Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.
This document contains no pages.
cp02-23-2016C
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
MCLEOD COUNTY
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA
Hutchinson City Center
11 l Hassan Street SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350-2522
Phone 320-587-5151, Fax 320-234-4246
NOTICE OF A SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
4:00 p.m.
Council Chambers — Hutchinson City Center
Notice is hereby given that the Hutchinson City Council has called a special workshop meeting
for Tuesday, February 23, 2016, in the Council Chambers at the Hutchinson City Center, l 13
Hassan Street SE, l Iutchinson, Minnesota for the following purpose:
r Review EDA Business Enterprise Project
DATED; February 17, 2016
POS"rED: City Center
YMatthew ]a c , City Admin s ator
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
MEETING AGENDA
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2016
CITY CENTER — COUNCIL CHAMBERS
(The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in advance by city staff, committees and boards. Many
decisions regarding agenda items are based upon this information as well as: City policy and practices, inputfrom constituents,
and other questions or information that has not yet been presented or discussed regarding an agenda item)
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER— 5:30 P.M.
(a) Approve the Council agenda and any agenda additions and/or corrections
2. INVOCATION — Faith Lutheran Church
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. RECOGNITION OF GIFTS, DONATIONS AND COMMUNITY SERVICE TO THE CITY
(a) Resolution No. 14528 — Resolution Accepting Donation from Hutchinson Hospital Auxiliary to
Hutchinson Police Department in the Amount of $3500.00
PUBLIC COMMENTS
(]his is an opportunity or members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Ifyou have a
question, concern or comment, please ask to be recognized by the mayor state your name and address for the record. Please
keep comments under 5 minutes. Individuals wishing to speakfor more than five minutes should ask to be included on the agenda
in advance ofthe meeting. All comments are appreciated, butplease refrain from personal or derogatory attacks on individuals.)
5. CITIZENS ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
(a) Regular Meeting of February 9, 2016
CONSENT AGENDA
(The items listedfor consideration will be enacted by one motion unless the Mayor, a member of the City Council or a city
staff member requests an item to be removed. Traditionally items are not discussed.)
7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA I
(a) Consideration for Approval of Local Surface Water Management Plan
(b) Consideration for Approval of Resolution No. 14529 — Resolution for Authorization to Execute
Minnesota Department of Transportation Airport Maintenance and Operations Grant Contract
(c) Consideration for Approval of Support of 42nd Annual Chamber of Commerce Arts & Crafts
Festival on September 16 & 17, 2016
(d) Consideration for Approval of Dairy Day Celebration on June 3, 2016
(e) Consideration for Approval of Luce Line/River Corridor Parks Reforestation Community Tree
Proj ect
(f) Appointment of William Mose to Creekside Advisory Board to October 2019
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 2016
(g) Appointment of Juli Neubarth to Tree Board to January 2018
(h) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register A
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA 11
(a) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register B
PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:00 P.M.)
9. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 AND THE PROPOSED
ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4-16 THEREIN AND THE
ADOPTION OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR
(a) Adopt Resolution No. 14530 —Resolution Adopting a Modification to the Development Program for
Development District No. 4; and Establishing Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 Therein
and Adopting a Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefor
(b) Adopt Resolution No. 14531 — Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan for Advance of Certain
Costs in Connection with Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16
COMMUNICATIONS REQUESTS AND PETITIONS
(The purpose oj this portion oj the agenda is to provide the 7777—with information necessary to craft wise policy. Includes
items like monthly or annual reports and communications from other entities.)
10. HUTCHINSON HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2015 YEAR END REPORT
11. PLANNING/ZONINGBUILDING DEPARTMENT 2015 YEAR END REPORT
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
12. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-753 — AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE
OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO TITANIUM PARTNERS LLC (Second reading and consideration of
adoption)
NEW BUSINESS
13. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-754 — AN ORDINANCE SETTING THE SALARIES OF
THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS (First reading, Set Second Reading and Consideration
of Adoption for March 8, 2016)
14. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-755 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.04
OF THE HUTCHINSON CITY CHARTER TO INCREASE MAYORAL TERMS TO FOUR
YEARS (First reading, Set Second Reading and Consideration of Adoption for March 8, 2016)
15. REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR OUTDOOR AQUATIC CENTER/POOL
�a) Approve/Deny Plans & Specifications as Presented
b) Approve/Deny Authorizing an Advertisement for Bids
16. APPROVE/DENY SETTING SPECIAL MEETING FOR FEBRUARY 29, 2016, AT 1:30 P.M.
TO ATTEND THE LEGISLATIVE FORUM AT CITY CENTER
2
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 2016
GOVERNANCE
(T e purpose o t is portion of the agenda is to deal with organizational development issues, including policies,
performances, and other matters that manage the logistics of the organization. May include monitoring reports, policy
development and governance process items.)
17. MINUTES FROM COMMITTEES, BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS
a) Hutchinson HRA Board Minutes from January 19, 2016
b) City of Hutchinson Financial Reports and Investment Reports for December 2015
MISCELLANEOUS
18. STAFF UPDATES
19. COUNCIL/MAYOR UPDATE
ADJOURNMENT
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RESOLUTION NO. 14528
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS
WHEREAS, the City of Hutchinson is generally authorized to accept donations of real and
personal property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 465.03 for the benefit of its citizens,
and is specifically authorized to accept gifts and bequests for the benefit of recreational services
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.17; and
WHEREAS, the following person has offered to contribute the cash amount set forth below
to the city:
Name of Donor
Hutch Health Hospital Auxiliary
Amount Donation Date
$3,500.00 1/14/2016
WHEREAS, such donation has been contributed to the Hutchinson Police department
as a general donation.
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to accept the donation offered.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS:
THAT, the donation described above is hereby accepted by the City of Hutchinson.
Adopted by the City Council this 23rd day of February 2016.
ATTESTED:
Matthew Jaunich
City Administrator
APPROVED:
Gary T. Forcier
Mayor
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2016
CITY CENTER — COUNCIL CHAMBERS
(The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in advance by city staff, committees and boards. Many
decisions regarding agenda items are based upon this information as well as: City policy and practices, inputfrom constituents,
and other questions or information that has not yet been presented or discussed regarding an agenda item)
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER— 5:30 P.M.
Mayor Gary Forcier called the meeting to order. Members present were Chad Czmowski, Bill Arndt,
Mary Christensen and John Lofdahl. Others present were Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, Marc
Sebora, City Attorney and Kent Exner, City Engineer
(a) Approve the Council agenda and any agenda additions and/or corrections
Motion by Czmowski, second by Christensen, to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried
unanimously.
2. INVOCATION — Faith Lutheran Church
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. RECOGNITION OF GIFTS, DONATIONS AND COMMUNITY SERVICE TO THE CITY
Council Member Arndt spoke about Winter Fest, Kiwanis Club providing hot chocolate at Rocket
Hill and the VFW Commander being in town recently.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
(]his is an opportunity or members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Ifyou have a
question, concern or comment, please ask to be recognized by the mayor state your name and address for the record. Please
keep comments under 5 minutes. Individuals wishing to speakfor more than five minutes should ask to be included on the agenda
in advance ofthe meeting. All comments are appreciated, butplease refrain from personal or derogatory attacks on individuals.)
5. CITIZENS ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL
6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
(a) Regular Meeting of January 26, 2016
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Arndt, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried
unanimously.
CONSENT AGENDA
(The items listedJor consideration will be enacted by one motion unless the Mayor, a member of the City Council or a city
staff member requests an item to be removed. Traditionally items are not discussed.)
7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA I
(a) Consideration for Approval of Issuing Short -Term Gambling License to 3M Club on March 31,
2016
(b) Consideration for Approval of Issuing Short -Term Gambling License to Hutchinson Rotary
Foundation on April 15, 2016
(c) Consideration for Approval of Issuing Short -Term Gambling License to Crow River Habitat for
Humanity on May 13, 2016
(d) Consideration for Approval of Change Order No. 1 — Letting No. 13, Project No. 15-13
(Wastewater Treatment Facility Forcemain Bypass Improvements)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
(e) Consideration for Approval of Resolution No. 14527 — Resolution Adopting Revised
Assessment for SA5079A
(f) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register A
Item 7(f) was pulled for separate discussion
Motion by Czmowski, second by Christensen, to approve Consent Agenda II with the exception
of Item 7(f). Motion carried unanimously.
Council Member Lofdahl noted that there are a couple of large payments on the register that he
wanted to note. These include $199,000 on a reconstruction project and another payment is for
$86,000 for the pool project.
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to approve Item 7(f). Motion carried unanimously
APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA 11
(a) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register B
Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, with Forcier abstaining, to approve Consent Agenda II.
Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Forcier moved Item 12 to follow the consent agenda.
12. FIRE DEPARTMENT 2015 YEAR END REPORT
Chief Mike Schumann presented before the Council. Chief Schumann provided an overview of fire
department highlights in 2015. The topics included goals/objectives, officers/roster, operational
data, training, and equipment. The department's annual report is on the fire department's web site.
Chief Schumann provided additional general information on the fire department.
PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:00 P.M.)
9. 2016 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PHASE 1 PROJECT (LETTING NO. 1,
PROJECT NO. 16-01)
(a) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14523 - Resolution Ordering Improvement and Preparation of
Plans and Specifications
(b) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14524 - Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and
Ordering Advertisement for Bids
Kent Exner, City Engineer, presented before the Council. Mr. Exner explained that a
neighborhood meeting was held February 8, 2016, and approximately two dozen properties were
represented. This project includes pavement reconstruction/rehabilitation measures on segments
of Linden Avenue, Madson Avenue, Milwaukee Avenue, Church Street, West Shore Drive and
Grove Street. If the project is approved, it is anticipated to start in late spring/early summer of
2016. Mr. Exner spoke about specific streets, such as narrowing Madson Avenue and Linden
Avenue and widening Grove Street. Council Member Arndt commented that the angle of the
pavement markings on Grove Street should be angled better to allow the school buses better
mobility in and out. Mr. Exner explained alternate bids for Grove Street and West Shore Drive.
The estimated project cost is $3,599,000 with $700,000 coming from assessments. Mr. Exner
reviewed briefly the City's assessment policy. Mr. Exner spoke of a geogrid method in
reclaiming the streets. Mr. Exner reviewed the assessment rates that were assessed to Lynn
Road two years ago. The rear yards of properties on the Grove Street project are on Lynn Road.
The Grove Street assessments are more than double the Lynn Road rates. Staff is proposing to
assess the Lynn Road rates to the Grove Street properties, in essence applying a corner credit to
these properties.
2
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
The public hearing was opened at 6:27 p.m.
Nan Crary, 46 Grove Street, presented before the Council. Ms. Crary noted that no seal coating
or crack filling has been done in the last 20 years on Grove Street. She noted only patching has
been done. Ms. Crary expressed that she feels the street does in fact need to be reclaimed and
she looks forward to it being maintained regularly in the future. Ms. Crary also expressed that
the Grove Street property owners all mainly use Lynn Road and the school district uses Grove
Street as a parking lot twice a day to pick up students. Ms. Crary was in favor of the Lynn Road
assessments being applied.
Sandy McCormick, 120 Grove Street, presented before the Council. Ms. McCormick has
concerns about the parking situation on Grove Street, especially in the winter with snow
removal. Ms. McCormick noted that no one from the city or school district has ever contacted
the property owners to see what concerns they may have. Ms. McCormick also raised concerns
with the use of North and South Park. Ms. McCormick read from a vacation that was granted
several years ago. Ms. McCormick questioned the details of the project.
Bridget Peller, 26 Grove Street, presented before the Council. Ms. Peller noted that she is in
favor of being assessed the lower Lynn Road assessment, however she questions the assessments
on Grove Street and how they are not the same as Lynn Road. Ms. Peller feels that the school
district has caused the majority of the deconstruction of the roadway. Ms. Peller's proposal is to
leave the sidewalks as they are and not widen them.
Motion by Czmowski, second by Lofdahl, to close public hearing at 6:42 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Mr. Exner noted that the main function of the Grove Street project is to make it mobility-friendly
in today's functionality, with school buses loading/unloading, parking on the west side and
having traffic flow through all at the same time. Mr. Exner noted that the street improvement
could be pushed off a few years and have the street be minimally maintained until it is reclaimed.
Council Member Arndt noted that he does not feel that the street has to be wider nor does a
sidewalk have to be wider. The more important aspect is the angle of the bus parking for
loading/unloading school children.
Ms. McCormick informed the Council that there are legal issues with widening the street and
widening the sidewalk. She also has concerns with the property owners not being consulted, nor
the bus drivers being consulted, about this project.
Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted that there are two resolutions before the Council for
consideration. Mr. Jaunich noted that the Council couldpropose changes to the plans and
specifications. Mr. Exner reminded the Council that staff relies on the expertise of the school
district as far as the bus parking for loading/unloading. Council Member Arndt expressed that he
feels Grove Street should be reconstructed, but he does not feel it should be widened nor should
trees be removed. Grove Street would be bid as an alternate. Exner noted that he will research
the possibility of decreasing the widening of Grove Street and will report back to Council.
Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, to approve Resolution Nos. 14523 and 14524, however
staff should look at alternatives on Grove Street and the width of the street. Motion carried
unanimously.
10. 2016 STREET SEAL COATING PROJECT (LETTING NO. 3, PROJECT NO. 16-03))
(a) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14525 - Resolution Ordering Improvement and Preparation of
Plans and Specifications
(b) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14526 - Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and
Ordering Advertisement for Bids
Kent Exner, City Engineer, presented before the Council. Mr. Exner noted that multiple city
street segments have been identified to be included in the 2016 street seal coating project. The
project includes street surface seal coat applications by construction of bituminous material,
aggregate and fog seal material. No assessments are on this project. Construction is anticipated
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
to begin June 20, 2016, with a completion date of August 9, 2016.
The public hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m.
Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, to close public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
Motion by Christensen, second by Arndt, to approve Resolution Nos. 14525 and 14526. Motion
carried unanimously.
11. CITY OF HUTCHINSON LOCAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
John Paulson, Environmental Specialist, presented before the Council. Mr. Paulson explained that
city staff has been utilizing the Stormwater Management Plan for Portions of the City of Hutchinson
as a guide for storm water planning purposes. Numerous regulatory and technical changes have
occurred related to municipal storm water. In 2007 the City of Hutchinson became a regulated
Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System owner and is required to implement a variety of storm
water best management practices ranging from public education to scheduled infrastructure
inspections. The Local Surface Water Management Plan is a comprehensive collection of the
various applicable regulations, local water resources, regulatory agencies, storm water system issues
assessment and implementation plan. The Plan is a one stop guide for City storm water
requirements. The Plan also serves as a planning tool used to identify routine ongoing storm water
program implementation costs as well as capital improvements needed to address issues with water
quality and water quantity throughout the City. The City's Resource Allocation Committee has
briefly reviewed the Plan as well. Mr. Paulson highlighted items of the plan.
Public hearing was opened at 7:21 p.m.
Steve Cook, 728 Juul Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Cook questioned an item
in Section 4.5(B). He asked about money being allocated for sediment in Otter Lake. Mr. Cook
thought perhaps the sediment could possibly be used at Creekside if it is clean enough. Mr. Paulson
noted that will be reviewed in soil analysis. General discussion was held regarding sediment cores
and finding native bottoms.
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to close public hearing at 7:26 p.m. Motion carried
unanimously.
COMMUNICATIONS REQUESTS AND PETITIONS
e purpose oJ this portion oJ the agenda is to provide the 777777ith information necessary to craft wise policy. Includes
items like monthly or annual reports and communications from other entities.)
13. CREEKSIDE 2015 YEAR END REPORT
Andy Kosek, Creekside Manager, presented before the Council. Mr. Kosek reviewed information
such as source separated organics tonnages received in and raw material tonnages coming in. Mr.
Kosek also reviewed the low volume model that the facility is implementing in 2016. Mr. Kosek
also reviewed the facility's sales coverage area, as well as trends and challenges. Mr. Kosek also
reviewed budget comparisons in the refuse and compost funds.
Council Member Arndt asked about fill from road projects. Kent Exner noted that the top soil is
what is best for Creekside — a nice, clean product. That doesn't always come from road projects, but
more from ponding projects. It is the City's discretion as to where the loads are taken.
Mayor Forcier moved Item 16 after the Creekside annual report.
16. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-753 — AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE
OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO TITANIUM PARTNERS LLC (First reading, Set second reading and
consideration of adoption for February 23, 2016)
.19
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
Miles Seppelt, EDA Director, presented before the Council. Mr. Seppelt explained that the City has
been approached by a developer that would like to bring a new hotel to the community at the
northeast corner of Hwy 7 and Hwy 15. The developer is proposing a mid-level hotel, similar in
nature to the AmericInn. Mr. Seppelt explained that the proposed property is zoned appropriately
and has the highest and best use. Mr. Seppelt provided benefits to the project, such as reduced city
maintenance costs on the current vacant lots, gas & electric sales for HUC, water/sanitary sewer
sales, job creation, drawing more people to downtown, additional lodging options and the project
will use local contractors when possible. The developer would like to expedite the project with
groundbreaking in May and opening this Fall. EDA staff is proposing to sell the property for $1.00.
The return on the investment is the annual taxes generated times the life of the hotel generating total
taxes of $4.6 million.
Mr. Seppelt noted that this is the first inquiry on the property since it went up for sale nine years
ago.
Deb Johnson, 440 Rose Lane, presented before the Council. Ms. Johnson stated that she moved to
her property eight years ago and does not want to live behind a hotel. Mr. Seppelt spoke about the
required setbacks and screenings the hotel property will need to comply with. Ms. Johnson has
concerns with where the parking lot will be located.
Kyle Felber, 450 Rose Lane, presented before the Council. Mr. Felber suggested the developer
look at the northwest corner of the intersection. Mr. Felber asked about the screening
requirements. Marc Sebora, City Attorney, noted that city ordinance requires screening between
commercial and residential neighborhoods. The Council encouraged Mr. Felber to provide his
feedback at the Planning Commission meeting where a public hearing will be held.
Mindy Anderson, 455 Rose Lane, presented before the Council. Ms. Anderson asked if there are
requirements that the developer will have to meet to keep the city looking nice. Ms. Anderson also
asked if they would have to develop a pond because the project is so close to the river. Mr. Seppelt
explained that when Hwy 7 was reconstructed several ponds were constructed so the developer
would only have to construct a pond if they cover more than 40% of the impervious surface.
Steve Cook, 728 Juul Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Cook asked about the reversionary
language in the purchase agreement. Mr. Cook noted that the developer has proposed 54 units and
he asked what if they only construct a 30 unit property. The agreement notes that a mid-level
structure is being developed and will be up to the developer and what the site can accommodate. It
was also noted that there is language in the agreement that if the developer does not have a
certificate
of occupancy by October 2017, the property will revert to the City.
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 16-753.
Motion carried unanimously.
The Council recessed at 8:15 p.m.
The Council reconvened at 8:22 p.m.
14. UPDATE BY STEVE COOK ON FOUNDERS' PARK AND SIGNAGE GRANT
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
Steve Cook, 728 Juul Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Cook informed the Council that he
has researched various grants for signage and a founder's park. He has found a national grant
available for placemaking. The EDA and Heart of Hutch have agreed to be the applicant for the
grant. The grant encourages cities to incorporate arts and culture into their community development.
The initialgrant application is due March 2, 2016. Finalists will be notified the end of May. Mr.
Cook noted this is a very competitive grant.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
15. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 15-749 — AN ORDINANCE APPROVING REVISIONS
TO SECTIONS OF THE HUTCHINSON CITY CHARTER AS RECOMMENDED BY THE
CHARTER COMMISSION (First Reading and Consideration of Adoption)
Marc Sebora, City Attorney, presented before the Council. Mr. Sebora provided background on
what the Council has discussed thus far. The amendments were initially presented to the Council on
January 12, 2016. Because a full Council was not present at the January 26, 2016, Council meeting,
the ordinance is before the Council this evening as a first reading.
Council Member Lofdahl noted he would like no changes made to Section 2.09 and leave it as
written. He suggested that the proposed ordinance be returned to the Charter Commission
requesting that Section 2.09 be removed. He is fine with all other suggested changes.
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Czmowski, to deny Ordinance No. 15-749. Discussion was held
regarding the topic of four-year mayoral terms. Council Member Lofdahl suggested putting the
four-year mayoral term on the ballot in November for the voters to vote on. Council Member
Lfodahl requested that an ordinance be drafted for the next Council meeting for four-year mayoral
terms. Roll call vote was taken: Christensen — aye; Lofdahl — aye; Arndt — nay; Czmowski — aye;
Forcier — nay. Motion carried 3 to 2.
17. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-750 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 154
OF THE ZONING CODE — MICRO -DISTILLERY COCKTAIL ROOMS (Second Reading and
Consideration of Adoption)
Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted there have been no changes to the ordinance since the first
reading.
Motion by Czmowski, second by Lofdahl, to approve Ordinance No. 16-750. Motion carried
unanimously.
18. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-751 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 154
OF THE ZONING CODE - ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (Second Reading and Consideration of
Adoption)
Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted there have been no changes to the ordinance since the first
reading.
Motion by Arndt, second by Czmowski, to approve Ordinance No. 16-751. Council Member
Lofdahl commented that he is not in favor of 2000 square feet garages in city limits. He likes the
changes regarding how things are sized and not having to follow a conditional use permit process.
Roll call vote was taken: Christensen — aye; Lofdahl — nay; Arndt — aye; Czmowski — aye; Forcier —
aye. Motion carried 4 to 1.
19. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-752 — AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE
OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO MACH1 PROPERTIES LLC (Second Reading and Consideration of
Adoption)
Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted there have been no changes to the ordinance since the first
reading.
rel
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, to approve Ordinance No. 16-752. Motion carried
unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
20. APPROVE/DENY RESOLUTION NO. 14522 - RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FILING OF A
PETITION TO REQUEST AMENDMENT TO THE MPCA RIVERINE STANDARDS
John Paulson, Environmental Specialist, presented before the Council. Mr. Paulson explained that
the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities and Minnesota Environmental Science and Economic
Review Board authorized the filing of a petition for rulemaking with the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency seeking to have the MPCA amend its newly adopted riverine standards based upon
the post -rulemaking identification of new evidence, which demonstrates such rules have relied upon
two factors flux and the five-day biochemical oxygen demand for purposes of identifying nutrient
impairment not accepted by the scientific community or the US EPA for use for such purposes. The
current MPCA riverine standards rule is significantly flawed and CGMC and MESERB desire to
present such information to the MPCA in the form of a petition for rule amendments so that the
MPCA can take the appropriate steps necessary to correct the rule. The City has been requested by
the CGMC and MESERB to petition the MPCA to amend its Riverine Eutrophication Standards due
to the standards not being based on sound science.
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to approve Resolution No. 14522. Motion carried
unanimously.
21. APPROVE/DENY SETTING COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2016, AT 4:00 P.M.
TO DISCUSS PROPOSED HUTCHINSON ENTERPRISE CENTER WITH THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Matt Jaunich explained that this workshop is to discuss the business incubator project.
Motion by Czmowski, second by Christensen, to set Council workshop for February 23, 2016, at
4:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
22. APPROVE/DENY SETTING BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION FOR APRIL 20,
2016, AT 5:30 P.M.
Motion by Lofdahl, second by Czmowski, to set Board of Appeal and Equalization for April 20,
2016, at 5:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
GOVERNANCE
(The purpose o t is portion of the agenda is to deal with organizational development issues, including policies,
performances, and other matters that manage the logistics of the organization. May include monitoring reports, policy
development and governance process items.)
23. MINUTES FROM COMMITTEES, BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS
�a) Library Board Minutes from December 28, 2015
b) Snow Removal — Ice Control Report for January 2016
MISCELLANEOUS
24. STAFF UPDATES
7
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016
Kent Exner — Mr. Exner noted that the Water Tower bids will be received next week.
Matt Jaunich — Mr. Jaunich noted that city offices will be closed next Monday for Presidents' Day. He
also informed the Council that they should have received an invitation from the CGMC regarding
Legislative Action Day. Mr. Jaunich mentioned that the City will be holding legislative forum on
February 29, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. Lastly, Mr. Jaunich noted that upgrades are being made to the Council
Chambers.
25. COUNCIL/MAYOR UPDATE
Bill Arndt — Council Member Arndt stated that Region 6E will consider a Resolution in support of Hwy
212 Corridor if the City forwards one to them to consider.
Steve Cook — Mr. Cook asked about Grove Street project. Mr. Cook spoke about the restriction on park
use, however he realizes that parking lots and sidewalks are part of parks but this prof ect is not for park
use. He strongly encouraged that the angle parking be looked at again instead of the street being
widened.
Mr. Cook also clarified Arndt's and Forcier's vote on the proposed ordinance for the Charter
amendments. Council Member Lofdahl clarified that his motion was simply to deny the ordinance,
however it got confusing because the Council then began discussing four-year mayoral terms. So the
vote was not on four-year mayoral terms, but rather only on denying the ordinance. Mayor Forcier
noted that it is his desire to listen to the boards and commissions that provide comments/suggestions to
the Council. When asked by Cook if he was okay with overturning a public vote, since Section 2.09
was voted on by the people in 2000, Forcier indicated yes. General discussion was held about Section
2.09 of the City Charter.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Arndt, second Lofdahl, to adjourn at 9:05 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
N.
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Adoption of City of Hutchinson Local Surface Water Management Plan
Department: PW/Engineering
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: John Paulson/Kent Exner
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: John Paulson/Kent Exner
Reviewed by Staff ❑
Consent Agenda
Time Requested (Minutes): 0
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: Yes
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
A Public Hearing was held at the 2/9/16 City Council Meeting to receive input on the Local Surface Water
Management Plan (LSWMP). To date, no comments have been received from the public regarding the contents of
the LSWMP. The LSWMP is a compilation of existing regulations that are already being implemented and enforced.
It is a one stop guide for City of Hutchinson storm water requirements. It also serves as a planning tool used to
identify routine on-going storm water program implementation costs as well as capital improvements needed to
address issues with water quality and water quantity throughout the City.
City staff will be available to present an overview of the plan and to answer any questions that you or the public may
have.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Consideration of adoption of the Local Surface Water Management Plan.
Fiscal Impact: Funding Source:
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: No
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
NO,
NO,
A,
VAN,
DECEMBER 2015
LOCAL SURFACE WATER
MANAGEMENT PLAN
............. WSB Project No. 2702-000 .............
all
LOCAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
FOR THE
CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA
December 2015
Prepared By:
WSB & Associates, Inc.
701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300
Minneapolis, MN 55416
763-541-4800
763-541-1700 (Fax)
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared
by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly
Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of
Minnesota.
Jacob Newhall, PE
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Reg. No. 49170
Certification
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title Page
Certification
Table of Contents
SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
SECTION 2: LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY
SECTION 3: AGENCY COOPERATION
SECTION 4: ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
SECTION 5: GOALS AND POLICIES
SECTION 6: IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A — Figures
Figure 1:
Location Map
Figure 2:
Zoning Map
Figure 3:
Future Land Use Map
Figure 4:
Storm Sewer Map
Figure 5:
National Wetlands Inventory & DNR Lakes Map
Figure 6:
Soils Map
Figure 7:
Water Resource Problem Areas Map
Figure 8:
Floodplain Map
Figure 9:
Water Quality Monitoring Map
Figure 10:
Pollutant Sources Map
Figure 11:
Stormwater BMP Map
Appendix B — MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization
Appendix C — Stormwater Management Design Standards
Local Surface Water Management Plan Table of Contents
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
SECTION 1
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. 1. Local Water Management Plan Purposes
The City of Hutchinson's Local Surface Water Management Plan (Plan, City Plan,
Local Plan) is a local management plan that has been written to be consistent with the
requirements of Minnesota Statutes 10313.235, Minnesota Rules 8410. Minnesota
Statute 10313.201 states that the purposes of the water management programs are to:
• Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention
systems;
• Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality
problems;
• Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and
groundwater quality;
• Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and
groundwater management;
• Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems;
• Promote groundwater recharge;
• Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and
• Secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of
surface and groundwater.
The Hutchinson Local Surface Water Management Plan addresses these purposes.
1.2. Local Surface Water Management Responsibilities and Related Agreements
The City of Hutchinson (the City) has not entered into any water management related
agreements with its neighboring cities, the County, or the State of Minnesota, other than on
a project -specific agreement for BMPs constructed to meet water quality requirements.
The City is responsible for construction, maintenance, and operation of the City's storm
water management systems (i.e., ponds, pipes, channels).
1.3. Executive Summary
The Hutchinson Local Surface Water Management Plan is divided into six sections:
• Section I Executive Summary provides background information and summarizes
the Plan contents.
• Section 2 Land and Water Resource Inventory presents information about the
topography, geology, groundwater, soils, land use, public utilities, surface waters,
hydrologic system and data, and the drainage system.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 1-1
SECTION 1
• Section 3 Agency Cooperation describes the City's ordinances and other
governmental controls and programs that affect water management.
• Section 4 Assessment of Problems and Issues presents the City's water
management related problems and issues.
• Section 5 Goals and Policies outlines the City's goals and policies pertaining to
water management.
• Section 6Implementation Program presents the implementation program for
the City, which includes defining responsibilities, prioritizing, and listing the
program elements. Table 6.1 outlines the projects, programs, studies, and Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) activities that have been identified to
address the problem areas contained in this Plan.
1.3.1. Background
McLeod County adopted a Comprehensive Local Water Plan in 2013. The
McLeod County Plan addresses water problems in the context of watershed units
and groundwater systems. In addition, The City of Hutchinson is located in the
south fork of the Crow River watershed, so the Crow River Organization of Water
assists in guiding local water resources policies. The City is not located in a
watershed district.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 1-2
SECTION 2
2. LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY
The City, located approximately 50 miles west of downtown Minneapolis, is surrounded by
lakes, wetlands, and valuable water and land resources. Protecting and enhancing these
important resources is a high priority for the City and the surrounding area. Information has
been collected regarding land and water resources for the City from a variety of sources.
This section of the Plan provides a general description and summary of the climate, geology,
surficial topography, surface and ground water resource data, soils, land use, public utilities
services, water-based recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, unique features, scenic areas, and
pollutant sources. This section also identifies where more detailed information can be
obtained.
2.1. Topography and Geology
The City is located in the northwest area of McLeod County as shown on Figure 1,
Appendix A. The area is characterized by nearly flat to gently rolling topography, with
the highest ground being in the north central portion of the City. Hutchinson is bordered by
Otter and Campbell Lake to the west and through the central portion of the city where it
continues on as the South Fork Crow River past the Hutchinson Dam. All of the City's
surface water drains to Otter Lake and the South Fork Crow River. The City has contour
data that covers the entire City and is based on 2011 LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging)
Data.
According to the McLeod County Geologic Atlas from the Minnesota Geologic Survey, the
depth to bedrock in the Hutchinson area ranges from approximately 400-500 feet below
ground surface.
2.2. Climate and Precipitation
The climate for McLeod County, about one hour west of the Minneapolis/St. Paul
metropolitan area, is described as a humid continental climate with moderate precipitation,
wide daily temperature variations, warm humid summers, and cold winters. The average
annual temperature is 44.3 degrees Fahrenheit. The total average annual precipitation is
approximately 26.9 inches. The annual snowfall average is 42.9 inches and is equivalent to
approximately 4.3 inches of water. Average monthly temperature and precipitation are
shown in Table 2-1 below. Additional climatological information for the area can be
obtained from the Minnesota State Climatology Office at http://www.climate.umn.edu/.
The recurrence interval of a rainfall event is based on the probability that a particular storm
event will reoccur in any given year. A 24-hour rainfall event having a 99% chance of
occurrence is approximately 2.4 inches. A 24-hour rainfall event having a 1% chance of
occurrence is approximately 6.9 inches. The 1%, 10 -day runoff is 7.1 inches (this is a
combination of snowmelt and precipitation when the ground is frozen and no infiltration
can occur and is from Figure 2-1 (A) of the National Engineering Handbook, Section 4,
Hydrology, Soil Conservation Service, August 1972). Additional rainfall events and
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-1
SECTION 2
probabilities are listed in Table 2-2 below. The rainfall data was obtained from the Atlas
14 website produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
Refer to http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/ for additional information.
TABLE 2-1 AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION
DATA FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON
Months
Average Temp
(F°)
Precipitation
(inches)
Snowfall
(inches)
January
11.8
0.7
8.5
February
17.1
0.6
7.2
March
3 0.3
1.5
8.7
April
45.7
2.4
2.9
May
5 8.3
3.4
0.0
June
67.8
4.3
0.0
July
72.3
3.4
0.0
August
69.6
3.7
0.0
September
60.8
2.7
0.0
October
48.4
2.0
0.6
November
32.4
1.3
5.9
December
17.6
0.9
9.1
Totals
Year Avg.) 44.3
26.9
42.9
TABLE 2-2 RAINFALL EVENTS FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RECURRENCE
INTERVAL
EVENT
DURATION
PROBABLILITY
OF OCCURRENCE
IN ANY GIVEN
YEAR
RAINFALL
AMOUNT
(INCHES)
1 - Year
24 - Hour
99%
2.40
2 - Year
24 - Hour
50%
2.76
5 - Year
24 - Hour
20%
3.44
10 - Year
24 - Hour
10%
4.09
25 - Year
24 - Hour
4%
5.09
50 - Year
24 - Hour
2%
5.95
100 - Year
24 - Hour
1%
6.90
2.3. Soils
The City is predominantly located in five different soil associations:
Clarion -Harps -Glencoe, Clarion-Canisteo-Storden, Estherville-Coland-Biscay,
Cokato-Storden-Muskego, and Cokato-Canisteo-Cordova. Soil textures, infiltration
rates, and slopes can vary greatly between the different soil associations. Infiltration
rates of soils affect the amount of direct runoff resulting from rainfall; the higher the
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-2
SECTION 2
infiltration rate for a given soil, the lower the runoff potential. Conversely, soils with
low infiltration rates produce high runoff volumes and high peak discharge rates. More
information about the local soils can be obtained from the Soil Survey ofMcLeod County
or The McLeod County Comprehensive Local Water Plan.
2.4. Land Use and Zoning
The City is approximately nine square miles with a 2014 population of 14,124. In
Hutchinson, population size is growing at a faster rate than the city area, resulting in an
increased trend in population density. The Current Zoning Map is shown in Figure 2.
The Future Land Use Map is shown in Figure 3. The City of Hutchinson
Comprehensive Plan was adopted on December 10, 2013. For more information on
Land Use and Zoning within the City, refer to the Comprehensive Plan which can be
found on the City website (http://www.ci.hutchinson.mn.us/).
2.5. Public Utilities
Hutchinson provides sanitary and water service throughout the City. In 2008, the
Hutchinson wastewater facility underwent a major expansion to help serve the needs of the
City through the year of 2028, with a maximum capacity of 9.62 million gallons per day
(mgd). The upgrade was designed to treat an average of 3.67 mgd using biological and
membrane bioreactor (MBR) processes. Prior to discharging into the South Fork River, the
water is treated with chemical phosphorus removal and ultraviolet disinfection. In addition
to the treatment facility, there are also areas of the City that utilize individual Subsurface
Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS).
Public water services are described in Subsection 2.7 Groundwater.
Storm sewers, ditches, curbs, and gutters provide storm water drainage for the City. The
storm sewer map (Figure 4) shows the City's storm water system of pipes, channels and
ponds. Future street maintenance and redevelopment will likely dictate the extension or
reconstruction of the storm drainage system. Mapping of storm water utilities will be
updated as improvements of the system are completed to stay in compliance with MS4
requirements.
2.6. Surface Waters
Figure 5 shows the major water resources in the City. The following table lists the named
DNR -protected lakes and wetlands within the City and the associated ordinary High
Water Level.
Waterbod Name
OHW
Lake ID #
Otter
1039.2
43 0085 00
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-3
SECTION 2
The Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 (WCA) dictates that Local Government Units
(LGUs) are responsible for administering the rules. The intent of the WCA is to promote
no net loss of wetlands. McLeod County is the LGU responsible for administering WCA
within the City. Refer to Figure 5 for the location of National Wetland Inventory (NWI)
wetlands throughout the City. A soils map is also included for reference as Figure 6.
2.6.1. Water Quality Data
Water quality data for the City has been obtained from the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) Environmental Data Access site. This database is utilized
by participating agencies to compile water quality testing data and is almost
entirely used for the storage of water quality parameters. This water quality
monitoring information/data and monitoring locations can be found at the MPCA's
Environmental Data Access site
at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-monitoring-and-reporting/w
ater-monitoring-and-reporting. html .
2.6.2. Impaired Waters
The MPCA lists the following water bodies located within or near the City as
being impaired:
• Otter Lake (Main Basin ID — 43-0085-01) is listed as impaired for mercury
in fish tissue and excessive nutrients/eutrophication
• Otter Lake (South Arm ID — 43-0085-02 and North Arm/Campbells ID —
43-0085-03) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish tissue
• South Fork Crow River (Headwaters to Hutchinson Dam:
ID -07010205-540) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish, turbidity, fishes
bioassessments and aquatic macroinvertab rate bioassessments
• South Fork Crow River (Hutchinson Dam to Bear Creek:
ID -07010205-510) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish and turbidity
As of 2015, TMDL studies are currently underway for Otter Lake and the South
Fork Crow River as part of a Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy
(WRAPS) study being conducted for the South Fork Crow Watershed. The
locations of these impaired water bodies are shown on the water resource problem
areas map, Figure 7, Appendix A.
2.6.3. Shoreland
The City has an adopted a shoreland management ordinance. A copy of this
ordinance can be found under Title XV: Land Usage in Chapter 152
at http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/ or obtained at City Hall.
This ordinance requires setbacks from shoreland areas, and limits the type of
development and use of the City's shoreland areas.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-4
SECTION 2
2.6.4. Flood Plain Management
The City has adopted a flood plain management ordinance. A copy of this
ordinance can be found under Title XV: Land Usage in Chapter 154
at http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson mn/ or obtained at City Hall.
This ordinance generally regulates developments, land alterations and uses within
each of the floodway, flood fringe, and general flood plain districts.
2.6.5 Storm Water Management
The City has adopted a storm water management ordinance that can be found under
Title V: Public Works in Chapter 54: Storm Water Management
at http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson mn/ or obtained at City Hall.
This ordinance identifies several features related to the City's storm water
management and erosion control goals and controls.
2.7. Groundwater
Various agencies are responsible for groundwater management and protection. The DNR
regulates groundwater usage rate and volume as part of its charge to conserve and use the
waters of the state. For example, suppliers of domestic water to more than 25 people or
applicants proposing a use that exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per
year must obtain a water appropriation permit from the DNR. Many of the agencies
charged with regulating water usage are currently involved in assessing and addressing
concerns of water usage. When and where feasible the City will work with the associated
agencies to be good stewards of water resources. The Minnesota Department of Health
(MDH) is the official state agency responsible for addressing all environmental health
matters, including groundwater protection. For example, the MDH administers the well
abandonment program and regulates installation of new wells. The MPCA administers and
enforces laws relating to pollution of the state's waters, including groundwater. The
Minnesota Geological Survey provides a complete account of the state's groundwater
resources. The City is charged with general responsibilities for groundwater protection and
use, but its role is limited to cooperating and assisting the DNR, MDH, and MPCA in their
groundwater protection efforts.
Continued research about infiltration impacts and groundwater recharge is ongoing with
the goal to help develop a better overall understanding of this groundwater/infiltration
interaction.
The City owns and operates five wells located within City limits. The wells draw from an
aquifer located approximately 100 feet below ground surface. The Hutchinson Water
Treatment Plant uses membrane technology to soften the water and reduce ammonia;
biological filtration to reduce iron and manganese; and ammonia to meet treatment
requirements within its site constraints. Treated water from the biological pressure filters,
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-5
SECTION 2
which use nonpathogenic organisms to remove iron, manganese, and ammonia, is blended
with the membrane permeate. The blended water's pH is increased to control corrosion.
