 90 —130 feet 100 feet minimum 2 Lots (10%) conform (except 2 lots are 95 feet" to requirement Average Lot Width Comer 101 feet 105.1 Lot Buffer Yard Lot Depth (lots 170 feet 165 feet* 170 feet except Block 9 which adjacent to arterial or major has 155 foot lots collector streets) Buffer Yard (lot width 25 feet 10 feet 10 feet requirements for side yards) Setback (PUD Periphery) 35 feet Unknown 35 feet Setbacks (front) 30 feet 30 feet 30 feet (side -interior) 15 feet 10 feet 10 feet (side -comer) 30 feet (side 20 feet 20 feet yard abutting a public street) (rear) 25 feet 30 feet 30 feet Wetland setback from O-H- 20 feet Unknown 20 feet W Building Height Maximum 35 feet Unknown 35 feet Maximum Lot Coverage for 25 percent of Unknown 25 percent of lot area Structures lot area Minimum Floor Area per 2 BR 960 sq. Unknown 2 BR 960 sq. ft. above ground Dwelling Unit ft. above 3 BR 1,040 sq. ft. above ground ground 3 BR 1,040 sq. ft. above ground 11 EXHIBIT D Albert Villas Second Addition Final Plat/Final Plan PUD CC Findings of Fact & Decision Northern States Power Company 414 Nicollet Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-1993 Telephone (612) 330-5500 October 18, 1999 Charles W Plowe Consulting Engineer 9180 Lexington Avenue NE Circle Pines, MN 55014 ENCROACHMENT — Albert Villas Line 0978 Section 2&11, Township 120, Range 24 County: Wright Dear Our Transmission Engineers have reviewed the Albert Villas encroachment. The encroachment is acceptable to NSP under the following conditions: (1) Excavation close to structure location. A minimum distance of 15 feet of supported earth must be maintained from any part of the line structure. Support of the ground beyond the 15 feet may be provided by a slope no greater than three feet horizontal to one foot' vertical. Support may also be provided by the use of cribbing, sheet piling, retaining wall or tunneling. The specific plan for providing the required support and the excavation plan for the proposed plan for the proposed project must be submitted to NSP for review and approval. (2) Grade change around structure location. Fill around or above steel structure foundations is not permitted. The grade around the structures must provide for surface water runoff — no surface water ponding around structures will be permitted. Any cost related to the adjustment of NSP's facilities will be at the requestors expense. (3) Grade change within easement. The ground elevation within the easement shall not be increased above the existing grade. Stockpiling of soil and/or material within the easement will not be permitted. You will need to provide grading plans showing proposed grade one easements -and surveyors structure locations. Pond #7 appears to conflict with Structure #71, and if this is the case, the pond must be relocated. EXHIBIT E Page 2 1011811999 (4) Clearances to equipment. A working clearance of 25 feet between the electrical and any cranes or digging equipment used in or near the easement, must be maintained at all times. If this clearance cannot be maintained, the contractor or developer must arrange for a line outage by calling NSP's System Control department (Carol Andrews 612/330-6135). At least two weeks advanced notice must be provided in order to schedule a line outage. There is a fee of approximately $350.00 per day, per outage, for this service. This fee must be paid prior to outage (5) Landscaping with the easement. Detailed plans for landscaping (including light standards) must be submitted to NSP for review and approval. Generally shorter varieties of trees and shrubs may be considered. If planting is permitted, the line's voltage and the tree's mature height and the distance from the line must be considered. For maintenance purposes there shalf be no planting within 15 feet of structure sites. (6) Building on easements. There shall be no permanent or temporary building allowed on the easement. The plans show the foundations right next to the easement, and the roof overhang would be encroaching on the easement and this is not allowed. (7) Street lights and signs on easements. If there are to be street lights, sign boards, identification signs or any other type of non -building structure within the easement, detailed plans must be submitted to NSP for review and approval to verify compliance with electrical code clearances. (8) Fences on easements. If the easement area is fenced, gates must be installed to provide access to NSP for maintenance purposes. chain link or other types of fences using metal material and constructed on or near an NSP easement should be properly grounded. Page 3 1011811999 (9) Structure Protection. Where streets, parking lots or other areas are developed which expose transmission structures to vehicular traffic, steel post or guardrail type barricades must be installed in accordance with NSP specifications. In some cases, curbing will provide adequate protection It is the express condition of this consent that all other terms and conditions of that certain easement granted by Victor and Clara Berning and recorded as Document No. 250955, and by William Vetsch and recorded as Document 260273, shall remain in full force and effect. To acknowledge receipt of and agreement with the terms of this consent, please sign this letter and return to my attention. Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation. Sincerely, Terri Boyle ACCEPTED: Real Estate Assistant By: 612/330-6956 Its C: Roger Johnson Steve LaCasse NH:43094-12 Str:68-72 i 4T" ; wt �➢ L 11 11 � I I I i� !! i9 .;•i�'•� I I I I I I I I I ! N! !____ ----- _ N __ �1 ------- I �AV��Uff I I \ _ I I I I I ---------- I li Ili � t 1 V NI I Mtii%♦ 'W^rs• �' \\ l° I i m I _ b I l / _ 1 ------------ I u� H:\00proj\00040\VORKING\00040PP2clwg 06/23,12000 ft$ Of Ow IM14 d Sw- Z 7 tM R 2, AV"B 'OS-Z Of Nf pail ASK -A4.1/- /! .+.t tie w a. sn/4 a s.r_ 2 T tm s xaan 1 —1—T---T---�-- ;� I �•� °sw aS s� s+ 'E� � ' I I UI71tty I Ul s s'" I 11 I 11 I II I II it II II II 11 II 11 W II II II N fl I I I I Z I Q i I I II II 11 -I II ILi<�yro J II ly=��— w'J II LJ II L_ II 1 Y wfc �: KANL AVENUE A I a II II 1 OU iI N l ilk II 11 II II 1 1 litrssran 116 tm utulty � i E ttu t •� ttw I 1 I` 18 � 1 6 j I -------- g .. I ------ i \ rn 1 a, I----------1 I ---- -- O / 10�02 16T _J -__-_- I ------------ I 1 igg. A I W i a �1 ;6 / I I . I I '} 1 I . I I r---- I I Rai lit FP In I g � � l � » __--Q-- L____R___—_ - at I 1 I ------------- `� sue, =� C nonrorsr� 9,\00proj\00040\WORKING\00040PP2.drg 06/23/2000 09,47:21 AM PDT b i r.p —IbW lYK S. 3bW 3 \ i I 31 \ I I IN l 6p r yL E gg3iF° S�� ' 8 7 I L811• JAI .Ynov�'srs r - JPA" - R(I I 4. •/ o 60 t > > SEA fr' 4, � � `OON d g y O 77 t \Ul ` at. l B / i 33 / / / 60 / / / / / / i NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED COS *546(42) NF,NkcGCOMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKc.i MEMORANDUM TO: Albertville Mayor and City Council Linda Goeb, City Administrator FROM: Deb Garross, Senior Planner DATE: July 31, 2000 RE: Albertville Park & Trail Plan Study — PARK FEE ANALYSIS FILE: 163.05 — 00.14 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this memo is to provide an explanation for the park fee analysis that is attached. Our office was requested to re-examine the 1997 Park & Trails Comprehensive Plan and associated park dedication fee structure in order to assess future improvements and cost/revenue aspects of the park and trails plan. To assist the City Council in the review of this matter the following documents are attached: Attachments: 1. Draft Resolution — Establishing Revised Commercial/Industrial Fee Schedule 2. Draft Ordinance — (Sections of the Subdivision Ordinance will need to be amended to implement the changes in the park fee structure and revised park and trails plan). 3. Park Implementation Chart — Includes park implementation table and fee analysis 4. 1997 Park and Trail Plan Map 5. 2000 Park and Trail Plan Map (this map is in draft form and the review of the plan has not yet been completed by the Planning Commission) 6. Planning Report — July 5, 2000 BACKGROUND An important issue has been raised by several local business owners/residents concerning the Commercial/Industrial park dedication fee structure outlined in the 1997 plan. The City has been requested to review its existing (1997) Park and Trail Comprehensive Plan and fee structure in light of property value changes that have occurred since completion of the Albertville Outlet Mall. The issue is that the land values for some properties within parts of Albertville have escalated at a tremendous rate in the three years since the 1997 Park & Trails Plan was adopted. The City must ensure that there is a rational nexus or relationship between the fees charged for parks and the related impacts associated with particular land uses. Some of the assumptions applied 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6 PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2-595-9837 to the 1997 Park Plan may no longer be accurate and this analysis is an attempt to provide current information for the City to address park implementation and fee issues. As an example, Mooney Addition is a commercial plat consisting of two lots (approximately 1 acre each). The commercial park dedication requirement is 10% land or cash. Cash dedications are based upon fair market value of the property at the time of sale. Under the 1997 Park Plan, the cash dedication for the site would be approximately $4,000 dollars. ($20,000 per Commercial acre x 2 acres = $40,000 x .10 (10% dedication) _ $4,000). The fair market value of the Mooney property as of the final plat date was approximately $700,000 or $350,000 per acre. The value of the property has increased over 1,650% since the 1997 Park Plan was completed. The park dedication fee for the site is equal to $70,000 dollars as opposed to the 1997 estimate of $4,000 dollars. The current park dedication fee for one lot in Mooney Addition is equivalent to the dedication fee that would be generated by 53 homes. The park impact associated with a convenience store/gas station and fast food restaurant is not likely to be equal to that generated by the residents of 53 homes. Therefore, it is prudent to consider a park dedication fee based upon an acreage calculation as opposed to fair market value provided that the outcome is sensitive to the total park dedication fee structure and system costs. ANALYSIS As part of the analysis the planned park system was reviewed to determine what elements have been implemented as well as to provide for new athletic fields, lakeshore park and a trail/sidewalk system. The attached Park Implementation Chart illustrates the improvements and costs identified in the 1997 Park and Trail plan. Existing facilities as well as the costs to complete the system are identified. The park improvements to be implemented have been adjusted to account for a 6% inflation increase that has occurred since the time that the original plan was developed. The inflation factor is based upon changes in the Consumer Price Index from December 1997 to June 2000. Future park improvements were based upon the relocation of Hamburg Park (from the Towne Lakes site to a search area on Mud Lake) and the addition of approximately 20 acres for athletic fields. The future improvements also take into account a reduction in the amount of trails that the City will need to construct. The trail element of the proposed park plan was significantly reduced by removing overland trail sections that have already been platted. There is also a heavy emphasis on developers providing sidewalks within the road right-of-way of future plats utilizing the recent Subdivision Ordinance amendment approved by the City Council. Please refer to the 1997 and draft 2000 Park and Trail Plan maps that are attached. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 12, 2000 to review the draft park plan update and fee analysis. The Planning Commission continued the review of the park & trail draft plan to allow them more time to evaluate the system prior to formulating a recommendation for the City Council. The review of the draft park and trail plan is tentatively scheduled for the August 9th meeting. As the Planning Commission has not yet completed its review of the draft park and trail plan, no recommendation is available concerning the future park improvements at this time. The fee analysis is to a large degree dependent upon the ultimate park/trail facilities that the City would like to have implemented at the time of build -out. As such, the City Council may want to wait for the Planning Commission to complete its review of the 2000 draft Park and Trail plan. As an alternative, the City Council could adopt the fee schedule that is recommended by the Planning Commission with the understanding that major additions/deletions to the park and trail system may require a future modification to the fee schedule. The fee structure recommendation forwarded by the Planning Commission is for the City Council to establish the commercial/industrial dedication as $5,766 per acre with the base fee to be adjusted for inflation on an annual basis. Please refer to attached chart "Proposed Park System Calculations" for reference to the specific formulas and assumptions. Staff will further review the analysis with the City Council at the August 7tn meeting. The Recommendation of the Planning Commission is based upon the following: It was assumed that the residential dedication would remain at $1,300 per unit. The total future parks and trail system costs associated with the draft park and trail plan map approximate $3,056,056.00. Staff anticipates that future residential development will result in $1,410,500.000 (based upon 1,085 units x $1,300 per unit). The balance of the fees, $3,056,056 is to be provided via C/I development park dedication fees (This figure assumes that 100% of the cost of the future park improvements is to be funded by new development). There are approximately 530 net C/I acres of land within the City, which when divided by the $3,056,056 balance, results in a commercial/industrial fee of $5,766.00 per acre. In the event that the draft park and trails map changes dramatically and/or the City Council chooses a different funding alternative, the park dedication fees will need to be modified accordingly. ACTION REQUESTED A motion to approve, deny or continue the discussion of this item pursuant to the discussion of the City Council is in order. A draft resolution has been prepared and attached to this memo, in the event that the City Council desires to change the C/I park dedication fee as described herein. Several sections of the Albertville Subdivision Ordinance will need to be amended to implement the park dedication fee changes and the modifications to the Park and Trail Plan map. The City Council will need to schedule and hold a public hearing to amend the Subdivision Ordinance with the provisions outlined in the attached draft Ordinance amendment CITY OF ALBERTVILLE WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION # 2000 - 21 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE FEE SCHEDULE FOR PARK DEDICATION EFFECTIVE AS OF AUGUST 7, 2000. WHEREAS, The City of Albertville has an established Park and Trail Comprehensive Plan which has been in effect since September 8, 1997; and WHEREAS, The City Council established park dedication fees for residential, commercial and industrial properties to obtain land and revenue to complete the park and trail system outlined in the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, The City of Albertville was requested by Mooney Development Corporation to review the park dedication fees for commercial properties; and WHEREAS, The City has conducted an analysis of park and trail system and the associated costs to implement said system; and WHEREAS, The City Council has determined that the fee structure should take into account park and trail infrastructure costs, property values, inflation, facility use and development as opposed to market value alone. 1. A draft resolution has been prepared to change the commercial/industrial park dedication fee to $4,324 per acre as opposed to 10/5% respectively of the fair market value determined at the time of sale. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it does hereby adopt this resolution setting forth park dedication fees for the land use categories specified as follows: Residential Uses: $1,300.00 per unit Commercial/Industrial Uses: $4,324.00 per acre ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE THIS 7th DAY OF AUGUST 2000. 1 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE Mayor John A. Olson ATTEST: By: , Linda Goeb, City Administrator -j 5 k � (D c @ k 0 to � 2 « a E S % 0 RU k � £ E Cc m C CL 2 E � § cu a- >o @ EC-4 •- @ 2� aE @ o � 2R 0k , � ■ CL � c 0 J _ / / a/ 7 E C) k C cNi %22� o 0 2a� cn CEz Olk E Qz a.t2 /Uk q cc k 0 0 o$ 7 2-le _ # Q. _ \ E 7 cc- § E / @ 7 2 g« >: L-�§ m 6 CDo 2 c cc 2 � o / 2 ~ k 3cc § ° cc co = § S - \ 2 § § $ cts/ 5 �:t.! E / ■ -�� o t m m o$ E cc ±�k�� � £ E/k k 2 °_ a) © > 5> c f cc f o m E cc � = ¢ 1 o 0 _ f _3 CD � 0 3 � ® " 1-� w 4" 40 ¢ o = E > $ c a 7$ f 2 a)0 §$ f 5.2 a a) E w § 0k / cn a/ 2 22c + 0 cc cc cc o �_ � kit t k) G�£J 2 » gy m m 2/ D cc 0 0) cc /ca cc C#) @ 2 @ /m c�aM$ § G 2 -0 2% C b £ / / o 2 \ $ % 7 ® \ \ § § 7 0 2 k ccQ. Af� _ :EEa) ca �@�U.- 0 o%§eee,�m§ cc co cc CO J�tEa) Ea q %E a-C )0o OOS-j m k § � � a � a E S § � 0 2U § E E £ � C CL to E § 0- >o @ E � . m %� L o @ -0 �± kk , � % � � c 0 ■ e ■ � � 0 LL 4 k 2 K22 N CD 2 CL E co a. /�k q k mot c kkM CM c23 2%a kccc u 0 \ \ 2 C.)cc 0 _ m /fo CL t m % 9� 2 f t \ cc c° m k \ C k 2 2 k \ 7 0 Qco— � � k cc %/ O � — 0) R w � � o § §3 / cc/ k \ : cc a)0 �0 / co 2 CL) % § = S a 2 % fca:6o $ § 2 2k=$ o� t E S > � CDc o 2 E� � f = = 2 D 2CL 2 2 0)ca 0 � 0 o o)2 m o o o c t 2 K32LO L %2f � CLE Eo a-$2 C 5 q 0 _ $ 7 � _ E £ E f =. w c cr CL 0 k/k E 2 § cc a CU 0 a % Ga4@ £ m § k 2 L 0 U � E � \ O m / / f cc $ LL S $ 2 E 0 cu �% 22k (LCL Ck �)cc 0 / nm3 C6 0 (L§R 2 M 5 » � 2 m � E S ui cn 0 2U % § ■ E £ m 2 CL �E §� � o o 0 0.0 C7 o-0 22 0k » k � k LQ £ � C R E2 2 - � q _ k m elf a§§ � E * 22$ CD 0 C) q cc U- / 0 cn m w k kQ. \ 7 \ E / c § f f 7 An c k k = 0 / q k 2a 2 2 q 7 0 - -o . �o _ _ o � �% % % % Z a ca @ R o c o f / $ § 7 / e£ E/ . �ca � :3 m = cc. g v ¥ o 0 ) a j -0c c %aa)0 M ® (j) = IrCL k o 22 ) $ ) k a °k6 _ tF/ 0 //£\k a00 � o 23k§U) CD � 0 o _ ££_ :3 o° a) —_— E 7 E 3 0 02$ o w m$J)0�§k c o■ o cc 0 ==�cC o 0. r m'■ @� 7 0 0 e 2 S m @ -,Ad£Ra c�� c ' 0 E a 2 2 2%� OSmq%EEcaJS 0 c N O N cu s N n E O U vi C 4' N O 0 .n U r N O s N tr0 > O r n E c C L O a) a 0 ao _ 0 N L m a. L o 0 cn c Uv z � E� o >o� a� CLCL 0 oU o N U O O t U 3 aD c N C C U U cc LL 0 O — C C� L f/I L L j c o O 10 u, fB n o +- � O cu N .- N O O Y U O cu ca O N O m LL I— cu cu �— �COJ CL a a .. z z O U J H H N U cc LL -v N c c cv a rn (D Q z Q O a O O t v N cu E a c � z E ° m > o c n V. Y �— aU)=' 0 0Uo N U O O t U 3 a� c_ � �CC C U c6 LL cnO — C cm cn N x w co o- �� U N w Ca O O- O -0 cc CA — c0 = O c4 — 0 O Cl ccco N N r- JCl Q Q .. z z 0 U J Q H cn O U cc LL 'v c c ca a rn rn r. Q Q c z az aE > o n� L yr a n C' 0 C) o Cl N U cn 'V O O LL O L w co w o m c L- > o c0 U � L L O > c � Q Q ., z z 0 O U J H H h N �U ca LL m c c cc a rn rn c m m .Q a� ca a� > 64 C N N Q � Q 6 N L N � O O C 7 O N N 3 E O a) C '+� C m a) .3 c o � c U •.• C O N O" N -p Q N E N O U � L C r O N O U c ca N o cc E CO cn E C E d O O N Q.O :3 E N 'a Q" O -0 o4- cn a cn 19 E Uv Q a z ( co D v > o A-- E L .y ate -' 0 C5 o N V a� Y m � c ca o U C N � E E w 0 cr += O ca L OL O Q d Q Q z Z 0 U J H N .v ca U- a> C c cc a r rn rn c m a� ca t N r rn O O N c cc L O L U) a N fl_ O U N C +' N O �U > N L E N > Q a� tQ 0 ao N L cu EQ L o O in N O N U -v N N r m a 0 a c m O E E O c� c N O c N L O U c O Q. O .a N f0 O c cB 0 c O N c O a m D c a) a) n U) i O iF .. O O O O o0oOo0 o o 0 0 o O o O O O o O 000 O O O c �O o OOovrnO 0 cn co OLOo p Q Qr E.Q cnN O NLto IWMrrco -i ON (O r et torN a7 N M w r �^ > O Q >C Co Q. Z E9 E*°'a a� c 0 oV o N V U ca O O 0 ao N N a) N O L 'U U cc cc LL Lq — a) N cc C > W c o C .p" c , .Q Q � O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O O 0 0 0 C O O O O 0 OOOetoO 0 0 Co 0 0 O O O L O co O OVL O O O p r O N LO to V' O N co 1- 14t to lqt w U N wMrrco N M co to c c c c o c m— cc ca Lm Ia- O� cvao m CoE U)c 3 3 C om o� 0) U w cncr 7 a) to O _ L _ o M c o _ p a) m c 'D N w ca O LO c p O L 7 cv a) LQ N c0 co o `° U 0 a� 4)i � .on a> cn c as o c ai w c o o =° c°i " x c� cn cN° � � � o o o — m o cl. � ag o a�i c O of L c V ai 0 co U � o c a) m— p c c0 L N 0 C p O y L a) > c c O E p a U d N cII Lo�O�oL L c O c �o L o5Loco�t°a CD �' N c Q Q> V Y c �p L N N �'c m 0 N p � c S Co L N a) 3 c cc w- O —o Lm� U N L .ca —_ O Q.a L) E � U 0� c U �� O — 0�cU�Ear D t CII0) CD c0 c co ca C a) j O U c_ O C. Y Co C� N c O C c 0 N L to 0 U) cc ccu = 't W O � 05 E 'N S Q L N(D n E C cc O M O O m Y 0 co 3— CL 3 N rd� Cc a) o Ur p U)�._LL C y u) O UJ t4 p r Q LEA -Cs to to cu cu cu L O N �-: to ` -C N O m . cu �. Efl � L N N i O — Oa cu a N C Q N s N Qo �+ O cu N oCA Q O cu U O L -p a o a L v 4� cu CD -cu c c a N 0)0 -0 L w CD N O N 3 a= c a) C a o 0 j L c ~ O cu N3 t06 a N d >. Q a) — CU E to cU O L 0 -0 H .0) c LO c c O N cn 0 � cu to U m o a > a cu cu E (0 a) w- L > N c ., L M O .2 E F- . , Q. N O NECU c �� O a) EL :3 20 CL C N N O c 0 N QE L Lo m 'CO ,2 a cu a a) N in N E 0 C Ecu Y ■ 2 as 0 0 OOOOo 0 000 .. c io o 0 o 00000 OtnNOO O 0 000 V00 �N NN O Q) QV O -v LOLOI-- v .