Disinfection and fluoridation complete the treatment process. Once treated, the pumped
water is sent into the City's water distribution system.
2.8. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling
The City's previous storm water management plan was drafted by Barr Engineering
Company in 1996. The plan included modeling the water quality and water quantity
issues for five specific portions of the City with the aid of PONDNET and HydroCAD
software. The previous plan proposed recommendations based upon the plan's findings
and identified expected outcomes. City-wide modeling has not been completed.
2.9. NPDES Phase II
The City is required to have a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit
through the MPCA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II
Program. MS4s designated by rule are urban areas with populations over 10,000 or urban
areas with populations greater than 5,000 with the potential to discharge to valuable or
polluted waters. Permits for construction sites greater than one acre will also be required
as part of Phase II.
As an MS4, the City will be required to implement the following six minimum control
measures:
1. Public Education and Outreach
2. Public Participation/Involvement
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination
4. Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control
5. Post -Construction Storm Water Management
6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations
For more information on the MS4 Permit requirements refer to www.pca.state.mn.us.
Refer to Appendix B for a copy of the City's MS4 SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan).
2.10. Water Resource Problem Areas
Water resource problem areas were identified through information obtained from City
staff, residents, and other agencies. Each problem was analyzed and potential solutions to
address the problems were developed as detailed in Section 4. Refer to Figure 7 for the
location of site-specific problem areas. The following is a list of some of the water
resource problem areas within the City:
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-6
SECTION 2
1. South Central Drainage Area
2. Otter Lake Outfall Sediment Removal and Potential Relocation
3. Northeast Drainage Area Flooding
4. Bradford Street Flooding Area
5. Low Area at Ridgewater College - Future Outlet
6. Potential Regional Ponding Location
7. Drainage Capacity and Maintenance Concerns
8. Low Point Flooding
9. Pond Maintenance Guidance
10. Nutrient TMDL — Otter Lake
11. Turbidity TMDL — Crow River
12. Downtown Storm Water Water Quality Improvements
2.11. Flood Insurance Studies
A Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Study (FIS) was
completed for the McLeod County in 2014. A FEMA floodplain map is included as
Figure 8.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 2-7
SECTION 3
3. AGENCY COOPERATION
There are a number of local, state, and federal agencies that have rules and regulations related to
local water management. The City recognizes the roles of these other agencies and will cooperate,
coordinate, and when possible partner with these agencies.
This Plan is in conformance with but does not restate all other agency rules that are applicable to
water resource management. The following agencies deal with or regulate water resources
throughout the City:
e Minnesota Department of Health www. health. state. mn.us
e Minnesota Pollution Control Agency www.pca.state.mn.us
e Board of Water and Soil Resources www.bwsr.state.mn.us and the Wetland
Conservation Act www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/index.html
e Minnesota Department of Natural Resources www.dnr.state.mn.us
e US Army Corps of Engineers http://www.mvp.usace. army. mil
e Minnesota Department of Agriculture www.mda.state.mn.us
e US Fish and Wildlife Service www.fws.gov
e McLeod County www.co.mcleod.mn.us
e Crow River Organization of Water www.crowriver.
e Minnesota Environmental Quality Board www.egb.state.mn.us
While these other agencies' rules, policies, and guidelines are not all restated in this Plan, they are
applicable to projects, programs, and planning within the City. The MPCA Minnesota
Stormwater Manual, which is a document intended to be frequently updated, is also incorporated
by reference into this Plan and can be found
at www.pca.state.mn.us/water/stormwater/stonnwater-manual.html.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 3-1
SECTION 4
4. ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS AND ISSUES
Outlined below is an assessment of existing and potential local water resource -related problems
that are known as of 2015. These problems have been identified based on an analysis of the land
and water resource data collected during the preparation of this Plan and through information
provided by the City, its residents, and other organizations. A description of any existing or
potential problem within the City has been listed and potential future corrective actions have
been incorporated into an implementation plan. Refer to Figure 7 for the location of many of the
problem areas discussed below. Figure 9 depicts water quality monitoring locations, Figure 10
depicts known pollutant sources, and Figure 11 depicts storm water BMPs.
4.1. Water Quality Problems
Problem 4.1.A The City discharges to the following impaired waters as listed by the
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA):
• Otter Lake (Main Basin ID — 43-0085-01) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish
tissue and excessive nutri ents/eutrophi cation.
• Otter Lake (South Arm ID — 43-0085-02 and North Arm/Campbell ID —
43-0085-03) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish tissue.
• South Fork Crow River (Headwaters to Hutchinson Dam: ID -07010205-540) is
listed as impaired for mercury in fish, turbidity, fishes bioassessments, and
aquatic macroinvertab rate bioassessments.
• South Fork Crow River (Hutchinson Dam to Bear Creek: ID -07010205-510) is
listed as impaired for mercury in fish and turbidity.
• South Fork Crow River (Hutchinson Dam to Bear Creek: ID -07010205-510) is
anticipated to be added to the impaired list for E. coli.
Corrective Action 4.1.A The MPCA completed a statewide mercury TMDL in 2007. As
storm water point sources account for less than 1% of the mercury (majority is
atmospheric), the City contributes an insignificant amount to this TMDL.
As of 2015, TMDL studies are currently underway for Otter Lake and the South Fork
Crow River as part of a Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) study
being conducted for the South Fork Crow Watershed. Once the WRAPS report is
finalized, the City will work with neighboring communities, Crow River Organization of
Water (CROW), and the MPCA to meet its waste load allocation for Otter Lake and the
South Fork Crow River.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-1
SECTION 4
Problem 4.1.B Implementation of storm water quality improvements in downtown
Hutchinson.
Corrective Action 4.1.B The City and MnDOT have plans to reconstruct Trunk
Highway 15 (2" d Avenue N to 5th Avenue S) in the next five to ten years. Storm water
quality improvements will be implemented in conjunction with this project. A storm
water study will be completed to help determine feasible improvement options.
The City will also investigate other storm water quality improvements in the downtown
area as opportunities arise.
4.2. Flooding and Storm Water Rate Control Concerns
Problem 4.2.A The South Central Recreation Center (RC) Area and S. Grade Road have
experienced localized flooding dating back to at least 1993 for moderate to heavy storms
(approximately 2 inches or greater depending on intensity).
Corrective Action 4.2.A A detailed Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis was completed for
the South Central Recreation Center (RC) Area and S. Grade Road by SEH in 2012. The
primary contributors to the flooding were determined to be: 1) an under capacity local
storm sewer within the RC area, and 2) lack of downstream storm sewer capacity in
combination with the lack of natural surface overflow paths and detention within the RC
area. The following is a list of recommendations provided in the study to mitigate
flooding. The actions are listed in order of priority.
1. Install new storm sewer system on west side of the RC area,
2. Install detention basins for the RC area in the existing ball field area,
3. Install a new, separate storm sewer system on the east side of the RC area (the
existing storm sewer system is to remain and be utilized concurrently with the
new, separate system),
Additional details and preliminary costs estimates for each recommendation are provided
in the report. Further analysis is ongoing and due for completion in early 2016.
Problem 4.2.B Clifton Heights flooding and surcharging at low point on Michigan
Street.
Corrective Action 4.2.B The City plans to construct a large regional storm water basin
upon the development of land near Arch Street and Michigan Street NE. This land is
currently designated as agricultural.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-2
SECTION 4
Problem 4.2.0 Drainage capacity and maintenance concerns in Market Street Ditch east
of Fairgrounds.
Corrective Action 4.2.0 The City will investigate upstream storm water capacity
opportunities as well as maintenance considerations and/or conversion of the ditch.
Problem 4.2.D Flooding near Bradford Street.
Corrective Action 4.2.D The City will investigate opportunities to reduce flood potential
in this area. A feasibility study will be completed to determine possible improvement
options and a recommendation for addressing the flood concerns.
Problem 4.2.E Low area near Ridgewater College is susceptible to standing water.
Corrective Action 4.2.E The City will investigate the possibility of constructing a
regional pond with an outlet to this landlocked area. This will include analyzing
downstream capacity and future development needs in the area.
Problem 4.2.F Localized flooding on 8th Avenue (storm water surcharges from School
Road).
Corrective Action 4.2.F The City will investigate connecting to the pond at the south
end of the golf course or other feasible improvements to reduce the flood potential in the
area.
4.3. Impacts of Storm Water Quality on Fish and Wildlife Resources
Problem 4.3.A Recurring winter fish kill in Otter Lake.
Corrective Action 4.3.A. The City will take measures to reduce the discharge of excess
nutrients to Otter Lake in accordance with the WLA allocations determined upon the
completion of the Otter Lake TMDL study. The DNR has historically measured winter
oxygen concentrations and completed winter fish kill assessments to guide lake
management.
4.4. Adequacy of Existing Regulations and Programs to Address Adverse Impacts on Local
Water Resources
Problem 4.4.A The City has adopted a floodplain ordinance, prohibited discharge
ordinance, storm water ordinance, and shoreland ordinance which require enforcement
and periodic updates. These ordinances can be found in Section 2.6.
Corrective Action 4.4.A The City will continue to enforce and update all ordinances as
necessary as required by their MS4 Permit.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-3
SECTION 4
Problem 4.4.B The adequacy of existing capital improvement programs to correct
problems.
Corrective Action 4.4.B The implementation program located in Section 6 of this Plan
presents the projects and other implementation tasks that are considered to actively
manage local water resource issues in the City. The City will incorporate into its annually
updated CIP these storm water proj ects/tasks and any future proj ects/tasks.
4.5. Impacts of Erosion and Sedimentation on Local Water Resources
Problem 4.5.A Presence of a sediment delta at the Alan Street outfall of Otter Lake.
Corrective Action 4.5.A The City may provide maintenance on this area to ensure the
outfall continues to function as intended and remove the deposited material. In addition,
the City will investigate sources of sediment and possible upstream treatment options to
help localize maintenance efforts.
Problem 4.5.B Presence of sediment deltas within Otter Lake and Crow River.
Corrective Action 4.5.B The City plans to take sediment samples and perform
maintenance to remove sediment/debris at outfalls. The City may also investigate
overall depth management within the east arm of Otter Lake to help mitigate deposited
material throughout the basin.
4.6. Impact of Land Use Practices and Development on Local Water Resource Issues
Problem 4.6.A Future land use is anticipated to increase storm water runoff volumes and
pollutant loads to local water bodies.
Corrective Action 4.6.A The City will investigate opportunities to implement water
quality and volume reduction BMPs during future reconstruction projects. In areas
where project specific BMPs will be unfeasible, the City will look into completing
regional water quality improvement projects to help meet future storm water
management requirements.
Problem 4.6.B The majority of the City is served by a sanitary sewer collection system
that conveys sanitary sewage to a treatment plant. However, there are areas which
contain subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) in operation within the City.
Corrective Action 4.6.B The City will continue to work with the County to ensure that
the SSTS remains in compliance and requires that connection to City sewer occur when
available.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-4
SECTION 4
4.7. Education Program
Problem 4.7.A The City recognizes the need for local water education programs to
increase public awareness of local water management and improve the quality of storm
water runoff.
Corrective Action 4.7.A The City will continue to provide educational content and
opportunities to residents, businesses, developers, and others. These efforts may include
regular notices in the City's monthly newsletter, articles in the local paper, postings on
the City website, and flyers in the utility bill. The City may work with CROW or
McLeod County to improve the efficiency of educational efforts and reduce duplication.
Educational topics may include but are not limited to:
• Wetland buffers
• Yard/pet waste management
• Illicit discharge to storm water
• Utility easements
• Storm water pond function
• Controlling invasive species
4.8. Identification of Potential Problems Which are Anticipated in the Next 20 Years.
Problem 4.8.A Inspecting and maintaining existing storm water infrastructure
throughout the City.
Corrective Action 4.8.A The City is responsible for maintenance of its storm water
system in conformance with the MCPA's MS4 Program. This includes maintenance of
pipes, constructed ponds, lakes, wetlands, ditches, swales, and other drainageways.
Proper maintenance will ensure that the storm water system continues to provide the
necessary flood control and water quality treatment. Refer to Appendix B for a copy of
the City SWPPP. Other units of government are responsible for maintaining the storm
water systems under their control. For example:
MnDOT is responsible for maintenance of storm sewer along Trunk Highway 7;
City of Hutchinson is responsible for maintaining storm sewer catch basins and
leads in the county roads;
Owners of private storm water facilities are responsible for maintaining their
facilities in proper condition, consistent with the original performance design
standards. Responsibilities include removal and proper disposal of all settled
materials from ponds, sumps, grit chambers, and other devices, including settled
solids.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-5
SECTION 4
Problem 4.8.B Prioritizing inspection and maintenance of storm water ponds, BMPs,
and outfalls as well as determining the performance of existing storm water ponds and
BMPs throughout the City.
Corrective Action 4.8.B The City will develop a program to identify pond, BMP, and
outfall maintenance activities. This program will need to be updated to result in an updated
prioritization of inspection and maintenance activities. In addition, the program will
estimate the current treatment provided by each pond/BMP to determine if the desired
amount of treatment is being achieved. This program will help meet the new MS4 permit
requirements related to the management of storm water ponds.
Problem 4.8.0 Maintenance of pond sediment and volunteer vegetation on pond
adjacent to Montana Street.
Corrective Action 4.8.0 The City will complete an inspection and determine the
appropriate amount of sediment and vegetation management to be performed to allow the
pond to have appropriate water quality and water quantity volumes.
Maintenance/construction may then be performed.
Problem 4.8.D Accumulation of debris and material on City streets.
Corrective Action 4.8.D The City uses pre -wetting with a brine solution in winter which
results in less material accumulation and uses sand when necessary to improve traction.
The City will continue to sweep debris and salt from City streets in the spring, summer,
and fall. The entire City takes approximately two to three weeks to sweep. More
information regarding street sweeping activities can be found in the SWPPP which is
located in Appendix B.
Problem 4.8.E Erosion and drainage issues adjacent to Bridgewater Pond.
Corrective Action 4.8.E The City will complete an inspection and determine the
necessary erosion repairs around the perimeter of Bridgewater Pond. Sediment
accumulation and vegetation will be removed east of Eighth Avenue SW where positive
drainage is being obstructed. Installation of stormwater infrastructure will be required
when Eighth Avenue SW is extended to the east to improve drainage functionality.
4.9. Availability and Adequacy of Existing Technical Information to Manage Local Water
Resources.
Problem 4.9.A Atlas 14 (updated precipitation probability information) was released by
NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) in 2013.
Corrective Action 4.9.A Previously developed areas within the City (designed to meet
TP -40 hydrologic demands) will continue to operate under this design criteria. New
development, redevelopment, and areas where problems may exist will be evaluated (as
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-6
SECTION 4
needed) by completing a risk assessment using Atlas 14. The City may update its policies,
codes, ordinances, and other appropriate documents accordingly.
Problem 4.9.B The City has mapped a vast majority of its storm sewer system. As new
and redevelopment projects are completed, the storm sewer GIS database needs to
continually be updated.
Corrective Action 4.9.B The City will annually update its storm sewer GIS database to
incorporate recent projects and associated storm sewer improvements.
Problem 4.9.0 Clear design guidance for developers is not available for
post -construction design standards.
Corrective Action 4.9.0 The City will incorporate design standards into the Plan; see
Appendix C for design standards.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -4-7
SECTION 5
5. GOALS AND POLICIES
5.1. General
The goals in Hutchinson's Local Surface Water Management Plan appear to be
consistent with the goals of the McLeod County Water Management Plan and the Crow
River Organization of Water (CROW), while addressing the more specific and changing
needs of the City. The goals of this plan are also consistent with the guidelines contained
in Minnesota Statutes 103B and Minnesota Rules 8410.
The City recognizes that McLeod County and the CROW will continue to seek an active
role regarding water resources in the City. McLeod County's most recent Water
Management Plan can be found
at http://www.co.mcleod.mn.us/department_ files/EnvironmentalSery/McLeod%20Count
y%20Water%2OPlan%202013-2023%20[6-18-13l.pdf. Additional goals and policies of
the City are contained throughout this section.
A general priority of the City is to cooperate, collaborate, and partner with other entities
such as McLeod County, CROW, and the MPCA as much as possible as the City
implements this plan. Cooperation, collaboration, and partnering results in projects that
are less likely to conflict with the goals of the affected entities, better able to meet
long-term goals, and generally are more cost-effective.
In addition to the goals and policies contained in this section, the City will annually
review and update its Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to effectively
manage its storm water system and be in conformance with the NPDES MS4 Program.
The MS4 General Permit and Construction Permit also apply. Refer to Appendix B for
the most recent version of the City SWPPP.
The rules and policies identified may be amended from time to time. Any updates to
rules and policies will become effective upon approval and shall be used in place of those
identified herein.
5.2. Water Resource Ordinances
The City has a Storm Water Management Ordinance (Chapter
54, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/). Refer to this ordinance for
requirements relating to application, review, and approval standards and the associated
storm water management plan components and requirements. It also outlines
suspensions, revocations, stop work orders, and associated enforcement/penalty.
Consistent with the Storm Water Management Ordinance (Chapter
54, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/), the policies in this section
are triggered for all projects disturbing more than one acre. Likewise, the City Engineer
may waive this requirement if it is determined the requirements cause a hardship or are
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-1
SECTION 5
contrary to the City's goals and objectives.
In addition, the City has adopted a Shoreland Ordinance (Chapter
152, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/) and a Floodplain Ordinance
(Chapter 154, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchin son_mnto regulate uses
within shoreland and floodplain areas.
5.3. Water Quality
5.3.1. Goal
Work with McLeod County and the CROW to maintain and/or enhance the water
quality of the City of Hutchinson's lakes, wetlands, streams, and other water
resources in the City.
Utilize regional storm water facilities where possible to enhance water quality by
removing sediment and nutrients from runoff.
5.3.2. Policies
The City's preferred means of protecting water quality is to infiltrate and
provide volume control for storm water runoff The City requires storm
water volume control (infiltration, reuse, or other) equivalent to one inch from
new impervious surfaces (increase from existing conditions) or 50%
phosphorus removal if infiltration is determined to be unfeasible or
undesirable (refer to Policy 2 of NPDES Construction permit regarding
infiltration constraints). In addition, Wellhead protection areas should also be
reviewed when considering infiltration (see Section 5.7.2.1).
2. Infiltration will not be required nor allowed in areas where there are known
groundwater contaminants, soils are not suitable for infiltration (unsuitable
soils are those with infiltration rates less than 0.3 inches/hour), or in areas
where there is less than three feet of separation between the bottom of the
infiltration system and the groundwater or bedrock. Percolation tests shall be
required to verify the infiltration rates of on-site soils following the
construction of infiltration BMPs.
3. Pretreatment of storm water is required prior to discharge to an infiltration
system. This pretreatment shall collect sediment and be easily accessed for
inspection and maintenance.
4. A pond buffer extending twenty feet outward and two feet up from the high
water level must be provided around the entire pond. The developer must
provide signs denoting pond buffer limits as deemed necessary and as
approved by the City. Pond buffers should be maintained as a meadow,
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-2
SECTION 5
prairie, or forest with no more than two mowings annually at a height of no
less than four inches (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances 54.23 (F)).
Inspections for non -routine maintenance items on all storm water
management systems must occur at a minimum of once every five years.
(Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances 54.24)
6. Sediment cleanout must occur when 50% of the permanent pool storage
volume is sediment. (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances 54.24)
7. Newly constructed storm water outfalls to public waters must provide for
filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before
discharge (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.24 (B)).
New storm water management BMPs (e.g. ponds, infiltration systems, swales)
constructed as part of private development shall be covered by drainage and
utility easements or outlots that are dedicated to the City. Maintenance
responsibilities for these areas will be spelled out in the developer's
agreement.
5.4. Runoff Management and Flood Control
5.4.1. Goal
Protect, preserve, and expand (where possible) the storm water storage and
detention systems to control excessive runoff volumes and rates, prevent flooding,
protect public health and safety, and minimize public capital expenditures.
5.4.2. Policies
1. The City's preferred flood control strategy is to reduce the volume of
runoff through regional storm water facilities and reuse or infiltration
proj ects.
2. Consideration shall be given to reduce the need for storm water
management system facilities by incorporating the use of natural
topography and land cover such as wetlands, ponds, natural swales, and
depressions as they exist before development to the degree that they can
accommodate the additional water flow without compromising the
integrity or quality of these natural features. (Hutchinson, AM Code of
Ordinances § 54.23 (B))
3. Under no circumstances shall the 2-, 10-, or 100 -year developed peak
flow exceed the 2-, 10-, or 100 -year existing peak flow without prior
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-3
SECTION 5
written approval by the City Engineer (Hutchinson, AM Code of
Ordinances § 54.23).
4. The regulatory flood protection elevation shall be an elevation no lower
than one foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases
in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the flood plain that result
from designation of a floodway (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances §
154.086 (C)).
All structures, including accessory structures, must be elevated on fill so
that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection
elevation. The finished fill elevation for structures shall be no lower than
one foot above the regulatory flood protection elevation and the fill shall
extend at that elevation at least fifteen feet beyond the outside limits of
the structure erected thereon (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances §
154.089 (B)).
6. Adjacent to floodplain, the lowest floor including basement shall be
placed at least two feet above the 100 -year flood level.
7. Adjacent to storm water ponds or BMPs, the lowest opening shall be
placed at least two feet above the 100 -year high water level.
An emergency spillway (emergency outlet) from ponding areas shall be
installed a minimum of one foot below the lowest building opening and
shall be designed to have a capacity to overflow water at an elevation
below the lowest building opening at a rate not less than the anticipated
100 -year peak inflow rate to the basin.
9. Residential basement construction shall not be allowed below the
regulatory flood protection elevation and non-residential basements may
be allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation provided the
basement is structurally dry flood proofed in accordance with division §
154.089 (D) (3) (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 154.089 (D) (2)).
10. All new principal structures must have vehicular access at or above an
elevation not more than two feet below the regulatory flood protection
elevation (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 154.089 (E)(1)).
11. Lateral and collector systems shall be designed to accommodate a
10 -year return frequency storm event. These systems shall be defined as
storm sewer that collects and conveys runoff from catch basins or other
inlets from a localized drainage area to a trunk system or ponding facility.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-4
SECTION 5
12. Trunk systems shall be designed to convey the anticipated 100 -year
critical event storm water flow rate. A trunk system shall be defined as
the main channel of the storm water system that receives water from
multiple laterals or collectors or serves as an outlet and downstream
conveyance system for a storm water storage facility.
13. An overland overflow should be provided for all lateral, collector, and
trunk systems to accommodate the 100 -year critical duration rainfall
event and prevent structural inundation should an obstruction occur in
these systems.
14. No orifice having a diameter less than four inches is allowed in the
design of rate control structures within the City.
5.5. Wetlands
5.5.1. Goal
Achieve no net loss of wetlands including acreage, functions, and values. Where
practical improve the functions, values, biological diversity, and acreage of existing
wetlands.
5.5.2. Policies
1. Wetland alterations must be in conformance with the Wetland Conservation
Act (WCA) and will be administered by McLeod County which is the Local
Governing Unit (LGU) for WCA in Hutchinson.
2. Water quality treatment to NPDES standards is required prior to discharge
into a wetland.
3. Grading or filling in any type 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 wetland must be evaluated
to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the
following functional qualities of the wetland. This evaluation must also
include a determination of whether the wetland alteration being proposed
requires permits, reviews, or approvals by other local, state or federal
agencies such as a watershed district, the State Department of Natural
Resources, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant will be
advised to consider:
i. Sediment and pollutant trapping and retention;
ii. Storage of surface runoff to prevent or reduce flood damage;
iii. Fish and wildlife habitat;
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-5
SECTION 5
iv. Recreational use;
v. Shoreline or bank stabilization; and
vi. Noteworthiness, including special qualities such as historic significance,
critical habitat for endangered plants and animals, or others.
(Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (C) (4) (a))
4. No person shall deposit grass clippings, leaves, or other vegetative materials,
with the exception of normal mowing or weed control, within natural or
man-made watercourses, wetlands, or within wetland buffer areas
(Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.04 (A) (3)).
5.6. Erosion and Sediment Control
5.6.1. Goal
Protect the capacity of the City's storm water management system, prevent
flooding, and maintain water quality by preventing erosion and sedimentation
from occurring, and correct existing erosion and sedimentation problems.
5.6.2. Policies
1. All persons, subject to meeting the requirements and needing to obtain a
NPDES permit. shall apply for coverage and file a copy with the City
Engineer (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.30 (A)).
2. The construction grading and erosion/sediment control plans, in a format
acceptable to the City Engineer, shall contain a drawing or drawings
delineating the features incorporated into the SWPPP including details of
perimeter protection, construction phasing, storm drain inlet protection,
erosion control measures, temporary and final stabilization measures,
including all BMPs. In addition, the construction specifications shall contain
technical provisions describing erosion, sedimentation, and water control
measures to be utilized during and after construction as well as to define the
entities responsible for the installation and maintenance of the BMPs. The
project SWPPP must be incorporated into the construction specification
documents (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.31 (B)).
3. The City will conduct erosion control inspections on a regular basis of all
projects that require an erosion and sediment control plan.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-6
SECTION 5
4. Alterations of vegetation and topography will be regulated to prevent erosion
into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve
historic values, prevent bank slumping and protect fish and wildlife habitat
(Hutchinson, AN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (A)).
5.7. Groundwater
5.7.1. Goal
Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater resources.
5.7.2. Policies
Encourage groundwater recharge efforts and protect recharge areas from
potential sources of contamination. Provide increased green space, native
vegetation, and pond "dead" storage wherever possible and appropriate to
allow for the infiltration of storm water runoff and promote groundwater
recharge.
2. Wellhead protection areas should be reviewed when infiltration and/or
groundwater recharge is considered. Refer to the City Engineering
Department for a copy of the Wellhead Protection Plan.
3. Maintain an updated record of all known on-site septic systems, and prohibit
installation of new individual sewer systems or alteration, repair, or extension
of existing systems when connection can be made to the City's sanitary sewer.
The City will notify property owners with on-site septic systems that they are
required to connect to the City's sanitary sewer.
4. The City will work with the Department of Health to insure that all unsealed
or improperly abandoned wells within the City are properly sealed.
5. Provide groundwater protection as laid out in the County's Local Water Plan.
5.8. Recreation, Habitat, and Shoreland Management
5.8.1. Goal
Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and recreation opportunities.
5.8.2. Policies
Cooperate with McLeod County and the CROW to protect existing habitat
and recreation corridors.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-7
SECTION 5
2. Maintain, enhance, or provide new habitat as part of wetland modification,
storm water facility construction, or other appropriate projects.
3. Encourage alternative landscape designs that a) increase beneficial habitat,
wildlife and recreational uses; promote infiltration and vegetative water use;
and that b) decrease detrimental wildlife uses (such as beaver dams, goose
overabundance), which damage water control facilities, shoreline vegetation,
water quality, or recreational facilities.
4. Shore and bluff impact zone deficiencies must be evaluated and reasonable
improvements made as part of the conversion. These improvements must
include, where applicable, the following:
i. Removal of extraneous buildings, docks or other facilities that no longer
need to be located in shore or bluff impact zones;
ii. Remedial measures to correct erosion sites and improve vegetative cover,
and screening of buildings and other facilities as viewed from the water.
(Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances § 152.091(C))
Placement of natural rock riprap, including associated grading of the shoreline
and placement of a filter blanket, is permitted if the finished slope does not
exceed three feet horizontal to one foot vertical, the landward extent of the
riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level and the height of the
riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet
(Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (C) (4) (a)).
6. Alterations of vegetation and topography will be regulated to prevent erosion
into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve
historic values, prevent bank slumping, and protect fish and wildlife habitat
(Hutchinson, AN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (A)).
7. Intensive vegetation clearing within the shore and bluff impact zones and on
steep slopes is not allowed. Intensive vegetation clearing for forest land
conversion to another use outside of these areas is allowable as a conditional
use if an erosion control and sedimentation plan is developed and approved
by the soil and water conservation district in which the property is located
(Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (B) (2) (a)).
In shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes, limited clearing of trees
and shrubs and cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees is allowed to provide a
view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the
placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, livestock
watering areas, beach, and watercraft access areas and permitted
water -oriented accessory structures or facilities, provided that:
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-8
SECTION 5
The screening of structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the
water, assuming summer, leaf -on conditions, is not substantially reduced;
ii. Along rivers, existing shading of water surfaces is preserved; and
iii. The above provisions are not applicable to the removal of trees, limbs or
branches that are dead, are diseased or pose safety hazards
(Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (B) (2) (b)).
9. Shore recreation facilities, including but not limited to swimming areas, docks
and watercraft mooring areas, and launching ramps must be centralized and
located in areas suitable for them. Evaluation of suitability must include
consideration of land slope, water depth, vegetation, soils, depth to ground
water, and bedrock or other relevant factors. The number of spaces provided
for continuous beaching, mooring, or docking of watercraft must not exceed
one for each allowable dwelling unit or site in the first tier (notwithstanding
existing mooring sites in an existing commercially used harbor). Launching
ramp facilities, including a small dock for loading and unloading equipment,
may be provided for use by occupants of dwelling units or sites located in
other tiers (Hutchinson, AN Code of Ordinances § 152.029 (D)(3)).
5.9. Education and Public Involvement
5.9.1. Goal
Increase public awareness, understanding, and involvement in water and natural
resource management issues.
5.9.2. Policies
Develop and distribute educational materials to the general public and
targeted groups in accordance with the City SWPPP. Specific topics could
include water resources, groundwater, wetlands, native vegetation, buffers,
wildlife habitat, litter control, pet wastes, recycling, trash disposal, leaf
collection, grass clippings, lawn chemicals, and hazardous materials.
Information may be distributed via the City's newsletter, City website, local
newspapers, cable television or other appropriate methods.
2. Coordinate education efforts with McLeod County and the CROW where
appropriate.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-9
SECTION 5
5.10. Financing
5.10.1. Goal
Minimize and fairly distribute public expenditures for plan implementation, with
emphasis on using the City's storm water utility to finance projects and
collaborating/partnering with other entities.
5.10.2. Policies
Use the City's Storm Water Utility Fund to pay for as many storm water
management projects and implementation activities as possible.
2. Use other funding sources to pay for the implementation activities,
studies/analysis, grants, land sale proceeds, State Aid funds, etc., when
available and appropriate.
3. The City will use either its general tax fund or the Storm Water Utility Fund
to pay for the public education and information programs.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page 5-10
SECTION 6
6. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
6.1. Implementation Program Components
Table 6.1 contains a comprehensive list of the MS4 activities and projects, programs, and
studies that make up the City's implementation program for the next ten years (2015
through 2024). The City developed this program by evaluating the requirements in the
MS4 permit (see MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization in Appendix B), reviewing
existing information (Section 2), identifying potential and existing problems (Section 4),
developing goals and policies (Section 5), and then assessing the need for programs,
studies, or projects. The City estimated total costs, identified possible funding sources, and
developed an approximate schedule to complete the implementation activities. It is
anticipated these tables will be updated/revised on a yearly basis.
6.2. Implementation Priorities
The implementation components listed in Table 6.1 were prioritized to make the best use
of available local funding, meet MS4 Permit requirements, address existing water
management problems, and prevent future water management problems from occurring.
Table 6.1 identifies which activities are MS4 Permit Requirements, MS4 Permit
Requirements — within twelve months, Annual Requirements, or Capital
Projects/Programs/Studies. The City's implementation plan reflects its responsibility to
protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens by addressing problems
and issues that are specific to the City.
6.3. Financial Considerations
The City will use funds generated from its storm water utility fee as the primary funding
mechanism for its implementation program including; maintenance, repairs, capital
projects, studies, etc. If funds from this utility fee do not cover necessary costs, the City
will consider adjusting the storm water utility fee as well as using general funds to cover
the costs associated with the implementation program. The City will continue to review
the storm water utility fee annually and adjust based on the storm water related needs of
the City and other available funding mechanisms.
Although not proposed at this time, the City may consider using plan implementation
taxes (MN Statutes 10313.241) or 429 Special Improvement Assessments in the future if
general funds or storm water utility funds are not sufficient to fund the projects. The City
will also take advantage of grant or loan programs to offset project costs where
appropriate and cost-effective.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -6-1
SECTION 6
6.4. Plan Revision and Amendments
The City may need to revise this Plan to keep it current. The City may amend this Plan at
any time in response to a petition by a resident or business. Written petitions for Plan
amendments must be submitted to the City Administrator. The petition must state the
reason for the requested amendment and provide supporting information for the City to
consider the request. The City may reject the petition, delay action on the petition until the
next full Plan revision, or accept the petition as an urgent issue that requires immediate
amendment of the Plan. The City may also revise/amend the Plan in response to
City -identified needs. This Plan is intended to be in effect for ten years. The Plan will be
revised or updated at that time, to the extent necessary.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Page -6-2
SECTION VI
TABLE 6.1
LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
a3
Proposed Cost By Year' 2
`w v
a —
A
uw
E v
o
10 Year
Possible
w
w
'o o
c O v
Cost
Funding
No.
Project Description
X
¢ m
o- o- u)
O Mw
Estimate'
Sources
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Comments
ADMINISTRATIVE
Education Activity Implementation Plan - Complete
See SWPPP Application for
outline of education activity implementation program and
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
implementation schedule for the upcoming permit year
by June 30th. Include procedures to meet requirements
for the following stormwater educational programs:
-Printed Brochures at City Hall
-Coordination of City Education Program
-IDDE Education postings on City website and PRCE
1
brochures
�/
�/
1
$7,500
Storm Water
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
-Post Construction SW Management Education
Utility
guidance documents provided to developers
-Targeted distribution of education materials for
grease dumpsters and lawn clippings -Other as noted in
the Citys SWPPP
-Others as noted in the City's SWPPP Application.
Annual SWPPP Assessment & Annual Reporting City
See SWPPP Application for
staff will conduct an annual SWPPP assessment in
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
preparation of each annual report. Proposed SWPPP
modifications are subject to Part II.G of the MS4 permit.
✓
✓
Storm Water
2
The final annual report will be posted on the City's
1
$10,000
Utility
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
webpage. City staff will submit the annual report to the
MPCA prior to June 30th for the previous calendar year.
Annual Review of Stormwater Utility Fund - The City will
Storm Water
See SWPPP Application for
3
assess annually the rate to determine if there is a need
✓
1
$5,000
Utility, Staff
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
for rate adjustments.
Time
Annual Public Meeting/Event Present the draft MS4
See SWPPP Application for
annual report to one public event per year to solicit
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
public input regarding the adequacy of the City's
SWPPP. Public input received (oral and written) will be
Storm Water
4
recorded in a record of decision and evaluated by the
2
$10,000
Utility, Staff
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
$1,000
City's MS4 General Contact. City responses (if relevant)
Time
will be made in writing to each commenter. Hold one
event per calendar year of the MS4 permit cycle.
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
SECTION VI
a3
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Proposed Cost By Year''2
`w v
a —
A
u w
E v
o
10 Year
Possible
M `E
0 0
c c A
Cost
Funding
No.
Project Description
fn w
X
c w
¢ m
!
o- o- u)
o w
U Mw
Estimate'
Sources
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Comments
Online Availability of the Stormwater Pollution Prevent
See SWPPP Application for
Plan (SWPPP) Program Document- The City will make
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
the SWPPP and annual reports on the City's webpage within
Storm Water
5
12 months from the date the MS4 permit coverage is extended
2
$5,000
Utility, Staff
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
to the City.
Time
Employee Training - Continue to host a minimum of one
See SWPPP Application for
staff training event per year to discuss illicit discharge
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
recognition and reporting. City staff will develop an
Storm Water
6
annual training schedule, record the employee names,
�/
�/
3
$5,000
Utility, Staff
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
topics covered, and date of each event, annually through
Time
the end of the MS4 permit cycle.
City Webpage updates- The City will update the
See SWPPP Application for
webpage to include city contact information for
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
construction site non-compliance. The update will also
Storm Water
7
include constriction site erosion and sediment control
✓
1
$2,500
Utility, Staff
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
related public education information. This update will
Time
occur within 12 months from the date MS4 permit
coverage is extended.
Employee Training - Building or Engineering Department
See SWPPP Application for
staff (a minimum of one staff member) will maintain valid
Storm Water
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
8
certification in NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit
✓
✓
4
$2,000
Utility, Staff
$400
$400
$400
$400
$400
related training per NPDES-CSW training requirements.
Time
Develop Priority Site Inspection Procedures - Develop
See SWPPP Application for
prioritized inspection frequencies for areas of high
Storm Water
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
g
concern. Post information associated with P2 and GH at
✓
✓
4
$7,000
Utility, Staff
$2,500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
City facilities that cause potential pollution causing
Time
activities.
Updated City Ordinance Chapter 54 Stormwater
See SWPPP Application for
Management - City code Chapter 54 will be revised to
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
comply with changing permit requirements related to
illicit discharges, and construction activity stormwater
Storm Water
10
discharges. The final ordinance language will be formally
✓
✓
3,4,5
$3,000
Utility, Staff
$1,500
$1,500
adopted and implemented within 12 months from the
Time
date MS4 permit coverage is extended to the City.
Update MS4 Program - incorporate inspections from
Storm Water
See SWPPP Application for
11
Industrial Stormwater permitted sites into MS4 program
�/
✓
6
$5,000
Utility, Staff
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
records.
Time
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
SECTION VI
a3
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Proposed Cost By Year' 2
`L v
CL -
A
u w
E v
o
10 Year
Possible
M `E
0 0
c c A
Cost
Funding
No.
Project Description
fn w
X
c w
¢ m
!
o- o- u)
o w
O Mw
Estimate'
Sources
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Comments
Post Construction Requirements - The City may
See SWPPP Application for
incorporate sensitivity to wellhead protection activities
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
into ordinance, accept MIDS calculator outputs during
post construction reviews, and will amend it's
✓
Storm Water
12
Stormwater Management Plan within 12 months from
5
$5,000
Utility
$5,000
the date permit coverage is extend to more clearly
identify system maintenance needs and regional
implementation strategies.
Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs) - the City
See SWPPP Application for
will develop an ERP within 12 months from the date
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
permit coverage is extended. ERP will include the
✓
Storm Water
13
process to enforce code violations associated with
General
$2,000
Utility
$1,000
$1,000
IDDEs, construction site runoff, and post construction
stormwater management.
Pond, Wetland, and Lake Inventory - The City will submit
See SWPPP Application for
its inventory form to the MPCA MS4 Permit Program
✓
Storm Water
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
14
within 12 months from the date permit coverage is
General
$4,000
Utility
$2,000
$2,000
extended.
Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Program -
Storm Water
See SWPPP Application for
Includes erosion control permit, City Code Chapter 54,
Utility,
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
15
staff training, distribution of educational materials, and
✓
4
$60,000
Developer's
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
$6,000
review of City permitted activities
Agreements
Annual Storm Sewer GIS Mapping Updates to include
Storm Water
Section 4.9.13
new storm sewer and 3MPs
Utility, Staff
16
✓
General
$5,000
Time,
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
$500
Subdivision
A reements
ADMINISTRATIVE TOTAL
$138,000
$23,900
$12,000
$12,400
$12,000
$16,900
$12,000
$12,400
$12,000
$12,400
$12,000
OPERATIONAL
Street Sweeping - The City will continue to conduct
See SWPPP Application for
annual street sweeping operations of all public streets
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
(record the sweeping roue and date per occurrence).
Review and revise (as needed) street sweeping
✓
✓
Storm Water
17
operations (including schedule, equipment's, and
6
$2,205,000
Utility
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
$220,500
disposal), stormwater quality priority areas, and routes
annually through the end of the MS4 permit cycle.
Structural Stormwater BMP Inspections - Continue
Storm Water
See SWPPP Application for
18
annual inspection of each structural BMP each year of
�/
�/
6
$48,000
Utility, Staff
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
$4,800
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
the MS4 permit cycle.