- tON c0 Ln �O� N r N� 1:i ti >�� 2 j Ntt ER fA L a U, QL 0 C) o N V L O L C OL `! i 0 O O O w. of .-. Q00 Yu ego cg cu v Q V U V Lq 0 Cm E N Cc o io C cu C° Li co r "' O v N o x toc 0 C1 c �G1V =a w �,0 N Q' 4C.0 Y cc O V cm N ccca N C CD `c? v c z cu Z U. O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O LO O OLONOO O tt')OO ►� O cc t1) 1 N U V COM two N O O c; O N O L C c Cu c a N Y O h cc cu cu to Q. Q. `� 0cc y cc z r to D M c 2 oN N M N 0 N to N ai II Y Ad tti cc 7 U N O C N 0 V c orn 0pc L c> O 0 0 Cl a) c T cvc0�- cc N O 0 V — C to c _ � :� '0r Q rn coi (/� tv c L ��0 n o � 0 m � 4—p o �c H E- cc O c w L c L 0 c c 0 to �" CU CM c =O 0 c a O 3 r 7 2 Ca_ O O >,�Cc V U c O O Y 0 Co c L y 'o N N C O N O cu cu 0 X c 4) to y 9 y OL N =r- m thC%4 nd�' ou >�JQ tc0 CO C CL �i m a) L L O 7 O L C 3 m L v a> C ca L 31-1 C 3 0 cn v a� a� E 0 Ica 2 a) � O Q u) E C E co a. 0 20 E N a) i r cQ4 E L OL O 0 0-0 O O 00 00 OooOo 00000 0 O 00* o000 C iNR too Olf NOO cO Ln00 E.o to �� LO st �N d d.�^�ct0 O >�� N a L a. 4b (n O C) o N V LD U cc LL C N X W O o0 0000o O o00 O O O O O O O O O O O O ►n tn0 O►nN00 cfl LOao N 0 �v �Ti— (OC CNN U N v rn C C cc E caQ c t3 O H 0 a) 2 c�Lv ca O C U a) N c; O .� N -0 N ca aN c ch U O U co -LL 0) C ( c C 0 p •� 0 C cam U W C N C tC 0 N N pj C N L 0 d 0 L p 0 O _ 0 CM C� 4m 0 w CB 0 7 'C ca — cc 3 U O N— 0 0 p 0 Cnw C cc N 0 U ^ C cc L N w 7 L +- C4 E a; 0 0 cv ._ cv pL N U L 00 N L L U �ccro��� CL �0E Qc�i�c maCOC%4ccuaaco Of0 OC'n 3 § � 2 § 0 c 7 £ ■ a k o 0 § k : @ k 7 � � a)c 3 k / CD q Y % ' 7a @ c k E /-J � S ƒ � a) ' 2� .ZZ07 £ § 7 � @ A � % $ 2 c \ § @ 0 £ g 72 @ 'a U $ E /k o u Ck Qo ck q 0 c $ 2 T -0U m 2m >a) E cu /2 a2 CU§ 0 r0 m a) E @: Em k �§ a) >0 ) '2 @o m c ECU e m a e 3 c 2�� �_ § k 70 c k_ 2 � q US �R £ ■ � a) E 2 0 o@ f 013 - ) . e ■ _ k k k �k /222 2 2 2 CD k L E a- /ok q 2 % U- k/ w 000 00 0 000 00 00 000 00 oCOL oo - otc�L qLc o- ocq o0 0 aV)CN 0m 2 gn04 �00 om 0M� ow Q � fa E Mn 2 § 0 3¢ 0 E m ° > © E J0 m k® § m m m 70/ § a cm 7 ■ CL. ¥ a c ff w 2 a k / $§ k / 2 f f § $ � 3°° 2 3 o § § o � f o $ § o 6 » 0 2 § § 0 » 0 o c = o®=�_� o e = o���c c @ = omao c m c � a) 2 U) L- 4)'o = a) a. c o o= o m 2 2 m � c » "� o® o E � o=« cc 3% ._ ccc o= \ �-_ I o�� - 2 o» 2 c f o e® O %§ o# 2 k R k � k§ 0» e■ kcl §\ ci E � Quo- —0 c �2c c ® 0 m- g/ o n o c■ _ o CL. ■ _ C :- o (� C � 0 7 c CL�m-_ � o �. a a o o e@ - o "' o d c o o m 2 o a v c 6® o a m_ 2 a/2#/ 2c ��ak\Q\ � Wa.�m/m-k\ �a-/aka C c cn v v v c 0 > 0) m cc t a v O o L Q 0. c m C m 7 C i -C Q N c (D E cc Y 3 c� c c a v v O Y Q 3 N � O L Q O ` c c U 0 Q O O OL aa) Q a) v :. EO ca U 0 c `O c'a a) O 'o O c C)m m cc v c o > a)\ E w a) -0 N -C Q O N v � v v LO U C E cc v �- -0 c O O C N N v a cu _ v c 0 a E m a 5 O .0 "O C m o 70 CL nay E off; U- a) a .0 C C co L a w -- a z a� a z > o .c L O a C 0 oU o N V N v •U cc LL O c X w O O O O O 0 0 0 Co 0 O W LO O O V5 O U cOMN Oa � c O N O cn U c 7 N i N O cn v . O U U- cn N v cc v �O N v — .0 0 cC +• co E 0 3 cc 3 rn rn v 3CL v cc O cn V U Q cn Cc v C U cn cn aMa�� N C v n cc E m s U cn v C O 0 v m y -.0 N U S O ~ J X LO N v- Q � E ;2 c U v L v M 0 � O c L O L E O ._ N U v v m N n L N � U cu v v cu ca) a O E a8 m *' U cc v ccc UL av O i N cc co a � 3 0 O v pnu , U t t� F-v UO�d O O O, O O O O toN" NCO O O O O O O 00 (14co O O 1 t 0 c_ J Q 0 O O c cc N a) O L M U L C O N cm r v O 'a — In 1. cc L 0 v O O U 'L O CD cc > cc 3 o>v0 U o Cl a-0iM E- M 0 O d � 0) U cm cc CD 0 cm �cac'in v '� ci O N N to Q U c`c = h O � w 0cl N 0 C 0 0 0 O U) cc :3a O CLc aN U - v cc mvmccflccaNi co •• in C13 v— m -cc 7 — co L ch O O N v a N -It cc aaa03Q cc a) W c ca Q O � cu U O L Q O N II 00 � � C O Q N ca U N w 'O I I C N II -0 -0 N N o � O O O U �( t0 m N N O UL> O 0 O 0 � O ca r r cu � '— X X .� rn cn w c LONw U I, ch O .. + n = M it N cc a) II O CL U cu a) Q cu Q Q II O O (n >+ .2:1 N O ) O CO Q �• X « N cn Q) y tB O Q O N tQ O uj O Q' N ) N O- O (n T > O O Q J >, O � a)0 >, zz v LO 0 M LO II U co c ca U cu cn O co L N E O i i u O U CV U) A cu d O CI) U C M co m N O r t4 L a) .w L v L 4) 4) ILL C 4) 'C N 4) 0 c "T O � M CO 0 ~ CO O N C6 0 M —IN CI: LL O U � O cn (o U) m 70 caCC V H Q U UUU U U U co co cu LL LL " C1 Q CL (OOcoN 1­ O M � � � N u u u a m m � cu cu cu a O 0 0 .0 LO LO LO O N O +�-�CflON i 0, N C) N N cn V. � o o N r O OI'l- C •L d E¢mU O UQQQ m m � .L c O CL � M U O O L U') o. o m 69. u cis c o rn Q 7 .� U N N CD a II O N ^ 'D 70 it 1 m C "OQ Q �+ o O o U mo .O _� ca ccu a)O O U � � ca c c- ca N O L '� c aF �N00 U c1r) II N a) II a) rL_ U a) CL C13 > Q II Q. c w N (En C: O N N OM O _ co x U)U3 to O !? Q O Q a) N Q _a U) Q c a) 3 70 Q 0-0 o O N a) >, Z Z LO O C7 LO II U ca c ca U ca c LB O O c dN'O� Lr) C7 M O �C~70N Cr �_ N �cANN PCD M _ IT M —IN _0 c cn �N/� Co Co 6L m L a ca ca E }� Q U U U U U U U ca ca ca L L L CL Q. CL (000ON I` O C) v 7 eg� 64 u u u M M M L O co O r LO LO tf) O N O CO O) N Or-N NC7NN d d IL N OT O ~ ,L ZZ d EQmU O _ _ _ UQQQ PARK AND TRAIL FEE INVENTORY OF OTSEGO AREA Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. February 7, 2000 CITY SINGLE FAMILY COMMERCIAL/ TRAIL OR RESIDENTIAL PARK INDUSTRIAL SIDEWALK DEDICATION (per unit) PARK DEDICATION DEDICATION Land Cash Land Cash Albertville 10% $1,300 commercial 10% commercial 10%/ Trails as industrial 5% industrial 5% of required by fair market value Plan, deducted from Park Fees Big Lake 10% $1,300 Brooklyn Park $1,300 $4,000 per acre Clear Lake 10% $750 $150 Clearwater 10% fee set by Council Dayton 10% $1,100 Elk River As required $1,200 As required by commercial by Plan, Plan, equal to $3,000/ equal to cash cash contribution industrial $2,000 contribution based on fair per acre based on fair market land market land value value Maple Grove 10% $1,125 7 1/2% commercial $3,600/ industrial $2,850 per acre Monticello 10% 10% raw Sidewalks on land cost one side of street Otsego 10% $950 10% $175 Plymouth 10% $1,600 10% $4700 per acre Rogers 10% $700 10% commercial $4,000/ industrial $2,000 per acre St. Michael 10% $1,100 10% commercial $200 for $3,000/ residential industrial $2,000 per acre PLANNING REPORT TO: Albertville Planning Commission Linda Goeb, City Administrator FROM: Deb Garross, Senior Planner DATE: July 5, 2000 RE: Albertville Park & Trail Plan Study FILE: 163.05 — 00.14 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this item is to review the 1997 Albertville Comprehensive Park and Trail System Plan to identify current conditions and to determine if the current dedication requirements are adequate to complete the planned recreation system. The need to review the Plan has been prompted by the issues concerning the following: 1. Commercial park dedication fee/fair market value standards 2. Requests from the public to provide additional athletic fields 3. Revised Subdivision Ordinance standards allowing the developer to pave a narrower road section if a sidewalk is provided 4. Timing and responsible party to install trail/sidewalk systems to ensure plan implementation 5. Review alternative locations within the City for a lakeshore park To assist the Planning Commission and City Council in the review of the various trail and parkland improvements associated with the Comprehensive Park and Trail Plan the following attachments are provided: ATTACHMENTS 1. 1997 Proposed Trail Map 2. 2000 Draft Park & Trail Map 3. 1997 Proposed Trail Map Transparency 4. 2000 Draft Park & Trail Map Transparency 5. Updated Base Map 6. Prior Lake Sidewalk Policy — Subdivision Ordinance Standards Page 1 TRAILS The proposed draft trail and park map was developed based upon input received by the City Council and Planning Commission as well as City Staff, City Consultants and comments provided by the public. The first task in updating the map was to update the base map with the current approved subdivisions (and preliminary plats/PUD's). The project files at NAC were reviewed to determine where trails and parks had been approved for the community. Additionally, a citywide site survey was done to determine where trail segments have been installed and the improvements, which have been made to the various parks. The school sites were also inventoried, as there is community use of the athletic fields and play structures at these sites. The inventory and base map information revealed that many trail links and park objectives of the Park and Trail Plan have been implemented. However, there were also many areas, most notably the overland trails and on -street local trails (indicated on the 1997 Plan), which have been platted/developed without the trail improvements. The inventory clearly identified the missing links. The proposed 2000 trail plan was developed with a heavy emphasis on utilizing the new Subdivision Ordinance provisions, which allow a developer to reduce the street pavement width provided a sidewalk is constructed within the right-of-way. This tool provides a means for the City to develop a comprehensive pedestrian system with the majority of costs (installation, maintenance and reconstruction) being borne by the private sector. One of the key issues with the 1997 Plan that has been voiced concerns the ability of the City to fund the installation and continued maintenance of parks and trails. The sidewalk improvements are intended to be provided by the developer as a subdivision improvement. No park dedication credit is given for sidewalks that are installed utilizing the narrower street width provision of the Subdivision Ordinance. Additionally, sidewalk snow removal is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner and future improvements/reconstruction can be assessed. The proposed trail map includes approximately 12.9 miles (68,112 lineal feet) of trails (concrete sidewalks and bituminous trail sections) which will likely need to be installed and paid for by the City. Approximately 23 miles or (123,948 lineal feet) of trails have been removed from the plan and/or replaced by a plan for future sidewalks to be provided at the time of development. It is important to note that the City must make a determination as to the appropriateness of utilizing sidewalks as opposed to overland trails. Many of the trails indicated in the 1997 Plan can no longer be implemented or will be extremely costly in terms of acquisition of easements and/or public acceptance of trails after the fact. If the City desires to provide more overland trails, the plan should be amended in the areas where future development will occur and the appropriate dedications/easements can be acquired to ensure implementation of the trail system. Suggestions: 1. Utilize the Subdivision Ordinance provisions to the maximum extent possible to create a safe, functional pedestrian system throughout the community. 2. Focus attention on providing trail/sidewalk systems along major roads and to connect schools, recreation areas, churches and commercial centers. Page 2 3. Consider amending the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Agreements and other applicable documents to require that trails be graded and installed at the time of development. The developer has more control over the builders than does the City and it should be incumbent upon the developer and builder to assure that the trails are installed and maintained in good condition until such a time as units are issued occupancy permits. 4. Consider amending the Subdivision Ordinance, Development Agreements and other applicable documents to specify the location upon the lot where construction vehicles are permitted and require that area to be surfaced with gravel. This provision will clearly identify the area of the lot where vehicles may be parked and/or deliver materials. Additionally, this provision will aid in reducing the amount of dirt and mud that is deposited on streets during the construction phase of the projects. 5. Consider developing a punch list for project completion that includes an inspection of trails to ensure they are installed where/when approved and that they are in good condition prior to the release of escrow monies for the project. 6. For areas of the City where overland trails are proposed, identify the resources and or amenities where said trails should be located and avoid duplication of trail systems. 7. Consider adopting a sidewalk and/or trail standards (and typical section drawings/specifications) similar to the attached Prior Lake Sidewalk Policy. PARKS The park plan has been updated to show the completed acquisition areas and new parks, which have been or will be, dedicated with approved PUD/preliminary plats. Four small parks have been removed from the plan which are identified as: 12. Crow River Park; 13. Frankfort Park, 14. Hidden Park and 15. Knights Park on page 21 of the 1997 Park and Trails Comprehensive Plan. Also, Hamburg Park which was originally shown on the property currently proposed for the Towne Lakes PUD, has been removed from the plan with the intent to relocate a similar facility on Mud Lake. The park plan also includes three park search areas which show the general location of a future lakeshore park, and two possible locations for additional athletic fields. The City Council requested staff to send a letter to the developers of the Towne Lakes PUD indicating that the City would not require dedication/implementation of Hamburg Park within the first phase of the development. The developer was notified that the City will pursue an alternate lakeside park location within the northeast quadrant of the City. The search area located northeast of Mud Lake has been identified as a potential area for such a park. This area is somewhat isolated due to the lake configuration and as such active use of a facility in this location would not disrupt residential development. This area of the City was also chosen because it is anticipated that the land values will be more reasonable than other areas that are zoned commercial or industrial. The Mud Lake park search area is also located within a part of the City that will not likely be serviced with municipal utilities at any time in the near future. The site contains gently rolling topography and good exposure to the lake both of which are conducive for park and recreation purposes. Additionally, the area has not yet been subdivided and therefore there are a limited number of property owners that would be involved in land negotiations. There are about 65 acres of land under one ownership in this location which would result in 6.5 acres of land dedication if the site were to be subdivided and the entire park dedication taken as land. Hamburg park was planned to be a neighborhood park Page 3 facility consisting of 7 acres of land. To relocate the park facility on a one-to-one basis, approximately .5 acres would need to be acquired by the City for a similar park in this location. In the event that the City would like to combine the three park facilities of the 1997 Plan (Hamburg, Crow River and Frankfort Park) into one lakeside facility, approximately 8.5 acres would need to be acquired resulting in a 15-acre neighborhood park facility. It is possible that athletic fields could also be located within this park area. The two park search areas located south of 1-94 have been included to show locations where additional athletic fields could be located. Search Area 1 is located south of the Kollville Estates PUD and is identified in the 1997 Park and Trail Plan as the location for Winter Park. Winter Park is identified as a community park intended to comprise a gross area of 18 acres (12 of those acres being dedicated to development of active recreational facilities). About 8.5 acres of the 18 acres has been dedicated within the Karston Cove, Cedar Creek and Kolleville Estates developments. The City will need to acquire about 6 additional acres of land above the 10% (4.02 acres) land dedication for the underlying parcel. The land area of the adjacent vacant residential property is relatively flat and would be conducive to the development of athletic fields. This location would be a prime area for additional athletic fields as it is located close to CSAH 37, and within % mile of the Lions Park athletic complex. A second site for athletic field consideration is the land area located south of County Ditch 9 and west of Swamp Lake. This site is the land area that is part of the Albert Villas site and consists of about 98 acres of land adjacent to Swamp Lake. Park dedication for this site would consist of about 9.8 acres of land if the 10% dedication is taken as land. Additionally, this area is located close to County Roads 18 and 19, the existing park complex in St. Michael (south of Swamp Lake) and is within close proximity to the High School athletic fields. Previous concept plans for Albert Villas indicated park areas along the lakeshore (within the 150' Lakeshore setback area from Swamp Lake), which is a Natural Environment Lake. Depending upon the type of fields that the City may desire to provide, it is anticipated that a minimum of 10 additional acres of land would need to be acquired by the City to accommodate an athletic complex. PARK & TRAILS IMPLEMENTATION — PARK DEDICATION FEES An issue that has been presented to the City concerns park dedication fees associated with commercial properties. The current requirement is that commercial property is subject to a 10% park dedication requirement and the cash equivalent is based upon fair market value of the property at the time of sale. The 1997 Park and Trail Plan included estimates for complete development of the City park and trails facilities as well as revenue sources. At that time, commercial land values were estimated to approximate $20,000/acre. The development of the Outlet Mall along with the current economic conditions has resulted in a situation whereby commercial land values are much higher (in the range of $350,000/acre for the Mooney Addition project). The Mooney Addition example indicates a 1,650% increase in land value over a 2.5 year period. The consumer price index for the same period has increased approximately 6% from an average of 160.5 for 1997 to 171.3 as of June 2000. Unfortunately, there are a limited number of cases where the fair market value is known and the limited cases are all properties located within relatively close proximity to 1-94 and the Outlet Mall. We cannot extrapolate from a few isolated cases what the exact valuation fluctuation will be. Page 4 However, from our research into who currently uses the City's facilities, it has been identified that people using the fields live and work within the Albertville/St. Michael area. According to Ron Rue, the softball leagues are comprised of local residents/employees as opposed to leagues from the Twin Cities or other communities. If this is indeed the case, then the City is in effect, collecting park dedication twice, once on a resident's lot/home and again from the residents employer. Unfortunately, there is no data that our office could find that breaks down the number of actual Albertville residents and employees that utilize the fields as opposed to residents of St. Michael and/or Otsego. What we do know is how much the 1997 plan would cost to implement based upon extensive research and analysis. Using the CPI, it is possible to apply the 6% inflation factor to the park improvements to calculate how much the system would cost in year 2000 dollars. Additionally we know approximately how many acres of low -density residential, medium density residential, commercial and industrial acres remain open for development. Utilizing this information it is possible to calculate how much the park system will cost to implement. Our office will provide a comparison of the planned versus implemented park improvements as well as an estimate to complete the system based upon the proposed plan. This comparison will be provided to the Planning Commission under separate cover as we are attempting to contact local appraisers to determine residential, commercial and industrial land values. Based upon this information we will forward possible alternatives for addressing the park dedication fee issue. It is important to note however that the information will be somewhat generalized due to the fact that we do not yet know if the proposed trail and park plan is acceptable nor do we know the extent to which the City would like to develop athletic fields. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council would like the Planning Commission to review the 1997 Park and Trails Plan with respect to the issues identified herein and forward recommendation(s) for build -out of the City's recreation system. The attached maps are provided as working documents for the Planning Commission and contain updated base map and trail/park information. It would be desirable to forward park/trail system recommendations to the City Council as soon as possible to assist them in resolving the key issues identified herein. PC Mike Couri, Pete Carlson Page 5 NF,Nc MEMORANDUM NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED C 606(3) COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MA,,.,-. - _ TO: Albertville Mayor and City Council Linda Goeb, City Administrator FROM: Deb Garross, Senior Planner DATE: July 31, 2000 RE: Albertville Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Transportation Plan, Road Functional Classifications FILE: 163.05 - 00.03 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this item is to consider a proposed amendment or change to the City of Albertville Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Plan. Specifically, the proposal is to amend the Plan to change the roadway functional classification of Main Avenue from a Major Collector to a Minor Collector. Additionally, the functional classification of Barthel Industrial Drive (and part of CSAH 35 east of Main Avenue), is proposed to be changed from a Minor collector to a Major Collector. Please see the attached Planning Report and Planning Commission minutes for further reference to this matter. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 12, 2000 to consider the amendment to the Albertville Comprehensive Plan — Transportation Plan. The City of St. Michael forwarded comments indicating that it is important for both City's to plan for logical transportation and road connections between the communities. A copy of the Planning Report, letter and public notice were mailed to Wright County Highway Engineer, Wayne Fingleson however, no review comments have been received from the County as of the date that this memo was written. The Planning Commission recommended that the functional classification of Main Avenue, Barthel Industrial Drive (and part of CSAH 35 east of Main Avenue) be changed as proposed. ACTION REQUESTED The City Council is requested to approve or deny the proposed amendment or continue the item for further research. A draft Resolution is attached with this memo, in the event that the City Council chooses to approve the amendment as presented. 1 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6 PHONE 6 1 2-595-9636 FAX 6 1 2-595-9837 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION # 2000-22 RESOLUTION OF THE ALBERTVILLE CITY COUNCIL APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO CHANGE THE FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF MAIN AVENUE, BARTHEL INDUSTRIAL DRIVE AND PART OF CSAH 35. WHEREAS, The City of Albertville has a Comprehensive Plan in force; and WHEREAS, The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment was submitted to Wright County and the City of St. Michael for review and consideration; and WHEREAS, The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan amendment on July 12, 2000, and persons attending were afforded the opportunity to comment on said Comprehensive Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, Notice of the public hearing on said motion was duly published and posted in accordance with the applicable Minnesota Statutes; and WHEREAS, The City Council has found the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the functional classification of Main Avenue from a Major Collector to a Minor Collector; and to change the functional classification of Barthel Industrial Drive (and that part of CSAH 35 located east of Main Avenue) from a Minor Collector to a Major Collector road to be acceptable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTBVILLE, WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it hereby approves the Comprehensive Plan amendment as identified herein. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE THIS 7TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2000. ATTEST Linda Goeb, City Administrator John A. Olson, Mayor PROPOSED FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ® Principal Arterial Minor Collector Minor Arterial Local Road Major Collector Source: 1994 Wright County Transportation Plan and NAC, Inc. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AU GUST2000 INVENTORY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ® Principal Arterial Minor Collector Minor Arterial Local Road ® Major Collector Source: 1994 Wright County Transportation Plan and NAC, Inc. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DECEMBER 1995 INVENTORY 53 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS NAF INC COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH PLANNING REPORT FILECOPYTO: Albertville Plannin Commission g Linda Goeb, City Administrator FROM: Deb Garross, Senior Planner DATE: July 6, 1999 RE: Albertville Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Transportation Plan, Road Functional Classifications FILE: 163.05 - 00.03 INTRODUCTION The purpose of this item is to consider a proposed amendment or change to the City of Albertville Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Plan. Specifically, the proposal is to amend the Plan to change the roadway functional classification of Main Avenue from a Major Collector to a Minor Collector. Additionally, the functional classification of Barthel Industrial Drive (and part of CSAH 35 east of Main Avenue), is proposed to be changed from a Minor collector to a Major Collector. The Planning Commission must hold a public hearing and allow for public input for all amendments to the City Comprehensive Plan. The amendment is considered to be a minor change to the Transportation Plan, which has been precipitated by discussion with the City Council and joint meetings with the City of St. Michael. BACKGROUND The rationale for the shift in functional classifications between these two streets stems from future transportation needs and the design of these streets. In working with St: Michael, there appears to be a need for another north -south collector- street extending between Highway 241 and CSAH 37. This future north -south collector would open areas for new development and provide some traffic volume relief for County Road 19. St. Michael is suggesting that the north -south corridor would follow Main Avenue alignment. However, existing conditions suggest that a north -south connection with Barthel Industrial Drive will be more appropriate to handle higher traffic volumes. Main Avenue is a 66-foot right-of-way and is bordered by single family lots having direct driveway access to the street. The introduction of more traffic through these 5775 WAYZATA BOULEVARD, SUITE 555 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 554 1 6 PHONE 6 1 2-595-963(5 FAX 6 1 2-595-9837 neighborhoods is not seen as being beneficial. Barthel Industrial Drive, on the other hand, has an 80-foot right-of-way, is designed for industrial traffic, has limited direct access and has an on -road trail along the west side of the road. DISCUSSION The City Council initiated the review of this Comprehensive Plan amendment to better reflect the characteristics of both Main Avenue and Barthel Industrial Drive. The proposed amendment has been forwarded to Wright County and the City of St. Michael for their review and comment. Review responses from these agencies will be forwarded to the Planning Commission at the meeting. ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission is requested to consider the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and to forward a recommendation to approve, deny or further study the matter. A copy of a draft Resolution approving the functional classification changes as outlined herein is attached for review and consideration of the Planning Commission. A motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the functional classification of Main Avenue to a Minor Collector and Barthel Industrial Drive (and CSAH 35 located east of Main Avenue) to a Major Collector road is in order. Attachments: 1. Functional Classification System Map (May 1996) 2. Proposed Functional Classification Map (July 2000) 3. Draft Resolution PC Mike Couri, Pete Carlson V, N MEMORANDUM TO: Albertville Mayor and City Council FROM: Cindy Sherman DATE: August 2, 2000 RE: Ordinance Amendment Regarding Attached Housing FILE NO: 163.05-00.11 The City recently adopted a moratorium to allow the development of regulations related to performance standards for two-family, townhouse, quadraminium, and multiple family uses. Attached is a draft ordinance that outlines the required submittals and performance standards for attached housing developments. The performance standards are designed to clarify the minimum improvements that are required for developments and include provisions for landscaping, open space, screening, streets, drives, exterior materials, and recreation areas. The proposed standards are consistent with the residential land use policies outlined in the Albertville Comprehensive Plan and are intended to specifically address policies related to high quality standards for new construction, providing a mix of housing types and options, and to encourage design and planning innovations in housing units and land development. Two provisions that require an explanation include the tables on page two and three. The table on page two outlines bonus provisions required in order to reduce lot size, thereby increasing density. The maximum decrease in lot area is proposed at 25%. This provision will allow some flexibility to increase density of a project without the need for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) if the underlying zoning regulations are met. The table on page three has been included to quantify the amount of landscaping required based upon the value of the project. The other provisions are intended to dictate minimum design standards that we feel will enhance development and clarify what will be acceptable to the community. The Planning Commission held a public hearing at their meeting on June 14, 2000; no one from the public spoke on this item. The Commission voted 3-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the ordinance subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney. c. Linda Goeb Mike Couri Memo on Attached Housing 2 CITY OF ALBERTVILLE WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 2000-6 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ALBERTVILLE ZONING ORDINANCE, SECTION 1000 BY ADDING SECTION 1000.24, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR TWO FAMILY, TOWNHOUSE, QUADRAMINIUM, AND MULTIPLE FAMILY USES. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA ORDAINS: SECTION 1. SECTION 1000.24 IS HEREBY ADDED AS FOLLOWS: 1000.24. Two Family, Townhouse, Quadraminium, Multiple Family Uses. In addition to the regulations outlined within each zoning district, all projects that include attached residential units are subject to the following requirements: (a) Submittals Required. All requests for a development shall be accompanied by a series of site plans and data showing: (1) Building locations, dimensions, and elevations, all signs, structures, entry areas, storage sites, and other structural improvements to the site including future decks and porches. (2) Circulation plans for both pedestrian and vehicular traffic. (3) Fences and screening devices. (4) Solid waste disposal/recycling provisions and facilities. (5) Storm drainage plans. (6) Fire fighting and other public safety facilities and provisions such as hydrant locations and fire lanes. (7) Data pertaining to numbers of dwelling units, sizes, lot area, ratio, etc. (8) Exterior wall materials and design information. (9) A two- (2) foot contour topographical map of the existing site. (10) A grading plan illustrating the proposed grade changes from the original topographical map. All site area, when fully developed, shall be completely graded so as to adequately drain and dispose of all surface water, storm water and ground water in such a manner as to preclude . large scale erosion, unwanted ponding and surface chemical runoff. (11) A recreation plan illustrating in detail all recreational facilities and structures. (12) A landscape plan consistent with the standards in Section 1000.7 of this Chapter. (13) A soil erosion control plan for the construction period. (14) Park dedication consistent with Section 600.15 of the Subdivision Regulations. (b) Height, setback and land area requirements shall be as required in the underlying zoning district and Section 1100.10. (c) The maximum development density for two family, townhome, quadraminium, or multiple family will be based on the net buildable area as required in Section 1100.9. The required lot size is exclusive of public street rights -of -way, wetlands, major drainageways, waterbodies and slopes steeper than twelve (12) percent. (1) Required lot area per unit may be decreased by up to 25% based on the following features: Bonus Feature Lot Area Per Unit Reduction A. For each additional percentage point in value of 100 square feet landscape amenities, as outlined in Section 1000.24(e) of the Zoning Ordinance. B. For each addition fifteen- (15) percent of park 100 square feet dedication above the minimum established by City Council resolution (cash, land, or construction), as determined acceptable by the City. C. For each additional five- (5) percent of open space 100 square feet developed above the minimum established in Section 1000.24 e 2 of the Zoning Ordinance. D. For each required parking space, that is included with 300 square feet basic rent, provided underground. E. For each two thousand (2,000) square feet of indoor 200 square feet private community center/recreation space up to a maximum of four thousand (4,000) square feet for each fifty 50 units in the project. (d) Parking requirements shall be provided as required by Section 1200 of this Chapter. 2 (e) Landscape provisions: (1) All open areas of the development project which are not used or improved for required parking areas, drives or storage shall be landscaped with a combination of overstory trees, understory trees, shrubs, flowers, and ground cover materials. The plan for landscaping shall include ground cover, bushes, shrubbery, trees, sculpture, foundations, decorative walks or other similar site design features or materials in a quantity having a minimum value in conformance with the following table: Project Value Including Building Minimum Landscape Value (plantings Construction, Site Preparation, and and installation) Site Improvements Below $1,000,000 2 percent $1,000,001 - $2,000,000 $20,000 plus 1 percent of project value in excess of $1,000,000 $2,000,001 - $3,000,000 $30,000 plus .75 percent of project value in excess of $2,000,000 $3,000,001 - $4,000,000 $37,500 plus .25 percent of project value in excess of $3,000,0000 Over $4,000,000 1 percent (2) Each site shall include at least thirty- (30) percent open space, that is space without buildings, paving, or other impervious surface. (3) The landscaping standards and requirements shall be consistent with Section 1000.7 of this Chapter. (f) Screening: (1) Screening to a height of at least five (5) feet shall be required when a drive access to a parking area or off-street parking area that contains more than six (6) parking spaces is within thirty (30) feet of an adjoining residential zone. (2) All exterior storage shall be screened. The exterior storage screening required shall consist of a solid fence or wall not less than five (5) feet high, and shall be located to meet the required building setbacks for the district. (3) In multiple family dwelling developments, refuse/recycling, either combustible or non-combustible, shall be contained in a rodent -proof, screened structure near the principal building. Access doors large enough to allow bin -type refuse containers to be removed for loading in refuse trucks shall be a part of the design of the refuse storage space. (4) For two-family, townhouse and quadraminium developments subject to these regulations, trash containers shall be stored within the garage or individual unit. (g) Streets: All streets shall be public and shall comply with design standards and specifications as governed by the City's Subdivision Ordinance unless private roads are permitted under a PUD. (h) Drives: (1) Dead-end private driveways shall serve a maximum of twenty-four (24) dwelling units subject to the ability to provide emergency vehicle access and maneuvering space. (2) Private drives shall be under the ownership and control of the property owner association who shall be responsible for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of surfacing. (3) Private drives must include plans and areas for snow storage (i) General Requirements: (1) All units proposed under this Ordinance shall be designed and constructed to have a mix of exterior finishes that shall include at least 25% brick or stone or an equivalent material to be approved by the City. (2) Multiple family units of three (3) or more stories shall be constructed of brick or stone or an equivalent material, to be approved by the City, on at least fifty (50) percent of each exterior elevation of a building. (4) Parking, storage or garage entrance areas of multiple family dwelling development shall be placed interior to the site rather than by neighboring residential uses. (5) All multiple residence dwelling units (apartments) shall provide a minimum of one hundred fifty (150) square feet of miscellaneous storage space for each dwelling unit within the structure. Such space shall be in addition to normal storage space provided in wardrobes, cabinets, closets and linen closets. (6) No multiple residence dwelling unit shall be so constructed as to have more than forty (40) percent of the horizontal lineal distance of a unit's exterior wall below ground. Continuous window wells or other 4 selective excavation shall not be used to circumvent this restriction. Areas which do not qualify as dwelling units because of the restriction may be used for recreation, amusement, storage, parking or as utility areas. (7) Sidewalks shall be provided from parking areas, loading zones and recreation areas to the entrances of the building. 0) Recreation Areas (1) The City Council may require, at its discretion, that open space as required in Section 1000.24 (e)(2) be configured in a manner to provide recreation facilities such as a tot lot or playing fields. The need for such facilities shall be based in part on the type of structure(s) proposed, the target market for the units, the proximity to public recreation areas and other factors identified by the City. (2) Outdoor swimming pools or other intensive recreation uses shall observe setbacks as required for the principal structure. SECTION 2. THIS AMENDMENT SHALL BE IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING ITS PASSAGE AND PUBLICATION. Approved by the Albertville City Council this day of ATTEST: IN Linda Goeb, City Clerk CITY OF ALBERTVILLE John A. Olson, Mayor 2000. 5 NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS COMMUNITY PLANNING - DESIGN - MARKET RESEARCH MEMORANDUM TO: Albertville Mayor and City Council FROM: Cindy Sherman DATE: August 2, 2000 RE: Survey regarding Garage and House size FILE NO: 163.05 general Councilmember Vetsch requested a survey of regulations from other communities regarding garage size and minimum square footage for a house. In the table below is a summary of the findings. Garage Size - Home Size Survey COMMUNITY MAXIMUM MINIMUM SQUARE FEET SQUARE FOR ATTACHED FOOTAGE FOR GARAGE SINGLE FAMILY HOME Albertville 1000 sq. ft. 1040 sq. ft (three bedroom Rogers 950 sq. ft. 960 sq. ft. St. Michael 1200 sq. ft. 800 sq. ft. Otsego 1000 sq. ft. (may 1040 sq. ft. (three increase subj. to bedroom) CUP Corcoran 1000 sq. ft. (may 1,100 sq. ft. attach allowable (rambler) detached sq. ft. Delano 1000 sq. ft. none Buffalo 900 sq. ft. 1040 sq. ft. ( three bedroom Monticello 400 sq. ft. 1000 sq. ft. minimum Albertville regulations are consistent with the regulations of other communities. Staff will be available to answer questions the Council may have on this information. April 14, 2000 Linda Goeb Albertville City Hall PO Box 9 Albertville, MN 55301 Dear Ms. Goeb: 5113 South 5th Avenue, P.O. Box 51, St. Cloud, MN 56302-0051 C • , architecture engineering envirvn� RE: City of Albertville Albertville Fire Station SEH No. A-ALBEV9906.01 The following are my recommendations for requests for Change Orders from Shingobee Builders: 1. Extend water service into building: I recommend the sharing of the expense as indicated on attached worksheet No. 15R. The construction documents state that the Owner would install site utilities; Shingobee moved the water service locations. + $1,795.72 2. Install dryer vent: I recommend rejecting Change Order Worksheet No. 16. The project was Design/Build; the dryer was indicated. 