Time
IDDE Inspections - The City will continue to annually
See SWPPP Application for
conduct IDDE inspections concurrently with stormsewer
Storm Water
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
19
outfall, and ponds inspections per the IDDE inspection
✓
✓
3
$7,500
Utility, Staff
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
$750
requirement.
Time
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
SECTION VI
a3
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Proposed Cost By Year' 2
`L v
CL -
A
u w
E v
o
10 Year
Possible
M `E
0
c A
Cost
Funding
No.
L ion
X
¢ m
0c
i!
o- o- u)
U Mw
Estimate'
Sources
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Comments
Inspect MS4 Outfalls and Ponds - Continue to inspect
See SWPPP Application for
all MS4 Outfalls, and Ponds through the end of the MS4
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
permit cycle and annually, review all pond, outfall, and
SPCD inspection records to determine if maintenance,
Storm Water
20
repair, or replacement is needed. Evaluate each SPCD's
6
$50,000
Utility, Staff
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
$5,000
inspection frequency and adjust as needed per MS4
Time
Permit. Evaluate and update inspection records
annually through the end of the MS4 permit cycle.
Stockpiles. Storage and Material Handling Area
See SWPPP Application for
Inspections - Creation of inspection and reporting
Reauthorization (Appendix B)
standard operating procedures to be developed to
Storm Water
21
conduct annual written inspections of all stockpile,
V/
V/
6
$2,500
Utility, Staff
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
$250
storage and material handling areas (per the facility
Time
inventory), through the end of the MS4 permit cycle.
Pond. BMP. & Outfall Management Program to prioritize
Storm Water
Section 4.8.13
22
inspection and maintenance activities
V/6
$25,000
Utility
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
$2,500
OPERATIONAL TOTAL
$2,338,000
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
$233,800
CAPITAL PROJECTS
Downtown Stormwater Improvements in conjunction with
Section 4.1.13
Trunk Highway 15 improvements
✓
Storm Water
23
-
$350,000
Utility, MNDOT
$350,000
South Central Drainage Area Improvements: newstorm
Section 4.2.A
sewer into neighborhoods west/east of RC, detention
✓
Storm Water
24
basin in the existing ball field area, new storm sewer into
-
$1,700,000
Utility
$970,000
$730,000
RC parking lot.
Clifton Heights Flood Improvement Project: stormwater
Section 4.2.13
basin near Arch Street and Michigan Street NE
Storm Water
25
V/-
$800,000
$800,000
Utility
Market Street Ditch Improvements: ditch east of
Section 4.2.0
Fairgrounds and possible options to improve
✓
Storm Water
26
drainage/maintenance
-
$30,000
Utility
$30,000
Bradford Street Flood Improvement Project construction
Section 4.2.D
27
of improvements.
V/
_
$100,000
Storm Water
$100,000
Utility
Flood Study Near Ridgewater College to investigate
Section 4.2.E
28
constructing a regional pond and adding an outlet to the
V/_
$12,000
Storm Water
$12,000
landlocked area
Utility
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
SECTION VI
a3
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
Proposed Cost By Year' 2
`L v
CL —
A
u w
E v
o
10 Year
Possible
M `E
0 0
c c A
Cost
Funding
No.
ProjectDescri tion
fn w
M
c w
¢ M
!
a` a` U)O
o w
Mw
Estimate'
Sources
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
Comments
8th Avenue Flood Improvements to reduce flood
Section 4.2.F
29
potential and surcharging impacts from School Road
✓
-
$75,000
Storm Water
$75,000
Utility
Alan Street Outfall Management to remove accumulated
Section 4.5.A
30
material near the outfall into Otter Lake
✓
6
$40,000
Storm Water
$40,000
Utility
Sediment Accumulation, Waterbody Functionality,
Section 4.5.13, Future/potential
Spillway Operations. Maintenance, and Depth
✓
Storm Water
project costs and schedule to be
Management Analysis within Otter Lake, Campbell Lake,
31
6
$25,000
Utility
$25,000
determined
and the Crow River
Vegetation/Sediment Management on Montana Street
Storm Water
Section 4.8.0
pond to allow for appropriate stormwater storage
32
✓
6
$20,000
Utility
$20,000
Bridgewater Pond Improvements to address erosion,
Section 4.8.E
33
sedimentation, and necessary infrastructure✓
6
$30,000
Storm Water
$30,000
improvements.
Utility
CAPTIAL PROJECTS TOTAL
$3,182,000
$0
$75,000
$970,000
$782,000
$175,000
$350,000
$30,000
$0$0
$800,000
GRAND TOTAL
$5,658,000
$257,700
$320,800
$1,216,200
$1,027,800
$425,700
$595,800
$276,200
$245,800
$246,200
$1,045,800
' Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to review and revision as engineer's reports are completed and more information becomes available. Table reflects 2015 costs and do not account for inflation. Costs generally include labor, equipment, materials, and all other costs necessary to
complete each activity. For City completed activities, staff time is included in the cost. Some of the costs outlined above may be included in other operational costs budgeted by the City.
10 Year cost projections are based upon 2 MS4 Permit Cycles with year 1 program updates occurring again in 2019
a Funding for stormwater program activities projected to come from following sources - Surface Water Utility, Developers Agreements, Grant Funds, General Operating Fund, or Special Assessments
Local Surface Water Management Plan
City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1
WSB Project No. 2702-00
APPENDIX A
Figures
Local SurfaceWater Management Plan Appendix A
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
? Zion M Wakefield ockvilleT,1 on��,demS `rne0f4w { t, !J
�ea�Clearwater
o,,
O •- Eden®sin
'• �Stearns
siscbueatrt avers ►.
' r ! ► tree ��
� �
o
d
• r Mbnti..11o
Union Msnannsh Foes _ r�
i
O nna
sobmsid. �
�dl
` MaPIT
Kin ston�- OF
g L / (
Fre•r }x t aPe ! Buffalo.--
sNede Hary y nck ..
Grove {rte• 0 Lkeh ^ Albion Is—--` BUR
-
Forest ry
>1 P City;
ChatKandiyohi
-1
f �.
%Art0
Wrighh +P
—
■l
'
Daw=A 0' okaro
Da�G.nn.ssa. y . Nrddlevilr saR~n
-4, tiw•
d
Maker
� T � •�
12 .
+ I
.41
w r `t
w
' ! Danlel>Vn riz ��� S: �A %!
• Greenlea Collinwood &oo� lnn veto,
.beth
—lie
E ohhif
1 4 t •� +.J d& I • Y 3
East Lake I_-11
sn
1,om , Hu[chin i
i/ Cedar
Casmas Mills
_--_ ----- ---------------
I Camden
ss
Kaan
�ll.v
Boon Waoonia
ak . Carver
•y City of Hutchinson McLeod
® vo'"s
Amen a
P,.non ins sent.' Glencoe _ Kelen
Lke I -
I
Renville
I — _—_--
Sibley I �
wasmogmn
IsisL
'------.---Bismarck
;4*1L
Transit Arlington J.ssenlandSCO[[Ba
®
+�
Kelso
IL-----•--------------
r-------� — _�_�--- —
I I
Jr
Brown �_ f� Nicollet Sweden -
Le c.,
s g.�
fL `'' 1 inch equals 5 miles
FIGURE 1: Location Map
April 2015 ^ �
City of Hutchinson
Zoning Map
August, 2012
Zoning
0 1
I . . . . E . . . . I
0 IT �arEwa.
l= �Eaw,�o�sra.
0 ,-oUsra,—....E-..I
0 n, Pn Pa��Eo oE��oPME� `
0 n= oazFaMo�P E;
0 n=Pn Pa��EooE� oPME� ,�
0 Rte ,�zanEoa�Ea;aa
� ne Pn ���Eo oE�E�oPME�r
� n s ���Fa�NaEo �oME Pa�
M�n M,xE-�sEo,—
Disclaimer
The end user of Nis infonnffiion agrees Nat these dad and Tdp sets have been
reated from infonndtion prwided by various g ---and pnodte sourcas dt
different moments in t— anddt variousI wels of a......Y They are onlya
graphic representation and should not be considered as positionally dc...do.
The data is p—id.d dI iIwith no ddiT made as to its dccurdsy orifi
dppropnatenass to its intended use of Ne dad. It is Ne responsibility of Ne end
ser to be aware of Ne data's linint— and to utilize Ne data in do dppropriate
Td.and Ne end user 19,ees to hold The City of Hutrnlnson harmless for
smg opt of mis e;:rndnge orTfo,Ta<ion. me,ero,e �,do, no
umsbnms shall Ne Cry of Hutchlnson be held responsibler an
foy —,
il
xpenses,, I Tdg—'l.unes.Wdmg speodl ono, con segu..tial
amages to any pe,son(s) o' p'opehy Nffi doses "OT the use, o, Tlsuse of Ne
lfoflnat oil prwided.
Figure 4.5 Future Land Use Map
07
City of Hutchinson
Future Land Use
January 2013
Future Landuse
oAg,-It— tPIa ,,g-t,U
o - D-,ty R -d- l Neigh -hod
o M d- D-,= R -deo l-gn-h-
H�9noeI=�R-d-� lNe�gh-h od
M.' �"
EA M blleHl-P-
�
Plb 11lttlo1111
P_._ save
Wm, 1,
}•
1
03-20-13
Tiller Dr
Fernold
21om st 8
�
29 'St 1 H [c
205th Dr r A��Y 20sN St 2060h St
,Ll
y�
�e
Aye NW b —'
I
_1
I 1
-�} Yr 200th St
J"y
12[h•Ave �•---'--North High Dr _ 1 1—.---i
� - t' 11iM1 Ave NE
9iM1 Ave I
NE -
.
•.���
I BIM1 �oUrs.r. � Y _ � N �l
� eRa
I Ave m o t �
_ _ + - m ]th Ave � ■ F
-
_
Ave NW I
• Of[er (North 3rd
ParkAve NE _.� � 1
Ann/Campbells) oaks - � --
La.. � 1 r pcoma Pa A Y, Lin'dt7 La �
�� 1
- - isl Ave NW 1st Ave
Hilltop Dr �-1 I
- VpOp\n Washington AveW �- r_._—_._—_.
�r I
SNJ 1s1 Ave 1st Ave SE
06 2n Ave SW SW N _>Y
Otter 3b Ave5W _ _ G _ _
Lewis Ave
(Main
m � m o - i
w
Basin) Aan 4th P eSw = E � i I
_
- th Ave SE W Arch:St=,='==,t
JuulRd I`.�
Roberts Rtl � Q � Ave N f Railroa'--_._—._
_. -I
Madsen Ave SW � _ m ' 1, d St
Q S161ey MC Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW m ]ih � Fair . � ill ry
A `�-
a ti �a 3 Ave N � _■ x
3 a 8N S N
�i� 5'W Oakland � Sti
�y�I m
Noble Rd
�,� I` _.I 1 O N - •-- •Freemont Ave S��f 1
^ 4
► 1 � '�'
_ l- CenturyAvea
1 7. I I ..-- CenturY:Ave SW r _ A: Elk �e
�9.
i ` i _"•. \
L--- —_._-
� •, `SSW l _ ,•�--' -
I-
Edmonton'
1SW
\
1
—Rtl I,_— C Airport Rd 170th St
I
r
i I
100th St
3
N Legend
- Storm Sewer
,0 Wetland Inventory
VZ,
Lakes
150,
1 inch equals 2,500 feet
FIGURE 4: Storm Sewer Map
sanre.cltyatxncnmsa. (zois) April 2015 N
Tiler Dr
215; Otter Lake's OHW = 1039.2*
a *DNR's LakeFinder
Fernold
21 Dth St 8
209th S(
Aco
3
205th 203N
St 206th St
q�e NW
¢'
£ 12th Ave �� NortM1 HigM1 Dr --- 266th St
9N Ave
1 BIM1 Ce4rse - � c uF � I
+ � � ]th Ave
5th Ave NW
E
�oJ NW o ti
Ti
NW m 3rd Ave NW Hwy,]
Otter (North Rolling qih qve
park Ave NE
Ann/Campbells)
NW 1sN �
1st Ave Eve
Hilltop Dr
�` S Upcon ashin9ton AveW �_ - - -'-
;
°o� SNJ 1st Ave 1st Ave SE r �
o SW N I
2nd Ave SE
2nd Ave S - _
Otter Lewis Ave 3rtlA eGW.
(Maii Havaen esw m " °' _16 I
1
� Roberts Rtl � A a J I Rd _
adsen Ave S
Slhle Mc onal Dr � Mil a kee Ave SW m � n
_ O � y Goebel SY m ]the � Fair m
=
8th S
A a rn a sti
1 � � � ti SN Oakland P iI _
r -� T---�-- —I R 3 t] o Noble Rd
_.. I Gratle tl 5 m
I I..
Freemont
I I Ave
I I a
I
I CenturyAve y
I Century Ave SW - �_ _
I Elka �
922
_ 1
I , I prchard Ave 9
Denver Ave ••Y .
SW
- Edmonton
SW
York Rd Airyort Rd, --- _--- _.__\ _. 170th St
I
-� Hasa
o
6
\\ I
160th 51
3
EE
155ths Legend
EDXft Nftg@
® National Wetland Inventory
- % 150th s
�i
i
1 inch equals 2,500 feet
FIGURE 5: NWI and DNR Waters Map
Source. U.S.Fish&Wildlife Service (2013), MN DNR (2008) ilpT'lt 2015 ^I
Tller Dr
Hydrologic Soil Group
215th &a
A
B
C
3
210th St _ D; A/D; B/D; C/D
Water
205th U, 203N St 2050 St
)Ll
y� OWN Now,
t I
1
a l"e
Q l
� - - 12th Ave �� _ NoriM1IHiOM1 Dr 1�, � 1--�--� 200th St
� �11iM1SAve!NE yy� � i �
I
9th Ave
NE
� Ave eRa m o t
NW N%L Q
r-_
E-
I
NW MN7 3rd Ave NW
Rdling qth Ave Park Ave NE 1
') U OLas oma Pew �� Lindy La
Ave
isl Ave NW 1st
_ NE Hilltopbr _I I
� I
9W 1s1 _Ave 1st Ave SE I
06 2n Ave SW SW N 2n Ave SE - _—'- .. I
� Lewis Ave 3b AveGW
eSW
m ihwnas
Robarts Rtl w Ava Juul Rd -
�
Madsen Ave SW _ Ra'troatl St
m � ,
Milwaukee A e SW -
/�� � � S161e Mc Donal Dr �
m �
� Ave Sti
Oakland �
�i� 5 �^�
�✓
NeaSl Ave
■'
�
�'�---'I SGratle Rtl - '� - I Noble Rd
I ' I Freemont Ave I
CenturyAve �
� I Century Ave SW _ 1
�e
I r F �+ Elka II yWi
I .Ih _ Ordlard Ave �ri 922q
L I) Denver-A�
SW
Edmonton---
47
_ \ I
York Rtl C A,M Rtl --�_.___.__\ ` 170th St
I
��
!r lleyn
�• Z - 06
F y
1s°tM1 St
E
Allen _ 155th St
a
¢sl
_ lsom 57
1 inch = 2,500 feet /
FIGURE 6: Hydrologic Soils and Infiltration /NJ\
S.— N-1 R--, co.s—lo. servle .zoos April 2015
fernold
3
I —I
3
Otter (North = •I
Ann/Campbells)
4.2B
'
4._ - - �•AviT ��
4.1
Otter F -
- - (Main 4.5A `•y'
Basin) e!- _.. ,� _--.-
r
I
4.2A
'. 14.2E I.
i
i
i
I
I i
I
t
Problem Areas:
4 South Central Drainage Area
0 Otter Lake Outfall Sediment Removal (Alan Street Outfall)
OClifton Heights Flooding Legend
o Bradford Street Flooding Area
Low Area at Ridgewater College -Future Pond/Outlet
0 Sediment Accumulation within Otter Lake and Crow River Impaired Water
0 Market Street Ditch Improvements
Pond Maintenance
Nutrient TMDL - Otter Lake
OTurbidity TMDL - Crow River Impairments:
0 Downtown Stormwater Water Quality Improvements Otter Lake (Mercury, Nutrients)
�; Localized flooding on 8th Avenue (surcharging from School Rd) Crow River (Mercury, Impaired Biology, Turbidity)
0 Bridgewater Pond Improvements
Aa 1 inch equals 2,500 feet
FIGURE 7: Water Resource Problem Areas
so.r.ecay,Me hmsoo(20is),MecA(2012) April 2015 N
Tller Dr w
1
215th &
,
21 Dr, St $
3
209th St
205th Dr iF _` �� 203rd St 2050h St
_1
Ia'e
1 -- 12th A-10 ` --- --Nodh High Dr J• I, . �,.1 - ; 1-- i 200th St
I
I 9iM1 Ave
.'�
� y
� ;ve PRa m o t
gam* • � ]tN Wve � j, �=F,%� ;
a- A
Otter (N rt y Rdling y 4th gveNW �s 3idA NW _ Palk -Ave NE-:"„''-ff, ^l i�� 1 I
Ann/Campbells) oaks - nma�.-
La L� ■ 9 DndLa
isl AYvwe 1st Ave ~ ��
fNW
ijpP en Wa ngt-Ave N/NE Hilltop Dr I
1sl Ave SE
SNJ Aver tylSt
7 I
06 2n Ave SW Sti !N'� I
Otter -
(Main
Resin)
� --
eRdbert
01 '��° Ava Juul Rd --
s Rtl ¢' Rartroatl
Madsen Ave SW `m St
Q S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW in ]ih � Fair ry
3 a 8th - , S
Neal Ave
--- —_.
S Gratle Rd-
-� oe - _ - w:,, o � Noble Rd
i I` J
s
Freemont
I I
Gemnry.Ave `
i I r Genwn Ave sw �, s
- eika
rIh
••
�t�ard Ave _922q'
L --- __._—:) Denver Ave 1 `\
Edmonton % I-'---” `^\
� I
—Rd I,_-- - t Airport Rd `� 170th St
-
I
j
1n0d, St n
Legend
Lakes
155th St
,_.._..
100 -Year Floodplain
y F F
500 -Year Floodplain
_ 9
lsom s7
1 inch = 2,500 feet
FIGURE d FEMA Floodplain Map
Sur.c
oe. McLeod County-FEMA(2014) iipT'1t 2015 w'
rf-,f
Tller Dr w
1
215th &
,
210th St $
-
209th S( - _ Hu[chlIs" J
3
205th Dr Il- Z03 51 2050 St
y`�y `•R\
'- 12th Ave �� �'--- —Nod High Dr J� ' � r:- � 1 - 1-- 200th St
NE.^ -
1 � 9iM1 Aver
NE - v
.� -
� Ave PRa N o W t � -
Ali
U1;"
paNW _91d Ave Nw
65 Otter INorthrn Rdiing .
4th_ �J. PaikAve NE - : y. 1
Ann/Campbells) DLks Aa�-r `- �
cind�,7 ca
p�ome � r --
��
_ isl AveNW.'1'st Ave
NE `Hilltop Dr I
_• _._—_.
'
f_._—_•___.___.+
- VpSA\n Washin9t;ASW z �
S��LL
SNJ 1s1 C, =—_171 Ave SE ,_ •__ I
Sti !N' Ave SE
2n -
2n Ave SW � _
MAU% Ottef Feyyis Ave 9N AveGW c,� _
(Maid -
qan eSW
E t
4th P 1_
.-in _ Jlw- .
l,
Roberts Rtl ' Ava Juul Rd _
� Madsen Ave SW RartroaU St
Milwaukee A e SW I
�'Q
ry
in ]ih � ,Fair
S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy
''Ave i
�i� SWC Oaklane � {
Neal Ave
o - m
S Gratle Rtl-- w;,, o �.t Irl Noble Rd
i_.___., J_._—_._—_. � o
s�
f
I I - Freemont AveI
i Century Ave SW CenturyAve y�e
I r F I J
s22
•• .!h i aarIMA Y al,
l I
L --- —--- —: Denver Ave
SW
^\
I- Edmonton I -'---"SW
I • l I ... I
York Rtl Airport Ra' 1: 170th St
F,II
I I- I V'a Ia
I
I
Legend
150th St
3
Owner, Monitoring Type
O MPCA, LAKE
MPCA, STREAM
Allen
F.tote: Monitoring sites shown have been used to collect data
some point. Not all sites shown are active monitoring sites.
lsom s7
1 inch = 2,500 feet
FIGURE 9: Water Quality Monitoring Stations
rf-,f S ... de MPCA,2014 April 2015 N
Tller Dr w
1
215th &
,
210th St $
chinson J
209th, HutdD
3
❑
205th Dr I �- �� 20s,d 51 2050h St
y`�y `•R\
'- 12th Ave��-----Nortli 1-_ 200th St
( .; 11iM1AveTNE .y
I _ 9iM1 Ave
1 v _ _-
•� .•'.. '
p"Cp ❑
'I'h
= NW (z7 V ac•
gam+ m nNWve E Cy v�y
_ U�
24
y
• N7 0 0' �y•� i �ate.Hwv.7.—: ---—I
M�._i-(sr�eNw �
_ O[[er (North Bolting "ash AvaNW� -dM'�Y•7o
-• Ann/Campbells) Oaks - Prk-Ave NE y 1
1st Ave
ist Ave,NW ', HiIItoP
Vpap\n Washington AveW -
S.
9� 1s1 Ave �.1 FtHve SE
r ° SW = `r
2n Ave SW N 2nd Ave SE- _
] iyJ Lewis Ave 3b AveGW c ►- y d V — I
`-' qan 4th P eSW m E o W
-=1. •`�— Arch St
- -- m .ihwnas _ - th Ave SE.; _
Robert "'�° Ava Juul Rd -
_ s Rtl a � Madsen Ave SW _ `m �_ Ra�troatl Sf
�'Q S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW in ]ih � Fair _�' �
�a v�i�
SW m Oakland PS Sti N � ro
-'---' ' SGiatle Rtl - o yr Noble Rd
I I - - N a V "•• ® .I�
rCentuiY Ave SW Q Century Ave y
•• .!h
VrtJ'
)
L --- __.__: Denver Avev
SW
Q/� — C' ❑ 0'�
/ .F
SW
I
I z
York Rtl I,__ _. _\ I2.__._I Airport Rtl,_._ O.___.__\ I`.r. 170th St
I
_
\ O -51
I I _ Legend
r _ I Air Permit
`\
I
❑ CSW Site Subdivision
❑ Contaminated Soil Treatment Facility
❑ Feedlot
160th St ❑ Hazardous Waste
❑ Industrial Stormwater Permit
" ❑ Landfill, Open
9 Leak Site
❑ Multiple Activities
Allen
O Petroleum Brownfield
❑ Solid Waste, Permit By Rule
❑ Tank Site
❑ Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC)
❑ Wastewater Discharger
'm 0.1
FIGURE 1A Pollutant Sources Map 1 inch = 2,500 feet
Source. MPCA-"What's in My Neighborhood?"(2014) itprlt 2015 ^I
Tiller Dr
Fernold
3
om st 8
C6
' h
29 'St
_ St
o_
dD
NJ
205th Dr r A��Y ld3, St 2050h St
Jlxx
- eAve MNT♦\ b —_
1 I
I
Q a� Pte' ♦� 1 -.. .711
�'---'--Nortli J 200th St
£ '12th Ave�� R15 Dr
11thAv NE r� �
9iM1rAve
_� ur :,
• BIM1 �C° rs - Y ? Jam. - '
� Ave PRa m o t � ro ���•
-_
ti n
aNW MN% �srd Ave Nw _ 1 sta[e.Hwy.].__._—_. _I
• _Offer . North xdllne 4thp Palk -Ave NE 1
Ann/Campbells) D�aa ma Pa •I �� rb eindy, �a h I 1
- isl Ave NW` 1,d AEve, _ '•HIII Dr �_,___I 1
9� eSE
1R_Ave istA _ 1
06 2n Ave SW SW N 2n Ave SE _ � I ��
OIIer �evyis Ave 9N AveSW � � � '
w
Basin) Aan 4th P eSW _ E o I
_
th Ave SE A,h;St=.=-==,1
m ihwnas
�
R v h Ave Juul Rd � - - _-__ l♦'� _I
i °harts Rtl � ¢' � \
Ra'troaU
Madsen Ave SW _ St
Q S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW in ]ih � ,Fair 1 ry
ti � 3 Ave N_ ''Ave i i
m SN! - - - 1 - •_ - '$ r: Uaklane � Sti \ Y.4 ro
•SG- Rtl-� lug• o Noble Rd
I I Freemont Ave f
1\
I oa
--Century
1 Century Ave SW � r � ♦•'SNe
' i Uldlard Ave^ �,..L3 9
L --- __.__: Denver Ave ^#�T�.-•� �,•— \
SW
Edmonton _ ^\
Ave
I
—Rd I,_-- Airy°d Rd 170tM1 St
Li
lMh St
3
N Legend
L" Ponds
Allen National Wetland Inventory
Lakes
- 'p, lsom s7
1 inch equals 2,500 feet
�\
FIGURE 11: Stormwater BMP Map
s°nr.aCity °exmmhms°o(zois) April 2015 N
APPENDIX B
MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization
Local SurfaceWater Management Plan Appendix B
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
V00. Minnesota Pollution MS4 SWPPP Application
Control Agency
520LafayetteRoadNorth for Reauthorization
St. Paul, MN 55155-4194
for the NPDES/SDS General Small Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit MNR040000
reissued with an effective date of August 1, 2013
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Document
Doc Type: Permit Application
Instructions: This application is for authorization to discharge stormwater associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems
(MS4s) under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Permit Program. No fee is
required with the submittal of this application. Please refer to "Example" for detailed instructions found on the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency (MPCA) MS4 website at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4.
Submittal: This MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form must be submitted electronically via e-mail to the MPCA at
ms4permitprogram.pca(cstate.mn.us from the person that is duly authorized to certify this form. All questions with an asterisk (*) are
required fields. All applications will be returned if required fields are not completed.
Questions: Contact Claudia Hochstein at 651-757-2881 or claudia.hochstein(cstate.mn.us, Dan Miller at 651-757-2246 or
daniel.miller(�state.mn.us, or call toll-free at 800-657-3864.
General Contact Information (*Required fields)
MS4 Owner (with ownership or operational responsibility, or control of the MS4)
*MS4 permittee name: City of Hutchinson *County: McLeod
(city, county, municipality, government agency or other entity)
*Mailing address: 111 Hassan St SE
*City: Hutchinson *State: MN *Zip code: 55350
*Phone (including area code): 320.234.4212 *E-mail: kexner@ci.hutchinson.mn.us
MS4 General contact (with Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program [SWPPP] implementation responsibility)
*Last name: Paulson *First name: John
(department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.)
*Title: Environmental Specialist
*Mailing address: 111 Hassan St SE
*City: Hutchinson *State: MN *Zip code: 55350
*Phone (including area code): 320.234.5682 *E-mail: jpaulson@ci.hutchinson.mn.us
Preparer information (complete if SWPPP application is prepared by a party other than MS4 General contact)
Last name: First name:
(department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.)
Title:
Mailing address:
City: State: Zip code:
Phone (including area code): E-mail:
Verification
1. I seek to continue discharging stormwater associated with a small MS4 after the effective date of this Permit, and shall
submit this MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form, in accordance with the schedule in Appendix A, Table 1, with
the SWPPP document completed in accordance with the Permit (Part II.D.). ® Yes
2. I have read and understand the NPDES/SDS MS4 General Permit and certify that we intend to comply with all requirements
of the Permit. ® Yes
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 1 of 14
Certification (All fields are required)
® Yes - l certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision
in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information
submitted.
l certify that based on my inquiry of the person, or persons, who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible
for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and
complete.
l am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of civil and criminal
penalties.
This certification is required by Minn. Stat. §§ 7001.0070 and 7001.0540. The authorized person with overall, MS4 legal
responsibility must certify the application (principal executive officer or a ranking elected official).
By typing my name in the following box, I certify the above statements to be true and correct, to the best of my knowledge,
and that this information can be used for the purpose of processing my application.
Name: Kent Exner
(This document has been electronically signed)
Title: Director of Public Works
Mailing address: 111 Hassan St SE
City: Hutchinson
Phone (including area code)
Date (mm/dd/yyyy): 11/26/13
State: MN
320.234.4212 E-mail: kexner
Note: The application will not be
processed without certification.
Zip code:
hutchinson.mn.uE
55350
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 2 of 14
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Document
I. Partnerships: (Part II.D.1)
A. List the regulated small MS4(s) with which you have established a partnership in order to satisfy one or more
requirements of this Permit. Indicate which Minimum Control Measure (MCM) requirements or other program
components that each partnership helps to accomplish (List all that apply). Check the box below if you currently have no
established partnerships with other regulated MS4s. If you have more than five partnerships, hit the tab key after the last
line to generate a new row.
® No partnerships with regulated small MS4s
Name and description of partnershi
NA
MCM/Other permit requirements involved
NA
B. If you have additional information that you would like to communicate about your partnerships with other regulated small
MS4(s), provide it in the space below, or include an attachment to the SWPPP Document, with the following file naming
convention: MS4NameHere Partnerships.
The City does not rely on other entities or MS4s to meet our permit requirements. The City does work in partnership
with local watershed organizations, the Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition, and citizen groups to amplify the quality
of the message that is being conveyed.
II. Description of Regulatory Mechanisms: (Part II.D.2)
Illicit discharges
A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that effectively prohibits non-stormwater discharges into your small MS4,
except those non-stormwater discharges authorized under the Permit (Part III.D.3.b.)? ® Yes ❑ No
1. If yes:
a.
Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply):
® Ordinance ❑ Contract language
❑ Policy/Standards ❑ Permits
❑ Rules
❑ Other, explain:
b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this
form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation:
Citation:
Hutchinson Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 Stormwater Management
Direct link:
http://www.amlegal.com/hutchinson mn/
❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming
convention: MS4NameHere IDDEreg.
2. If no:
Describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date
permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met:
Updates will be made to the Ordinance within the next 12 months to comply with the changing permit
requirements.
Construction site stormwater runoff control
A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that establishes requirements for erosion and sediment controls and waste
controls? ® Yes ❑ No
1. If yes:
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 3 of 14
a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply):
® Ordinance ❑ Contract language
❑ Policy/Standards ❑ Permits
❑ Rules
❑ Other, explain:
b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this
form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation:
Citation:
Hutchinson Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 Stormwater Management
Direct link:
http://www.amlegal.com/hutchinson mn/
❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming
convention: MS4NameHere CSWreg.
B. Is your regulatory mechanism at least as stringent as the MPCA general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated
with Construction Activity (as of the effective date of the MS4 Permit)? ❑Yes ® No
If you answered yes to the above question, proceed to C.
If you answered no to either of the above permit requirements listed in A. or B., describe the tasks and corresponding
schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit
requirements are met:
City staff will review and amend, as necessary, our current ordinance to comply with the most current MPCA
stormwater requirements within 12 months of permit issuance.
C. Answer yes or no to indicate whether your regulatory mechanism(s) requires owners and operators of construction
activity to develop site plans that incorporate the following erosion and sediment controls and waste
controls as
described in the Permit (Part III.D.4.a.(1)-(8)), and as listed below:
1. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion.
® Yes
❑ No
2. BMPs to minimize the discharge of sediment and other pollutants.
® Yes
❑ No
3. BMPs for dewatering activities.
® Yes
❑ No
4. Site inspections and records of rainfall events
® Yes
❑ No
5. BMP maintenance
® Yes
❑ No
6. Management of solid and hazardous wastes on each project site.
® Yes
❑ No
7. Final stabilization upon the completion of construction activity, including the use of perennial
® Yes
❑ No
vegetative cover on all exposed soils or other equivalent means.
8. Criteria for the use of temporary sediment basins.
® Yes
❑ No
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding
schedules that will
be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met:
Post -construction stormwater management
A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) to address post -construction stormwater management activities?
® Yes ❑ No
1. If yes:
a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply):
® Ordinance ❑ Contract language
® Policy/Standards ❑ Permits
❑ Rules
❑ Other, explain:
b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this
form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation:
Citation:
Hutchinson Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 Stormwater Management
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 4 of 14
Direct link:
http://www.amlegal.com/hutchinson mn/
❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming
convention: MS4NameHere PostCSWreg.
B. Answer yes or no below to indicate whether you have a regulatory mechanism(s) in place that meets the following
requirements as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.):
1. Site plan review: Requirements that owners and/or operators of construction activity submit ® Yes ❑ No
site plans with post -construction stormwater management BMPs to the permittee for review and
approval, prior to start of construction activity.
2. Conditions for post construction stormwater management: Requires the use of any
combination of BMPs, with highest preference given to Green Infrastructure techniques and
practices (e.g., infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse/harvesting, conservation design, urban
forestry, green roofs, etc.), necessary to meet the following conditions on the site of a
construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP):
a. For new development projects — no net increase from pre -project conditions (on an annual ® Yes ❑ No
average basis) of:
1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management
limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)).
2) Stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS).
3) Stormwater discharges of Total Phosphorus (TP).
b. For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre -project conditions (on an annual ❑ Yes ® No
average basis) of:
1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management
limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)).
2) Stormwater discharges of TSS.
3) Stormwater discharges of TP.
3. Stormwater management limitations and exceptions:
a. Limitations
1) Prohibit the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post -construction ❑ Yes ® No
stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) when the infiltration structural
stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in areas:
a) Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under
an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by the MPCA.
b) Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur.
c) With less than three (3) feet of separation distance from the bottom of the
infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of
bedrock.
d) Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by the
infiltrating stormwater.
2) Restrict the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post -construction ❑ Yes ® No
stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), without higher engineering
review, sufficient to provide a functioning treatment system and prevent adverse
impacts to groundwater, when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas:
a) With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils.
b) Within 1,000 feet up -gradient, or 100 feet down -gradient of active karst features.
c) Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) as defined in Minn.
R. 4720.5100, subp. 13.
d) Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour.
3) For linear projects where the lack of right-of-way precludes the installation of volume ❑ Yes ® No
control practices that meet the conditions for post -construction stormwater management
in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), the permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) may allow
exceptions as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(b)). The permittee's regulatory
mechanism(s) shall ensure that a reasonable attempt be made to obtain right-of-way
during the project planning process.
4. Mitigation provisions: The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that any
stormwater discharges of TSS and/or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction
activity are addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following
requirements are met:
a. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference:
❑ Yes ® No
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 5 of 14
1) Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the
original construction activity.
2) Locations within the same Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR)
catchment area as the original construction activity.
3) Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up -stream
4) Locations anywhere within the permittee's jurisdiction.
b. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the
❑ Yes ® No
retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional
structural stormwater BMP.
c. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this permit cannot
❑ Yes ® No
be used to meet mitigation requirements of this part.
d. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original
❑ Yes ® No
construction activity.
e. The permittee shall determine, and document, who will be responsible for long-term
❑ Yes ® No
maintenance on all mitigation projects of this part.
f. If the permittee receives payment from the owner and/or operator of a construction activity
❑ Yes ® No
for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or operator of that construction activity meeting
the conditions for post -construction stormwater management in Part III.D.5.a(2), the
permittee shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project, and all
projects must be in compliance with Part III.D.5.a(4)(a)-(e).
5. Long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs: The permittee's regulatory
mechanism(s) shall provide for the establishment of legal mechanisms between the permittee
and owners or operators responsible for the long-term maintenance of structural stormwater
BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, that have been implemented to meet the
conditions for post -construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). This
only includes structural stormwater BMPs constructed after the effective date of this permit and
that are directly connected to the permittee's MS4, and that are in the permittee's jurisdiction.
The legal mechanism shall include provisions that, at a minimum:
a. Allow the permittee to conduct inspections of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or ® Yes ❑ No
operated by the permittee, perform necessary maintenance, and assess costs for those
structural stormwater BMPs when the permittee determines that the owner and/or operator
of that structural stormwater BMP has not conducted maintenance.
b. Include conditions that are designed to preserve the permittee's right to ensure maintenance ® Yes ❑ No
responsibility, for structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, when
those responsibilities are legally transferred to another party.
c. Include conditions that are designed to protect/preserve structural stormwater BMPs and ® Yes ❑ No
site features that are implemented to comply with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). If site
configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural
stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be
implemented to ensure the conditions for post -construction stormwater management in the
Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) continue to be met.
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will
be taken to assure that, within twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements
are met:
Post construction requirements are enforced by reference to the most restictive of all applicable state and local
regulations. The City will also be amending it's Stormwater Management Plan within the next 12 months to more clearly
identify system maintenance needs and regional implementation strategies. Ordinance updates will also be made
within the next 12 months to directly reference the requirements of both the CSW and MS4 permit requirements for Post
Construction.
III. Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs): (Part II.D.3)
A. Do you have existing ERPs that satisfy the requirements of the Permit (Part III.B.)? ❑ Yes ® No
1. If yes, attach them to this form as an electronic document, with the following file naming
convention: MS4NameHere ERPs.
2. If no, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, with
twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met:
The City of Hutchinson will develop a ERP within 12 months of permit issuance. The ERP to be
developed will include the process to enforce code violations associated with IDDEs,
construction site runoff, and post construction stormwater management.
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 6 of 14
B. Describe your ERPs:
The ERPs will include current process and actions for any non-compliance issues. It will include the steps to be taken,
who will be responsible for that enforcement action, and associated mitigative measures such as stop work orders and
criminal penalties.
IV. Storm Sewer System Map and Inventory: (Part II.D.4.)
A. Describe how you manage your storm sewer system map and inventory:
An annual review of the system map is completed so new BMPs can be added and modifications to existing BMPs can
be updated in the map and inventory. Map updates are managed with a GIS system and include all known aspects of
the City stormwater system and as modifications/additions to the system are made the map system is updated.
B. Answer yes or no to indicate whether your storm sewer system map addresses the following requirements from the
Permit (Part III.C.1.a-d), as listed below:
1. The permittee's entire small MS4 as a goal, but at a minimum, all pipes 12 inches or greater in ® Yes ❑ No
diameter, including stormwater flow direction in those pipes.
2. Outfalls, including a unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee, and an ® Yes ❑ No
associated geographic coordinate.
3. Structural stormwater BMPs that are part of the permittee's small MS4. ® Yes ❑ No
4. All receiving waters. ® Yes ❑ No
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will
be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met:
C. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the requirements of 2009 Minnesota Session Law, Ch. 172.
Sec. 28: with the following inventories, according to the specifications of the Permit (Part III.C.2.a.-b.), including:
1. All ponds within the permittee's jurisdiction that are constructed and operated for purposes of ® Yes ❑ No
water quality treatment, stormwater detention, and flood control, and that are used for the
collection of stormwater via constructed conveyances.
2. All wetlands and lakes, within the permittee's jurisdiction, that collect stormwater via constructed ® Yes ❑ No
conveyances.
D. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the following information for each feature inventoried.
1. A unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee. ® Yes ❑ No
2. A geographic coordinate. ® Yes ❑ No
3. Type of feature (e.g., pond, wetland, or lake). This may be determined by using best professional ® Yes ❑ No
judgment.
If you have answered yes to all above requirements, and you have already submitted the Pond Inventory Form to the
MPCA, then you do not need to resubmit the inventory form below.
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will
be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met:
E. Answer yes or no to indicate if you are attaching your pond, wetland and lake inventory to the MPCA ❑ Yes ® No
on the form provided on the MPCA website at: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4 , according to the
specifications of Permit (Part III.C.2.b.(1)-(3)). Attach with the following file naming convention:
MS4NameHere inventory.
If you answered no, the inventory form must be submitted to the MPCA MS4 Permit Program within
12 months of the date permit coverage is extended.
V. Minimum Control Measures (MCMs) (Part II.D.S)
A. MCM1: Public education and outreach
1. The Permit requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their
education and outreach program that focuses on illicit discharge recognition and reporting, as well as other specifically
selected stormwater-related issue(s) of high priority to the permittee during this permit term. Describe your current
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 7 of 14
educational program, including any high-priority topics included:
The City of Hutchinson educates on a wide variety of stormwater pollution topics and the information is distributed via our
monthly utility billings to each home and business throughout town.
The City also utilizes our local newspaper to highlight topics of concern or interest. The Hutchinson Leader is very helpful
in highlighting points of concern and conveys an appropriate message that the general public can relate to.
The City utilizes its Park and Rec Brochure every year to distibute information on local stormwater concerns and to also
highlight our annual rain barrel sale.
Other outlets used to distribute educational information is our Stormwater Website as well as Hutchinson's Local Public
Access Channels 7&10 are used to for distributing PSAs every year.
2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public education and outreach program, including the distribution of
educational materials and a program implementation plan. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have
established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term.
Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In
addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the
BMPs. Refer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase Il Small MS4s
(hftp://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf).
If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row.
Established BMP categories
Measurable goals and timeframes
Distribute Educational Materials
Number of people reached and hits to website/Annual
Implement and Education Program
Number of brochures distributed to various entities/Annual)
Public Education and Outreach
Number of brochures distributed at City facilities/Annual)
Public Participation -storm drain marking/annual
meeting
Number of public meetings and events/Annual)
IDDE Education
Posting information on web and PRCE brochure/Annual)
Construction Site Run-off Control Education
Number of handouts to builders/excavators / Annual)
Post Construction SW Management Education
Number of guidance documents to developers/Annually
PP/Good Housekeeping Education
Number of staff trained/Annual)
Coordination of Education Program
Check and update City website links to information/Annual)
Annual Public Meeting
Information distributed and number of attendees/Annual)
Stormwater Utility Fund
Assess annually to determine need for rate increases
BMP cateaories to be implemented
Measurable goals and timeframes
Targeted distribution of education materials for issues
of concern such as grease dumpsters and mowing Number of businesses reached/New topic annually to focus
clippings into streets efforts on new issues of concern as they arise.
Host rain barrel sale or workshop I Number of barrels sold or constructed at a workshop/annuallv
3. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this
MCM:
Environmental Specialist
B. MCM2: Public participation and involvement
1. The Permit (Part III.D.2.a.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees
shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement a public participation/involvement program to
solicit public input on the SWPPP. Describe your current program:
The City host an annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention plan meeting at a City Council meeting each spring. It is an
opportunity for both the Council and interested citizens to learn about the program, implementation activities, and is used
to respond to questions. This meeting is meant to engage the public and bring awareness to stormwater issues both in
our City and abroad. It is the primary, but not the only, opportunity for receiving public input/feedback. In addition to the
annual meeting (which is televised on the local television station) City staff is actively engaged with the public for a wide
variety of issues surrounding stormwater.
2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public participation/involvement program, including solicitation and documentation
of public input on the SWPPP. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for
categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term.
Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 8 of 14
addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs.
Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf).
If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row.
Established BMP categories
Measurable goals and timeframes
Public Notice annual meeting Prepare and publish public meeting notice/annual)
Solicit Public Opinion on adequacy of SWPPP Receive written or oral comments/annually
Consider Public In
BMP cateaories to be implemented
Host a stormwater education booth at local fair or
event
Analyze comments and incorporate necessary changes/ongoin
Measurable goals and timeframes
Number of people reached/ann
3. Do you have a process for receiving and documenting citizen input? ® Yes ❑ No
If you answered no to the above permit requirement, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to
assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met:
4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this
MCM:
Environmental Specialist
C. MCM 3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination
1. The Permit (Part III.D.3.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise
their current program as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit
discharges into the small MS4. Describe your current program:
The City implements IDDE program elements by utilizing a variety of tools. A call line is posted on the website and is
available in all public education brochures is continously monitored. Incident tracking and response to issues is ongoing
as problems are identified.
An education program is used for both City staff and the general public to emphasize what illicit discharges are and how to
report them. This is done through the use of brochures, posters, in person trainings, and site visits that are done when an
illicit discharge is identified.
A robust GIS map is also used to identify areas of concern, track routes of flow through the pipes, and to keep City staff on
the frontline of identifying and preventing illicit discharges. This system is used for inspection location and identification of
sources when an issue is identified.
2. Does your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program meet the following requirements, as found
in the Permit
(Part III.D.3.c.-g.)?
a. Incorporation of illicit discharge detection into all inspection and maintenance activities conducted
® Yes ❑ No
under the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.-f.)Where feasible, illicit discharge inspections shall be conducted
during dry -weather conditions (e.g., periods of 72 or more hours of no precipitation).
b. Detecting and tracking the source of illicit discharges using visual inspections. The permittee may
® Yes ❑ No
also include use of mobile cameras, collecting and analyzing water samples, and/or other detailed
procedures that may be effective investigative tools.
c. Training of all field staff, in accordance with the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.g.(2)), in
® Yes ❑ No
illicit discharge recognition (including conditions which could cause illicit discharges), and
reporting illicit discharges for further investigation.
d. Identification of priority areas likely to have illicit discharges, including at a minimum, evaluating
® Yes ❑ No
land use associated with business/industrial activities, areas where illicit discharges have been
identified in the past, and areas with storage of large quantities of significant materials that could
result in an illicit discharge.
e. Procedures for the timely response to known, suspected, and reported illicit discharges.
® Yes ❑ No
f. Procedures for investigating, locating, and eliminating the source of illicit discharges.
® Yes ❑ No
g. Procedures for responding to spills, including emergency response procedures to prevent spills from
® Yes ❑ No
entering the small MS4. The procedures shall also include the immediate notification of the
Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer, if the source of the illicit discharge is a spill or
leak as defined in Minn. Stat. § 115.061.
h. When the source of the illicit discharge is found, the permittee shall use the ERPs required by the
® Yes ❑ No
Permit (Part III.B.) to eliminate the illicit discharge and require any needed corrective action(s).
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113
Page 9 of 14
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be
taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met:
3. List the categories of BMPs that address your illicit discharge, detection and elimination program. Use the first table for
categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement
over the course of the permit term.
Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In
addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the
BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase Il Small MS4s
(hftp://www.epa.ciov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals. pdf).
If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row.
Established BMP categories
Measurable goals and timeframes
Review and update sstem map
Updates made to ma /annual)
Review and update ordinance
U dates made to ordinance/annual)
IDDE plan implementation
Complaints taken, responses to complaints, # of outfalls
inspected/an uall
Public and Employee IDDE education
Number of brochures, posters, and training content/annual)
Non-stormwater flows evaluation
Assess list annual)
BMP cateaories to be implemented
Measurable goals and timeframes
Implement higher level of detail into system map to
comply with inventory requirements Information updated/annually
4. Do you have procedures for record-keeping within your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) program as
specified within the Permit (Part III.D.3.h.)? ❑ Yes ® No
If you answered no, indicate how you will develop procedures for record-keeping of your Illicit Discharge, Detection and
Elimination Program, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended:
Record keeping and tracking procedures of the IDDE program will be formalized to align with the current process that is
being implemented in Hutchinson. This will be done through the formal development of a standard operating procedure.
5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this
MCM:
Environmental Specialist
D. MCM 4: Construction site stormwater runoff control
1. The Permit (Part III.D.4) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall
revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a construction site stormwater runoff
control program. Describe your current program:
The City implements it's CSW permit program parallel to the MPCA CSW program. Plan reviews, post construction
treatment reviews, contractor education, ordinance enforcement, site inspections, and on site education are all part of
program activities implemented to reduce%liminate risks associated with contaminated stormwater runoff from
construction sites.
Common issues receive additional focus with educational outreach. New industry products are also highlighted to
contractors when they appear to be a good substitute to a traditional BMP.
2. Does your program address the following BMPs for construction stormwater erosion and sediment control as required in
the Permit (Part III.D.4.b.):
a. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you conduct prior to the start of ® Yes ❑ No
construction activity?
b. Does the site plan review procedure include notification to owners and operators proposing ® Yes ❑ No
construction activity that they need to apply for and obtain coverage under the MPCA's general
permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity No. MN R100001?
c. Does your program include written procedures for receipt and consideration of reports of ® Yes ❑ No
noncompliance or other stormwater related information on construction activity submitted by the
public to the permittee?
d. Have you included written procedures for the following aspects of site inspections to determine
compliance with your regulatory mechanism(s):
1) Does your program include procedures for identifying priority sites for inspection? ® Yes ❑ No
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 10 of 14
2) Does your program identify a frequency at which you will conduct construction site
inspections?
3) Does your program identify the names of individual(s) or position titles of those responsible for
conducting construction site inspections?
4) Does your program include a checklist or other written means to document construction site
inspections when determining compliance?
e. Does your program document and retain construction project name, location, total acreage to be
disturbed, and owner/operator information?
f. Does your program document stormwater-related comments and/or supporting information used to
determine project approval or denial?
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
g. Does your program retain construction site inspection checklists or other written materials used to ® Yes ❑ No
document site inspections?
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be
taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met.
3. List the categories of BMPs that address your construction site stormwater runoff control program. Use the first
table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan
to implement over the course of the permit term.
Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and
completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement
and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase 11 Small MS4s
(http://www.epa.aov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals.Of). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key
after the last line to generate a new row.
Established BMP categories
Measurable goals and timeframes
Ordinance Development
Ordinance developed/permit cycle
Construction site implementation of BMPs
Sites inspected/annually
Construction site waste control
Sites ins ected/annual)
Site plan review
Plans reviewed/annual)
Procedures for receiving complaints
Complaints received and responses to them/annual)
BMP categories to be implemented
Measurable goals and timeframes
Revise ordinance to comply with new standards
Updates made/annual)
Conduct training for interested entities
Trainin s conducted and content/annual)
Distribute education materials to contractors at time of
permit application
Number ofpermits/annually
Review active MPCA CSW permit list for discrepancies
with City permitted activities
#Sites that obtained appropriate coverage/annually
4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this
MCM:
Environmental Specialist
E. MCM 5: Post -construction stormwater management
1. The Permit (Part III.D.5.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees
shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a post -construction stormwater
management program. Describe your current program:
The City includes post -construction requirements into it's plan review procedures. BMPs are implemented in accordance
with CSW and MS4 requirements to meet both treatment requirements and to address local and regional flooding issues
as opportunities present themselves. A wide range of BMPs are considered and in place throughout Hutchinson and a
stormwater maintenance agreement is required for detention that is required as part of a regulatory requirement.
2. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you will conduct prior to the start of ® Yes ❑ No
construction activity?
3. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have the following listed procedures for documentation of
post -construction stormwater management according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.D.5.c.):
a. Any supporting documentation that you use to determine compliance with the Permit (Part ® Yes ❑ No
III.D.5.a), including the project name, location, owner and operator of the construction activity, any
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 11 of 14
checklists used for conducting site plan reviews, and any calculations used to determine
compliance?
b. All supporting documentation associated with mitigation projects that you authorize? ® Yes ❑ No
c. Payments received and used in accordance with Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(4)(f))? ® Yes ❑ No
d. All legal mechanisms drafted in accordance with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(5)), including date(s) of ® Yes ❑ No
the agreement(s) and names of all responsible parties involved?
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the steps that will be taken to assure that, within
12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met.
4. List the categories of BMPs that address your post -construction stormwater management program. Use the first table
for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to
implement over the course of the permit term.
Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and
completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement
and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase Il Small MS4s
(http://www.epa.aov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after
the last line to generate a new row.
Established BMP categories
Measurable goals and timeframes
Develop and implement structural and non-structural
BMPs Number of BMPs installed/annually
Ordinance to address post construction runoff I Review and updates of ordinance/annually
Long term O&M of BMPs I Number of agreements implemented/annually
BMP cateaories to be implemented
Measurable goals and timeframes
Incorporate sensitivity to Wellhead Protection activities
into ordinance Updated ordinance/12 months
Update City stormwater management plan and
incorporate references to requirements of CSW and
MS4 Updated SWMP/12 months
Accept MIDS calculator outputs during post
construction reviews Number of plan reviews that used MIDS calculator/annually
5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this
MCM:
Environmental Specialist, City Engineer
F. MCM 6: Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations
1. The Permit (Part III.D.6.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall
revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement an operations and maintenance program that
prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from the permittee owned/operated facilities and operations to the small
MS4. Describe your current program:
The City implements its pollution prevention/good housekeeping program through staff training, inspections of stormwater
system components, and evaluations to determine the need for increased activities in any area that is in need. Inspections
of ponds, system outfalls, biofiltration practices, structural system components, and general facility operations are
conducted by trained and knowledgeable staff. Street sweeping is a front line of defense that is used to remove volumes
of potential pollutants from the streets.
2. Do you have a facilities inventory as outlined in the Permit (Part III.D.6.a.)?
® Yes ❑ No
3. If you answered no to the above permit requirement in question 2, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that
will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met:
4. List the categories of BMPs that address your pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations program.
Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you
plan to implement over the course of the permit term.
Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 12 of 14
addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the
BMPs. For an explanation of measurable goals, refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase 11 Small MS4s
(http://www.epa.aov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals.pdf).
If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row.
Established BMP categories
Measurable goals and timeframes
Municipal operations and maintenance
Annual staff trainin /#attendees
Street sweeping
Routes and frequencies/annually
Annual inspection of structural devices
Number ins ected/annual)
Pond, outfall inspections
Number inspected/ annual)
Inspection of exposed stockpiles
Number inspected/annually
Repair and Maintenance follow up of inspections
Maintenance activities conducted/annual)
Record retention of inspections
U dates made to tracking system/annually
BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes
Incorporate inspections from Industrial Stormwater
permitted sites into MS4 program records Inspections conducted/Annually
Post information associated with P2 and GH at City
facilities that conduct potential pollution causing
activities Number ofposters/annually
Prioritize inspection frequencies for areas of high
concern Priority listing and number of inspections/annually
5. Does discharge from your MS4 affect a Source Water Protection Area (Permit Part III.D.6.c.)? ® Yes ❑ No
a. If no, continue to 6.
b. If yes, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is in the process of mapping the
following items. Maps are available at
http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/maps/index.htm. Is a map including the
following items available for your MS4:
1) Wells and source waters for drinking water supply management areas identified as ® Yes ❑ No
vulnerable under Minn. R. 4720.5205, 4720.5210, and 4720.5330?
2) Source water protection areas for surface intakes identified in the source water ® Yes ❑ No
assessments conducted by or for the Minnesota Department of Health under the federal
Safe Drinking Water Act, U.S.C. §§ 300j — 13?
c. Have you developed and implemented BMPs to protect any of the above drinking water ® Yes ❑ No
sources?
6. Have you developed procedures and a schedule for the purpose of determining the TSS and ® Yes ❑ No
TP treatment effectiveness of all permittee owned/operated ponds constructed and used for the
collection and treatment of stormwater, according to the Permit (Part III.D.6.d.)?
7. Do you have inspection procedures that meet the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.(1)- ❑ Yes ® No
(3)) for structural stormwater BMPs, ponds and outfalls, and stockpile, storage and material
handling areas?
8. Have you developed and implemented a stormwater management training program commensurate with each
employee's job duties that:
a. Addresses the importance of protecting water quality? ® Yes ❑ No
b. Covers the requirements of the permit relevant to the duties of the employee? ® Yes ❑ No
c. Includes a schedule that establishes initial training for new and/or seasonal employees and ® Yes ❑ No
recurring training intervals for existing employees to address changes in procedures,
practices, techniques, or requirements?
9. Do you keep documentation of inspections, maintenance, and training as required by the Permit ® Yes ❑ No
(Part III.D.6.h.(1)-(5))?
If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements listed in Questions 5 — 9, then describe the tasks and
corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended,
these permit requirements are met:
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 13 of 14
An inspection and reporting standard operating procedure will be developed within 12 months to comply with new
permit requirements.
10. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this
MCM:
Environmental Specialist, Public Works Manager
VI. Compliance Schedule for an Approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) with an
Applicable Waste Load Allocation (WLA) (Part II.D.6.)
A. Do you have an approved TMDL with a Waste Load Allocation (WLA) prior to the effective date
of the Permit?
1. If no, continue to section VII.
2. If yes, fill out and attach the MS4 Permit TMDL Attachment Spreadsheet with the following
naming convention: MS4NameHere TMDL.
This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4.
VII. Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems (Part II.D.7.)
A. Do you own and/or operate any Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems which
are regulated by this Permit (Part III.F.)?
1. If no, this section requires no further information.
2. If yes, you own and/or operate an Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment System
within your small MS4, then you must submit the Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus
Treatment Systems Form supplement to this document, with the following naming
convention: MS4NameHere TreatmentSystem.
This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4.
VIII. Add any Additional Comments to Describe Your Program
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats
wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 14 of 14
APPENDIX C
Storm Water Management Design Standards
Local SurfaceWater Management Plan Appendix C
City of Hutchinson
WSB Project No. 2702-00
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
Purpose
The primary purpose of this design guide is to set forth regulatory requirements for construction
activities to help protectthe property and citizens in the City of Hutchinson. The goals are presented in
Section 5 of the Local Plan. Definitions can be found in Appendix C.
Other Agency Regulations
Agency regulations as outlined in Local Plan Sectio n 3 m u st be m et in addition to the requirements
of any other relevant regulations. Pertinent regulations that provide the greatest protection for
human welfare and/or the environment shall be given highest emphasis.
Receiving Waters
Pertinent receiving waters relevant to the Local Plan are discussed in the Local Plan Section 2.
Related Review and Regulations
Hutchinson Ordinance Requirements
Local Plan Section 2 and Appendix C
MPCA NPDES Construction Permit
http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.PhP/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/construction-
stormwater/index.html
Crow River Organization of Water
http://www.crowriver.org/
Environmental review (e.g. EAW, EIS) should be completed for projects that trigger the requirements,
consistent with MN Rules.
Design Requirements
Developers are required to provide three submittals to the City, which are elaborated in greater detail in
the City ordinances and Appendix C:
• Drainage/Erosion Control Permit,
• Stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and
• NPDES Construction Permit.
A SWPPP shall besubmitted withthe Drainage/Erosion Control Permit application. The SWPPP shall be
consistent with the requirements outlined in this document, City ordinances, and State and Federal
regulations. The SWPPP shall be completed priorto submitting a Drainage/Erosion Control Permit
application and priorto conducting any land disturbing activities. SWPPP plan content must include at a
minimum the items required and identified in the NPDES Construction Permit Part III. This includes
information to meet the requirements of the Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control and Post -
Construction Stormwater Management sections of this document, where applicable.
Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Requirements
Site plans and project documentation must incorporate erosion and sediment controls and waste
controls as required and identified inthe NPDES Construction Permit Part IV, includingthose identified
inthe NPDES Construction Permitfor dischargesto special and impaired waters, when applicable. These
requirements may include:
• Erosion prevention practices,
• Sediment control practices,
• Dewatering and basin draining activities,
• Inspections and maintenance,
• Pollution prevention management measures, and
• Final stabilization.
Post -Construction Stormwater Management Requirements
Site plans and project documentation must incorporate post -construction (permanent) stormwater
management BMPs/systems to manage stormwater longterm once construction activity is complete.
Permanent stormwater systems shall be designed consistent with the Minnesota Stormwater Manual
and address the following requirements as detailed in Local Plan Section 5 and Appendix C:
• Water Quality (see Local Plan Section 5.3),
• Runoff Management and Flood Control (see Local Plan Section 5.4),
• Wetlands (see Local Plan Section 5.5),
• Erosion and Sediment Control (see Local Plan Section 5.6),
• Groundwater (see Local Plan Section 5.7), and
• Recreation, Habitat, and Shoreland Management (see Local Plan Section 5.8).
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: MnDOT Aeronautics Maintenance & Operations Agreement
Department: PW/Engineering
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: John Olson
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: John Olson
Reviewed by Staff ❑
Consent Agenda
Time Requested (Minutes): 0
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: Yes
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
Every biennium, MnDOT Aeronautics issues Maintenance and Operations (M&O) Agreements for airports throughout
Minnesota. The agreement is standard and has not substantively changed over the last several years.
As part of the agreement, MnDOT offers reimbursements for qualifying expenses of maintaining and operating the
airport up to an amount set by them. For this biennium, the maximum M&O reimbursement is $26.727 per year, for a
total of $53,454.
In the past, the City has been reimbursed the entire amount included in the M&O agreements, and there is no
indication that the City wouldn't incur qualifying expenses at least to that level for the upcoming biennium covered by
this agreement.
Over the course of the last 4 years, reimbursements made under the M&O agreement have accounted for an average
of 22% of the airport's total revenue.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Consideration of adoption of resolution authorizing entering into the MnDOT Aeronautics Maintenance & Operations
Agreement and executing the Agreement.
Fiscal Impact: -$ 26,727.00 Funding Source: Airport Revenue
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: Yes
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
MnDOT Contract No. 1000999
STATE OF MINNESOTA
AIRPORT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION GRANT CONTRACT
State Project Number (S.P.): A4304-MO16
State Project Number (S.P.): A4304-MO17
This contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("State") and City of
Hutchinson acting through its City Council ("Recipient").
RECITALS
1. Minnesota Statutes §§360.015 and 360.305 authorize State to provide financial assistance to airports for maintenance
and operation activities.
2. Recipient owns, operates, or controls an airport ("Airport") in the state system, and Recipient desires financial
assistance from the State for maintenance and operation activities for State Fiscal Year 2016 and State Fiscal Year
2017.
3. Recipient assures the State that Recipient will operate and maintain the airport according to the duties and obligations
set forth in this Contract.
CONTRACT TERMS
1. Term of Contract and Survival of Terms
1.1 Effective Date: This contract will be effective on the date State obtains all required signatures under
Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 2.
1.2 Expiration Date: This contract will expire on June 30, 2017 or when all obligations have been satisfactorily
fulfilled, whichever occurs first.
1.3 Survival of Terms: All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive in
order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration or termination of this
contract, including, without limitation, the following clauses: 9. Indemnification; 10. State
Audits; 11. Government Data Practices; 13. Governing Law, Jurisdiction and Venue; and 14.
Data Disclosure.
2. Recipient's Duties
2.1 Recipient will operate and maintain the Airport in a safe, serviceable manner for aeronautical purposes only for
the use and benefit of the public.
2.2 The Recipient will keep the runway and the area around the lights mowed at the Airport. The grass must be
mowed at least 7 feet beyond the lights, and the grass must not exceed 6 inches in height on the landing area.
2.3 If the Airport remains operational during the winter months, the Recipient will keep at least one runway,
associated taxiway, and apron area cleared of snow and ice to the same priority as arterial roads. Snow banks
must be limited in height so that aircraft wings, engines, and propellers will clear them. Landing strip
markers and/or lights must remain visible.
2.4 If the State contracts for the periodic paint striping of the Airport's runways and taxiways during the term of
this Contract, the Recipient will cooperate with the marking operation. The Recipient must coordinate seal coat
pavement maintenance projects with the State to maximize the pavement marking life.
2.5 The Recipient will allow a representative of the State's Office of Aeronautics access to any area of the Airport
necessary for the purpose of periodic inspections.
Page 1 of 5
MnDOT Contract No. 1000999
3. Recipient's Assurances
3.1 In accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 360.305, subdivision 4, Recipient assures the State that Recipient will
operate and maintain the Airport in a safe, serviceable manner for aeronautical purposes only for the use and
benefit of the public.
3.2 Recipient represents and warrants that Recipient has established a zoning authority for the Airport, and such
authority has completed, or is in the process of and will complete, with due diligence, an airport zoning
ordinance in accordance with Minnesota Statutes §§ 360.061 to 360.074.
4. Third -Party Contracting
4.1 Recipient will comply with all applicable local, state, or federal laws, regulations, policies and procedures in the
procurement of goods and services funded in whole or in part under this Contract.
5. Consideration and Payment
5.1 Consideration. State will pay for all eligible maintenance and operation costs incurred by Recipient under this
Contract as follows:
5. 1.1 Basis. Recipient will be paid for 75% of the eligible maintenance and operation costs not reimbursed by any
other source, not to exceed $26,727.00 ("Base Amount") of state aid for each state fiscal year.
5.1.2 Total Obligation. The total obligation of State for all compensation and reimbursements to Recipient under
this contract will not exceed $53,454.00 [Total for both fiscal years] ($26,727.00 for FY2016 and
$26,727.00 for FY2017).
5.2 Payment
5.2.1 The Recipient must submit a reimbursement request of its eligible costs to the Director of the Office
of Aeronautics on a quarterly basis. The State's Office of Aeronautics will supply the reimbursement
request forms which Recipient must submit. Reimbursement requests must be submitted according to the
following schedule:
• In October, No later than November 15, for the period July 1 through September 30.
• In January, No later than February 15, for the period October 1 through December 31.
• In April, No later than May 15, for the period January 1 through March 31.
• In July, No later than August 15, for the period April 1 through June 30.
The State reserves the right to reject items that may not be eligible for reimbursement.
6. Conditions of Payment
6.1 All services provided by Recipient under this contract must be performed to State's satisfaction, as determined at
the sole discretion of State's Authorized Representative and in accordance with all applicable federal, state and
local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, including business registration requirements of the Office of the
Secretary of State. Recipient will not receive payment for work found by State to be unsatisfactory or performed
in violation of federal, state or local law. In addition to the foregoing, Recipient will not receive payment for
Airport's failure to pass periodic inspections by a representative of the State's Office of Aeronautics.
Authorized Representatives
7.1 State's Authorized Representative. State's Authorized Representative will be:
Jenny Bahneman, Grants Specialist
222 East Plato Boulevard
Saint Paul, Minnesota 55107-1618
651-234-7240
State's Authorized Representative or his /her successor, will monitor Recipient's performance and has the
authority to accept or reject the services provided under this contract. If the Recipient's duties are performed in a
satisfactory manner, the State's Authorized Representative will certify acceptance on each reimbursement request
submitted for payment.
Page 2 of 5
MnDOT Contract No. 1000999
7.2 Recipient's Authorized Representative. Recipient's Authorized Representative will be:
John Olson, Public Works Manager
City of Hutchinson,111 Hassan Street SE, Hutchinson, MN 55350
(320) 234-4473
jolson@ci.hutchinson.mn.us
If Recipient's Authorized Representative changes at any time during this contract, Recipient must immediately
notify State.
8. Assignment, Amendments, Waiver and Contract Complete
8.1 Assignment. Recipient may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this contract without the
prior consent of State and a fully executed Assignment Contract, executed and approved by the same parties who
executed and approved this contract, or their successors in office.
8.2 Amendments. Any amendment to this contract must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been
executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original contract, or their successors in
office.
8.3 Waiver. If State fails to enforce any provision of this contract that failure does not waive the provision or State's
right to subsequently enforce it.
8.4 Contract Complete. This contract contains all prior negotiations and agreements between State and Recipient.
No other understanding regarding this contract, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party.
9. Indemnification
9.1 In the performance of this contract by Recipient, or Recipient's agents or employees, Recipient must indemnify,
save and hold State, its agents, and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action, including
reasonable attorney's fees incurred by State, to the extent caused by Recipient's: 1) intentional, willful or
negligent acts or omissions; 2) breach of contract or warranty; or 3) breach of the applicable standard of care.
The indemnification obligations of this section do not apply if the claim or cause of action is the result of State's
sole negligence. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal remedies Recipient may have for State's
failure to fulfill its obligation pursuant to this contract.
10. State Audits
10.1 Under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 5, Recipient's books, records, documents and accounting
procedures and practices relevant to this contract are subject to examination by State, State's Auditor or the
Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the expiration date of this contract.
11. Government Data Practices
11.1 Government Data Practices. Recipient and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices
Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to all data provided by State under this contract, and as it
applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or disseminated by Recipient under this
contract. The civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this
clause by either Recipient or State. If Recipient receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause,
Recipient must immediately notify State and consult with State as to how Recipient should respond to the
request. Recipient's response to the request must comply with applicable law.
12. Workers' Compensation
12.1 Recipient certifies that it is in compliance with Minnesota Statutes § 176.181, subdivision 2, pertaining to
workers' compensation insurance coverage. Recipient's employees and agents will not be considered State
employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of these
employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these
employees are in no way the State's obligation or responsibility.
Page 3 of 5
MnDOT Contract No. 1000999
13. Governing Law, Jurisdiction and Venue
13.1 Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this contract. Venue for all legal
proceedings arising out of this contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with
competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota.
14. Data Disclosure
14.1 Under Minnesota Statutes §270C.65, and other applicable law, Recipient consents to disclosure of its social
security number, federal employer tax identification number and Minnesota tax identification number, already
provided to State, to federal and state agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of state obligations.
These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of federal and state laws which could result in
action requiring Recipient to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any, or pay other state
liabilities.
15. Termination and Suspension
15.1 Termination by State. State may cancel this contract at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days' written
notice to Recipient. Upon termination, Recipient will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for
services satisfactorily performed.
15.2 Termination for Insufficient Funding. State may immediately terminate this contract if it does not obtain
funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level
sufficient to allow for the payment of the services covered here. Termination must be by written notice to
Recipient. Written notice may be transmitted by electronic means. State is not obligated to pay for any services
that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, Recipient will be entitled to payment,
determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. State
will not be assessed any penalty if the contract is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota
Legislature, or other funding source, not to appropriate funds. State must provide Recipient notice of the lack of
funding within a reasonable time of State's receiving that notice.
16. Discrimination Prohibited by Minnesota Statutes §181.59
16.1 Recipient will comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 which requires that every contract for
or on behalf of the State of Minnesota, or any county, city, town, township, school, school district or any other
district in the state, for materials, supplies or construction will contain provisions by which Contractor agrees: 1)
That, in the hiring of common or skilled labor for the performance of any work under any contract, or any
subcontract, no Contractor, material supplier or vendor, will, by reason of race, creed or color, discriminate
against the person or persons who are citizens of the United States or resident aliens who are qualified and
available to perform the work to which the employment relates; 2) That no Contractor, material supplier, or
vendor, will, in any manner, discriminate against, or intimidate, or prevent the employment of any person or
persons identified in clause 1 of this section, or on being hired, prevent or conspire to prevent, the person or
persons from the performance of work under any contract on account of race, creed or color; 3) That a violation
of this section is a misdemeanor; and 4) That this contract may be canceled or terminated by the state of
Minnesota, or any county, city, town, township, school, school district or any other person authorized to grant
contracts for employment, and all money due, or to become due under the contract, may be forfeited for a second
or any subsequent violation of the terms or conditions of this contract.
THE BALANCE OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Page 4 of 5
STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION
Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as
required by Minnesota Statutes § 16A.15 and § 16C.05.
Signed:
Date:
SWIFT Contract (SC) ID No.
Purchase Order (PO) ID No.
RECIPIENT
Recipient certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed
Contracts on behalf of Recipient as required by applicable
articles, bylaws or resolutions.
By:
Title:
Date:
By:
Title:
Date:
MnDOT Contract No. 1000999
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
0
(with delegated authority)
Title:
Date:
MuDOT CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
By:
Date:
Page 5 of 5
RESOLUTION NO. 14529
AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRPORT
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION GRANT CONTRACT
It is resolved by the City of Hutchinson as follows:
That the state of Minnesota Contract Number 10000999, "Airport Maintenance and Operation Grant
Contract", at the Hutchinson Municipal Airport is accepted.
That the Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute this Contract and any amendments on
behalf of the City of Hutchinson.
Adopted by the Hutchinson City Council on this 23rd day of February, 2016.
Mayor, Gary Forcier
City Administrator, Matt Jaunich
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF MCLEOD
I certify that the above Resolution is a true and correct copy of the Resolution adopted by the City of
Hutchinson at an authorized meeting held on the 23rd day of February, 2016, as shown by the minutes
of the meeting in my possession.
CORPORATE SEAL
City Administrator
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M -W
Agenda Item: Special Event Request
Department: Police
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Daniel T. Hatten
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Daniel T. Hatten
Reviewed by Staff ✓❑
Consent Agenda
Time Requested (Minutes): 2
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: No
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
The 42th Annual Arts & Crafts Festival and Taste of Hutchinson will be held Friday, September 16th, 10 am - 6 pm and
Saturday, September 17th, 9 am - 4 pm in Library Square and 1 S\ Ave SE.
Setup for the festival will begin on Thursday, September 15th at 8 am. The event will end on Saturday the 17th at 4
pm. Cleanup is usually completed by 8 pm on the 17th. A rain location will not be provided. A severe weather
emergency plan is currently in place.
The Arts & Crafts Festival committee would like to request the support and assistance of the City of Hutchinson in
regards to the areas outlined. We understand that our request for support of the festival will affect multiple City of
Hutchinson departments.
Request of Support from the City of Hutchinson -
Administration
• The Hutchinson Ambassadors wish to reserve all concession rights on 1 st Ave SE between Main Street and
Hassan Street as well as the control of any and all food exhibitors for the Taste of Hutchinson. The Ambassadors
have an agreement with the Downtown Association regarding the operation of the Popcorn Wagon during the event.
• Use of electricity in band shell and along 151 Ave SE during the festival weekend.
Police Department
• Overnight security on Thursday, September 161 h and Friday, September 17th.
• Assistance with pedestrian traffic crossing on the comer of Main Street and 1 st Ave.
• Assistance in directing vendor traffic during the event
• Assistance with vendor check in traffic control and allow use of Hassan Street from Washington to 5th Ave SE to aid
in this process
• Emergency services support during the event
Parks & Recreation
• Exclusive use of Library Square for art & craft exhibitors for September 15-17 2016
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
I Recommend approval
Fiscal Impact: $ 4,000.00 Funding Source: Department Buget
FTE Impact: 20.00 Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: Yes
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Special Event
Department: Police
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Daniel T. Hatten
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Daniel T. Hatten
Reviewed by Staff ✓❑
Consent Agenda
Time Requested (Minutes): 2
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: No
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
On behalf of the Hutchinson Chamber & Tourism's Agri-Business Committee I would like to make a request to close
First Ave SE between Main Street and Hassan Street.
This request is for our annual Dairy Day Celebration on Friday, June 3, 2016 in library Square. We would like to use
First Ave SE for the tractor club and equipment displays. We currently have library Square reserved from 9:00 am
until 3:00 pm. The tractors would be brought in Friday morning after 9:00 am. The event is scheduled to run until 1:30
pm, but we are requesting 3:00 pm to allow for clean-up.
If you have any questions, or if the committee can be of any assistance, please give me a call at 320-234- 0785 or
email meatmary@explorehutchinson.com.
Thank you for your help.
The Hutchinson Police Department has reviewed the request and plans for the 2016 Dairy Day Celebration and we
look forward to assisting the Chamber with another successful event.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Recommend Approval
Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
FTE Impact: 0.00 Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: No
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Luce Line/River Corridor Parks Reforestation Community Tree Project
Department: Parks
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Sara Witte
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter:
Reviewed by Staff ❑
Consent Agenda
Time Requested (Minutes): 0
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: No
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
Funding is being made available from Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources money and
administered through the DNR and other partnerships to improve community forests through citizen engagement.
This project will help to move Hutchinson forward in it's pro-active approach to community forestry. The main focus
will be to involve citizens of all ages and abilities in all aspects of community forestry. This includes education on: tree
identification, inventorying, planting processes, maintenance, etc. The planting area of interest is the Luce Line
trail/Crow River corridor, due to the number of park acres that fall into this zone.
The total number of trees on the grant is 206, all of which are considered trees native to Minnesota and the upper
Midwest, and are all approved species by the DNR.
If awarded this grant, DNR and it's project partners will help with all the necessary citizen education and planting
activities.
Parks and Public Works recommends that the City Council approve the grant submission to the DNR and if so
awarded, are approving Parks funds of which half is considered in-kind labor ($3,750.00) and other operating budget
($3,803.99) all in total of $7,553.99 for materials/equipment needed during the volunteer education, planting and
maintenance activities. The upfront cost of trees, materials and tools ($30,103.27) will come out of the Parkland
Dedication Account. When we receive reimbursement from the LCCMR grant, the money will go back into Parkland
Account.
City staff is available to answer any questions that you may have.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Approval to apply for the 2015 to 2018 LCCMR Grant for Improving Community Forests Through Citizen Engagement
Fiscal Impact: $ 7,553.99 Funding Source:
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: Yes
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost: $ 37,657.26
Total City Cost: $ 7,553.99 Funding Source: Parks General Operating budget
Remaining Cost: $ 30,103.27 Funding Source: MN DNR LCCMR Grant
CHECK REGISTER -A FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
CHECK DATE FROM 02/09/2016
- 02/23/2016
Check Date
-------------------
02/09/2016
Check
--------------
189803
Vendor Name
--------------------------------------------------------------
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES -INS TRUST
Description
-----------INS P--EMIU---------/16-3/31---------------------
3RD QTR INS PREMIUMS 1/1/16-3/31/16
Amount
-------------- 5.75-
58,945.75
02/23/2016
189807
AARP
FEBRUARY INSTRUCTION
280.00
02/23/2016
189808
ABSOLUTE LOGISTICS LLC
LOAD 01/28 & 1/29 FOSTER'S
650.00
02/23/2016
189809
ACE HARDWARE
TOILET TANK RENEWAL KIT, CABLE TIE
537.82
02/23/2016
189810
AEM MECHANICAL SERVICES INC
TRUCK SURCHARGE AIRPORT FBO HANGAR- HVAC
511.10
02/23/2016
189811
ALL SPORTS AMERICA
TACKLE TWILL, JERSEY
1,364.10
02/23/2016
189812
ALLINA MEDICAL
AED W/CABINET
3,750.00
02/23/2016
189813
ALPHA WIRELESS
MAI NT ON CONSOLE & FIXED TRANSMITTERS FE
848.19
02/23/2016
189814
AMERICAN BOTTLING CO
MISC BEVERAGES
106.16
02/23/2016
189815
AMERIPRIDE SERVICES
TOWELS, MOP
89.53
02/23/2016
189816
ANIMAL MEDICAL CENTER ON CROW RIVER
CAT & DOG BOARDING
748.00
02/23/2016
189817
ARCTIC GLACIER USA INC.
ICE
78.85
02/23/2016
189818
ARNESON DISTRIBUTING CO
FEB PURCH
450.00
02/23/2016
189819
ARROW TERMINAL LLC
ATBUALARM- SHOP SUPPLIES
231.48
02/23/2016
189820
ARTISAN BEER COMPANY
FEB PURCH
323.68
02/23/2016
189821
ASSESSCO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
430 WATER ST ASBESTOS
749.00
02/23/2016
189822
AUTO VALUE - GLENCOE
SOCKET SET 13PC
94.44
02/23/2016
189823
B & C PLUMBING & HEATING INC
FURNACE NOT WORKING- EVENT CENTER
490.50
02/23/2016
189824
BELLBOY CORP
FEB PURCH
2,146.11
02/23/2016
189825
BENNY'S MEAT MARKET
ANNUAL TOWN BOARD MTG-SHREDDED PORK, BU
59.82
02/23/2016
189826
BERGER PLUMBING HEATING AC
HUD COUPLING, PATCH SPRINKLER SYSTEM
90.98
02/23/2016
189827
BERNICK'S
MISC BEVERAGES
213.40
02/23/2016
189828
BLUE EARTH COUNTY
RADIO BD DUES
631.89
02/23/2016
189829
BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE
FEB PURCH
25,012.40
02/23/2016
189830
BUSINESSWARE SOLUTIONS
HP DESIGNJET SD PRO MFP & CARE PACK
17,465.82
02/23/2016
189831
C & L DISTRIBUTING
FEB PURCH
14,179.37
02/23/2016
189832
CENTRAL HYDRAULICS
WATER HOSE
175.60
02/23/2016
189833
CENTRAL MCGOWAN
HIGH PRESSURE CYL
138.88
02/23/2016
189834
COALITION OF GREATER MN CITIES
2016 PLEDGE WW LEGAL & REGULATORY PROGR
4,740.00
02/23/2016
189835
CROW RIVER AUTO & TRUCK REPAIR
OIL CHANGE -2006 DODGE DAKOTA
1,032.43
02/23/2016
189837
CROW RIVER PRESS INC
SENIOR NEWSLETTERS
87.60
02/23/2016
189838
CROW RIVER TITLE GUARANTY INC
BUILDING PURCHASE- OLD MEDICAL BUILDING-
218,260.93
02/23/2016
189839
CROW RIVER WINERY
FEB PURCH
1,267.48
02/23/2016
189840
DALE A. ZORMAN TRUCKING SERVICE INC
STARKMAN LANDSCAPE ELY MN
1,400.00
02/23/2016
189841
DROP -N -GO SHIPPING INC
SOIL CONTROL LABS, WATSONVILLE CA
2,029.41
02/23/2016
189842
DVS RENEWAL
2004 MACK STRT-522-HTK
822.00
02/23/2016
189843
VOID
0.00
02/23/2016
189844
VOID
0.00
02/23/2016
189845
VOID
0.00
02/23/2016
189846
DYNA SYSTEMS
SLASHER, WASHER
1,939.80
02/23/2016
189847
E2 ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC
BIPIN, LAMPS
652.63
02/23/2016
189848
ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION
COCKROACH/RODENT PROGRAM- FEB
212.07
02/23/2016
189849
ECONOMIST, THE
1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION
155.00
02/23/2016
189850
EDINA REALTY RELOCATION
UB refund for account: 2-640-5300-1-02
39.40
02/23/2016
189851
ELECTRIC MOTOR CO
NEW MOTOR
119.00
02/23/2016
189852
ELECTRONIC SERVICING
LUXUL ROUTER
419.95
02/23/2016
189853
EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS
FIRE DEX FX -R TURN OUT COAT & PANT PER G
6,850.91
02/23/2016
189854
FARM -RITE EQUIPMENT
BOB TACH REPLACEMENT PART
3,401.22
02/23/2016
189855
FASTENAL COMPANY
LYNCHPIN, SCRWDRBITST
521.18
02/23/2016
189856
FINANCE & COMMERCE
BID LOCATION HENNEPIN COUNTY
204.88
02/23/2016
189857
FIRST CHOICE FOOD & BEVERAGE SOLUTI
COFFEE
228.00
02/23/2016
189859
FOSTER'S INC.