3. Install water heater fresh air intake: I recommend rejecting Change Order worksheet No. 19. The project was Design/Build; the water heater was indicated. 4. Install fresh air intake for infrared heaters: I recommend rejecting Change Order worksheet No. 20. The project was Design/Build; the infra -red heaters were indicated. 5. Cost of delay due to delay in issuing State Plumbing Permit: I recommend rejection. Remely requested additional information on 10/15/99. SEH sent information on 10/15/99. 6. Supply storks fitting on hose: I recommend approving Change Order worksheet No. 26. An independent supplier confirmed the additional cost of the fittings. + $1,084.21 7. Install PVC pipe under the driveways for telephone and future parking lights: I recommend approving Change Order worksheet No. 27. This was better than cutting into the new bituminous. + $407.61 8. Install irrigation sleeve: I recommend approving Change Order worksheet No. 28. This was requested at a progress meeting. + $260.56 9. Omit snowguards: I recommend acceptance of Change Order worksheet No. 29. $185.00 Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Offices located throughout the upper Midwest Equal Opportunity Employer We help you plan, design, and achieve. Linda Goeb April 14, 2000 Page 2 10. Add faucets: I recommend acceptance of Change Order worksheet No. 30. These faucets are needed for the sink supplied by the fire department. + $544.31 Please don't hesitate to call if you have any questions. Respectfull sl Cc: Mi Kran Shingobee \\cpu131\ust2s\albe-caU-albev041400.doc Shingobee Builders, Inc. 1999 Fire Station, Albertville, MN Description: Install 30' of 6" DIP water line into building with flange termination at floor line Requested Days Extension: Change Order Worksheet # 15R Date: 12/20/99 Revised: 3/28/00 Subcontract costs: list subcontractors Amount 1 Latour Construction $ 2,925.00 2 3 4 5 6 7 Subtotal Subcontracted costs $ 2,925.00 8 OH&P on Subs (%) 5% $ 146.25 9 Total Subcontracted costs $ 3,071.25 Shingobee Costs Labor Costs Hours Rate $/hr Total Carpentry Hours $ Laborer Hours $ Field Superintendent Hours 2 $ 55.00 $ 110.00 Project Manager Hours 1 $ 55.00 $ 55.00 Other Hours $ Subtotal Of Labor $ 165.00 Labor burden 38% $ 62.70 Subtotal SBI Labor $ 227.70 OH&P on labor 10% $ 22.77 Total SBI Labor $ 250.47 Material Costs S Subtotal Material Costs $ State Sales tax 6.50% $ - City Tax 0 $ - Subtotal Material costs $ - OH&P on Material 10% $ Total Material costs $ General Conditions Days I Ratelda Equipment Rental 1 01 0 $ - Jobsite office rental 1 01 0.00 $ - Temporary Facility Rental 1 01 0 $ - Total General Conditions 6%, $ 199.30 Summary Total Subcontracted costs $ 3,071.25 Total labor costs $ 250.47 Total Material Costs $ Total Field Overhead costs $ 199.30 Subtotal $ 3,521.02 Bond costs 2.00% $ 70.42 Total $ 3,591.44 Shingobee Share - 60% City of Albertville Share - 50% $1,795.72 $1,796.72 Page 1 COW ksht#15R-GCUtility ,MAR.27.2000 12:1-3PM SHINGOEEE BUILDERS Shingobse Builders, Inc. NO.932 P.4i11 0 I I I 1688 Flre Ststlon, AlbefMll0, MN Descriptions i insfsll dryer venlinp stack, roorlack 6 first floor hole in bass bid. i Raquested Days Extension., Change ON& WorlCsheet bate: 112d10o #16 1 Subcontract costs! list subcontractors Amount 1 St. Claud Reffi eratlon 1 3 450.00 2 1 3 d � 6 a l 7 Subletal Subcontracted ceata b 450.00 a & on Subs {96) S 22.50 Total subcontracted costs shin o ee costs Labor Costs Hours Rate S1hr I Toed Camentry Hours $ A6.00 $ Laborer Hours S - Field Su arintendant Hours 1 66.00 $ 55.00 Pro act Mana er Hours 1 s5,00 $ 55.00 Other Hours $ - Subtotal Of Labor 110,00 Labor burden 38% S 41.80 Subtatal SBI Labor S 151.80 H&P an labor i 10°b 15.15 Total SBI Labor 1 $8 Material Costs S S Subtotal Material Costs I S State $ales tax 6.50% $ City Tax 0 subtotal Material costs $ OHS on Material S Ton Material costa ©eneral Conditions Oa s Ratelda -E—qufpment Rental I o gt�- Jobsite edflce rental 0 Tem orary Fecll ty Rental 0 Total General Conditions 6% 8.3� Summs Tate[ Subcontracted costs $ 472.50 3 189.88 Total tabor costs s Total Material Costs $ 38.37 Total Field Overhead costs Subtotal 677.85 Band costa 2.0056 S 13.5tS i Tatal i 8t31.A1 Page 1 COMMhdll S.GCMech 'MAR.27.2000 12:14PM SHINGOBEE BUILDERS NO.932 P.5/11 Shingobes Builders, Inc. i I 1999 firs Station. Albertville, MN Descrlpdon: Insty# 1=))-sir fntake for water heater a►aWW by 14VAClnspector. RoofJaeknseded Requested Days Extension; Change Order Worksheet Date 1126MO #19 Subcontract costs; 1st subcontractors Amount 351.7 1 St. Cloud Refrigeration $ 250.00 2 Fornchen & Peterson Roofing $ 85,00 3 4 5 8 I 7 Subtotal Subcontracted Costs $ 336.00 8 a OHaP on Subs ( -I 596 S 16.75 Total -Subcontracted costs Shin obse Costs Labor Cusp■ Hours Rate 31tir Total Carpentry Hours 46.00 $ Laporer Hours $ Field Superintendent Hours 1 55.00 S 55,00 Project Manmad r Hours 1 S 55,00 $ 55.00 Other Houm $ - Subtotal Of Labor b 110.00 Labor burden 3896 I S A1.60 Subtotal $BI t.obor 9 151.80 OH&P on labor 10 $ 15.18 Total SBI Labor 166.8 I Material Costs a $ Subtotal Material Casts S State Salsa tux I 8.500A S Cltv Tax 0 S Subtvtel Material coats I 1 S OHBP on Material 1 10%1 5 - Total Material costs General Condltlons I Des i Rats/da E ul meat Rental 0 O S Jobslts office rental 1 0 0.00 3 Temporary facility Rental 0 0 $ + Total General Cond rlons iN. Summary Total Subcontracted costs S 3S1.75 Total labor coats 5 186,98 Totai Material Coats Total Field Overhead aostS Subtotal $ 31.12 $ 54$.w Bond coats 2.0096 5 11.00 Total 090.88 Page 1 COWkshtW1q-GCMech IMAR.27.2000 12:14PM SHINGOEEE BUILDERS NO.932 P.6/11 Shingobse Bulldera, Inc. 1698 Fire Station, Albertville, MN Description: ln8hp A+ahair 1ptaks lbr air tube heaters ordered by HVAC lnspecior: RoafJocAm npoded. Requested onyx 8xtanson: Change Order Worksheet Date: 11215100 020 p Subcontract costs: list subcontractors Amount 2,299.50 1 2 8t. Claud Retrl eratlon 1 Forachen & Peterson Roofingb 2 1 a80.02 610.00 3 1 4 S tt i 7 Subtotal Subcontracted costs i 2190A0 8 a OHBP on Subs ( I 71 Total Subcontracted cosy S 100. 50 Shin oboe Costs Labor Canter 1 Hours Rats Ihr Total Carpentry Hours 48.00 $ 3 .88 Laborer Hours Field Superintendent Hours 3 b5.00 S ' 5 1 ti5.00 Project Manager Hours I 85.00 S r.5,00 Other Hours Subtotal of Labor 220.00 Labor burden 35% 83.60 Subtotal 381 Labor I s 303A0 OH&P an labor 10% Total S81 Labor $ 30.35 Material Costa I $ AL Subtotal Material Costs $ state 3ais$ tax 6.so% $ CI Tax 0 $ Subtotal Matarlsl oasts I $ OHBP on Materiel f 10% $ Total Meter ai costs I S General Conditions Da RsWda s1 Equipment Rental I 0 0 S Jobso office rental 1 0 0.00 $ Tertirwery Facility Rental 0 0 $ Total General Condition's ti%i Summary Total Subcontracted costs 2,299.50 Total labor coats 1 333.96 Total Material Costs 1 $ $ 158.01 Total Reid Overhead coats I Subtotal $ 2 791.47 Bond costs 2.00°A 5 55.83 I oral S 3.847.30 page 1 COWksht820-GCMech 0MPR.27.2000 15:14PM SHINGOEEE EUILDERS N0.952 P. /11 1990 Fin Station, Albertvl Description: Ready for underp fldtd actual start-up on 1 /17 rovlew and moue a p t grade pour by 15 colendA Requested Days Extens Shingobee Builders. Inc, MN Change Order Worksheet Date: 1131100 mbing start up on 11/299, State rook 4 weeks to rq permit. Delayed slab on days lncnrssedhealing season. in, 15 # 26 D 11 Subcontraet coats: list subcontractors Amount 1 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Subtotal Subcontrscnd costs OH&P on Subs 66 S S S 0 Total subcontracted coats Shin —lobed Costs Labor Costs Hours Rate SJhr Total Car enter Noun II S S - Laborer Hours 5a 56.00 b 4 840.00 Field Su erfntendent Hours 1 S 55.00 $ 55.00 pro set Manager Hours I S other Hours S 4,895.00 Subtotal Of Labor $ 1,850.10 Labor burden 3996 b 6,755.10 subtotal sBi Labor ii 1096 5 675.51 OH&P on labor i .430.41 Total 581 Labor 6 Mat,trlal Cosu 14 86.00 $ 1,232.00 Torn ors Healin F4e1;iDa it S S 1,232.00 Subtotal Material Costs II 6.50°l6 3 eO.OB State Salsa tax $ - _City Tax 0 S 1,�12.08 Subtotal Material coats U 10% b 131.21 OH&P on Material $ 1,443. Total Material costs 11 General Conditions UaYSRatelds E ul ment Rental § 0 0. S - Jebsits office rental I' - 0 00 Tem orery ac 11 anal 32.43 Total otntral Conditions 5% I. summary3 Total Subcontracted coots g 7.4 00.61 Total labor costs 1 $ 1,443.20 Total Material Costs 11532A3 Total Field Overhead costs Subtotal 1,408.33 2.0096 S 188.13 Bond costs Total 1 $ 6,584.4fi Pepe 1 CONNksht#25•GCPIMQ 'MAR.27.2000 12:15PM SHINGOEEE EUILDERS NO.992 P.Eill Shinpobee Builders. Inc. 188a Fire Stsdon, Albertvllis, MN Change Ordar Warkshe':at 26 Description: I' Oats: 2111100 Supply storks Origs omftto ends o/the two hors reels as requested. Thel'bid was based on national pipe thmada: Raquested Days Extension: 0 Subcontract costs- list subcontractors Amount 1 Voson PlumbingS 708,00 2 3 4 5 e 7 Subta4l Subcontmeed casts S 786.00 6 OH&P on Subs (%) 96 S 39.80 9 To—tal Subcontracted costs Shin obas Costs Labor Coats Houle RateS/hr Total Carpenter Hours ; Laborer Hours S Field Superintendent Hours 1 55,0a $ 55.00 Pro ect Manager Hours 1 S 55.00 S 55.00 Other Hours _ Subtotal Of labor S 110.00 Labor burden 311% S 41.90 Subtotal aBI Labor $ 131.ao OHAP on labor 109A Total SBI Labor 166.98 Material Costs 5 Subtotal Material Costs S State Sales tart 8.50% $ City Tax 0 3 Subtotal Material costa S OHdP on Material 10% S - Total Material costs S General Conditions Ds RsWde E ul ment Rental 1 3 Jobalte office rental 0 0.00 4 Temporary Facility Rental 0 015 Total 0eneral Cottdltlons s 6 .1 summar Total Subcontracted costs S y35,a0 Total labor costa 166.80 Total Material Costs S Total Field Overhead coop 5 80.17 