FOS CATALOG
154.43
02/23/2016
189860
G & K SERVICES
COVERALLS
216.18
02/23/2016
189861
GALLS LLC
1ST RESPONDER XTRA KIT
446.40
02/23/2016
189862
GAVIN WINTERS TWISS THIEMANN & LONG
FLAT FEE -JAN
3,200.00
02/23/2016
189863
GOPHER STATE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO.
ENGINE #7, 10# ANSUL ABC RECHARGE
70.50
02/23/2016
189864
GRAINGER
HIGH CAP PLEATED FILTER
929.58
02/23/2016
189865
GRAPE BEGINNINGS, INC
FEB PURCH
1,129.50
02/23/2016
189866
GREATER MINNESOTA PARKS & TRAILS
2016 MEMBERSHIP- D. MOON
225.00
02/23/2016
189867
GREEN EARTH LAWN CARE INC
REPLACE WOODEN POST ON 12/23/15
385.32
02/23/2016
189868
GTS
REG#89347215- MELISSA STARKE- 2016 MCFOA
265.00
02/23/2016
189869
HANSEN GRAVEL
D6 DOZER PUSHING @ BASS POND
1,554.50
02/23/2016
189870
HANSON & VASEK CONSTRUCTION
4.5HRS SNOW HAULING 2/4/16
351.00
02/23/2016
1189871
1 HAWKINS INC
IAZONE 15 1
1,359.47
CHECK REGISTER -A FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
CHECK DATE FROM 02/09/2016
- 02/23/2016
Check Date
-------------------
02/23/2016
Check
--8--8--------
189872
Vendor Name
--------------------------------------------------------------
HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD
Description
3/4" SHORT IPERL WATER METERS
-/4" S--ORTIPERL-------------ETER-------------------------------------,053.20
Amount
5,053.20
02/23/2016
189873
HILLYARD / HUTCHINSON
TISSUE, LINER, ICE MELT
5,217.19
02/23/2016
189874
HJERPE CONTRACTING
HAULING SNOW 4.5HRS
936.00
02/23/2016
189875
HOLT MOTORS INC
SWITCH, AARESISTOR-ST658
29.81
02/23/2016
189876
HP INC
PROMO- HP 4GB DIMM MEMORY
39.60
02/23/2016
189877
HRA
BETH & STEVE GASSER - SCDP PROJECT
3,618.00
02/23/2016
189878
HUTCHFIELD SERVICES INC
JANITORIAL- FEB 2016
1,512.28
02/23/2016
189879
HUTCHINSON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
BRING IT HOME EXPO 2016
100.00
02/23/2016
189880
HUTCHINSON CO-OP
FORKLIFT TANK
9,514.45
02/23/2016
189881
HUTCHINSON HEALTH
EMPLOYEE SCREENING M. DEMARS
387.00
02/23/2016
189882
HUTCHINSON LEADER
ADVERTISING
1,378.58
02/23/2016
189883
HUTCHINSON SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD
TOUR REIMBURSEMENT
750.00
02/23/2016
189884
HUTCHINSON UTILITIES
JAN UTILITIES 12/31- 1/29/16
135,291.83
02/23/2016
189885
HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE
TAIL LAMP, HATCH
848.71
02/23/2016
189886
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
SERVICE 1/1/16-1/31/15
170.43
02/23/2016
189887
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
REPLENISH ATM
5,000.00
02/23/2016
189888
IFCO SYSTEMS NA INC.
08-B GRADE 48 X40
6,000.00
02/23/2016
189889
INDIAN ISLAND WINERY
FEB PURCH
129.12
02/23/2016
189890
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULT
ISA MEMBERSHIP D. SCHUETTE
255.00
02/23/2016
189891
INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM MINNEAPOL
31-MHD, MT -78
131.95
02/23/2016
189892
J & B PALLET
48X40 #2 GMA PALLETS
6,960.00
02/23/2016
189893
JAY MALONE MOTORS
OIL CHANGE- 2014 FORD FUSION
57.57
02/23/2016
189894
JEFF MEEHAN SALES INC.
JANUARY COMMISSIONS
4,057.16
02/23/2016
189895
JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC
HOLMATRO CORE PUMP, SPREADER, CUTTER
17,639.10
02/23/2016
189896
JJ TAYLOR DIST OF MN
FEB PURCH
5,231.05
02/23/2016
189897
JLR GARAGE DOOR SERVICE
ADJUSTED AIR SWITCH
150.00
02/23/2016
189898
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
FEB PURCH
32,852.59
02/23/2016
189899
JUUL CONTRACTING CO
FORCEMAIN TEST AT ROBERTS PARK
651.00
02/23/2016
189900
KDUZ KARP RADIO
ADVERTISING -:30 SPOT
72.00
02/23/2016
189901
KOSEK, JEFF
SNOW REMOVAL TRUCKING 4.5 HRS
351.00
02/23/2016
189902
L & P SUPPLY CO
SLIDER MOWERS -BELT, PULLEY
1,313.64
02/23/2016
189903
LEAGUE OF MN CITIES
2016 SAFETY & LOSS CONTROL WORKSHOP J.PA
780.00
02/23/2016
189904
LEXISNEXIS
JANUARY 2016 USER
151.41
02/23/2016
189905
LIEN, MIKE
BRAINERD CONFERENCE
466.46
02/23/2016
189906
LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC
4.68 HRS OF REPAIR LABOR ON WING
468.00
02/23/2016
189907
LOCATORS & SUPPLIES
SUBSURFACE METERED MAGNETIC LOCATOR
4,795.60
02/23/2016
189908
LOCHER BROTHERS INC
FEB PURCH
24,151.85
02/23/2016
189909
M -R SIGN
SIGNS
242.17
02/23/2016
189910
MACTEK SYSTEMS INC
ANNUAL MAINT AGREEMENT FOR HIGHERGROUND
3,547.00
02/23/2016
189911
MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP
SERVICES RENDERED THROUGH 1/31/16
2,862.69
02/23/2016
189912
MARIPOSA PUBLISHING
2016 MINN ATTY SEC UPDATE
135.26
02/23/2016
189913
MATHESON TRI -GAS INC
ACETYLENE, HIGH PRESSURE
15.04
02/23/2016
189914
MAYTAG LAUNDRY & CAR WASH
CLEANING OF LINENS
142.31
02/23/2016
189915
MCKAY, JEFF
FIRE OFFICER SCHOOL- ALEXANDRIA
351.05
02/23/2016
189916
MCLEOD COUNTY BAR ASSN
2016 BAR ASSN DUES
40.00
02/23/2016
189917
MCLEOD COUNTY COURT ADMINISTRATOR
BAIL- D.AIME
300.00
02/23/2016
189918
MCLEOD COUNTY RECORDER
DOC#A423967 & A423968, B. SCHEURER
92.00
02/23/2016
189919
MCLEOD PUBLISHING INC
BRIDE & GROOM SUPPLEMENT
118.45
02/23/2016
189920
MENARDS HUTCHINSON
ROYAL OAK CHARCOAL, LIGHTER FLUID
1,056.13
02/23/2016
189921
MESSAGE MEDIA
MONTHLY ACCESS FEE - FEB
30.00
02/23/2016
189922
MID AMERICA BUSINESS SYSTEMS
NETLABELS 1 YEAR MAINT
116.75
02/23/2016
189923
MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH
ARENA DUES - CONCESSIONS
120.00
02/23/2016
189924
MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH
WEST RIVER PARK
126.00
02/23/2016
189925
MINNESOTA DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
REPLACE "ODDFELLOWS PARK" SIGNS ON HWY 7
1,020.00
02/23/2016
189926
MINNESOTA GREEN EXPO
PREMIUM BOOTH FOR MNLA GREEN EXPO 2017
489.60
02/23/2016
189927
MINNESOTA SPORTS FEDERATION
LEAGUE SANCTIONING- VB & BASKETBALL
272.00
02/23/2016
189928
MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LAB
BOD
684.50
02/23/2016
189929
MN STATE PATROL
MANDATORY INSPECTION DECALS
36.00
02/23/2016
189930
MNDRIVERSMANUALS.COM
COMMERCIAL MANUALS
544.23
02/23/2016
189931
MOTION INDUSTRIES INC
SA37/A REDUCER
517.45
02/23/2016
189932
MRPA
LEAGUE SANCTIONING -VB
216.00
02/23/2016
189933
NERO ENGINEERING
WELL #4, WWTF FORCEMAIN BYPASS, WTP AIR
1,883.96
02/23/2016
189934
NEW FRANCE WINE
FEB PURCH
1,641.00
02/23/2016
1189935
1 NORTH AMERICAN RESCUE
TOURNIQUET, COMBAT APP, CASE, DRESSING
1,844.75
CHECK REGISTER-A FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
CHECK DATE FROM 02/09/2016
- 02/23/2016
Check Date
-------------------
02/23/2016
Check
--------------
189936
Vendor Name
--------------------------------------------------------------
NORTH CENTRAL LABORATORIES
Description
------------------------------------------------------------------
NALGENE
Amount
-----------------88
312.88
02/23/2016
189937
NORTHERN BUSINESS PRODUCTS
LINER, INK CRG
883.56
02/23/2016
189938
NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC
PLOWBOLT #8 PKG
418.27
02/23/2016
189939
NU-TELECOM
FEB SERVICE
76.45
02/23/2016
189940
NYBAKKE, LYLE
FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS
11.44
02/23/2016
189941
O'REILLY AUTO PARTS
MINI BULB, WIPER BLADES
220.46
02/23/2016
189942
OFFICE DEPOT
PAPER, TOWELS
523.59
02/23/2016
189943
PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY
FEB PURCH
1,104.27
02/23/2016
189944
PETERSON, TIM
FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS
12.06
02/23/2016
189945
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
FEB PURCH
13,284.50
02/23/2016
189946
POSTMASTER
SR NEWSLETTER- MARCH
147.00
02/23/2016
189947
POWDER RIDGE WINTER REC AREA
2015-2016 SEASON 6-TIME SKI/BOARD CLUB
4,089.00
02/23/2016
189948
PRINTERS SERVICE INC
77" ICE KNIFE SHARP
120.00
02/23/2016
189949
QUILL CORP
MOP
26.94
02/23/2016
189950
RATH PRECISION
TANKER 6 DROP TANK LATCH REPAIR
145.00
02/23/2016
189951
RATH RACING
POLARIS RANGER-REMOVED OLD LIGHTING
3,142.65
02/23/2016
189952
RATH, DARYL
FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS
14.77
02/23/2016
189953
REINER ENTERPRISES INC
GERTEN'S ROUND TRIP
780.00
02/23/2016
189954
RIPPE PRINT COMMUNICATIONS
WONDERBLEND REBATE MIX
1,496.21
02/23/2016
189955
RJO CORPORATE
SCREEN PRINTED T SHIRTS
1,889.25
02/23/2016
189956
ROSENBAUER MN LLC
ROSENBAUER MOTORS CHASSIS - FIRE TRUCK
226,600.00
02/23/2016
189957
RUNNING'S SUPPLY
HOSE CLAMP, BATTERY, NOZZLE, BINS
343.66
02/23/2016
189958
SAM'S CLUB
MISC PURCH
1,710.90
02/23/2016
189959
SARGENT, DAN
FIRE DEPT TRAINING ST LOUIS PARK
47.30
02/23/2016
189960
SCARCELY LTD
GASSER- 815-817 MAIN ST S (HRA LOAN)
325.00
02/23/2016
189961
SCHIMMEL CONSTRUCTION LLC
GASSER- 815-817 MAIN ST S (HRA LOAN)
2,200.00
02/23/2016
189962
SEBORA, MARC
COURT EXPENSES
76.86
02/23/2016
189963
SHAW, KAREN
YOGA & PILATES
210.00
02/23/2016
189964
SHRED-IT USA INC
ON SITE SHRED 5 CONTAINERS
48.99
02/23/2016
189965
SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP
QUARTERLY CONTRACT 6/1/15-5/31/16
180.80
02/23/2016
189966
SOIL CONTROL LAB
FINISHED COMPOST CELL 1
698.00
02/23/2016
189967
SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF MN
FEB PURCH
13,979.44
02/23/2016
189968
SPS COMMERCE INC
WEBFORMS MONTHLY SUB & PROCESSING FEE
357.65
02/23/2016
189969
STAPLES ADVANTAGE
ROLL- DMV
680.32
02/23/2016
189970
STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPT OF PUBLIC S
HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL INVENTORY FEE
25.00
02/23/2016
189971
STEARNS COUNTY COURT ADMINISTRATOR
BAIL- N. SELLE
200.00
02/23/2016
189972
STREICH TRUCKING
ON SITE HAULING- FINES 2/4/16-2/5/16
947.50
02/23/2016
189973
STURGES, JASON
FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS
15.49
02/23/2016
189974
STURGES, MATT
FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS
24.24
02/23/2016
189975
SUBWAY WEST
EDA MEETING
58.46
02/23/2016
189976
THOMPSON, DENEIL
SAFETY GLASSES
100.00
02/23/2016
189977
THOMSON REUTERS-WEST
DISCOUNT PLAN CHARGES JAN - LEGAL
1,412.85
02/23/2016
189978
TITAN MACHINERY
SENDER ENGINE OIL PRESSURE
64.31
02/23/2016
189979
TKO WINES
FEB PURCH
839.40
02/23/2016
189980
TOWMASTER INC.
HYDRAULICS ARE SLOW- EMERGENCY REPAIR
4,159.00
02/23/2016
189981
TRI COUNTY WATER
BOTTLE WATER DEL
560.66
02/23/2016
189982
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED
UNIFORMS
39.45
02/23/2016
189983
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
J. SCHELITZCHE- SHADE TREE SHORT COURSE
195.00
02/23/2016
189984
UNUM LIFE INSURANCE CO OF AMERICA
LIFE & LTD INSURANCE FOR MARCH
2,019.06
02/23/2016
189985
VESSCO INC
TUBING, MARPRENE
373.96
02/23/2016
189986
VIK, BRANDON
FD LEADERSHIP CLASS- ST LOUIS PARK
85.77
02/23/2016
189987
VIKING BEER
FEB PURCH
19,689.77
02/23/2016
189988
VIKING COCA COLA
MISC BEVERAGES
315.60
02/23/2016
189989
VINOCOPIA INC
FEB PURCH
1,603.43
02/23/2016
189990
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN
1/16-1/31/16 DISPOSAL FEES
4,081.26
02/23/2016
189991
WELCOME NEIGHBOR
HUTCHINSON NEW RESIDENTVISITS
60.00
02/23/2016
189992
WELLS FARGO
MISC PURCH
4,653.80
02/23/2016
189993
WEST CENTRAL SHREDDING
FEB 2016 DOCUMENT PURGE- 2005 LBS
401.00
02/23/2016
189994
WINE MERCHANTS INC
FEB PURCH
1,489.00
02/23/2016
189995
ZIEGLER INC
PUMP PARTS- GRINDER
118.46
02/23/2016
189996
ZWILLING, TROY
INNOVATIVE CONFERENCE
108.20
GRAND TOTAL
I
1
999,787.45
CHECK REGISTER -B FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
CHECK DATE FROM 02/23/2016 - 02/23/2016
Check Date
-------------------
02/23/2016
Check
--------------
189836
Vendor Name
--------------------------------------------------------------
CROW RIVER GLASS
Description Amount
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------65.0 --
FIX DOOR 65.00
02/23/2016
189858
FORCIER - MARTY'S ROOFING INC
INSTALL METAL COUNTER- EVERGREEN APTS 525.00
GRAND TOTAL
590.00
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Consideration of adoption of a modification to the Development Program for Devfi
Department: EDA
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Miles R. Seppelt
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Miles R. Seppelt
Reviewed by Staff r-1
Public Hearing
Time Requested (Minutes): 10
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: No
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
In order to promote the redevelopment of downtown and remove blight the Hutchinson Economic Development
Authority would like to acquire and demolish the "Old Medical Clinic" building located at 126 Franklin Street NW.
In order to pay for the project an economic development tool known as Tax Increment Financing would be used. This
will allow the City of Hutchinson to capture a portion of the future property taxes generated by the property once its
redeveloped with a new building.
The EDA plans to acquire the property, demolish the existing structure, make needed soil corrections on the site, and
market the site to potential developers. Once a developer has been identified the lot would be sold to them for $1.
To establish the TIF District a public hearing is required, after which the City Council will be asked to consider the
adoption of two resolutions: the first to establish the TIF District and the 2nd to authorize an inter-fund loan to cover
project costs until such time as tax increment from a new development can provide reimbursement.
Initial project costs will be advanced from existing tax increment within Development District # 4 and reimbursed via
future tax increment generated by the new development.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call anytime at 234-4223.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
1. Adoption of resolution establishing TIF District 4-16; 2. Adoption of a resolution authorizing an inter-fund loan for
advance of certain costs in connection with TIF District 4-16
Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source: N/A
FTE Impact: 0.00 Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: No
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
Tax Increment Financing District Overview
City of Hutchinson
Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16
The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16. More detailed information on each of these topics can be
found in the complete Tax Increment Financing Plan.
Proposed action: ➢ Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (District) and
the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan).
Modification of the Development Program for Development District No. 4
which includes the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No.
4-16 and represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in
the Development Program for Development District No. 4.
Passing an interfund loan in conjunction with the District.
Type of TIF District: A redevelopment district
Parcel Numbers: 23.056.2880
Proposed The District is being created to enable the EDA and City to acquire property
Development: and prepare the site for future development in the City. Please see Appendix
A of the TIF Plan for a more detailed project description.
Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the
first increment (26 years of increment). The City elects to receive the first tax
increment in 2019. It is estimated that the District, including any
modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would
terminate after December 31, 2044, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied.
Estimated annual tax Up to $81,219
increment:
EHLERS
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
Authorized uses: The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount that
may be expended:
Land/Building Acquisition .....................................................$225,000
Site Improvements.................................................................$284,000
Other Qualifying Improvements ............................................$335,326
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ..........................................$140,000
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ...................................................$984,326
Interest...................................................................................$555,674
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL .............................................
1 540 000
See Subsection 2-10, on page 2-6 of the TIF Plan for the full budget
authorization.
Form of financing: The project is proposed to be financed by a pay-as-you-go note, interfund
loan, or a combination of both.
Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified.
Interfund Loan If the City wants to pay for administrative expenditures from a tax increment
Requirement: fund, it is recommended that a resolution authorizing a loan from another
fund be bassed PRIOR to the issuance of the check.
4 Year Activity Rule After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the
(§ 469.176 Subd. 6) following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District:
• Demolition
• Rehabilitation
• Renovation
• Other site preparation (not including utility services such as sewer and
water)
If the activity has not been started by approximately February 2020, no
additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel until the
commencement of a qualifying activity.
5 Year Rule Within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax increments must be
(§ 469.1763 Subd. 3) expended or obligated to be expended.
Any obligations in the District made after approximately February 2021, will
not be eligible for repayment from tax increments.
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City resolution.
Page 2
isEHLERS
LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE
,i�i�lll
nen SII
As of February 9, 2016
Draft for Public Hearing
Modification to the Development Program
for Development District No. 4
and the
Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the establishment of
Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16
(a redevelopment district)
within
Development District No. 4
City of Hutchinson
McLeod County
State of Minnesota
Public Hearing: February 23, 2016
Adopted:
40 FREERS
Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC.
3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105
651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com
Table of Contents
(for reference purposes only)
Section 1 - Modification to the Development Program
for Development District No. 4 ............................................. 1-1
Foreword............................................................. 1-1
Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 .................................
2-1
Subsection 2-1.
Foreword ...............................................
2-1
Subsection 2-2.
Statutory Authority ........................................
2-1
Subsection 2-3.
Statement of Objectives ...................................
2-1
Subsection 2-4.
Development Program Overview ............................
2-1
Subsection 2-5.
Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired
. 2-2
Subsection 2-6.
Classification of the District .................................
2-2
Subsection 2-7.
Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ...........
2-4
Subsection 2-8.
Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity
Value/Increment
and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................
2-4
Subsection 2-9.
Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ......................
2-5
Subsection 2-10.
Uses of Funds ...........................................
2-6
Subsection 2-11.
Business Subsidies .......................................
2-6
Subsection 2-12.
County Road Costs .......................................
2-7
Subsection 2-13.
Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................
2-7
Subsection 2-14.
Supporting Documentation .................................
2-9
Subsection 2-15.
Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ........................
2-9
Subsection 2-16.
Modifications to the District ................................
2-10
Subsection 2-17.
Administrative Expenses ..................................
2-10
Subsection 2-18.
Limitation of Increment ...................................
2-11
Subsection 2-19.
Use of Tax Increment ....................................
2-12
Subsection 2-20.
Excess Increments ......................................
2-12
Subsection 2-21.
Requirements for Agreements with the Developer ..............
2-13
Subsection 2-22.
Assessment Agreements .................................
2-13
Subsection 2-23.
Administration of the District ...............................
2-13
Subsection 2-24.
Annual Disclosure Requirements ...........................
2-13
Subsection 2-25.
Reasonable Expectations .................................
2-13
Subsection 2-26.
Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment .................
2-14
Subsection 2-27.
Summary ..............................................
2-14
Appendix A
Project Description...................................................... A-1
Appendix B
Map of Development District No. 4 and the District ............................. B-1
Appendix C
Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1
Appendix D
Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1
Appendix E
Minnesota Business Assistance Form ....................................... E-1
Appendix F
Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1
Appendix G
Findings Including But/For Qualifications ..................................... G-1
Section 1 - Modification to the Development Program
for Development District No. 4
Foreword
The following text represents a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4.
This modification represents a continuation ofthe goals and objectives set forth in the Development Program
for Development District No. 4. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Tax
Increment Financing District No. 4-16.
For further information, please review the Development Program for Development District No. 4, adopted
May 1980 and modified on April 24, 1990; December 30, 1991; May 13, 1997; June 8, 2003; June 29, 2004;
August 23, 2005; and June 12, 2007. It is available from the City Administrator or Economic Development
Director at the City of Hutchinson. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing
Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Development District No. 4.
City of Hutchinson Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 1-1
Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16
Subsection 2-1. Foreword
The City of Hutchinson (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to
expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (the "District"), a redevelopment
tax increment financing district, located in Development District No. 4.
Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority
Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or
redevelopment to occur. To this end, the City has certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
Sections 469.124 to 469.133, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794,
inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs
related to this project.
This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant
information is contained in the Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4.
Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives
The District currently consists of one parcel of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is
being created to enable the Hutchinson Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and City to acquire
property and prepare the site for future development in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District
information. The City has not entered into an agreement or designated a developer at the time of preparation
of this TIF Plan. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Development
Program for Development District No. 4.
The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Development Program and the TIF Plan do not
preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are
anticipated to occur over the life of Development District No. 4 and the District.
Subsection 2-4. Development Program Overview
1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the District may be acquired by
the City and is further described in this TIF Plan.
2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws.
3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary
legal requirements, the City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire
within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer.
4. The City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction,
relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District.
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-1
Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcels listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information
on the location of the District.
The City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any
properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City only in order to accomplish one or more of
the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry
out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives
set forth in this plan. The City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase
from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken
only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs.
Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District
The City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S.,
Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended, inclusive, finds that the District, to be established, is a
redevelopment district pursuant toMS, Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below:
(a) 'Redevelopment district" means a type oftax incrementfinancing district consisting ofaproject,
or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the
following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists:
(1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets,
utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent
of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree
requiring substantial renovation or clearance;
(2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently
used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way;
(3) tank -facilities, orproperty whose immediately previous use was for tank -facilities, as defined
in Section 115C, Subd. 15, if the tank facility:
(i) have or had a capacity of more than one million gallons;
(ii) are located adjacent to rail facilities; or
(iii) have been removed, or are unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently
used; or
(4) a qualifying disaster area, as defined in Subd. IOb.
(b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in
structural elements or a combination ofdeficiencies in essential utilities andfacilities, light and
ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition ofinteriorpartitions,
or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify
substantial renovation or clearance.
(c) A building is not structurally substandard ifitis in compliance with the building code applicable
to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15
percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-2
site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard
under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size,
type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or
other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without
an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal
prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the
property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable
to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that
owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion
that the building is structurally substandard.
(d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the
finding under paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the
following conditions are met:
(1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements ofparagraph
(e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the
parcel as part of the district with the county auditor;
(2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished
or removed by the authority or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or
was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority;
(3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was
occupied by a structurally substandard building or met the requirement ofparagraph (e) and
that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a
district; and
(4) upon filing the requestfor certification of the tax capacity of the parcel as part ofa district,
the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of the parcel must be
adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph 0.
(e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved
or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel
contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures.
(f) For districts consisting of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must qualify as a
redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of
the district must satisfy paragraph (a).
In meeting the statutory criteria the City relies on the following facts and findings:
• The District is a redevelopment district consisting of one parcel.
• An inventory shows that more than 15 percent of the parcel is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities,
paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures.
• An inspection of the sole building located within the District finds that the building is structurally
substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F).
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that
qualified under the provisions of MS, Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes
payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District.
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-3
Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax
increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. l b.,
the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years
of tax increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2019, which is no later than four years
following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any
modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2044, or when
the TIF Plan is satisfied. The City reserves the right to decertify the District priorto the legally required date.
Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity
Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements
PursuanttoM. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 andM. S., Section 469.177, Subd. l , the Original Net Tax Capacity
(ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor
in 2015 for taxes payable 2016.
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.177, Subds. I and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning
in the payment year 2019) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of
Change in tax exempt status of property;
Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district;
Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements;
Change in the use of the property and classification;
Change in state law governing class rates; or
Change in previously issued building permits.
In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTO, no
value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City.
The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2016, assuming the
request for certification is made before June 30, 2016. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the
District appear in the table below.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated
Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Development District No. 4, upon completion of
the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table on
the following page. The City requests 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of
its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2019. The Project Tax Capacity
(PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed.
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-4
Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $63,965
Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTO) $8,372
Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $55,593
Original Local Tax Rate 146.095% Estimated
Pay 2016
Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $81,219
Percent Retained by the City 100%
Tax capacity includes a 3% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in this
chart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year one is
estimated to be $30,550.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the City shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its
request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S.,
Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which
building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the
TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase
the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building
permit was issued.
The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found no parcels for which building
permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the
City.
Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued
The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax
increments. The City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As
presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a and interfund loan, pay -as -you go
ora combination of both. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan
Modification. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The City will issue bonds or incur other
debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City.
The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below:
SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL
Tax Increment $1,400,000
Land Sale Proceeds $1
Interest $139,999
TOTAL $1,540,000
The City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from
the District in a maximum principal amount of $984,326. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as-you-go
notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded
indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval.
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-5
Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds
Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to enable the EDA and City to acquire property
and prepare the site for future development. The City has determined that it will be necessary to provide
assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The City has studied the feasibility of the
development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and
development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to
pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with
the District is outlined in the following table.
USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL
Land/Building Acquisition $225,000
Site Improvements/Preparation $284,000
Other Qualifying Improvements $335,326
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) $140,000
PROJECT COST TOTAL $984,326
Interest $555,674
PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $1,540,000
The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total
projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9.
Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification
to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed,
without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant
to M. S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the
District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within
the boundaries of Development District No. 4, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be
spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-11. Business Subsidies
Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered
a business subsidy:
(1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000;
(2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses,
such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria;
(3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a
public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at
the time the improvements are made;
(4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined MM S., Section 116J. 552, Subd. 3;
(5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing
it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that
the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost;
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-6
(6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to
provide those services;
(7) Assistance for housing;
(8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing
hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23;
(9) Assistance for energy conservation;
(10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law;
(11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation;
(12) Benefits derived from regulation;
(13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions;
(14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and
bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999;
(15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business;
(16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section
469.174, Subd. 19;
(17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation
is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value;
(18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally
technical nature;
(19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local
government agency;
(20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority;
(21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less;
(22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic
Development Administration; and
(23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to
valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100.
The City will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance
under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions.
Subsection 2-12. County Road Costs
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. ]a, the county board may require the City to pay for all or part of
the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in
the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road
improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years
under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan.
If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the City within forty-five days
of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the City and consultants, the proposed development outlined
in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan was not forwarded to
the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The City is aware that the county could claim that tax
increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing.
Subsection 2-13. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF
Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the City has determined that such
development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-7
fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as
follows if the "but for" test was not met:
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2016 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are
based on actual Pay 2015 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2016 rates and figures,
which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared.
Pursuant to M. S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) :
(1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be
generated over the life of the District is $1,400,000;
(2) Probable impact of the District on cL provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the
District on police protection is not expected. The City Police Department does track all calls for
service including property -type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses,
police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional
overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and
of itself, will necessitate new capital investment.
The probable impact ofthe District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new
buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing building, which
will be eliminated by the new development, is blighted and not maintained.
The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is
not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-8
IMPACT ON TAX BASE
Estimated
Estimated Captured
2015/Pay 2016
Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC
Total Net
Upon Completion
to Entity Total
Tax Capacity
McLeod County
35,498,296
55,593
0.1566%
City of Hutchinson
8,908,926
55,593
0.6240%
Hutchinson ISD No. 423
14,965,582
55,593
0.3715%
IMPACT ON TAX RATES
Estimated
Percent
Potential
Pay 2016
of Total
CTC
Taxes
Extension Rates
McLeod County
0.509340
34.86%
55,593
28,316
City of Hutchinson
0.744170
50.94%
55,593
41,371
Hutchinson ISD No. 423
0.173390
11.87%
55,593
9,639
Other
0.034050
2.33%
55,593
1,893
Total
1.460950
100.00%
81,219
The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate
used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2016 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are
based on actual Pay 2015 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2016 rates and figures,
which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared.
Pursuant to M. S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) :
(1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be
generated over the life of the District is $1,400,000;
(2) Probable impact of the District on cL provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the
District on police protection is not expected. The City Police Department does track all calls for
service including property -type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses,
police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional
overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and
of itself, will necessitate new capital investment.
The probable impact ofthe District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new
buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing building, which
will be eliminated by the new development, is blighted and not maintained.
The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is
not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-8
sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from
the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated
with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District
is expected to contribute to sanitary sewer (SAC) and water (WAC) connection fees, however the
exact amount is unknown at this time.
It is not anticipated that there will be any general obligation debt issued in relation to this project,
therefore there will be no impact on the City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit.
(3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the
amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district
levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions
remained the same, is $166,180;
(4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of
tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the
county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $488,040;
(5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any
standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and
impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional
information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax
increment financing plan.
No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed
development for the District have been received.
Subsection 2-14. Supporting Documentation
Pursuant to MS Section 469.175, Subd. I (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and
description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth MMS Section 469.175, Subd.
3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of
reports and studies on file at the City that support the City's findings:
• Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District Eligibility Study: "Old Medical Clinic".
• Imagine Hutchinson Downtown Vision and Action Plan.
• Levee Area Walkway Alternatives.
Subsection 2-15. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues
Pursuant to M. S, Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing
district include all of the following potential revenue sources:
Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed underM. S,
Section 469.177;
The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was
purchased by the authority with tax increments;
Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments;
Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments;
Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for
which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-9
6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384.
Subsection 2-16. Modifications to the District
In accordance with MS, Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any:
Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the
requirements of MS, Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e);
Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred;
A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF
Plan;
Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the City;
Increase in the estimate of the cost ofthe District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid
or financed with tax increment from the District; or
Designation of additional property to be acquired by the City,
shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval
of the original TIF Plan.
PursuanttoM.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 40, the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not
be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county
auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that
the addition to the district meets the criteria of M. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10, must be documented in
writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is
elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2)(A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated
from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax
capacity or (B) the City agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax
capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the
District.
The City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the District
in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan.
Subsection 2-17. Administrative Expenses
In accordance with M. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the
City, other than:
Amounts paid for the purchase of land;
Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and
engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the
District;
Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the
District;
Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued
pursuant to M. S., Section 469.178; or
Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance
costs described in clauses (1) to (3).
For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982,
and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-10
counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M. S., Section
469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative
expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures
authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined byM.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause
(1), from the District, whichever is less.
For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay
any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment
expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined MMS, Section 469.174, Subd.
25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual
administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits
ofM..S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the
year following the year the expenses were incurred.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36
percent) of any increment distributed to the City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to
the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated
to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of
examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually
by the Commissioner of Revenue.
Subsection 2-18. Limitation of Increment
The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District
may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow
account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or
redemption date.
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6:
if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax
incrementfinancing districtpursuanttoM.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation
or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a
street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water
systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax incrementfinancing district
by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax incrementfinancing
plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax
capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax
increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently
commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on thatparcel
including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the
tax incrementfinancingplan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity
has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most
recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity
ofthe tax incrementfinancing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions ofthis
subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required
activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be
submitted by February I of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified
as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-11
street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street,
and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street.
The City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately February 2020 and
report such actions to the County Auditor.
Subsection 2-19. Use of Tax Increment
The City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property
located in the District for the following purposes:
To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project;
To finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs of Development District No. 4
pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.124 to 469.133;
To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan;
To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4;
To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the
City or for the benefit of Development District No. 4 by a developer;
To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing
the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to
M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/orM.S., Sections 469.178; and
To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on
the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152
through 469.165, and/orMS, Sections 469.178.
These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other
purposes prohibited by MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 4.
Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by McLeod County to the City for the Tax Increment
Fund of said District. The City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as
specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements,
demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for
City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement activities outside the District.
Subsection 2-20. Excess Increments
Excess increments, as defined inM.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shallbe used only to do one or more ofthe
following:
1. Prepay any outstanding bonds;
2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds;
3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or
4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in
proportion to their local tax rates.
The City must spend or return the excess increments under MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 2, paragraph (c)
within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the City may, subject to the limitations set forth
herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Development District No.
4 or the District.
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-12
Subsection 2-21. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer
The City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the
Development Program and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the
following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and
electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any
other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the City to demonstrate the conformance of the development
with City plans and ordinances. The City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the
development.
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be
acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the City as a result of
acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M. S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from
property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the City
concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides
recourse for the City should the development or redevelopment not be completed.
Subsection 2-22. Assessment Agreements
Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the City may enter into a written assessment agreement in
recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market value
of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be
presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be
constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be
constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the
judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum
assessment agreement.
Subsection 2-23. Administration of the District
Administration of the District will be handled by the City Administrator.
Subsection 2-24. Annual Disclosure Requirements
Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the City must undertake financial reporting for all tax
increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or
before August 1 of each year. M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be
published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15.
If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M. S., Section
469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the
distribution of tax increment from the District.
Subsection 2-25. Reasonable Expectations
As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated
development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the
reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value ofthe site that could reasonably be expected
to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value
estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax
increments forthe maximum duration ofthe District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination,
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-13
reliance has been placed upon City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site(s) within
the District. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the
District and the use oftax increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with
the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed
development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the
establishment of the District and the use of tax increments.
Subsection 2-26. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment
General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF
Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs of
Development District No. 4 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.124 to 469.133. Tax increments may not be
used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition,
construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for
conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government
or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax
increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure.
2. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on
activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance
activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not
more than 25 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise,
on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced
bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they
were solely for activities outside of the District.
Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Tax increments derived from the District shall
be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule
set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year
following certification of the District, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures
permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit
enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5.
4. Redevelopment District. At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a
redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation
of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts underM. S., Section 469.176 Subd. 4j. These costs
include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or
improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary
to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures,
clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of
the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated
administrative expenses of the City, including the cost of preparation ofthe development action response
plan, may be included in the qualifying costs.
Subsection 2-27. Summary
The City of Hutchinson is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop
substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was
prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, telephone
(651) 697-8500.
City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-14
Appendix A
Project Description
The proposed Tax Increment District project involves acquisition of the property located at 126 Franklin
Street NW in Hutchinson, by the Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"). In order to prepare the
site for new commercial or office development, the EDA will use tax increments generated to pay for
costs incurred for demolition and removal of the existing building, site corrections, parking lot
maintenance and repair, and the possible addition of a new sidewalk segment. The EDA will issue an
interfund loan to Development District No 5, the 1990 Shopko redevelopment tax increment district. The
increments received from the proposed District will repay the interfund loan.
Appendix A-1
Appendix B
Map of Development District No. 4 and the District
Appendix B-1
7
'liilill�
m
Appendix C
Description of Property to be Included in the District
The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the
parcel listed below.
Parcel Numbers Address Owner
23.056.2880 126 Franklin St. NW Applegate Properties LLC
Appendix
C-1
Appendix D
Estimated Cash Flow for the District
Appendix D-1
1/21/2016
DistrictType:
District Name/Number:
County District #:
First Year Construction or Inflation on Value
Existing District - Specify No. Years Remaining
Inflation Rate - Every Year:
Interest Rate:
Present Value Date:
First Period Ending
Tax Year District was Certified:
Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development:
Years of Tax Increment
Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment
Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA]
Incremental or Total Fiscal Disparities
Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio
Fiscal Disparities Metro -Wide Tax Rate
Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate:
Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.)
State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes)
Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes)
IS EHLERS
LEADERS INPDDUG nNANGE
TIF District No 4-16
City of Hutchinson
Redevelopment Project
Redevelopment
TIF District No. 4-16
2017
3.00
4.00
1 -Aug -16
1 -Feb -17
Pay 2016
2019
26
2044
NA
Incremental
0.0000% Pay 2016 TNT
0.0000% Pay 2016 TNT
146.095% Pay 2016 TNT
146.095% Pay 2016 TNT
49.0000% Pay 2016 TNT
0.19340% Pay 2016 TNT
Base Value Assumptions - Page 1
Tax Rates
Exempt Class Rate (Exempt)
0.00%
Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.)
First $150,000
1.50%
Over $150,000
2.00%
Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/1)
2.00%
Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental)
1.25%
Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental)
First $106,000
0.75%
Over $106,000
0.25%
Non -Homestead Residential (Non -H Res. 1 Unit)
Market
First $500,000
1.00%
Over $500,000
1.25%
Homestead Residental Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.)
After
First $500,000
1.00%
Over $500,000
1.25%
Agricultural Non -Homestead
1.00%
Note:
1. Base values are based email from County auditor on 1/11/16.
Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls
BASE
VALUE INFORMATION
• .Capacity)
I
Building
Total
Percentage
Tax Year Property
Current
Class
After
Land
Market
Market
Of Value Used
Original
Original Tax
Original
After
Conversion Area/
Map # PID Owner Address Market Value
Value
Value
for District
Market Value
Market Value Class
Tax Capacity
Conversion
Orig. Tax Cap. Phase
126 23-056-2880 Applegate Properties 126 Franklin St 364,100
92,000
456,100
100%
456,100
Pay 2016 C/I Pref.
8,372
C/I Pref.
8,372
364,100
92,000
456,100
8,372
8,372
Note:
1. Base values are based email from County auditor on 1/11/16.
Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls
1/21/2016
EHLERS
(FADE RSIN PORtif FINANCE
TIF District No 4-16
City of Hutchinson
Redevelopment Project
Base Value Assumptions - Page 2
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estimates from City staff.
PROJECT INFORMATION
CALCULATIONSTAX
(Project Tax
Capacity)
o aI
OEM
1-0cai
LOCaIve-witio
Estimated Taxable
Market Value Market Value
Area/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit
Total
Sq. Ft./Units
Total Taxable
Market
Value
Property
Tax
Class
Project
Tax Capacity
Project Tax
Capacity/Unit
Percentage
Completed
2017
Percentage
Completed
2018
Percentage
Completed
2019
Percentage
Completed
2020
First Year
Full Taxes
Payable
Commerical 1,565,000 1,565,000
1
1,565,000
C/I Pref.
30,550
30,550
100%
100%
100%
100%
2019
14,970
3,027 62,628 62,628.23
Note:
Subtotal Residential
0
0
0
Subtotal CommerciallInd.
1
1,565,000
30,550
Note:
1. Market values are based upon estimates from City staff.
1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, and other factors which cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM FOR
Total Property Taxes 62,628 Current Market Value -Est. 456,100
less State-wide Taxes (14,970) New Market Value - Est. 1,565,000
less Fiscal Disp. Adj. 0 Difference
less Market Value Taxes (3,027) Present Value of Tax Increment
less Base Value Taxes (12,231) Difference
Annual Gross TIF 32,401 Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:
Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls
CALCULATIONSTAX
o aI
OEM
1-0cai
LOCaIve-witio
ar e
Tax
Disparities
Tax
Property
Disparities
Property
Value Total Taxes Per
New Use Capacity
Tax Capacity
Capacity
Taxes
Taxes
Taxes
Taxes Taxes Sq. Ft./Unit
Commerical 30,550
0
30,550
44,632
0
14,970
3,027 62,628 62,628.23
Note:
1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, and other factors which cannot be predicted.
WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM FOR
Total Property Taxes 62,628 Current Market Value -Est. 456,100
less State-wide Taxes (14,970) New Market Value - Est. 1,565,000
less Fiscal Disp. Adj. 0 Difference
less Market Value Taxes (3,027) Present Value of Tax Increment
less Base Value Taxes (12,231) Difference
Annual Gross TIF 32,401 Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than:
Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls
1/21/2016
Tax Increment Cashflow - Page 3
IS EHLERS
4r F7rRS isi
TIF District No 4-16
City of Hutchinson
Redevelopment Project
08/01/17
02/01/18
08/01/18
02/01/19
100%
30,550
(8,372) -
22,178
INCREMENTTAX •
Project
Original
Fiscal
Captured
Local Annual Semi -Annual State Admin. Semi -Annual Semi -Annual PERIOD
of Tax
Tax
Disparities
Tax
Tax Gross Tax Gross Tax Auditor at Net Tax Present ENDING Tax Payment
OTC Capacity
Capacity
Incremental
Capacity
Rate Increment Increment 0.36% 10% 1 Increment Value Yrs. Year Date
16,200
(58)(1,614)
14,528
- - - - 02/01/17
08/01/17
02/01/18
08/01/18
02/01/19
100%
30,550
(8,372) -
22,178
146.095%
32,401
16,200
(58)
(1,614)
14,528
12,900
0.5
2019
08/01/19
16,200
(58)(1,614)
14,528
25,548
1
2019
02/01/20
100%
31,467
(8,372) -
23,095
146.095%
33,740
16,870
(61)
(1,681)
15,128
38,460
1.5
2020
08/01/20
16,870
(61)
(1,681)
15,128
51,118
2
2020
02/01/21
100%
32,410
(8,372) -
24,038
146.095%
35,119
17,560
(63)
(1,750)
15,747
64,036
2.5
2021
08/01/21
17,560
(63)
(1,750)
15,747
76,701
3
2021
02/01/22
100%
33,383
(8,372) -
25,011
146.095%
36,540
18,270
(66)
(1,820)
16,384
89,619
3.5
2022
08/01/22
18,270
(66)
(1,820)
16,384
102,284
4
2022
02/01/23
100%
34,384
(8,372) -
26,012
146.095%
38,003
19,001
(68)
(1,893)
17,040
115,198
4.5
2023
08/01/23
19,001
(68)
(1,893)
17,040
127,859
5
2023
02/01/24
100%
35,416
(8,372) -
27,044
146.095%
39,510
19,755
(71)
(1,968)
17,715
140,763
5.5
2024
08/01/24
19,755
(71)
(1,968)
17,715
153,415
6
2024
02/01/25
100%
36,478
(8,372) -
28,106
146.095%
41,062
20,531
(74)
(2,046)
18,411
166,306
6.5
2025
08/01/25
20,531
(74)
(2,046)
18,411
178,944
7
2025
02/01/26
100%
37,573
(8,372) -
29,201
146.095%
42,661
21,330
(77)
(2,125)
19,128
191,817
7.5
2026
08/01/26
21,330
(77)
(2,125)
19,128
204,437
8
2026
02/01/27
100%
38,700
(8,372) -
30,328
146.095%
44,307
22,154
(80)
(2,207)
19,867
217,287
8.5
2027
08/01/27
22,154
(80)
(2,207)
19,867
229,886
9
2027
02/01/28
100%
39,861
(8,372) -
31,489
146.095%
46,004
23,002
(83)
(2,292)
20,627
242,710
9.5
2028
08/01/28
23,002
(83)
(2,292)
20,627
255,283
10
2028
02/01/29
100%
41,057
(8,372) -
32,685
146.095%
47,751
23,875
(86)
(2,379)
21,410
268,078
10.5
2029
08/01/29
23,875
(86)
(2,379)
21,410
280,621
11
2029
02/01/30
100%
42,288
(8,372) -
33,916
146.095%
49,550
24,775
(89)
(2,469)
22,217
293,382
11.5
2030
08/01/30
24,775
(89)
(2,469)
22,217
305,893
12
2030
02/01/31
100%
43,557
(8,372) -
35,185
146.095%
51,404
25,702
(93)
(2,561)
23,048
318,617
12.5
2031
08/01/31
25,702
(93)
(2,561)
23,048
331,092
13
2031
02/01/32
100%
44,864
(8,372) -
36,492
146.095%
53,313
26,656
(96)
(2,656)
23,904
343,776
13.5
2032
08/01/32
26,656
(96)
(2,656)
23,904
356,212
14
2032
02/01/33
100%
46,210
(8,372) -
37,838
146.095%
55,279
27,639
(100)
(2,754)
24,786
368,854
14.5
2033
08/01/33
27,639
(100)
(2,754)
24,786
381,247
15
2033
02/01/34
100%
47,596
(8,372) -
39,224
146.095%
57,304
28,652
(103)
(2,855)
25,694
393,843
15.5
2034
08/01/34
28,652
(103)
(2,855)
25,694
406,192
16
2034
02/01/35
100%
49,024
(8,372) -
40,652
146.095%
59,390
29,695
(107)
(2,959)
26,629
418,739
16.5
2035
08/01/35
29,695
(107)
(2,959)
26,629
431,041
17
2035
02/01/36
100%
50,494
(8,372) -
42,122
146.095%
61,539
30,769
(111)
(3,066)
27,593
443,537
17.5
2036
08/01/36
30,769
(111)
(3,066)
27,593
455,789
18
2036
02/01/37
100%
52,009
(8,372) -
43,637
146.095%
63,752
31,876
(115)
(3,176)
28,585
468,232
18.5
2037
08/01/37
31,876
(115)
(3,176)
28,585
480,431
19
2037
02/01/38
100%
53,570
(8,372) -
45,198
146.095%
66,031
33,016
(119)
(3,290)
29,607
492,819
19.5
2038
08/01/38
33,016
(119)
(3,290)
29,607
504,964
20
2038
02/01/39
100%
55,177
(8,372) -
46,805
146.095%
68,379
34,190
(123)
(3,407)
30,660
517,294
20.5
2039
08/01/39
34,190
(123)
(3,407)
30,660
529,382
21
2039
02/01/40
100%
56,832
(8,372) -
48,460
146.095%
70,798
35,399
(127)
(3,527)
31,744
541,652
21.5
2040
08/01/40
35,399
(127)
(3,527)
31,744
553,682
22
2040
02/01/41
100%
58,537
(8,372) -
50,165
146.095%
73,288
36,644
(132)
(3,651)
32,861
565,891
22.5
2041
08/01/41
36,644
(132)
(3,651)
32,861
577,860
23
2041
02/01/42
100%
60,293
(8,372) -
51,921
146.095%
75,854
37,927
(137)
(3,779)
34,011
590,006
23.5
2042
08/01/42
37,927
(137)
(3,779)
34,011
601,913
24
2042
02/01/43
100%
62,102
(8,372) -
53,730
146.095%
78,497
39,248
(141)
(3,911)
35,196
613,994
24.5
2043
08/01/43
39,248
(141)
(3,911)
35,196
625,837
25
2043
02/01/44
100%
63,965
(8,372) -
55,593
146.095%
81,218
40,609
(146)
(4,046)
36,417
637,852
25.5
2044
08/01/44
40,609
146
4,046
36,417
649,630
26
2044
02/01/45
Total
1,402,692
(5,050)
(139,764)
1,257,878
Present Value From 08/01/2016
Present Value Rate
/
724,419
2,608
72,181)
649,630
Prepared by Ehlers &Associates, Inc. -Estimates Only N:\Minn sota\Hutchinson\Housing- Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls
Appendix E
Minnesota Business Assistance Form
(Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development)
A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar
year's activity by April 1 of the following year.
Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at
http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFFonn.htm for information and forms.
Appendix E-1
Appendix F
Redevelopment Qualifications for the District
Appendix F-1
Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District
Eligibility study
TIF District 4-16
"Old Medical Clinic"
126 Franklin Street NW
Prepared By
Miles R. Seppelt, EDA Director
Kyle Dimler, Building Official
January 12, 2016
!. Governing Statutory Language
To be eligible for a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District, the area to be
redeveloped must meet certain requirements as outlined in state statute. These
are:
Minnesota Statute 469.174
Subd. l O.Redeveiopment district.
Subd. 10 (a)
"Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting
of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution
that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the
district, exists:
(1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by
buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures
and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are
structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance;
Subd. 10 (b)
For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing
defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities
and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout
and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies
are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.
Subd. 10 (c)
A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code
applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost
of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square
footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not
disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of
reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the
average cost ofplumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable
evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior
inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal
prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior
inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the
municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best
efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2)
the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is
structurally substandard. Items of evidence that support such a conclusion include
recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing
inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.
Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not
conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3, clause
(1). Failure of a building to be disqualified under the provisions of this paragraph is
a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition to determining that the building is
substandard.
Subd. 10(e)
For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets,
utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of
the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking
lots, or other similar structures.
Study Area
1$7 AVE NW
LN
Sim
___
Figure Z — Aerial
view of study area.
175
Redevelopment TIF District 4-16 will encompass 126 Franklin Street NW in
downtown Hutchinson. The site is composed of five city lots that have been platted
into one parcel and is occupied by a structure commonly referred to at the `old
Medical Clinic.'
Table 1— Identification of Study Area
Common Name..
71
'Old Medical Clinic' 126 Franklin Street NW Lots 1-2-3-4-5, Blk 41, North
Half of Hutchinson, County of
McLeod, MN
Figure 2 — Map of Study Area
IST AVE NW
126 Franklin Street NW
III. Criterion 1
Minnesota Statute 469.174, Subd. 10 (1) states:
"(1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by
buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar
structures... "
Findings
There is one parcel in the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. This one lot is
occupied by buildings and a paved parking lot.
1_parcel = 100%
1 occupied
Since 100% of the parcels in the proposed Redevelopment TIF District are in fact
occupied by buildings are parking lots as specified in statute, this criterion is
satisfied.
IV. Criterion 2
The second criterion that must be satisfied is that more than one-half of the
buildings in the proposed redevelopment district must be found to be substandard
based upon an internal inspection. The governing statutes state:
Minnesota Statute 469.174, Subd 10. (1)
"...and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are
structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; "
Subd. 10 (b)
For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing
defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities
and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout
and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies
are ofsuffrcient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance.
Subd. 10 (c)
A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code
applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost
of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square
footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not
disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of
reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the
average cost ofplumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable
evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior
inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal
prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior
inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the
municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best
efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2)
the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is
structurally substandard. Items of evidence that support such a conclusion include
recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing
inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence.
Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not
conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3, clause
(1). Failure ofa building to be disqualified under the provisions of this paragraph is
a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition to determining that the building is
substandard.
Findings
An internal inspection of the `Old Medical Clinic' was completed on January 12,
2016. Building Code violations found include the following:
1. The west exterior door is decayed and no longer weather resistant. Multiple windows
on the north side of the building have rotten brick -molding allowing moisture to enter
the building envelope. Joints of exterior wall finish materials are not sealed from
weather intrusion International Property Maintenance Code Section 304.2
2. There are numerous gaps in the parapet flashing allowing moisture intrusion into the
building envelope.
3. There is evidence of bulk water intrusion through the apparently failed roof assembly as
there is moisture staining in the ceiling and walls throughout the building as well as
unidentified organic growth in multiple office areas on interior and exterior wall
assemblies and on the office floor coverings. Multiple areas of the office area have
experienced ceiling finish collapse due to bulk water intrusion.
4. In the basement, there is unpermitted plumbing piping installed within the mechanical
plenum space, prohibited by Section 602.2.1 of the MN Mechanical Code.
5. Flexible exhaust ventilation ducting in the ceiling space does not comply with Section
603.6 of the MN Mechanical Code.
6. Drain and waste piping in basement is improperly pitched and is not installed in
compliance with the MN Plumbing Code's Sections 4715.2400, 4715.1430,
4715.0310. (Incorrect slope of piping, incorrect support of piping, discharge of waste in
sump basin).
7. The discharge pipe on the water heater's temperature and pressure relief valve is
undersized per MN Mechanical Code 1006.6.
8. The structure's mechanical system is out of service and in apparent need of service or
replacement due to the length of time is has not been operated or maintained.
9. On the exterior of the building there are multiple electrical receptacles that do not meet
the requirements of the MN Electrical Code for exterior devices. Some portions of the
electrical service appear outdated and non-compliant with the current MN Electrical
Code (fuse panels, open boxes, etc.).
10. There are some open electrical junction boxes in the ceiling space of the structure. MN
Electrical Code,
11. The restrooms do not comply with the requirements for clear spaces, grab bars, and
accessories of Sections 603 and 604 of the MN Accessibility Code.
12. The concrete floor in the eastern half of the office space has heaved noticeably and
results in an irregular walking surface.
13. The stairway leading to the mechanical room does not provide closed riser spaces, a
code compliant handrail, nor a code compliant guardrail per Sections 1009.7.5, 1012,
and 1013 of the MN Building Code.
14. The installation of the building's brick veneer does not appear to have provided flashing
and weep holes as required by Section 1405.4 of the MN Building Code.
Per a cost estimate provided by Hasslen Construction, the total cost to bring the
existing building up to current building code standards would be between $500,125
and $728,920.
Also per Hasslen Construction, a new building of this type, at the same type and size
of 4,973 square feet would cost between $870,275 and $994,460.
Repair Cost
New Building
Percentage
Low Estimate
$500,125
$870,275
57.5%
High Estimate
$728,920
$994,460
73.3%
Since the total cost to renovate the existing building is far more than 15% of the cost
to construct a new building, the 'Old Medical Clinic' does meet the statutory
definition of substandard.
Please refer to the Hasslen Construction attachment at the end of this report for
details.
V. Criterion 3
Minnesota State Statute 469.174 Subd. 10(e) states:
For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, ,streets,
utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of
the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking
lots, or other similar structures.
The parcel in question covers one acre of downtown Hutchinson, an area
encompassing 43,560 square feet.
The improved area of the parcel is as follows:
Building 4,973
Paved Parking Lot 8,102
Sidewalk 330
TOTAL 13,405
The total improved area is 13,833 square feet.
13,405 / 42,560 = 31.5 %
31.5 % of the parcel is 'improved/ therefore this criterion is satisfied.
VI. Conclusion
All three statutory criteria are satisfied. Therefore the area of this study being
considered for a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District is in fact eligible.
Any questions regarding this eligibility study can be directed to Miles R. Seppelt,
Economic Development Director, City of Hutchinson at (320) 234-4223 or
mse elt ci.hutchinson.mn.us
FHASSLEN CONSTRUCTION
45 First St SE • PO Box 157 •Ortonville MN 56278
Phone 320-839-2529 • Fax 320-839-2339
www hasslenconstructio n. com
990 Fifth Avenue SE, Suite #1 Hutchinson, MN 55350
Phone 320-587-3970 Fax 320-587-7271
Building Deficiencies
'Old Medical Clinic' (Approx. 4,973 sf)
1. The west exterior door is decayed and no longer weather resistant. Multiple windows on the north side of the
building have rotten brick -molding allowing moisture to enter the building envelope. Joints of exterior wall finish
materials are not sealed from weather intrusion International Property Maintenance Code Section 304.2
Cost to Remedy $ 18,600.00424,995,00
2. There are numerous gaps in the parapet flashing allowing moisture intrusion into the building envelope,
including replacement of roof
Cost to Remedy $ 35,700.00-$55,175.00
3. There is evidence of bulk water intrusion through the apparently failed roof assembly as there is moisture
staining in the ceiling and walls throughout the building as well as unidentified organic growth in multiple office
areas on interior and exterior wall assemblies and on the office floor coverings. Multiple areas of the office area
have experienced ceiling finish collapse due to bulk water intrusion.
Cost to Remedy $372-975.00 _$497,300.00
4. In the basement, there is unpermitted plumbing piping installed within the mechanical plenum space, prohibited
by Section 602.2.1 of the MN Mechanical Code.
Cost to Remedy $ 1,500.00-$4,000.00
5. Flexible exhaust ventilation ducting in the ceiling space does not comply with Section 603.6 of the MN
Mechanical Code.
Cost to Remedy $ 5,000.00-$8,000.00
6. Drain and waste piping in basement is improperly pitched and is not installed in compliance with the MN
Plumbing Code's Sections 4715.2400, 4715.1430, 4715.0310. (Incorrect slope of piping, incorrect support of
piping, discharge of waste in sump basin).
Cost to Remedy $ 2.500.00-$4,600.00
7. The discharge pipe on the water heater's temperature and pressure relief valve is undersized per MN
Mechanical Code 1006.6.
Cost to Remedy $ 1,850.00-$2,950.00
8. The structure's mechanical system is out of service and in apparent need of service or replacement due to the
length of time is has not been operated or maintained.
Cost to Remedy $4000.00-$45,000.00
9. On the exterior of the building there are multiple electrical receptacles that do not meet the requirements of the
MN Electrical Code for exterior devices. Some portions of the electrical service appear outdated and non-
compliant with the current MN Electrical Code {fuse panels, open boxes, etc.}.
Cost to Remedy $ 11500.00 3,500.00
10. There are some open electrical junction boxes in the ceiling space of the structure. MN Electrical Code.
Cost to Remedy $_1,500-00-$5,500.00
11. The restrooms do not comply with the requirements for clear spaces, grab bars, and accessories of Sections
603 and 604 of the MN Accessibility Code.
Cost to Remedy $10,000.00 er bathroom
12. The concrete floor in the eastern half of the office space has heaved noticeably and results in an irregular
walking surface.
Cost to Remedy $ 15800.00-$25,000.00
13. The stairway leading to the mechanical room does not provide closed riser spaces, a code compliant handrail,
nor a code compliant guardrail per Sections 1009.7.5, 1012, and 1013 of the MN Building Code.
Cost to Remedy $_ _ 5,000.00-$8,000.00
14. The installation of the building's brick veneer does not appear to have provided flashing and weep holes as
required by Section 1405.4 of the MN Building Code.
Cost to Remedy $ 15,000.00-$25,000.00
Estimated cost for a building the same square footage and type: $ 870 275.00 - $994,460.00
(4,973 sf building)
Respectively submitted,
Hasslan Construction Company, Inc.
f
Scott W. Schochenmaler Date
Estimator! Project Manager
General Construction Design/Build Services Construction Management
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Appendix G
Findings Including But/For Qualifications
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF
Plan) for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 is a redevelopment district as defined in
M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10.
The District consists of one parcel, with plans to redevelop the area for commercial/industrial
purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings,
streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and that the sole building on
the parcel, not including outbuildings, is structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial
renovation or clearance.
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeablefuture and that
the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of
tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from
the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the
maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIFPIan.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur
solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported
by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for
redevelopment. Due to the high cost of redevelopment on the parcel currently occupied by a single
substandard building, the incompatible land uses at close proximity, and the cost of financing the
proposed demolition and land purchase, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from
tax increment financing.
The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of
tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the
proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the
maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIFPIan: This finding is justified on the grounds
that the cost of site and public improvements add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, site
and public improvements costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax
increment assistance. This site has been marketed for approximately ten years without success. The
City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site
without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development.
Therefore, the City concludes as follows:
a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will
increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0.
b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be
$1,108,900.
C. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the
district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $724,419.
Appendix G-1
d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the
Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase
greater than $384,481 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax
increment assistance.
3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or
redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The City Council has reviewed the TIF Plan and finds that the TIF Plan conforms to the general
development plan of the City pending approval by the City Planning Commission.
4. Finding that the TIF PIan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the
sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Development
District No. 4 by private enterprise.
The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the
State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and
add a high quality development to the City.
But -For Analysis
Current Market Value 456,100
New Market Value - Estimate 1,565,000
Difference 1,108,900
Present Value of Tax Increment 724,419
Difference 384,481
Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 384,481
Appendix G-2
Council member
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
MCLEOD COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 14530
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4; AND ESTABLISHING
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4-16 THEREIN AND
ADOPTING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota
(the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals
1.01. The City Council of the City of Hutchinson (the "City") has heretofore established
Development District No. 4 and adopted the Development Program therefor. It has been proposed that the
City adopt a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 (the
"Development Program Modification") and establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (the
"District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Development
Program Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Program and Plan"); all
pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 to
469.133 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the
Program and Plan, and presented for the Council's consideration.
1.02. The City has investigated the facts relating to the Program and Plan and has caused the
Program and Plan to be prepared.
1.03. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the
establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Program and Plan, including,
but not limited to, notification of McLeod County and Independent School District No. 423 having taxing
jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written comment on the
Program and Plan by the City Planning Commission, recommendation of the Program and Plan by the
City Economic Development Authority on January 27, 2016, and the holding of a public hearing. Notice
of the public hearing was duly published as required by law in [Name of Publication], on [Date, 20].
1.04. Certain written reports (the "Reports") relating to the Program and Plan and to the
activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to
the Council and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Program and Plan. The Reports,
including the redevelopment qualifications, reports and planning documents, include data, information
and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made in
this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby
incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein.
1.05 The City is not modifying the boundaries of Development District No. 4, but is however,
modifying the Development Program therefor.
Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and ADnroval of the DeVelonment Program Modification
2.01. The Council approves the Development Program Modification, and specifically finds
that: (a) the land within the Project area would not be available for redevelopment without the financial
aid to be sought under this Development Program; (b) the Development Program, as modified, will afford
maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the
Project by private enterprise; and (c) that the Development Program, as modified, conforms to the general
plan for the development of the City as a whole.
Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16
3.01. The Council hereby finds that the District is in the public interest and is a "redevelopment
district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 10 of the Act.
3.02. The Council further finds that (1) the proposed redevelopment would not occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of
the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be
less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after
subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District
permitted by the Tax Increment Financing Plan; (2) that the Program and Plan conform to the general
plan for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and (3) that the Program and Plan will
afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development
or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings
stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing,
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Section 4. Public Puraose
4.01. The adoption of the Program and Plan conforms in all respects to the requirements of the
Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the City which is already built up, to provide
employment opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and
thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in Exhibit A, the City believes these benefits
directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided under the TIF Plan. A private developer will
receive only the assistance needed to make this development financially feasible. As such, any private
benefits received by a developer are incidental and do not outweigh the primary public benefits.
Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Program and Plan
5.01. The Program and Plan, as presented to the Council on this date, including without
limitation the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified,
established, and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Administrator.
5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to
proceed with the implementation of the Program and Plan and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to
this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this
purpose.
5.03 The Auditor of McLeod County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the
District, as described in the Program and Plan, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which
the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the City of Hutchinson is authorized and
directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form and content as the Auditor
may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building permits have been
issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this resolution.
5.04. The City Administrator is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the Program
and Plan with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State
Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subd. 4a.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member
, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Dated: February 23, 2016
Mayor
(Seal)
ATTEST:
City Administrator
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 14530
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan)
for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section
469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S.,
Section 469.174, Subd. 10.
The District consists of one parcel, with plans to redevelop the area for commercial/industrial purposes. At
least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved
or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and that the sole building on the parcel, not including
outbuildings, is structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See
Appendix F of the TIF Plan.)
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the
increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the
proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum
duration of the District permitted by the TIFPlan.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact
that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to the
high cost of redevelopment on the parcel currently occupied by a single substandard building, the
incompatible land uses at close proximity, and the cost of financing the proposed demolition and land
purchase, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing.
The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration
of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the cost of site and
public improvements add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, site and public improvements costs
in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. This site has been
marketed for approximately ten years without success. The City reasonably determines that no other
redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being
provided to the development.
Therefore, the City concludes as follows:
a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will increase without
the use of tax increment financing is $0.
b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $1,108,900 (see Appendix
D and G of the TIF Plan).
c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted
by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $724,419 (see Appendix D and G of the TIF Plan).
d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no
alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $384,481 (the
amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment assistance.
3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or
redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The Planning Commission has reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general
development plan of the City.
4. Finding that the TIFPlan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs
of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Development District No. 4 by private
enterprise.
The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the State of
Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality
development to the City.
Council member
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
MCLEOD COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO. 14531
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF
CERTAIN COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT NO. 4-16.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota
(the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Background.
1.01. The City has heretofore approved the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District
No. 4-16 (the "TIF District") within Development District No. 4 (the "Project"), and has adopted a Tax
Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the
Project.
1.02. The City has determined to pay for certain costs identified in the TIF Plan consisting of
landibuilding acquisition, site improvements/preparation, other qualifying improvements, interest and
administrative costs (collectively, the "Qualified Costs"), which costs may be financed on a temporary
basis from City funds available for such purposes.
1.03. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the City is authorized to advance or
loan money from the City's general fund or any other fund from which such advances may be legally
authorized, in order to finance the Qualified Costs.
1.04. The City intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax increments derived
from the TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to
collectively as the "Interfund Loan").
Section 2. Terms of Interfund Loan.
2.01. The City hereby authorizes the advance of up to $900,000 from the Development District
No. 5 (Shopko District) fund or so much thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs. The City shall
reimburse itself for such advances together with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the
principal amount from the date of each advance. The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged is
limited to the greater of the rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09
as of the date the loan or advance is authorized, unless the written agreement states that the maximum
interest rate will fluctuate as the interest rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or
Section 549.09 are from time to time adjusted. The interest rate shall be 4% and will not fluctuate.
2.02. Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on
each August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on which
the Authority has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined by the City
Administrator, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District.
2.03. Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment,"
which shall mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been paid,
or as determined by the City Administrator, generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the
property within the TIF District and remitted to the City by McLeod County, all in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended. Payments on this Interfund
Loan may be subordinated to any outstanding or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in whole or in
part with Available Tax Increment, and are on parity with any other outstanding or future interfund loans
secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment.
2.04. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre-
payable in whole or in part at any time by the City without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment
shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this
Interfund Loan.
2.05. This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the City in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available
Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund Loan and the interest
hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political
subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the City. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any
political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or
other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor
the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment
of the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto. The City shall have no
obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund Loan or accrued interest thereon, which may
remain unpaid after the final Payment Date.
2.06. The City may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the City
Council, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to the
extent permissible under law.
Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon the date of its approval.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member
, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Dated: February 23, 2016
Mayor
(Seal)
ATTEST:
City Administrator
Hutchinson HRA
i7,�
Downtown Rental Rehab
HRA
HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
111 Hassan Street SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350
(320) 234-4251
Fax (320) 234-4240
NMISR# 396789
www.hutchinsonhra.com
Foreclosure Remediation: School Construction Program
445 Adams Street SE
r
Np aN.ksoN Hk.9
o �•s 44
_ 1
f RA
2015 YEAR END REPORT
Hutchinson Housing &
Redevelopment Authority
The Hutchinson HRA is a public body politic, formed by the Hutchinson City Council in 1969
according to MN State Statue. The HRA was created to address a shortage of housing needs for
low income families and to address substandard areas in Hutchinson. Since then the HRA has
been involved in building and operating Park Towers Apartments with HUD Federal funding and
is a HUD High performer. In the 1990's, the Hutchinson HRA helped to redevelop the parcel
that is now Prince of Peace Retirement Living. Since 1990, HRA has been involved with owner
occupied rehab, rental rehab, the school construction program and affordability gap for new
construction workforce housing. In 2015, the HRA was awarded $364,359 Small Cities
Development Program funds for an approved $771,501 downtown area rental rehab project, and
$234,000 in funds were awarded from Minnesota Housing Publicly Owned Housing Program as
part of the Park Tower's $425,000 elevator project. The HRA also implemented a plan to use
$300,000 of TIF available funds for owner occupied rehab projects in the City of Hutchinson.
Over the past twenty-five years the HRA has obtained over $20M of federal, state or other
outside funding for the housing needs in Hutchinson.
Why does Housing matter?
Housing matters because:
• Decent, affordable housing is shown to stabilize families. For example, studies have
shown that children who have stable housing do better in school
• Housing Programs help improve neighborhoods and maintain property values
• Housing Programs provide economic stimulus for the local economy by providing
work for local contractors and businesses
In 2015, the HRA worked on the following objectives:
1. Continued to maintain strong emphasis on property management, property improvements,
energy conservation, and tenant services at Park Towers.
2. Supported the rehabilitation of housing stock to preserve housing stock and enhance
neighborhoods.
3. Monitored foreclosures, median resales, and other housing data.
4. Completed a demolition/new construction home at 445 Adams Street by partnering with the
school construction program.
5. Completed updating the HRA website.
6. Implemented Portfol, the Community Development Software Program for better housing
loan tracking.
Summary of 2015 Activities:
Park Towers Apartments:
Property improvements and energy conservation remains a priority
1. $97,525 in federal capital program funding and $167,152 in operating
reserves were expended as part of the $425,000 elevator update project.
Completion of both elevators is expected in February, 2016.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 1 of 10 Pages
2
Other Improvements/Repairs: $110,000 was spent from operating reserves for various
improvements as follows: Replaced one apartment
air conditioner, replaced 101 unit locks with
proximity locks and front desk programmer as well
as card readers at entrances, replaced
security/surveillance cameras, replaced fire alarm
panel, commons areas smoke detectors and pull
stations. Replaced unit carpets in eight apartments
when apartments were vacated, replaced the
management office carpet, replaced commons areas
plumbing circulating lines, zone valves, programmable thermostats and dielectric unions.
Property Management
1. Updated/prepared the following: ACOP, 2015 Schedule of Charges and 2016 Park Towers
Annual Plan.
2. Achieved a HUD PHAS High Performer Score of 99 out of 100 on Park Towers operation
and management.
3. Achieved a 99% average occupancy for 2015 and leased sixteen apartments.
4. Inspected all units, community areas and systems and during the unit inspection changed the
toilet flappers and completed any maintenance work necessary to save time in doing the work
order at a later date.
Tenant Services
Continued focus on providing decent, affordable housing as well as facilitating services needed
by the senior and disabled population at Park Towers. A management goal at Park Towers has
been to support programs and partnerships that address the needs of residents.
• Park Towers continued as a Senior Dining Program Site through a lease with Lutheran
Social Services. Meals are prepared at the Evergreen Senior Dining kitchen, then
delivered and served at Park Towers. 5573 meals were served at Park Towers in 2015
through the Senior Dining Program. The full cost of a meal is $7.00 and the suggested
donation is $4.00.
• The Park Tower's 2015 budget included funding for Tenant Services to create a monthly
activities calendar and newsletter.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 2 of 10 Pages
City Center Operations:
Home Ownership
MHFA has the MHFA START UP purchase loan for first time homebuyers and is featured on
the HRA website. These loans have an option to obtain funding for down payment and closing
costs along with a first mortgage. MHFA also offers funding through their STEP UP loans for
current homeowners to purchase a new house or refinance their current house.
Owner Occupied Rehabilitation
In 2015, an available balance of $300,000 in city TIF housing funds was added as a flexible tool
for single family owner occupied housing rehab to continue owner occupied rehab efforts
throughout the city. The City Deferred Grant program and Minnesota Housing Rehab Loan
Program, are "full service" programs that are HRA labor intensive, requiring home inspections,
work write ups, procurement and bidding, loan closing with the owner(s), construction oversight,
disbursal of loan proceeds to the contractor, and reports to the state.
The Minnesota Housing Fix Up Loan Program, Community Fix Up Loan Program, City
Accessibility Deferred Grant and the HRA Home Improvement Loan Program (3% interest with
a monthly payment) requires that the owner submit contractor quotes and that the owner meets
loan underwriting criteria to obtain home improvement loan proceeds. However, HRA
inspection and construction management is not required.
1. City Deferred Grant Program Funding for this program is from SCDP Program Income
(SCDP revolving/program income funds must be expended before any new allocation of
funding can be requested) and from TIF funds. Homeowners receive a 0% deferred loan
with no payments, forgiven after five years. The City Deferred Grant covers 50% of the
repair costs. The HRA closed on four SCDP Program Income rehab loans in 2015.
City Home Improvement Loans $49,648
Other leverage funds $24,585
Total $74,233
Before After
2. City Revolving Local Income Program (CRLI) Funding for this program is from SCDP
Local Income. CRLI provides a 0-2% loan depending on the household income that has
monthly payments. Maximum loan amount is $5,000 with a maximum term of 5 years. One
project used this funding for an owner match to the City Deferred Grant.
HRA Home Improvement Loan Program (HILP) — No loans were closed in 2015. HILP
provides a 3% loan that has monthly payments. Maximum loan amount is $20,000 with a
maximum term of 10 years.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 3 of 10 Pages
4. Minnesota Housing (MHFA) Rehabilitation (RLP) Program — One, $25,152 RLP loan was
closed and completed in the year. The MHFA Rehabilitation Program is a 0% deferred loan
forgiven after fifteen years that stresses safety, livability, and accessibility for families with
very low incomes who own their homes.
Before After
5. Minnesota Housing Finance (MHFA) Fix Up Loan and Community Fix Up Loan
Home Improvement Programs — No loans were closed in 2015.
Five total owner occupied properties were improved in 2015; however multiple loans may
have been needed to fund the rehab project for each property.
Rental Rehab Program
DEED awarded the City of Hutchinson $364,359 for the City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab
Program in June 2015. Unit goals are: 3 single family units, 8 units of duplexes and 24 units of 3+ unit
complexes. One duplex rehab project closed in 2015.
City Rental Rehab Loan/Grant $27,832
Other leverage funds $14,328
Total $42,160
2015 Foreclosure Remediation Initiative:
Demolition of an abandoned, foreclosed, blighted house at 445 Adams Street occurred during the
summer of 2014. New construction began in the fall of 2014 and was completed the summer of
2015, partnering with the School Construction Program. There is a purchase offer on the house
with closing scheduled for early March 2016. The HRA was awarded $47,500 in value gap
funds from Minnesota Housing Impact Fund for the project. The Impact Fund requires rehab or
new construction according to Green Criteria, providing an end product that is more energy
efficient. For example, the HRA first new construction house built according to Green Criteria,
400 Lynn Road, had a HERS rating of 55 which should translate into 45% lower utility bills than
standard construction practices. The 907 Lewis Ave house had a HERS rating of 58. 445
Adams Street has an excellent HERS rating of 47, translating into 53% lower utility bills than
standard construction practices. This program requires a large commitment of staff time to
acquire the properties, rehab or demolish according to EPA guidelines and adhere to the
requirements of the Impact Program.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 4 of 10 Pages
Trends:
1. Rental Housing
Market Rate General Occupancy Rental
The market rate general occupancy rate in the fall of 2015 was 1.85%. A 5.0% vacancy rate
is considered a healthy vacancy rate to allow for turnover and consumer choice. A vacancy
rate of greater than 5.0% indicates a soft demand or mismatch between supply and demand.
Since 1999, the rental vacancy rate has fluctuated from 1.00% to a high of 14.9% in 2009 due
to area layoffs. The Maxfield Housing Study recommends that no additional market rate
general occupancy units be built until 2014 + or until the economy and unemployment rate in
Hutchinson improves. Demand should increase to a level sufficient enough to support the
development without adversely affecting the existing rental market (vacancy rate generally in
the 2.0% range or less).
Market Rate General Occupancy Vacancy Rate
14.90%
15.00%
11.50%
10.31%
10.00% 9. °° 9.00% 8.38%
7.00% 7.54%
4.60% 4.68% 5.30%
5.00% 4. % 4.08%
2.12%
1.89%1.85%
0.00%
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Subsidized General Occupancy Rental
The vacancy rate of subsidized general occupancy projects in the fall of 2015 was 3.65%
Vacancies in subsidized developments should typically fall around 2.0% - 3.0%.
Senior Housing
The 2015 vacancy rate for market rate senior housing except for memory care was 1.64%.
Prince of Peace Retirement Living is in the planning stages for development of market rate
Congregate Housing at their downtown location.
The 2015 vacancy rate for affordable/subsidized senior housing was 0%. Vacancies in
subsidized developments should typically fall around 2.0 -3.0%.
3.65%
4.00% ■ Market Rate General
Occupancy
3.00% °° 1.64/ ° ■ Subsidized General Occupancy
2.00%
1.00% ° ■ Senior Market Rate Rental
Housing
0.00% ■ Senior Subsidized Rental
2015 Vacancy Rates Housing
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 5 of 10 Pages
2. Homeownership
The median sales price rose slightly in 2015, reflecting that a stable housing market.
Foreclosures declined slightly in 2015. Low interest rates and an affordable median sales
price provides opportunities for buyers who have good credit and are mortgage ready. The
current interest (February 2015) rate for a first time homebuyer MHFA Start Up loan for an
RD or FHANA loan is 3.375%.
According to information from McLeod County, in 2015 there were 356 sales in Hutchinson
with a median sales price of $138,750.
According to information from the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, looking at data
for Hutchinson, the 2015 median sales price was $145,000 compared to $142,900 in 2014.
There were 338 sales in 2015 compared to 310 sales in 2014. As of December 2015, there
were 88 homes for sale, compared to 124 homes for sale in December 2014.
The 2015 median family income for McLeod County is $73,900. Based on a household
being able to afford a home priced at 2.5 times their income, not factoring in savings or debt
that they may have, a household would need an income of $58,000 to afford a home priced at
$145,000, the MLS 2015 median sales price of a house.