Subtotal $ 1,082.95 Bond costs 2.00% S 21.26 Total S 10=5421 PsQa 1 COW)mhtf26-GCGenCond I -MRR.27.2000 12:15PM SHINGOEEE BUILDERS NO.932 P.9i11 Shingobes Butiders. Inc. 1989 Fla Stetlon, Albertville, MN Change Order Warkshaet 0 2T Description: Dow., 2MI imtarl PVC pipe underme dduewam fir phone sold future psridng lot lights. Xmqueeted Goys Extansionr a Subcontract costs: (list subcontraotara Amount 93 47M 1 Granite CI Electric 278.53 2 3 4 5 e 7 a 9 Subtotal Subcontractsd,case 279.63 F—A Fan 8ub4 ( TotalSsubcontracted costs Shin cbse Costs Labor Costs Hours Rate 91hr Total Cementer Hours $ Laborer Hours $ 55.00 5 5 27.50 Field Su arintsndsnt Hours 0.5 Pro ect Msne ar Hauls 6.5 5 W00 5 27.50 Other Hours 5 55.00 Subtotal Of Labor 4 2040 Labor burden 34% Subtotal 381 tabor S 75.90 OHSP on labor 10% 5 7.58 Tatai SBI Labor 5'� Ma wrial Costs S Subtotal htatertal Casa S sate sales tax 8.50% $ city TeX 0 $ Subtotal Material coats 5 OH&P on Material 100 S Total Meterial coots General Conditions Da Ratelds E ul meat Rental S 01 0.00 Jobsite offlce rental 01 0 S - eRlPorarY FscI11N Rental S B Total Ganes' Conditions 41% summary al subcontrected costsml labor coatsoml vI MateAtsel Cas S 89'62subtotal otal Field Overhead coati S 368.62 ond costa 2.00% 3 7.99 Total If 007.61 Page 1 C0Wl%ht92B-GCEIaa -MAR.27.2000 12:15PM SHINGOEEE BUILDERS NO.932 P.10i11 Shinpobas Builders, Ina, 1888 Fire Station, Albettvllie, MN Change Order Worksheet 028 Description: Oats: 2/11100 inatafi lawn lrrigalton pips sleeve in precast Wei as requested Requested Onyx Extension: 0 Subcontract Coats: list subcontractors Amount 1 Vocon Plumbingi 150.00 2 4 3 8 7 Subtotal Subcontracted coats 5 150.00 8 OH3P on Subs 96 3 7.34 fiTotal Subcontract costs 157.50 Shin oboe Costs labor Costs Hours Rate S/hr Tatel 112rojoct Ca aster Hours � Labour Hours S Paid Superintendent Hours 0.5 S 65,00 $ 27.50 Manager Hours 0.5 $ 5S.00 S 27.50 Other Houre $ Subtotal Of Labor $ 55.00 Labor burden 36% i $ 20.90 Subtotal Sol Labor S 75,20 OH&P on Isbor 1096 $ 7.69 Total SBI Labor 5 83,48 Material Costs S subtotal Material Coate $ state Sales tax 8.50% S COY Tax 01 S Subtotnt Mebrleti Costs 1 5 OHdP on Material 10%j 5 - Total Material costs asnaral Conditions do Ratslda E ul ment Rental 5 Jobsits office rerttai i 0 0.001 3 To M -kqqy Faclll Rental 0 0 5 - Total General Conditions 6%. S 14.46 Summary Total Subcontracted costs $ 167.50 Total labor costs $ B3.4B Total Material Costs $ Total Field Owtieed coats 74.46 Subtotal 23SAS Bond costs Total $ 290.79 Page 1 C0W1mht%28-GCG4nP1M9 ,MRR.27.2000 12:16PM SHINGOBEE BUILDERS NO.992 P.11/11 ShinBobee Builders, Inc. 1989 Flre station, MberMlle, MN change Order Workaheet * 29 Description: Date: 3/27100 Omit snow Guards on south entry canopy Requested Days Extension: Subcontract costs: list subcontractors amount 1 I SentraSota Sheet Metal 185.40 2 3 4 S B 7 Subtotal Subcontracted costs 5 18i.04 8 OHBP on Subs (%) 5% e 1 Total Subcontracted costs 1 Shin obee Coats Labor Coats Hours Rate $/hr Total Ca enter Hours S Laborer Hours $ ' Field Superintendent Hours $ 55.00 $ Project Manager Hours $ 66,00 $ Other Hours $ ' Subtotal Of Labor $ - Labor burden 380b Subtotal Sal Labor OH -Pon labor 10% 5 Total 3131 Labor $ Material Costa 5 Subtotal Material Cobh $ State Sales tax 6.50% $ City Tax 0 $ ' Subtotal Material costs I$ OHBP on Material 1096 S - Total Material costs $ General Conditions Da Rate/da E ui ment Renbml Jobslte office rental 0 0.00 $ Temporary Facility Rental 01 01 - Total General Conditions s% S .summary Total Subcontracted costs 185.00 Total labor costs S Total Material Costs $ Total Field Overhead costs $ ' Subtotal 185.04 Bond costs 2.00% Total 185,06 Pane 1 COWksht#29-GCSM APR.11.2000 4:0 PM SHINGOBEE BUILDERS NO.763 P. G/J Shingobno Builders, Inc, 1999 Fire Station, Albertville, MN Change Order Worksheet # 30 Description: Date: 4111100 Suppty two Chicago fauceh for the three compartment s/nk and labor to hook-up the second faucet. Sink located in SCBAii..aundry. Requested Days Extension; 0 Subcontract costs: list subcontractors Amount 420.00 1 voson Plumbing $ 420.00 2 3 4 5 G 7 Subtotal Subeontr®cNd costs $ 420.00 8 9 OH&P on subs 116 Total Subcontracted costs Shin obss Costs Labor Costs Hours Rate 51hr Total carpenter Hours 5 5 83.a9 Hours $ Superintendent Hours $ 55.00 S ane er Hours 1 55.00 S 55.00 urs l O} Labor$ 5S.00 rden 38% S 20.90 l SBi Labor $ 75.90 OHBP on labor 10% Total S81 Labor $ 7.59 Material Costs $ Subtotal Material Costs S State Sales tax fi.50°6 S City Tax 0 $ subtotal Materiel costs $ - OHBP on Material 10% S Total Matwial costs 5 General Conditions Da a Retetda Equipment Rental I $ Jobsite office rental 01 0.00 Temporary Faclil Rental 01 0 - Total General Conditions 5% 30,15 Summary Total Subcontracted cosm $ 420.00 Total labor costs 83.49 Total Material Costs 5 Total Field Overhead costs $ 30.15 Subtotal $ 533.84 Bond costs 2.00% 1 S 10.67 Total 1 $ 544.31 Page 1 C0Wksht#30-GCPL1V1G 4/14/00 Albertville Fire Department PO Box 56 Albertville MN. 55301 To Albertville City Council; This letter is in regard to floor in apparatus bay. We realize that the floor has been redone because of water standing on floor. However it seems that it hasn't been corrected. We realize also that it is ultimately Up to the council to make a decision to accept as is or have the contractor redo, we also realize that it could be a safety issue that needs to be addressed by the city. How ever we were asked to get a feeling by Department members to see if we were willing to accept floor as is. A discussion was had 4/13/00 a majority of members agreed that it would be acceptable to leave floor as is if the city was compensated with a monetary settlement, this money preferable used for fire equipment. We also would like to note it was not unanimous to accept floor. The thought's behind accepting floor would be that we feel floor has to be squeegee after washing trucks for housekeeping anyway to keep floor looking clean. Respectfully; Albert Barthel Fire Chief !J &��,La�vr)ate j -lq Crn In regards to the change orders from Singobee dated April 14, 2000: #1 This is between S.E.H. and Shingobee (committee had no involvement). #2 The dryer was in the print and the vent should have been included. #3 This is a building code issue. #4 This is a building code issue. #5 Committee had no involvement. #6 A call was placed to Chad Cichos in regards to the hose. According to Chad's conversation with Vossens Plumbing, this hose was included with no additional cost. #7 The committee's understanding was that S.E.H. was putting in this PVC pipe because they were the ones who put in the parking lot. #8 This was brought up at a progress meeting. We mentioned about a pipe through the wall panel underground for a future lawn sprinkling system. Steve Voss from Vossens Plumbing said, "I'll throw that in." Bill Valerius asked him again, "This will not cost us anything." Steve said, "No." #9 Snow guards were omitted at a council meeting. #10 The proper channels were not followed in regards to these faucets, but they were approved by a committee member. These are additional issues that need to be addressed/corrected: ■ the first overhead door does not operate; ■ the steel above the overhead doors is drooping down; ■ painting of the areas by the overhead doors — the original paint froze and is peeling; ■ the shelf in the men's restroom needs to be hung; and ■ we need to do a final walk-through of the building. The Building Committee --Bill Valerius --Chad Cichos --Dave Vetsch g m i �D r 03 z mom m C/) m rn O z0Z cn K --I m D vz� 0"/00 10132151AM SEH FILE vn\albov\0008\aad\a1001-exhtbltA,dgr w n d01Srn ' n cn ; ij z �l y m c Mo 0 °I o C i mz O �-- 1 n \N = 03 r 1 STOP 4i I £00; zoo in TY[L1.Lxasly f U2010 IS XON'H3S ZOOT £SZ OZ£ Wa 5E-9T 00/ZO/90 08i02/00 16:37 F:U 320 253 1002 ,,A& SEH.RCM ST CLOUD 1200 25th Avenue South, P.0, Box 1717, St. Cloud, MN 56302-1717 TO: Linda Goeb Albertville City Administrator FROM: Peter J. Carlson, P.E. City Engineer DATE: August 1, 2000 RE: Park Layout Concept Albertville, Minnesota SEH No. A-ALBEV 0101.00 14 ALBERTVILLE 03/003 MEMORA 320.229.4300 800.572.0617 320.229.4301 FAX Attached is a park concept that I have reviewed with Don Barthel. Don has expressed a willingness to work with the City to develop this concept. There are general issues, which will need to be resolved, the largest of which is the wetland fills. (Setting a permit to fill the wetlands as shown on the attached concept will be difficult and time consuming. I would like to discuss this issue with the City Council and get some direction on how to proceed. cb Enclosure W-'ga'40"'W1&W-M.dM Short Not Hendrickson Inc. . Offices located thKghout the Upper Midwest Equal OpportunRy Employer Ws help you plan, design. and achuwe 1 V ---� L ------------ 3nW3AV V3011"1 I I I 1 ! 2 I - �- I 1 I_ I I I I ti I ice, p�y.pQ����gpp�r�CTW 3�J N35 i IM W.D., W AVID C )°'27) WZ 5cc2 iu w Q CG tl l3! TOOQn 3"IiI.1LX3gIti f 0010 IS N0H'HHS ZOOT £SZ OZ£ Ytz3 b3=9T 00/ZO.,80 i r r CITY OF TSEGO e� 8899 Nashua Avenue N.E. ON THE GREAT RIVER ROAD (612) 441-4414 Elk River, MN 55330 Fax: (612) 441-8823 April 25, 2000 Albertville City Council C/O City Administrator Linda Goeb PO Box 9 Albertville, MN 55301-0009 Re: City of Otsego Proposal Albertville Sewer Plant Dear Albertville City Council: The Otsego City Council has approved the following proposal for discussion with the City of Albertville. 1) Otsego wishes to purchase 100,000 gallons per day of sewer plant capacity from the City of Albertville. 2) The land uses to be served would be industrial/commercial land use north of County Road 37 and single family detached land use south of County Road 37. 3) No more than 30% of Otsego's sewer capacity would be used for residential development. 4) The wastewater produced would be residential strength. The City of Otsego would not allow any industrial processors who would produce a wastewater of higher than residential strength. 5) The industrial/commercial building standards would be equal to or greater than the standards currently in use in the Otsego industrial park. No pole structures or metal buildings would be allowed. The City Council of Otsego would like to meet with the City Council of Albertville within the next six weeks to discuss this proposal. Please give me a call to set a convenient time. Sincerely, Michael obertson City Administrator