3. Housing Construction in Hutchinson
According to the City of Hutchinson, PI anning/Zoning/Building Department, there were 20
single family homes built in 2015. There is an adequate supply of 279 residential lots
available compared to 284 lots as of January 1, 2015.
Residential Lots Available
500
400
HOME RESALES
3 8 92 292 317 314 309 284
300
200
224 262
202 314 299 9
100
180
0
199719981999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015
CITY OF HUTCHINS ON
2006 through 2015
Year
2015
2014
2013
2012 2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
P rir e. Ranoe.
N.
Pet.
N. Pet.
N.
Pet.
N.
Pet. N.
Pet.
N.
Pet.
N.
Pet.
N. Pet.
N.
Pet.
N.
Pet.
Under $50 000
$
15
4.2%
18
5.7
5.4
29
10.2
44
15.3 30
12.4
24
11.1
9
27
4.2
12.5
6 2.7
5
1.8
6
1.6
39
11.0%
12.7
62
23 10.2
17
6.1
22
5.8
$75,000 to $99,999
34 10.8
36
21.6 46 19.0 32 14.8 36 16.7
$100,000 to $124,999
58
16.3%
"r-59
18.7
49
17.3
52
18.1
38
17.6
47
21.8
4�0
39
$125,000 to $149,999
68
19.1%
68
21.5
59
20.8
41
14.3 33
13.6
38
17.6
46
21.3
34 15.0
63
22.6
67
17.7
$150,000 to $174,999
6.9%
5
16.1
29
1
16
2
3
20
9.3
5
5
$175,000 to $199,999
27
7.6%
21
6.6
16
5.6
13
4.5 9
3.7
12
5.61
12
5.61
22 9.7
36
12.91
45
11.9
$1,00,000 +
i 3561
100.0%1
100.01 242
100.0
216
100.01
216
100.01
226 100.0279
100.0
379
100.0
Total
3161 100.01
2841
100.01 2871
Median
1 $138,750
1 $133,500
$121,000
1
$101,400 $109,950
$121,600
$117,750
$146,750
$157,900
$158,000
Sources:
Peterson -Paulsen Associates Inc. Realty
Maxfield Research
McLeod Coun Assessor's
Office
The 2015 median family income for McLeod County is $73,900. Based on a household
being able to afford a home priced at 2.5 times their income, not factoring in savings or debt
that they may have, a household would need an income of $58,000 to afford a home priced at
$145,000, the MLS 2015 median sales price of a house.
3. Housing Construction in Hutchinson
According to the City of Hutchinson, PI anning/Zoning/Building Department, there were 20
single family homes built in 2015. There is an adequate supply of 279 residential lots
available compared to 284 lots as of January 1, 2015.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 6 of 10 Pages
Residential Lots Available
500
400
337
3 8 92 292 317 314 309 284
300
200
224 262
202 314 299 9
100
180
0
199719981999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 6 of 10 Pages
Number of New Dwelling Units Construction
100 93
McLeod
81
2001
80
73
43
2003
48
58
60
48
14
2005
56
40
2006
72
32
142
40
2008
159
42
2009
19 23 20
20
2010
200
62
2011
176
12
2012
135
45
2013
93
39
2014
75
0
2015
53
25
2015 Sheriff Sales Cancelled In Hutchinson
7
2016 Sheriff Sales Scheduled to Date In Hutchinson
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
The above charts are based on information from the Department of Planning, Zoning and Building
4. Foreclosure Update
McLeod County and Hutchinson
Foreclosure Counts
200
200 14 159 135 76
3
100 2 77 5 53
0 7�7
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Number of Foreclosures in McLeod County and Hutchinson
■ McLeod County
■ Hutchinson
Year
McLeod
Hutchinson
2001
37
2002
43
2003
48
2004
48
14
2005
56
2006
72
2007
142
40
2008
159
42
2009
135
50
2010
200
62
2011
176
77
2012
135
45
2013
93
39
2014
75
28
2015
53
25
2015 Sheriff Sales Cancelled In Hutchinson
7
2016 Sheriff Sales Scheduled to Date In Hutchinson
6
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 7 of 10 Pages
2016 Predictions from local realtors:
• According to the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, the median sales price for
Hutchinson in December 2015 based on 338 closed sales was $145,000, an increase of 1.5%
from $142,900 in December 2014. Currently, the number of homes for sale inventory is
low and if the inventory remains low, the resale price may continue to rise in 2016. Listings
are down nationwide.
• There were 20 newly constructed homes built in 2015. Many of the new construction homes
in 2015 were patio or twin homes in the $225,000 - $250,000 with 2016 expecting similar
numbers.
• The impact of the buyout of HTI on housing remains unknown, because no one knows if
there will be any changes.
• With rental housing vacancy rates for general occupancy below 2% why are people renting
instead of buying? The decrease in home values during the years 2008 - 2011 is still fresh in
peoples' minds and this is also a national trend. People want the freedom to pick up and go
whenever they want, without worrying about selling a home. However, if the shortage of
rentals cause rents to increase, homeownership may look more attractive in 2016.
Hutchinson HRA Priorities for 2016:
HRA Park Towers:
• Complete the modernization of elevators at Park Towers.
• Develop plans and establish funding to convert a regular unit to a handicapped accessible
unit at Park Towers.
• A new HUD rule called the AFFH (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing) Assessment Tool
for Local Governments has been finalized. During 2016, the HRA will research
implementation of the AFFH Assessment Tool. A new HUD rule for Section 3 will be
finalized in 2016. Develop a Section 3 Policy reflecting the finalized rule.
• A new HUD rule regarding Smoke Free Housing will be finalized in 2016. Determine
whether the existing Smoke Free Policy at Park Towers will need to be updated.
• HUD has published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on strengthening oversight of
over income tenants in Public Housing.
City Center Operations, Downtown Rental Rehab Pro, -ram:
• The Rental Rehab SCDP for the downtown area of Hutchinson began accepting applications
in August 2015. Since then a duplex project is complete and a mixed use project with 2
upper units has applied and is in the process of obtaining bids. An HRA staff person, who
has years of experience working with SCDP programs, is assigned to work primarily with
this program in 2016 and has been in contact with all the owners who submitted Intents to
Participate. Even though numerous applications have been given out, there seem to be a few
changes since the application to DEED was submitted. There are now numerous rental
properties for sale in the project area; these owners are not interested in participating in the
program if they are planning to sell their rental property. Another issue is that the Utility
Allowances have increased substantially decreasing the amount of rent landlords can charge.
The Hutchinson HRA cannot change the utility allowances or this requirement. Finally,
some owners need help financing the 30% owner match for the project. Therefore, the HRA
Board has authorized using $80,000 in SCDP Local and Program Income as an owner match
source with loan terms of 0% principal payments over a five year term.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 8 of 10 Pages
City Center Operations, Owner Occupied Rehab:
• Administer the Minnesota Housing Fix- Up Loan Program.
When RFP becomes available, determine whether to apply for Community Fix -Up Fund as
leverage funds to the City deferred rehab program.
Administer the Minnesota Housing Rehab Loan Program for owner occupied rehab.
Administer the City Deferred Grant Program (TIF available funds) for owner occupied rehab.
City Center Operations, Rental Development:
• With a general occupancy vacancy rate of 1.85%, support the 2016 development of a general
occupancy rental project, recommended by the Maxfield Research Inc. Comprehensive
Housing Market Analysis for Hutchinson.
• Monitor availability of potential funding sources for Housing Development and determine
feasibility of projects if TIF is requested.
City Center Operations:
• Continue to request free radon test kits from the Minnesota Department of Health for
distribution in Hutchinson. Free radon test kits are available at the Hutchinson Planning,
Zoning, & Building front desk. Hutchinson is in a high radon area; radon mitigation is
recommended at radon levels above 4.Opc/L.
Program Changes for 2016:
HRA City Center Operations, School Construction Program:
• After a successful run since 2002, there will be no school construction project in 2016. The
HRA was unable to secure a foreclosed or tax forfeited, blighted property and the High
School will be re -vamping their training program in a new direction. Ten homes were
constructed throughout Hutchinson and 4 homes were rehabbed during the tenure of the
program. Thanks to all the High School construction class students, teachers and
administration for
in this very successful program.
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 9 of 10 Pages
2015 Hutchinson HRA Summary:
Park Towers:
Federal Operating Funds
Federal Capital Funds
Operating Reserves
Operating Reserves
Homeowner Rehab Loans closed
DEED/SCDP
TIF
MHFA:
CFUF
FUF
Unsecured FUL
RLP
SCDP Rental Rehab
Foreclosure Remediation:
Construction financing/Value gap
2015 Federal & State
Funds Administered
$123,302.00
$97,525.00 Elevator Project
Elevator Project
Park Towers Improvements
$0.00 City Home Improvement Loans
Other Leverage funds
$0.0
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$25,152.00
$27,832.00 Other leverage funds
$100,000.00 445 Adams Street
2015 Local Funds
Administered
$167,652.00
$110,000.00
$49,648.00
$24,585.00
$14,328
$72,235
Total 2014 Federal & State Funds Total 2015 Local Funds
Administered $373,811.00 Administered $438,448.00
Total all Funds Administered
Funds Available:
SCDP City Revolving Local Income
SCDP City Revolving Program Income
TIF Available Balance
Housing Fund Loan Balances:
HRA Notes Receivable HHPOP
HRA Notes Receivable Rehab
City SCDP New Construction
City SCDP Rehab
Total Balance of City SCDP Loans
Receivable
2015 Budgets
Park Towers
City Center
Total HRA Budget
$812,259.00
$116,949.73F--
$24,266.48,($20,000
116,949.73$24,266.48($20,000 allocated to Rental Rehab)
$300,000.00
$85,445.56
$5,586.00
$302,450.00
$511,951.71
$814,401.71
$552,013.00
$357,772.00
$909,785.00
G: HRA/Year End Report/2015 HRA Year End Report
2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 10 of 10 Pages
Appendix
A. "TIF: A Flexible Tool for Single Family
Rehab Housing" EHLERS Article
B. City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab
Interest List
C. City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab
Owner Match Scenarios
D. 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
E. Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors
Sales Information
F. City of Hutchinson Vacant Lots — 2016 Map
G. 2015 Hutchinson Foreclosures
H. 2016 Hutchinson Foreclosures
wavw.ehfers-hc.com
EHLERS
LEADERS IN PUBLIC HNRNCE
TIF: A Flexible Tool for Single Family Rehab Housing
By Shelly Elui �u u, Senior Municipal Advisor
Each year, the Hutchinson HRA struggles to
acquire funding for the housing needs in
Hutchinson. Should it prioritize single family
rehab or provide much needed assistance to
improve its affordable rental housing? Fortunately,
this year is different. The HRA can offer deferred
loans for both owner occupied and rental housing
due to a new funding source: tax increment from
an existing housing district.
The City of Hutchinson identified an existing district where the obligations have been paid in
full, leaving a balance of approximately $300,000. State statute allows authorities to use
increment from an existing housing district for affordable housing elsewhere in the City, without
regard to the five year rule or whether the new expenditure is within the original project area.
"The increment gives us the opportunity to keep re -investing in our community," said Jean
Ward, Executive Director of the HRA. "Our Small Cities grant is dedicated to rental housing, so
the TIF allows us to maintain and improve our single family neighborhoods."
The HRA plans to use the increment, in part, to make 0% deferred loans, forgiven after five
years, to fund up to 50% of projects that will address deferred maintenance or accessibility needs
of homes owned by income eligible families. In addition, the HRA may use available increment
to acquire and demolish blighted houses in targeted areas. Because the income limits for tax
increment are higher than other loan and grant programs, the HRA is anticipating using
increment to improve "workforce" housing in the City. The HRA expects to be able to assist in
up to five housing projects a year.
Ehlers assisted the City and HRA by monitoring the TIF Districts and identifying opportunities
to accomplish the community's goals. To kick off the loan program, Ehlers also prepared a TIF
plan modification to adjust the budget and identify the target area as potential sites for property
acquisition.
"The new TIF Loan program fails into a continuum of loan programs we have for different kinds
of property and different income levels. It complements our overall efforts and is easy to
administer because the loans are forgiven after five years," said Andy Reid, Finance Director.
Contact your Ehlers Municipal Advisor to learn more about a debt study for your community.
City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Interest List
Property Address
Owner
Units
Comments
1
815-817 Main Street S
Steve & Beth Gasser
Duplex
2
Under Construction
2
106 Second Avenue SW
Rod Manderscheid
AA
2
Out to bid
3
245 Monroe Street SE
George Schaust
SF
1
working on application
4
345 Jefferson Street SE
Westwind Prop. Man. (Colonial)
Bldg
8
working on application
5
18 Main Street South
Julie Elder
AA
1
working on application
6
6 Main Street N
Mark Dawson
AA
4
Needs a roof
Maybe:
Total Units
18
35 Goal
*
628 Main Street South
Gerald Heintz
Duplex
2
working on application
*
536 Main Street SW
Robert Sandstede & Janet Valen
SF-4plex
4
Withdrawn atter HQS insp.
because of added costs, but
maybe interested in OM
Frog.
*
105 2nd Avenue SW
HH & L Properties - Manther
AA
7
Currently for sae & don't
want to put in any money.
405 Franklin Street SW?
Stix & Brix - Scott
Duplex
2
Looking for a property
3 Main Street N
Stix & Brix - Scott
AA
2
Determining if has a good
226 Franklin Street SW
Stix & Brix - Scott
Duplex
—
2
property program.
Questions
Questions on City Rental
406 Hassan Street SE
Stix & Brix - Scott
Duplex
2
program. Meeting in Feb.
36 Jefferson Street SE
Stix & Brix - Scott
SF
1
2016
841 Main Street S
Stix & Brix - Scott
SF
1
655 Main Street S
Stix & Brix - Scott
SF
1
209 Hassan Street SE
Robert Sandstede & Janet Valen
Duplex
2
Don't need as much rehab
Not eligible(NE) or not interested (NI):
NE
116 Monroe Street SE
Wildflower Properties LLC - Ian McDo
SF
1
Rent over FMR
NI
250 3rd Avenue SE
Turner Properties - Daniel & Linda
Bldg
6
Doesn't want federal
money & not to raise
rents for 5 years
NE
565 Main Street S.
Amy Forcier (owner occupied)
Duplex
1
Over Income
NE
705 Main Street S.
Robert & Jennifer Grimsly
SF
1
Rent over FMR
NE
315 Adams Street SE
Nathanial Baldry
SF
1
Rent over FMR
NE
145 First Ave/46 Jefferson SE
Joshua Schimmel
AA
1
Rent over FMR
NI
415 Jefferson Street SE
Michael & Connie Olson (Alexander)
Bldg
11
B e t t e improvements
were not worth the tax
increase
NE
146 Adams Street SE
Kon & Diane Sorensen
AA
1
Rent over FMR
NE
140 Main Street N.
Quade Investments LLC
AA
2
In flood plain
NE
146 2nd Avenue SE
Roger Bluhm (owner occupied)
Duplex
1
Over Income
NI
126 Washington Ave. SE
George Quast
SF
1
Busy with other projects.
NI
8 Main Street North
Anthony & Katherine Prellwitz
AA
2
Rents?
NI
130 Main Street S.
Brett Oman
AA
6
Doesn't believe that the units
currently need updates
NE
557 Main Street S
Justin Rooney
SF
1
Notice of Foreclosure
NI
28 Main Street N
Tammy Lauer
AA
4
Message left 1/29/16
NI*
14 & 16 Main Street S
Jeff Haag (Kristen Haag)
AA
3
working on application?
Interested: To -be Purchased
3BR
*
31 Main Street N (Janousek Ca
Jason B
AA
1
*
325 Jefferson
Tom Anderson
Bldg
12
Out -side Boundry:
135 Washington Avenue W.
Linda Stacy (owner occupied)
Duplex
2
11 Glen Street NW
Coffee Tree Investments
Bldg
17
*
For Sale
I
I
1
1 26
Units for sale
City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Owner Match Scenarios
Property Address
Owner
# of Units
Owner Match
245 Monroe Street SE
George Schaust
SF
1
$10,714
345 Jefferson Street SE
Westwind Prop. Man. (Colonial)
Bldg
8
$42,857
18 Main Street South
Julie Elder
AA
1
$4,286
6 Main Street N
Mark Dawson
AA
1 4
$17,143
14
$75,000
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
PARCEL
SELLER
BUYER
SALE PRICE
DATE OF SALE
23.112.0090
US BANK
DOSTAL
$6,000
8/27/2015
23.143.0160
ZL ENTERPIRSES
BARTCO RENTALS
$9,020
5/14/2015
23.050.2080
HOLTBERG
KUHLMEY
$9,500
3/11/2015
23.050.5150
MEYERSON
RONNGREN
$25,000
5/04/2015
23.056.0240
SEC OF HOUSING
KNUDSON
$25,550
7/29/2015
23.050.4940
FANNIE MAE
VOLKOV
$26,000
6/23/2015
23.394.0010
BANK OF NEW YORK
SKOOG
$30,000
5/12/2015
23.050.3040
MN HOUSING
SILBERNICK
$32,000
5/01/2015
23.218.0130
STEELE
KOTZER RENTALS
$36,000
1/22/2015
23.143.0370
SEC OF HOUSING
LABRAATEN
$36,500
10/01/2015
23.050.0990
BANK OF NEW YORK
IND SCHOOL DISTRICT
$37,955
8/04/2015
23.050.0920
BAUER
VMAX PROPERTIES
$38,500
4/01/2015
23.050.4160
LAIDEMITT
SCHERPING
$40,000
7/21/2015
23.050.4200
PETERSON
PETERSON
$40,000
4/21/2015
23.162.0060
ROLF
STARK
$46,493
1/30/2015 15
4.2%
23.056.1920
BANK OF NEW YORK
BURR
$50,000
4/07/2015
23.130.0140
PETZEL
WURZBERGER
$50,000
12/04/2015
23.088.0610
SECRETARY OF HOUSI
JARMAN
$50,550
8/24/2015
23.050.3840
FANNIE MAE
STIX & BRIX
$51,115
9/02/2015
23.169.0190
MN HOUSING
POLO
$52,500
5/13/2015
23.312.0070
PREGLER
TRYGG
$53,000
9/03/2015
23.145.0350
BRADY
STARR
$53,505
12/10/2015
23.112.0860
WILSON
FANNIE MAE
$54,000
3/31/2015
23.088.0640
PAUL
PAUL
$55,000
9/02/2015
23.056.1670
JP MORGAN
RECH
$56,175
9/30/2015
23.061.0020
MIELKE
TIFTT
$56,650
7/17/2015
23.099.0060
MN HOUSING
BESTUL
$57,000
2/05/2015
23.084.0030
EKGERG
HW HOLDING
$58,400
1/23/2015
23.112.1160
HOFFMAN
SPRENGER
$58,900
4/14/2015
23.050.2920
WORNSON
GROFF
$60,000
3/31/2015
23.143.0050
TERRELL
HORNICK-TERRELL
$60,000
12/01/2015
23.112.0670
BOOCK
JARMAN
$61,000
5/01/2015
23.154.0290
BANK OF NEW YORK
JACQUES
$64,000
6/17/2015
23.106.0350
BREWSTER
POSUSTA
$65,000
2/17/2015
23.114.0080
RATH
HOUK
$65,000
2/20/2015
23.380.0090
BANK OF NEW YORK
FIRST CLASS BUILDERS
$65,399
11/02/2015
23.056.3830
ACKERMAN
RUHLAND
$72,500
8/19/2015
23.147.0090
ACTIVE ASESSTS
HUSE & LIBOR
$74,000
1/06/2015
23.102.0045
STEPHENS
WARNER
$74,400
12/08/2015
23.145.0690
BAH
NEMITZ
$74,900
7/29/2015
23.407.0010
STEVENS
ELDER
$74,900
2/27/2015 26
7.3%
23.218.0050
FISHER
DORING
$75,000
8/25/2015
23.050.1950
KOLBE
RANNOW
$75,500
4/28/2015
23.310.0070
WOLLER
CONTRERAS
$75,500
1/06/2015
23.231.0140
TOFTELY
BUECHELE
$77,000
6/18/2015
23.112.2010
KUECHLE
BLEVINS
$78,000
10/13/2015
23.112.1980
MAIERS
HEIDECKER
$80,000
9/15/2015
23.248.0070
MCLAIN
NELSON
$81,000
10/29/2015
23.001.0700
FEDERAL HOME MORTC.
RUSSELL
$81,500
8/25/2015
23.149.0270
SEC OF HOUSING
BAYSINGER
$82,100
12/17/2015
23.063.0110
SCHRAMM
DEMENGE
$82,500
12/15/2015
23.056.0360
ALINE
KRIENKE
$83,000
7/22/2015
23.192.0020
CHRISTENSEN
CHRISTENSEN
$83,000
7/31/2015
23.050.5280
GERTKEN
BERRY
$85,000
12/28/2015
23.056.1470
SCHAFFER
SCHAFFER
$85,000
2/04/2015
1 of 7
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
23.231.0330 HOVERSTEN
FRANSEN
$85,600 5/07/2015
23.255.0260 HAMANN
SPRIGLER
$86,000 4/08/2015
23.360.0040 SEC OF HOUSING
SCHILING
$86,000 2/12/2015
23.167.0020 DUESTERHOEFT
BETKER
$87,900 5/12/2015
23.112.1060 LOFGREN
HOPP
$91,382 12/31/2015
23.086.0040 ROFFEY
KAPING
$92,000 5/27/2015
23.124.0140 PRIBYL
MCGINNIS
$92,500 7/06/2015
23.143.0460 ANDERSON
CORDES
$92,700 8/10/2015
23.056.1490 WELLS FARGO
SMITH
$92,900 1/28/2015
23.231.0010 DEMEYER
SCHWARZ
$93,500 2/12/2015
23.050.0050 SEC OF HOUSING
DALBEC
$94,800 9/22/2015
23.050.3890 BENSON
ORTLOFF
$95,000 4/01/2015
23.050.4400 OLSON
SMALLWOOD
$95,000 10/29/2015
23.145.0300 SCHARA
MACKEDANZ
$95,000 12/08/2015
23.118.0060 MCGINNIS
PLAUNT
$95,650 6/10/2015
23.120.0080 WRASPIR
COUBROUGH
$96,000 5/12/2015
23.255.0210 MASSMANN
CRONEN
$96,000 6/30/2015
23.255.0200 SCHUETZ
BLACK
$97,000 3/06/2015
23.167.0330 ASKEW
VALLACHER
$98,500 4/22/2015
23.086.0050 SCHOENFELD
BENJAMIN
$98,900 12/17/2015
23.231.0270 RADTKE
ROEPKE
$98,900 11/18/2015
23.050.5370 SCHMELING
ELLMAN
$99,500 4/29/2015
23.143.0360 DOSTAL
LARSON
$99,500 5/01/2015
23.088.0150 PLATH
TRETTIN
$99,750 10/29/2015
23.423.0650 WALKER
ARNESON
$99,900 2/11/2015 39
11.0%
23.228.0025 NELSON
SUKO
$100,000 3/27/2015
23.050.3040 SILBERNICK
BIPES
$102,000 11/13/2015
23.176.0080 FISCHER
KALENBERG
$102,500 7/06/2015
23.165.0200 KURTH
MULYCK
$105,000 1/13/2015
23.362.0080 PETTIS
MCMANUS
$105,000 3/05/2015
23.167.0340 NOEHRING
BONNIWELL
$106,000 3/03/2015
23.423.0650 ARNESON
BERNARD
$106,000 2/11/2015
23.070.0100 STEPHENS
ARTIBEE
$106,900 5/27/2015
23.389.0120 JOHNSON
HOUK
$106,900 8/11/2015
23.082.0060 BANK OF AMERICA
EXSTED
$107,811 3/30/2015
23.058.0020 THODE
CUMMINGS
$109,000 8/17/2015
23.070.0010 LARSON
BUSCHE
$109,900 7/22/2015
23.146.0030 KEEHR
VANCE
$109,900 9/03/2015
23.255.0160 WAREING
JURVELIN
$109,900 8/04/2015
23.112.1910 MAYNARD
KUESTER
$110,000 8/31/2015
23.423.0300 ADOLPHSEN
BAKKE
$112,000 2/12/2015
23.094.0060 WEIDE
BROESDER
$112,500 1/22/2015
23.269.0080 ANDERSON
ANDERSON
$112,500 4/17/2015
23.056.2850 RECH
CHELIN
$114,000 4/14/2015
23.058.0040 PICHOTTA
UNTERBURGER
$114,900 6/04/2015
23.118.0140 NEPHEW
SMITH
$114,900 9/08/2015
23.050.5380 US BANK
DOLEZAL
$115,000 7/02/2015
23.278.0040 ETTEL
KALENBERG
$115,000 1/30/2015
23.479.0160 HERITAGE INVESTMEN
SCHMIDT
$115,000 6/04/2015
23.176.0080 KALENBERG
BRAND
$115,400 11/23/2015
23.165.0140 MIKRUT
KIRCHOFF
$115,900 1/29/2015
23.255.0240 COOPER
NORTROM
$116,000 8/25/2015
23.336.0930 MATTSFIELD
LARSEN
$116,000 5/22/2015
23.112.1090 RYBERG
JOHNSON
$117,500 9/01/2015
23.154.0570 BROWN
CARLSON
$118,000 9/25/2015
23.167.0270 FRANCO
FINK
$118,000 6/15/2015
2 of 7
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
23.145.0880
ROBBIN
HAGEMAN
$119,000
4/06/2015
23.145.0480
CLOUSE
SCHORNACK
$119,900
4/22/2015
23.154.0180
FISCHER
HARBARTH
$119,900
5/12/2015
23.154.0210
MACKEDANZ
RASMUSSEN
$119,900
9/30/2015
23.115.0010
YOUNG
KOFORD
$120,000
12/28/2015
23.145.0230
LUETH
JUHL
$120,000
1/20/2015
23.154.0500
WEBER
HOECKE
$120,000
7/22/2015
23.167.0300
VACEK
HOPKINS
$120,000
6/03/2015
23.255.0040
PICHA
ANDERSON
$121,000
8/24/2015
23.386.0120
LADE
BEEM
$122,000
7/30/2015
23.086.0030
LICKFELT
NORTON
$122,500
8/25/2015
23.154.0240
CZECH
FOSTER
$122,500
9/04/2015
23.050.3610
BRECHT
PAQUET
$122,750
9/30/2015
23.176.0020
POWELL
SCHWARTZ
$122,750
9/28/2015
23.218.0080
FELIX
MULLERLEILE
$122,900
11/20/2015
23.148.0080
CLARK
ENSTAD
$123,500
6/23/2015
23.063.0040
SMITH
HEMINGSEN
$123,850
5/20/2015
23.118.0040
LEONARD
BLAIR
$123,900
6/12/2015
23.050.2440
ROSTBERG
LARSON
$124,000
4/27/2015
23.150.0070
KOHLS
STEVENS
$124,000
3/13/2015
23.133.0180
SOUTHER
O'NEAL
$124,315
2/20/2015
23.112.1260
STEPHENS
ELFERING
$124,900
5/04/2015
23.112.1580
ROSKAMP
DILLON
$124,900
2/19/2015
23.126.0010
SMITH
PETERMAN
$124,900
8/04/2015
23.423.0550
KOEHLER
NOWAK
$124,900
6/29/2015
23.479.0200
HERITAGE INVESTMEN1
CARRIGAN
$124,900
11/17/2015
23.479.0250
REINER
DEAN
$124,900
5/21/2015 58
16.3%
23.050.1430
WILDFLOWER
STUBER
$125,000
11/10/2015
23.101.0050
HLAVKA
JOHNSON
$125,000
3/27/2015
23.124.0150
PLOWMAN
YERKS
$125,000
10/14/2015
23.139.0240
KRUMRIE
GROFF
$125,000
3/09/2015
23.143.0180
HOUK
SLATER
$125,000
6/10/2015
23.145.0720
BENTON
BERGUM
$125,000
6/03/2015
23.160.0290
GOODWIN
BROLL
$125,000
12/17/2015
23.255.0140
BJUR
GILLETT
$125,000
8/25/2015
23.448.0050
MUELLERLEILE
ANTONSON
$125,000
9/18/2015
23.253.0090
CROW RIVER HABITAT
RENVILLE
$127,000
6/05/2015
23.238.0020
GARCIA
CARNICOM
$129,000
2/24/2015
23.167.0420
KROMMENHOEK
RODEBERG
$129,500
7/22/2015
23.218.0100
SCHREINER
WICHMAN
$129,650
1/22/2015
23.145.0440
SUESS
ELLMAN
$129,900
1/22/2015
23.154.0580
MCKITTRICK
WENDLANDT
$129,900
4/24/2015
23.386.0190
OTTERSTATTER
KROMMENHOEK
$129,900
7/06/2015
23.130.0210
JOHNSON
FARIAS
$130,000
8/21/2015
23.454.0050
NATIONSTAR MORTGAC.
FITZGERALD
$130,000
1/22/2015
23.160.0290
BROLL
SHANDS
$131,000
12/17/2015
23.423.0480
MARQUARDT
MURPHY
$131,000
12/08/2015
23.096.0050
RADEMACHER
MOLITOR
$131,500
5/22/2015
23.392.0070
PETERSON
LICKFELT
$131,500
6/10/2015
23.423.0520
MILLER
MALONE
$132,000
12/22/2015
23.124.0100
KUVAAS
PARKER
$133,900
11/10/2015
23.176.0430
REED
BECKER
$134,000
7/09/2015
23.193.0010
SCHMIDT
MARKWARDT
$134,000
10/23/2015
23.443.0020
RAMIREZ
CZECH
$134,000
7/29/2015
23.154.0160
WINES
IDSO
$134,900
12/15/2015
23.169.0330
WENDLAND
TIMM
$134,900
6/24/2015
3 of 7
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
23.423.0230 YOB
MARSHALL
$134,900 11/03/2015
23.269.0120 FEDERAL HOME LOAN
BESTUL & MCCORMICK
$135,000 7/30/2015
23.296.0030 MERKINS
LANDFAIR
$135,000 9/30/2015
23.344.0050 KRAFT
COX
$135,000 2/26/2015
23.108.0100 THRALL
KRUGERUD
$135,500 1/22/2015
23.296.0030 TURMAN
MERKINS
$135,500 9/29/2015
23.056.1380 NEATON
MCDONALD
$136,000 10/13/2015
23.252.0040 ALBRECHT
MILLER
$137,000 12/03/2015
23.269.0070 KUTTNER
KASTEL
$137,900 5/01/2015
23.116.0030 TEUBERT
RESENDEZ
$138,400 11/02/2015
23.435.0180 SOUTHWEST SALES
MILLIES
$138,500 4/02/2015
23.453.0150 ZIMMER
PLATH
$139,000 9/17/2015
23.269.0060 PLOMBON
PEITROBON
$139,900 2/03/2015
23.423.0580 WILSON
ZEULI
$139,900 6/04/2015
23.088.0730 RONNEI
MARCEAU
$140,000 9/02/2015
23.102.0030 BERGER
LINDELL
$140,000 10/01/2015
23.154.0290 JACQUES
CURWICK
$140,000 11/02/2015
23.186.0090 NORTON
BULTHUIS
$140,000 8/28/2015
23.479.0140 HERITAGE INVESTMEN1
DWINNELL
$140,500 7/06/2015
23.079.0020 RANNOW
CGE PROPERTIES
$141,000 3/05/2015
23.133.0310 LABAT
OLINGER
$141,000 11/24/2015
23.050.4020 TAYLOR
OHARA
$142,000 11/10/2015
23.112.0585 SCHAEFER
DAWKINS
$142,000 3/04/2015
23.162.0030 BEEM
KOEHLER
$142,000 6/29/2015
23.374.0030 HEPOLA
LOFGREN
$142,000 9/23/2015
23.118.0150 HAHN
ORME
$142,400 7/06/2015
23.330.0060 COTE
OSTLUND
$142,900 4/06/2015
23.310.0050 COLLINS
PFANNSMITH
$143,000 6/25/2015
23.196.0130 LUEDTKE
SIFFERATH
$145,000 3/20/2015
23.309.0320 RENVILLE
TRACY
$145,000 6/08/2015
23.154.0470 KASAL
SMITH
$145,900 9/08/2015
23.294.0040 JP MORGAN
KRZMARZICK
$145,950 6/24/2015
23.050.4420 WRIGHT
HOLLATZ
$147,000 5/22/2015
23.426.0040 PIKAL
SCHUETZ
$147,290 3/20/2015
23.174.0040 CHRISTENSON
HALTER
$148,000 1/22/2015
23.124.0060 JOHNSON
AVERY
$149,400 12/08/2015
23.169.0090 ELDER
DRAPER
$149,900 2/19/2015
23.396.0040 SIMMONS
HILSGEN
$149,900 2/24/2015
23.427.0170 MARTIN
SCHREINER
$149,900 1/22/2015 68
19.1%
23.063.0080 WALTRHOUSE
PETERSEN
$150,000 11/24/2015
23.079.0020 CGE PROPERTIES
MASSMANN
$150,000 6/30/2015
23.220.0030 SCHMIDT
TOUTGES
$150,000 7/06/2015
23.240.0070 WENDORFF
BOLLIG
$150,000 7/06/2015
23.244.0170 HEINTZ
KRIPPNER
$150,000 7/07/2015
23.468.0130 WILLERS
CANO
$150,000 4/01/2015
23.414.0220 FRANSEN
STENDER
$150,400 5/07/2015
23.056.1850 PETERSON
BREITKREUTZ
$152,000 7/20/2015
23.106.0320 JOHNSON
SAXTON
$152,000 4/06/2015
23.238.0025 MCRAITH
DAVIS
$153,000 4/22/2015
23.268.0020 EVENSON
NORNES
$153,000 10/13/2015
23.453.0460 MCMANUS
WITTE
$153,000 3/05/2015
23.440.0040 KIECKER
BRIGGS
$153,500 4/06/2015
23.306.0070 LUTHENS
BOCK
$153,900 8/20/2015
23.056.0970 JOECKS
LLAMAS
$154,000 5/08/2015
23.396.0070 VOELKER
KRUMIE
$154,500 9/30/2015
23.435.0150 SOUTHWEST SALES &
FIELD
$154,500 3/02/2015
4 of 7
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
23.435.0150 SOUTHWEST SALES &
VARELAS
$154,500 4/29/2015
23.001.0300 STRATMAN
MALONE
$154,900 7/17/2015
23.101.0080 BLAKE
SOLDNER
$155,000 6/15/2015
23.176.0340 LYMAN
FISCHER
$155,000 7/06/2015
23.294.0040 KRZMARZICK
JONES
$155,000 7/16/2015
23.275.0190 JOHNSON
PLATHE
$155,500 5/12/2015
23.442.0030 BUTLER
JACOBS
$155,500 3/10/2015
23.112.0800 SCHMIDT
RAABE
$156,045 10/23/2015
23.050.3850 LERDAL
MATTHEWS
$156,500 8/12/2015
23.309.0380 BITZER
BERGS
$157,000 7/17/2015
23.352.0060 HERRICK
STACEY
$158,000 7/14/2015
23.224.0020 RIDDLE
LANGENBERG
$158,900 9/02/2015
23.300.0090 ENGFER
CRANDALL
$159,000 9/15/2015
23.435.0170 SOUTHWEST SALES
FAULKNER
$159,000 2/06/2015
23.436.0050 HARTSUIKER
OKESON
$159,400 6/24/2015
23.442.0270 DALBECK
NELSON
$159,900 11/02/2015
23.300.0150 CARRIGAN
HAGEN
$160,400 4/06/2015
23.372.0230 SCHWARZ
NELSON
$161,000 3/19/2015
23.453.0450 SAYRE
BRIESEMEISTER
$161,300 8/04/2015
23.468.0040 AMUNDSON
SORENSEN
$161,682 8/10/2015
23.342.0080 SCHUETTE
ANDERSON
$162,000 11/04/2015
23.442.0140 SCHWEDLER
SMITH
$162,900 8/05/2015
23.414.0090 ALBRECHT
MCCORMICK
$163,000 7/06/2015
23.244.0250 PETERSON
BROWN
$163,900 11/24/2015
23.453.0330 KELTGEN
OLSON
$163,900 10/16/2015
23.112.1750 NIKOLAISEN
CORBIN
$164,600 9/28/2015
23.453.0050 HANNEMAN
MRKVICKA
$164,900 9/15/2015
23.115.0020 HOEFT
BURCHILL
$165,000 6/17/2015
23.137.0010 NELSON
HEINTZ
$165,000 7/02/2015
23.414.0110 JENSEN
HOME SERVICE
$165,000 11/25/2015
23.423.0420 MAIN
SIMMONS
$165,000 2/24/2015
23.427.0020 SCHWARTZ
KURTH
$165,000 1/13/2015
23.192.0090 ZIMMERMAN
WAGNER
$168,900 5/22/2015
23.423.0390 GILK
WILLETT
$169,500 8/17/2015
23.266.0030 BRAUER
WHITE
$169,900 1/06/2015
23.141.0170 ENGFER
OWEN
$170,000 3/05/2015
23.389.0310 FLEMING
ROBINSON
$170,000 3/05/2015
23.423.0390 WILLETT
PIERCE
$170,700 8/17/2015
23.309.0200 WITTMAN
JOHNSON
$172,000 9/17/2015
23.389.0310 ROBINSON
KROEGER
$172,000 7/06/2015
23.244.0180 WIKE
THODE
$173,000 8/19/2015
23.252.0020 SCHLUETER
RICHARDSON
$174,900 8/06/2015
23.394.0010 SKOOG
LENZEN
$174,900 8/12/2015 60
16.9%
23.176.0350 MCCORMICK
OESTREICH
$175,000 12/01/2015
23.351.0040 ANDERSON
CONRAD
$180,000 8/11/2015
23.162.0170 LINGBEEK
GROSS
$180,100 7/30/2015
23.176.0360 LOEFFLER
PETERSON
$181,000 6/04/2015
23.244.0150 LOTRIET
DAUWALTER
$182,500 7/06/2015
23.452.0060 NAUSTDAL
NEUBAUER
$182,990 6/17/2015
23.328.0020 REYNOLDS
KARG
$183,450 8/06/2015
23.118.0020 SOREGAROLI
LINDEKUGEL
$183,800 7/06/2015
23.380.0060 LINDER
NELSON
$185,000 4/01/2015
23.437.0100 KLATT
HANSEN
$185,000 12/31/2015
23.141.0040 PHILLIPS
RANNOW
$185,800 5/22/2015
23.336.0830 EDDY
JOHNSON
$187,000 6/04/2015
23.453.0130 HORN ICK
MICHEL
$187,900 4/06/2015
5 of 7
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
23.112.1030 RATTER
KOHLS
$188,000 8/04/2015
23.056.2870 BURLEY
KING
$189,500 8/11/2015
23.444.0270 ELLINGSON
SCHMIDT
$189,900 10/16/2015
23.382.0110 HARTMAN
ARGO
$191,050 11/19/2015
23.352.0020 MCKIMM
PLOMBON
$191,500 6/02/2015
23.253.0230 CROW RIVER
VEGA
$192,500 9/10/2015
23.444.0230 SCHWINT
TORRES
$194,000 12/03/2015
23.228.0010 STEFFEL
HOME SERVICE
$194,250 12/03/2015
23.230.0120 SUESS
DENEKE
$194,900 7/06/2015
23.413.0080 KUESTER
DENNIN
$195,000 8/10/2015
23.451.0070 JOHNSON
VANHOUTTE
$195,000 11/25/2015
23.270.0070 AUGER
MIELKE
$196,000 1/23/2015
23.336.0810 MUENCH
MCELHINNY
$197,000 7/29/2015
23.428.0340 GEHLEN
ETTEL
$197,500 1/23/2015 27
7.6%
23.220.0050 KLOBE
DIVINE HOUSE
$200,000 12/29/2015
23.296.0020 RUSTAD
BRANDSOY
$200,000 4/09/2015
23.108.0070 CARLSON
JARMAN
$207,500 7/09/2015
23.428.0430 BEACH
SCHUETTE
$209,000 11/04/2015
23.451.0275 BETKER
STIBAL
$209,500 8/11/2015
23.451.0110 WENDOLEK
FORST
$214,000 6/16/2015
23.452.0040 SORENSEN & NAUSTDA
BATEMAN
$214,533 4/22/2015
23.484.0070 BETKER
BUSKE
$215,000 8/20/2015
23.372.0060 MAYLAND
ALLISON
$216,800 9/17/2015
23.472.0210 NAUSTDAL
RUNKE
$217,078 8/24/2015
23.466.0770 NAUSTDAL
SCHRAMM
$219,100 8/10/2015
23.451.0330 BETKER
ZIMMERMAN
$219,900 5/22/2015
23.176.0310 STRAKA
HOLMGREN
$221,000 10/30/2015
23.441.0030 BATEMAN
WOZNEY
$221,900 5/27/2015
23.451.0335 BETKER
UPTON
$222,500 9/08/2015
23.501.0010 WURDELL
TYDLACKA
$223,748 7/06/2015
23.291.0030 STEARNS LENDING LLC
PLOWMAN
$224,000 10/13/2015
23.420.0100 KRUMREY
WESELOH
$224,500 2/03/2015
23.114.0060 HAGEMAN
BEGNAUD
$225,000 7/06/2015
23.364.0050 JOHNSTON
SMITH
$225,000 4/14/2015
23.112.0830 KRAFT
WILSON
$226,000 7/02/2015
23.224.0060 MEYER
FISCHER
$227,000 5/12/2015
23.274.0030 MURPHY
PLOTZ
$227,500 12/08/2015
23.195.0010 YOUNG
KUTTNER
$229,400 6/17/2015
23.468.0170 NAUSTDAL
BOEFF
$230,000 4/16/2015
23.437.0130 PLATH
LOWINSKE
$232,000 12/31/2015
23.387.0030 STEVENSON
PEAVY
$233,000 2/24/2015
23.287.0040 DAGGETT
HOFFMAN
$235,000 10/29/2015
23.501.0020 WURDELL
HEIKES
$235,864 5/01/2015
23.327.0020 SUKO
ELBERT
$236,500 3/27/2015
23.441.0140 CHRISTIANSEN
RIEKE
$239,900 9/30/2015
23.327.0010 DENAULT
HARMS
$240,000 6/11/2015
23.482.0060 COTE
HOLLE
$240,000 6/24/2015
23.274.0080 HANNA
SCHLUETER
$241,000 8/06/2015
23.451.0340 BETKER
ORT
$241,371 11/10/2015
23.365.0030 SZYMANSKI
BURNS
$244,900 8/04/2015
23.327.0060 STROBEL
KUTTER
$245,000 5/22/2015
23.455.0380 METZGER
LADWIG
$245,000 4/06/2015
23.195.0480 STARK
KARG
$249,900 6/24/2015
23.439.0210 NEUBAUER
HARTSUIKER
$250,000 6/17/2015
23.376.0060 RISTAU
ROSTBERG
$252,000 3/13/2015
23.445.0190 RUTKOWSKI
SUESS
$253,500 12/23/2015
6 of 7
2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales
23.223.0120
ALBRECHT
KUVAAS
$253,900
11/10/2015
23.468.0050
SORENSEN & NAUSTDA TRUSTY
$255,250
12/08/2015
23.157.0060
WOODSIDE
HAUTH
$256,000
12/30/2015
23.270.0210
GOLDSMITH
SCHOOLER
$258,900
2/12/2015
23.433.0040
ZIEMER
RYBERG
$259,000
3/06/2015
23.485.0020
BETKER
KADLEC
$262,900
8/17/2015
23.451.0170
LUTHENS
CZECH
$263,000
9/10/2015
23.371.0070
PIEHL
HARTMAN
$264,000
8/04/2015
23.501.0050
WURDELL
BLAZINSKI
$268,077
6/10/2015
23.198.0120
POWELL
HOFF
$275,000
12/03/2015
23.445.0140
HOWELL
SCHAEFER
$275,900
2/24/2015
23.056.2810
HOFFMAN
JOHNSON
$305,000
1/15/2015
23.262.0040
MAHER
SCHWEDLER
$317,500
7/06/2015
23.271.0050
YOST
GOETZ
$317,900
1/23/2015
23.418.0060
KNORR
CHRISTENSEN
$320,000
3/05/2015
23.326.0010
MATTHEWS
MCCORMICK
$325,000
9/08/2015
23.428.0210
COMPTON-ANDERSON
PERRAULT
$352,076
12/08/2015
23.451.0480
BETKER
BROWN
$353,900
2/24/2015
23.267.0010
OJHA
SCHROEDER
$375,000
6/24/2015
23.002.1575
WILSON
ANDERSON
$429,000
8/11/2015
23.428.0190
BERG
SOLIEN
$432,500
8/04/2015 63
17.7%
356
100.0%
Median $138,750
Average $146,611
7 of 7
Jean Ward
Homes for Sale
130
120
UK
100
M
Lward Qci. hutch! n so n. m n. us
— Hutchinson
MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association
-f REALTORS"'
80
1-2413 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016
Each data point is 12 months of activity. Data is from February 11, 2016.
Data from NorthstarMLS. Report provided by MAAR 0. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. Powered by 1 OK Research and Marketing.
Jean Ward
Median Sales Price
$150K
$140K
$130K
$120K
$110K
jward Cmci, hutchinson. mn.us
— Hutchinson
MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association
of REALTORS"
$100K
1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2095
9utchinson
�tG ZGlS
! ys�n o d t�•S �a
Each data point is 12 months of activity. Data is from January B. 2016.
Data from NorthstarMLS. Report provided by MAAR ®. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. Powered by 10K Research and Marketing.
Jean Ward
Average Sales Price
$170K
$160K
$150K
$140K
$130K
$120K
Mard(�Dci.hutchinson. mn. us
Hutchinson
MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association
or REALTORS'
$110K
1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015
Hutchinson
Each data point is 12 months of activity. Data is from January 6, 2416.
Data from NorthstarM LS. Report provided by MAAR S. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. Powered by 10K Research and Marketing.
?► $a Y
f-a.s Zo
r�
Fairw y Es sAd i
♦ ` I
6HEHEB�
mer I
ma
on
� rk Mea Ad
� I Ed
edition
MF�HlLH�L�
HH
�FUN�JJJI W 9
bdivision Ad #AE�
wood Additio
Westrid a resAdd— Ridg Addition
-
MrOgewarer Esta s ition
� ee
mm me
View eig is Addition -
®® ♦.
nwood
Ell
Ravenw dwest dl,*' - ottke ourtAd ition
et Addiii ,
L—� � �-iSouthfork idge Addl n
� U
/1
� Southwind Ad ion %
City of Hutchinson
Vacant Lots -2016
N
- citylimits WE
S
Vac -lots -Jan -2016
<all other values>
New Additions
Vacant Lots - January, 2016
Addition
Zoning
Year
Avaiability
Fairway Estates Add 'tion
R -1 -PD
1999
14 Lots
Park Meadows Addison
R-3
2005
7Lots
Br d ge wate r Estate s Ad or ti o n
R-1
2000
28 Lots
Island Vi ew He' ghts Addition
R -2 -PD
2004
13 Lots
Rave nwoodWest Adcrtion
R-2
2005
7Lots
Su m me rs etAd d't on
R -2,R-3
2005
110 Lots
Southw ndAddition, lst and 2nd
R-2
2003
10 Lots
SouthforkAdd't on
R -3 -PD
2004
49 Lots
KottkeC rtR oatto RverPonte%r as
R -2 -PD
2008
10 Lots
Westroge Shores Adcrtion
R-1
1995
1Lots
Santel Addition
R -3 -PD
1993
9Lots
StearnwoodAddition
R-1
2004
5Lots
Ravenwood
R-3
1999
2Lots
Hunte Rdg Addition
R-2
2004
1Lots
F—e r SudivisionAddition
R-2
2005
1Lots
Exce I si or Add't on
R-2
2007
5Lots
He l lands Sixth Additi on
R-2
1984
4Lots
Other Misc
R-2
unknown
3Lots
Totall
279 Lots
Disclaimer
The end user of this information agrees that these data and map sets have been
created from information provided by various government and private sources at
different moments in time and at various levels of accuracy. They are only a
graphic representation and should not be considered as positionally accurate.
The data is provided "as is' with no claim made as to its accuracy or its
appropriateness to its intended use of the data. It is the responsibility of the end
user to be aware of the data's limitations and to utilize the data in an appropriate
manner and the end user agrees to hold The City of Hutchinson harmless for
claims arising out of this exchange of information. Therefore under no
circumstances shall the City of Hutchinson be held responsible for any costs,
expenses, damages or injuries, including special or incidental or consequential
damages to any person(s) or property that arises from the use, or misuse of the
information provided.
2015 Hutchinson Foreclosures
2015
#
SS Date
Address
Mortgagor
Mortgagee
Orig. Mortgage
Claimed Amount
Sold Amt
1
1/6/2015
1125 13th Avenue NW
Douglas Woelfel
Stearns Lending Inc.
$175,920.00
$180,726.21
$192,160.57
2
1/6/2015
756 Ivy Lane SE
Lucas & Amanda Gustafson
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$119,800.00
$128,146.07
$84,550.00
3
1/6/2015
580 Peterson Circle NE
Jolene Ellsworth
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
$240,000.00
$101,230.11
$73,000.00
4
1/7/2015
446 Erie Street SE
Stephan Voelkel
US Bank National Association
$101,500.00
$118,920.23
$121,477.46
5
1/14/2015
542 Adams Street SE
Waltraud Heldt
JP Morgan Chase Bank
$75,162.00
$87,644.86
$87,950.78
6
1/21/2015
902 Hassan Street SE
Jean & Harold Ostrom
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$155,500.00
$170,194.81
$173,955.94
7
2/5/2015
1000 Goebel Street SW
Mark & Clarissa Thompson
CitiMortgage Inc.
$159,493.00
$151,532.25
$83,600.00
8
2/5/2015
567 Lynn Road SW
Darell Lange
Security Bank & Trust Co.
$10,000.00
$6,179.11
$7,853.41
9
3/11/2015
938 7th Avenue NW
Cheryl & Nassor Salim
Federal National Mrtg Assoc.
$124,000.00
$118,976.00
$120,179.81
10
3/11/2015
820 Spruce Street NE
David & Cindy Wimmer
Bank of America
$126,529.00
$133,799.00
$96,000.00
11
3/19/2015
700 California St. NW
Francisca Mendoza
MHFA
$94,000.00
$101,374.63
$84,150.00
12
4/8/2015
535 4th Avenue SW
Gary Dullinger
JP Morgan Chase Bank
$107,500.00
$104,284.29
$52,720.00
13
4/8/2015
425 Hassan Street SE
Holly Newman
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$59,473.00
$54,055.88
$54,000.00
14
5/6/2015
966 Lewis Avenue SW
Bradley & Kim Horstmann
Federal National Mrtg Assoc.
$103,000.00
$121,116.87
$82,800.00
15
6/18/2015
426 Huron Street SE
Randall & Edith Carlson
US Bank Trust National Associ
$201,003.04
$227,792.77
$85,484.59
16
7/30/2015
317 Stoney Point Rd SW
Thomas & Yvette Fischer
Home State Bank
$127,250.00
$132,995.33
$136,919.43
17
8/12/2015
643 5th Avenue SW
Charles Gilbertson
Bank of America
$138,380.00
$126,908.83
$90,250.00
18
8/27/2015
1055 Jorgenson St. SE
Gary Gustafson
Freedom Mortgage Corp.
$149,598.00
$151,998.88
$119,070.00
19
9/3/2015
17 5th Avenue NW
Jennifer & Gordon Evenson
Green Tree Servicing LLC
$140,000.00
$151,646.19
$102,600.00
20
9/10/2015
1058 Jefferson St. SE
Cheryl & Tom Moore
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$92,700.00
$91,973.98
$72,000.00
21
9/23/2015
982 Jefferson Street SE
Curtis & Tressa Hughes
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$90,000.00
$72,842.72
$75,719.10
22
10/22/2015
110 Oakland Avenue SE
Benita & Larry Quast
US Bank National Association
$150,300.00
$193,818.44
$200,256.05
23
10/28/2015
705 Dale Street SW
Vincent Haag
US Bank National Association
$142,373.00
$142,129.25
$138,700.00
24
11/5/2015
617 Bluff Street NE
Jon & Riana Mross
MHFA
$126,000.00
$147,632.81
$154,613.83
25
11/12/2015
7 - 9th Avenue NE
Andrew Bonderman
US Bank National Association
$111,700.00
$119,074.28
$93,500.00
Cancelled:
1
1/20/2015
825 Ivy Lane SE
Anthony Forcier
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$79,150.00
$80,316.54
2
7/15/2015
338 4th Avenue SW
Carola Laidemitt
PNC Bank, NA
$82,400.00
$68,375.19
3
9/10/2015
614 3rd Avenue SW
Dennis & Barbara Wedge
US Bank National Association
$154,000.00
$209,248.77
4
9/16/2015
1027 Prairie View Dr. SW
Shalee Miller
MHFA
$69,690.00
$54,636.40
5
10/20/2015
38 McLeod Avenue NE
Christohper, Denise &Joyce Schramm
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$143,350.00
$186,835.24
6
12/16/2015
1263 Denver Avenue SE
Luana Issendorf
Green Tree Servicing LLC
$214,000.00
$218,423.28
7
12/16/2015
585 Juul Road SW
Thomas & Rebecca Hudson
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$76,587.00
$74,501.95
2016 Hutchinson Foreclosures
2016
#
SS Date
Address
Mortgagor
Mortgagee
Orig. Mortgage
Claimed Amouni
Sold Amt
1
1/19/2016
45 Northwoods Ave. NE
Kent & Renee Glessing
Nationstar Mortgage LLC
$153,980.00
$146,714.50
2
1/20/2016
1020 West Shore Dr. SW
David & Betty Croghan
JP Morgan Chase Bank
$204,676.00
$219,363.17
3
1/27/2016
585 Glen Street SW
Jason & Elizabeth Slepica
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$130,159.00
$126,160.57
4
2/10/2016
305 Adams Street SE
David Whiting
E*Trade
$82,600.00
$60,296.12
5
3/2/2016
924 Keith Street SW
Gloria Rueckert
Wells Fargo Bank, NA
$145,166.00
$137,605.13
6
3/8/2016
545 Hassan Street SE
Brittany Eckstein
US Bank National Association
$87,720.00
$84,802.05
Cancelled
1/26/2016
557 Main Street S.
Justin Rooney
CitiMortgage Inc.
$128,150.00
$113,944.62
2/11/2016
615 Merrill Street SW
Darlene & Chris Johnson
JP Morgan Chase Bank
$135,950.00
$142,718.50
Cancelled multi times
HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
2015 Year End by the Numbers
General Occupancy Vacancy Rate
16.00%
14.00% 11.50%
12.00%
10.00% -4
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
Market Rate General Occupancy Vacancy Rate
7.00%
14.90%
10.31%
9.00% 9.00% 8.38%
7.54%
4.60% 4.68% °
4.07% 4.08%
2.12% 1.89% 1.85
0.00% -k-,- "
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
4.00%
3.50%
3.00%
2.50%
2.00%
1.50%
1.00%
0.50%
0.00%
2015 Vacancy Rates
2015 Vacancy Rates
Market Rate General Occupancy
Subsidized General Occupancy
■ Senior Market Rate Rental Housing
■ Senior Subsidized Rental Housing
2015 Home Resales
HOME RESALES
CITY
OF HUTCHINS ON
2006 throw h 2015
Year
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
Price Range
XL
LLL
XL
LLL
LLL
XL
P.. L
XL
Pry
XL I
aL
XL 1
P. - L
X[L
P..e L
XL
LLL
XL
Lu -
XL
29
10.2
44
Under $50,000
15
4.2%
18
5.7
15.3
30
12.4
24
11
9
4.2
6
2.7
5
1.8
6
1.6
$50,000
26
7.3%
17
5.4
11.5
31
12.8
12.5
11
4.9
2.6
$75,000 to $99,999
39
11.0%
34
10.8
36
12.7
62
21.6
46
19.0
32
14.8
36
16.7
23
10.2
17
6.1
22
5.8
$100,000 to $124,999
58
16.3%
59
18.7
� 49
17.3
52
18.1
48
19.8
38
17.6
47
21.8
43
19.0
39
14.0
56qr
14.8
$125,000 to $149,999
68
19.1%
68
21.5
59
20.8
41
14.3
33
13.6
38
17.6
46
21.3
34
15.0
63
22.6
67
17.7
$150,000 to $174,999
60
16.9%
51
16.1
29
10.2
16
5.6
22
9.1
23
10.6
20
9.3
51
22.6
59
21
88
23.2
$175,000 to $199,999
27
7.6%
21
6.6
16
5.6
13
4.5
9
3.7
12
5.6
12
5.6
22
9.7
36
12.9
45
11.9
$200,000+
63
17.7%
48
15.2
31
10.9
26
9.1
23
9.5
33
15.3
19
8.8
36
15.9
54
19.4
85
22.4
Total
3561
100.0%
3161
100.0
284
100.0
287
100.0
242
100.0
216
100.0
216
100.0
226
100.0
279
100.0
379
100.0
Median
$138,750
$133,500
$121,000
$101,400
5109,950
$121,600
$117,750
$146,750
$157,900
$158,000
Sources:
Peterson -Paulsen Associates Inc. Realty
Maxfield Research Inc.
McLeod County Assessor's Office
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Residential Lots Available
09 299
284
279
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Number of New Dwelling Units
Construction
32
19
4
7
4
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
23
20
i
tt
2012 2013 2014 2015
200
150
100
50
0
2007 2008 2009 2010
Foreclosures
McLeod County and Hutchinson
Foreclosure Counts
176
2011
135
93
77 75
53
mows qqq"'O
45 39 ��25
28
::�;7
2012 2013 2014 2015
■ McLeod County
■ Hutchinson
2016 Priorities
HRA Park Towers:
• Complete the modernization of elevators at Park Towers.
• Develop plans and establish funding to convert a regular unit to a handicapped
accessible unit at Park Towers.
City Center Operations, Downtown Rental Rehab Program:
• The HRA Board has recently authorized using $80,000 in SCDP Local and ProgramA-
Income as an owner match source with loan terms of 0% principal payments over
a five year term. We encourage landlords in the downtown area to apply now for p
spring construction.
City Center Operations, Owner Occupied Rehab:
• Administer the Minnesota Housing Rehab Loan Program for owner occupied rehab..,, a
• Administer the City Deferred Grant Program (TIF available funds) for owner occupied
rehab.
City Center Operations, Rental Development:
• Monitor availability of potential funding sources for Housing Development and
determine feasibility of projects if TIF is requested
City Center Operations:
• Continue to request free radon test kits from the Minnesota Department of Health for
distribution in Hutchinson. Free radon test kits are available at the Hutchinson
Planning, Zoning, & Building front desk. Hutchinson is in a high radon area; radon N
a
mitigation is recommended at radon levels above 4.Opc/L.
Program Changes for 2016
HRA City Center Operations, School Construction
Program:
• After a successful run since 20021 there will be no
school construction project in 2016.
• The HRA was unable to secure a
forfeited, blighted property
will betaking their training
direction.
and
foreclosed or tax
the High School
program in a new
• Ten homes were constructed and 4 homes were
rehabbed throughout Hutchinson during the
tenure of the program.
• Thanks to all the High School construction class
students, teachers and administration for
partnering in this very successful program.
School Year 2002-2003 School Year 2003-2004 School Year 2004-2005 School Year 2005-2006 School Year 2006-2007
966 Carolina PKWY NW 626 Harmony Lane SW 425 Maryland St. NW 1160 Prairie View Dr. SW 1150 Prairie View Dr. SW
School Year 2007-2008 School Year 2008-2009 School Year 2009-2010 School Year 2010-2011 School Year 2010-2011
1170 Prairie View Dr. SW 1863 Island View Circle SW 1116 Lewis Avenue SW 755 Milwaukee Ave. SW 925 Stevens Street SW
School Year 2011-2012 School Year 2012-2013 School Year 2013-2014 School Year 2014-2015
400 Lynn Road SW 734 Southview Dr. SW 907 Lewis Avenue SW 445 Adams Street SE
2016 Trends
According to local realtors:
• The median sales price according to the Minneapolis Association of Realtors
for Hutchinson in December 2015 based on 338 closed sales was $145,000,
an increase of 1.5% from $142,900 in December 2014. Current listing
inventory is low and if the number of listings remains low, the resale price
may continue to rise in 2016. Listings are down nationwide.
• There were 20 newly constructed homes built in 2015. Many of the new
construction homes in 2015 were patio or twin homes in the $225,000 -
$250,000 with 2016 expecting similar numbers.
• The impact of the buyout of HTI on housing remains unknown, because no
one knows if there will be any changes.
• With rental housing vacancy rates for general occupancy below 2% why are
people renting instead of buying? The decrease in home values during the
years 2008 — 2011 is still fresh in peoples' minds and this is also a national
trend. People want the freedom to pick up and go whenever they want,
without worrying about selling a home. However, if rents increase because
of the shortage of rentals, homeownership will look attractive in 2016.
PLANNING/ZONING/BUILDING
DEPARTMENT
2015 ANNUAL REPORT
Table of Contents
Page Number
BUILDING DEPARTMENT................................................................................. 3
A.
Overview of Building Department........................................................... 3
B.
Number of Building Permits Issued........................................................ 4
C.
Construction Valuation........................................................................ 4
D.
Inspections....................................................................................... 5
E.
New Dwelling Unit Construction............................................................ 5
F.
Computerization and Technology........................................................... 6
G.
Evergreen Senior Dining...................................................................... 6
H.
Nuisances, Complaints, and Housing Standards Enforcement ........................ 7
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT............................................................ 7
A. Overview.......................................................................................... 7
B. Planning Applications......................................................................... 8
C. Miscellaneous Meetings.........................................................................8
D. Site Plan Review.................................................................................9
E. Joint Planning Board...........................................................................9
F. Annexation.......................................................................................9
G. Technology........................................................................................9
H. Building Permit Review....................................................................... 9
I. Number of Zoning Reviews................................................................... 9
J. Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Amendment ....................................... 10
ADDENDA
Count of Building/Plumbing/Mechanical Permits............................................11
Yearly Permit and Valuation Totals............................................................
12
New Residential Construction....................................................................
13
2015 Construction Activity........................................................................14
PopulationGrowth..................................................................................
15
2015 New Housing Starts.........................................................................
16
Residential Lots Available as of January 1, 2016 ............................................
17
InspectionCounts..................................................................................
18
Building Permit Summary for the Year of 2015 ............................................
19
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 2
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
A. Overview of Building Department - MN Rule 1300.0030 states that the purpose of the MN State
Building Code is to establish minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and
general welfare, through structural strength, means or egress facilities, stability, sanitation,
adequate light and ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire and
other hazards attributed to the built environment and to provide safety to firefighters and
emergency responders during emergency operations.
The code applies to the design, construction, addition, alteration, moving, replacement, demolition,
repair, equipment, installation, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, and inspection of any
building, structure, or building service equipment in a municipality.
The code includes among other provisions: The MN Building Code, the MN Residential Code, the
MN Conservation Code for Existing Buildings, the MN Floodproofing Regulations, the MN
Accessibility Code, the Prefabricated Structures Code, the Industrialized/Modular Buildings Code,
the MN Plumbing Code, the MN Commercial Energy Code, and the MN Residential Energy Code.
The purpose and scope of the MN State Building Code clearly convey the complexity and
significance of building code administration. The practical administration of the code includes
education, communication, plan review, correspondence, permit administration, field inspection,
and enforcement to ensure the purpose of the code is accomplished throughout the breadth of its
scope.
Building Department Staffing
In 2015, the Building Department has experienced multiple changes. In March of 2015, the Permit
Technician position was modified from a 0.5 fte position to a full-time position. This change was
necessary due to repeated increases in the workload of the Building Department over the previous
two years.
The Department continued to be served by both the Designated Building Official and the Planning
and Building Specialist, as it had been in 2014. However, in October of 2015, Designated Building
Official Lenny Rutledge resigned his position after approximately 16 years of service to the City of
Hutchinson. Planning and Building Specialist Kyle Dimler has been designated as the City's
Building Official during the interim period while a permanent Designated Building Official is
sought by the City.
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 3
B. Number of Building Permits Issued — A total of 866 building permits were issued in 2015,
compared to 779 in 2014. This is an 11% increase from 2014. In addition, 245 plumbing and
mechanical permits were issued by the City in 2015 for new construction, alterations, additions,
and repairs to both residential and commercial structures.
Number of Permits
Issued 2005 Through 2015
1000 - 915 92i 925 905 946
858 833 879 866
788 779
800
600
400
200
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
C. Construction Valuation — 2015 provided approximately $ 14.9 million in construction valuation,
which is an increase over the $14.2 million from 2014. The construction activity report, included
in this report's addenda, provides details on some of the largest valuation based permits issued in
2015. Construction value over the last six years has been as follows: 2015 - $14.9 million, 2014 -
$14.2 million, 2013 - $15 million, 2012 - $7.85 million, 2011 - $8.68 million, 2010 - $26.77
million, and 2009 - $19.23 million. The valuation of construction projects in the past 3 years
indicates a more moderate and sustainable level of construction in contrast to the volume
experienced between 2000 and 2007.
CONSTRUCTION VALUATION
MILLION $ VALUATION
2005-2015
50
40
30
20
10
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 4
D. Inspections — A total of 1,841 inspections were completed by Building Department staff in 2015.
The inspection totals for the previous five years are as follows: 1,958 in 2014, 1,698 in 2013,
1,508 in 2012, 1,381 in 2011, and 1,707 in 2010. Throughout the year, the overall monthly
average of inspections is 153, or approximately 38 per week. During the typically busiest
construction season of May through October, the average number of monthly inspections is 179.
2005 — 2015 Total Building Inspections
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
E. New Dwelling Unit Construction - In 2015, a total of 20 single family dwelling units were
constructed within the City of Hutchinson. In 2014, a total of 23 single family dwelling units were
constructed. As noted in Section C above, the construction industry in general in this area appears
to have returned to a more moderate and sustainable level of growth and activity after a very rapid
rate of growth and then decline experienced over the period of approximately 2000 - 2008.
80 73
70
60 58
50
40 32
30
19 23 20
20 12
10
4 7 4 5
0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 5
Staff has researched recent trends of new residential construction in this region by surveying other
communities in the area with populations similar to Hutchinson in an effort to attempt to verify if
the level of new residential construction activity in Hutchinson is common to the surrounding
regions. The majority of similarly sized communities in this region indicate construction trends
similar to what Hutchinson has experienced in recent years. As may be expected, communities that
are metropolitan suburbs or regional hubs have experienced higher total volumes of construction.
However, the overall trend of construction activity in the surveyed region is very similar between
communities.
160
140
120
100
80 ■ 2012
60 ■ 2013
■ 2014
40
■ 2015
20 IL
0
No a�\��O atr,�0 \\o � 'o \,6 \a \\�a� ¢, o�'
�o�
F. Computerization and Technology — A very significant change was made to the Hutchinson
Building Department's computerized permitting and record management system in 2015. The
City has transitioned from the Permit and Inspection Management System (PIMS), provided by
LOGIS, to a new system offered by BS&A.
The new permitting system has facilitated more efficient use of the inspectors' time by eliminating
the need for duplicative data entry. The BS&A system has also provided the opportunity for staff
to use tablet computers while performing field inspections, which provides the inspectors access
to digital versions of the building code while they are on project sites. These new capabilities
allow staff members to more fully serve the public and contractors while they are out of the office
setting.
G. Evergreen Senior Dining — Department staff provide maintenance and janitorial services for the
Evergreen dining area. Staff also administers the reservations of available rental space for private
gatherings on site. The senior dining facility prepared approximately 37,305 meals in 2015, 37% of
which were for Hutchinson area residents. The remaining meals are delivered to the cities of
Silver Lake, Glencoe, Brownton, and Stewart. The number of meals prepared in 2015 was an
increase of approximately 37% over 2014 (37,167 meals prepared in 2014).
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 6
Total Meals Prepared at Evergreen Senior Dining Facility in 2014
In 2015 the Dining Room was again available for rent; however it was only rented out 3 times.
H. Nuisances, Complaints, and Housing Standards Enforcement — The Building Department
continues to regularly process nuisance and complaint calls which are often redirected, based upon
the nature of the complaint, to the appropriate City department. Department staff has also worked
closely with the Hutchinson Police Department's Nuisance Code Enforcement Officer in 2015 to
address multiple buildings that have been cited as hazardous structures.
In 2015, Planning and Building Specialist Kyle Dimler became involved with a group of McLeod
County Public Health Nuisance providers. The focus of this group is to facilitate a more uniform
approach to serve residents, throughout the county, who are directly affected by nuisance or
hazardous living conditions. This group also works to efficiently direct residents to case specific
social services that are available.
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
A. Overview — Planning and Zoning Department staff provide a variety of customer services,
coordination, and review services, including processing and reviewing of land use applications.
The Department provides long range planning services and reviews land use plans for
consistency with city plans. Demographic information, as well as projections about population
growth are monitored and planned for by this department. The Department also drafts policies
and revises ordinances to implement the goals of the City regarding growth management and
development practices. The Department works closely with the Engineering, Housing and
Redevelopment, and Economic Development Departments.
Zoning is the regulation of property to ensure general health, safety, and welfare standards for
the community. The Zoning Department assists residents and applicants with zoning requests,
development requests and flood plain information. Staff coordinates efforts to communicate
with the property owner or developer by arranging pre -development meetings "up -front' to get
questions answered at the beginning of the project. Department staff issues applications for
Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Rezoning, Annexations, Lot Splits, Platting, and Sign
permits.
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 7
Meals in 2012
Percent of Total
Hutchinson
13,990
37
Park Towers Residents
6174
16
Glencoe
8,083
21
Stewart
3,884
10
Silver Lake
2,644
9
Brownton
2,530
7
Total
37,305
100
In 2015 the Dining Room was again available for rent; however it was only rented out 3 times.
H. Nuisances, Complaints, and Housing Standards Enforcement — The Building Department
continues to regularly process nuisance and complaint calls which are often redirected, based upon
the nature of the complaint, to the appropriate City department. Department staff has also worked
closely with the Hutchinson Police Department's Nuisance Code Enforcement Officer in 2015 to
address multiple buildings that have been cited as hazardous structures.
In 2015, Planning and Building Specialist Kyle Dimler became involved with a group of McLeod
County Public Health Nuisance providers. The focus of this group is to facilitate a more uniform
approach to serve residents, throughout the county, who are directly affected by nuisance or
hazardous living conditions. This group also works to efficiently direct residents to case specific
social services that are available.
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
A. Overview — Planning and Zoning Department staff provide a variety of customer services,
coordination, and review services, including processing and reviewing of land use applications.
The Department provides long range planning services and reviews land use plans for
consistency with city plans. Demographic information, as well as projections about population
growth are monitored and planned for by this department. The Department also drafts policies
and revises ordinances to implement the goals of the City regarding growth management and
development practices. The Department works closely with the Engineering, Housing and
Redevelopment, and Economic Development Departments.
Zoning is the regulation of property to ensure general health, safety, and welfare standards for
the community. The Zoning Department assists residents and applicants with zoning requests,
development requests and flood plain information. Staff coordinates efforts to communicate
with the property owner or developer by arranging pre -development meetings "up -front' to get
questions answered at the beginning of the project. Department staff issues applications for
Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Rezoning, Annexations, Lot Splits, Platting, and Sign
permits.
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 7
In 2015, City Staff worked to develop a Wayfinding and Signage Master Plan for Downtown
Hutchinson and the Luce Line Trail. Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. of Minneapolis assisted
with the development of the Plan. In 2016, plans and specifications are being developed and if
everything goes well the wayfinding signs should be in place by the fall of 2016.
B. Planning Applications - In 2015, 14 planning applications were received, which was down
from last year. There is typically a strong relationship between the amount of planning
applications and the amount of building activity that takes place in a given year, however that
wasn't the case in 2015. In 2014, 32 applications were reviewed; in 2013, 22 applications were
reviewed, in 2012, 31 applications were reviewed, in 2011, 17 applications were reviewed; 45
applications in 2010; 45 application in 2009; 52 applications in 2008; 81 applications in 2007;
63 applications in 2006; 69 applications in 2005; 82 applications in 2004 and 56 applications in
2003. Of the 12 applications in 2015, 8 requests were for conditional use permits, 2 for site plan
review, 1 variance, and 1 vacation of easements. Additionally there was 1 zoning ordinance
amendment; 2 site plan reviews, and 1 resolution approval. A bar chart comparing the number
of applications since 2005 follows.
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
TOTAL ANNUAL PLANNING APPLICATIONS
2005-2012
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
C. Miscellaneous Meetings - There were approximately 257 miscellaneous meetings attended by
staff during 2015. There are a number of groups and committees that meet monthly and
weekly along with other miscellaneous meetings with City and County individuals. The
Planning Department did review plans for several commercial remodeling projects and other
miscellaneous projects. There were approximately 26 predevelopment/pre-application meetings
with property owners, developers, etc. by planning staff members. There were 61+ site visits
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 8
with violations. Also, staff cited 30+ zoning enforcement cases which included site visits
and/or letters.
D. Annexations — There were no annexations in 2015.
E. Technology — The Department continues to update web site information with current
information, maps and new ordinances. The web site information has been an excellent source
of data to communicate with customers that are able to access pertinent planning data to make
decisions about property. In 2015 the Planning and Building Department upgraded to a new
software system called BS&A which is a much more comprehensive system for planning and
building record management.
F. Building Permit Review — The Planning Department reviews building permits for new
structures and additions received by the building department for compliance with zoning
ordinance requirements and development approvals. In 2015, the lot coverage for properties in
the shoreland area and airport zone continued to be monitored closely. Staff reviewed
approximately 22 building and land use permits and 63 sign and banner permits for zoning
compliance.
G. Number of Zoning Reviews for Building Permits — The Planning Department reviewed 85
building permits for compliance with the zoning codes in 2015.
H. Number of Zoning Reviews for Land Use Permits — There were 137 zoning reviews of land
use permits which are permits such as fences, small utility sheds, driveways, patios, pavers,
detached decks, etc.
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 9
ADDENDA
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
COUNT OF BUILDINGIPLUMBING/MECHANICAL PERMITS
ISSUED AND VALUATION
Total Number Inspections
1850
Building Permits Issued by Type
Year to Date
Number Permits
& Valuation
Commercial new
2 - $1,757,000
Commercial Additions/ Remodels
86 - $6,993,599
Industrial new
0_$0
Industrial Additions/Remodels
0_$0
Fire Sprinkling
8-$163,930
Total New Residential Units (Single Family, twins, townhomes)
20 - $3,623,304
Residential misc. additions, repairs, remodels, etc
126 - $799,831
Set fee permits (reside, reroof, window replacement, misc.)*
548
HRA Building Permits
7-$67,980
Waived Fees started in March
5-$284,200
Subtotal Building Permits:
$13,689,844
Mechanical
164 - $1,247,905.52
HRA Mechanical
2
Plumbing*
78
Signs*
62-$100
Total Permits issued and valuation
1109 - $14,938,121.52
*Set fees not included in valuation
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 10
Yearly Permit and Valuation Totals
YEAR
TOTAL NO. OF PERMITS
TOTAL VALUATION
2015
Building
865
$13,690,216
Mechanical
166
$ 1,247,905
Plumbing
78
$
$14,938,121
2014
Building
779
$12,378,612
Mechanical
219
$ 1,821,629
Pluming
83
$
$14,200,241
2013
Building
879
$14,099,677
Mechanical
190
$ 898,781
Plumbing
70
$
$14,998,458
2012
Building
946
$ 6,670,152
Mechanical
168
$ 1,183,714
Plumbing
68
$
$ 7,854,157
2011
Building
919
$ 6,438,050
Mechanical
175
$ 2,240,584
Plumbing
55
$
$ 8,678,634
2010
Building
788
$25,935,474
Mechanical
244
$ 767,772
Plumbing
74
$ 69,300
1106
$26,772,546
2009
Building
833
$17,885,707
Mechanical
195
$ 1,336,884
Plumbing
81
$ 14,253
1109
$19,236,844
2008
Building
925
$14,802,531
Mechanical
207
$ 1,208,482
Plumbing
113
$ 6,400
1,247
$16,017,413
2007
Building
858
$24,047,333
Mechanical
223
$ 2,319,851
Plumbing
118
$
1,199
$26,367,184
2006
Building
921
$36,620,381
Mechanical
259
8,030,317
Plumbing
128
269,000
1,308
$44,919,698
2005
Building
233
$23,443,345
Special
682
915
• Special permits are fixed fee permits for residential reshingle,
resides, window replacements, and
excavations, signs, manufactured homes, fences, moving,
demolitions, decks, residential sheds, and fire
sprinkler permits.
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 11
New Residential Construction
YEAR HOUSING TYPE BUILDINGS UNITS CONSTRUCTION COST
2015
Single Family Dwellings
20
20
$
3,623,304
2014
Single Family Dwellings
23
23
$
4,770,652
2013
Single Family Dwellings
12
12
$
2,378,254
2012
Single Family Dwellings
5
5
$
935,140
2011
Single Family Dwellings
4
4
$
852,053
2010
Single Family Dwellings
7
7
$
1,156,000
2009
Single Family Dwellings
4
4
$
773,000
2008
Single Family Dwellings
10
10
$
1,488,000
Twinhomes
4
8
1,087,000
14
18
$
2,575,000
2007
Single Family Dwellings
24
24
$
3,692,000
Twinhomes
4
8
1,044,000
28
32
$
4,736,000
2006
Single Family Dwellings
44
44
$
6,509,000
Twinhomes
7
14
$
1,911,000
51
58
$
8,420,000
2005
Single Family Dwellings
59
59
$
7,110,000
Twinhomes
7
14
$
1,553,000
5 Family of More
1
32
$
2,700,000
67
105
$
11, 363, 000
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 12
2015 Construction Activity
NEW CONSTRUCTION STARTS
Valuation
New Homes
$ 3,623,304
Goodwill
1,379,000
Aspen Dental
378,000
Detached Garages — 325 Monroe St SE
19,000
738 L�rnn Rd SW
18,700
5554 h Ave SW
12,000
107 Mark Dr SE
16,700
570 Miller Ave SW
15,033
989 Jefferson St SE
31,320
Total New Construction $ 5,493,057
]JiIJiI�:03Fail wa_1kiIIlIN111RAINFa_1Wail QC111161LIKI 1I7:7=lJi161C=1%?
Crosspoint Church — remodel — 1215 Roberts Rd SW
1,990,000
Solar Aray — 1100 Adams St SE
1,200,000
Hutchinson Health — MRI — 1095 Hwy 15 S
454,000
Qdoba — 1380 Hwy 15 S
441,250
Landy Lodge — remodel — 35 3rd Ave SE
420,000
Hutchinson Health — reroof — 1095 Hwy 15 S
305,000
Aspen Dental — interior — 964 Hwy 15 S
247,000
McLeod County — fence — 1065 5 h Ave SE
166,000
Caribou — Cashwise remodel — 1020 Hwy 15 S
152,000
Crosspoint Church - remodel — 1215 Roberts Rd SW
113.000
Novation — remodel — 45 Hassan St SE
95,000
1310 Hwy 15 S — interior remodel
55,000
1605 Roberts Rd SW — fence
54,000
Qdoba — add bathrooms — 1380 Hwy 15 S
25,000
Total Addition and Remodel Work $ 5,717,250
All Other Commercial/Industrial Work 1,276,349
All Other Residential Work 755,058
Waived Fees 284,200
Mechanical 1,247,905
Plumbing 0
Fire Sprinkler 163,930
Signs 372
Total Construction Valuation $ 14,938121
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 13
Population Growth
NO OF
HOUSING NEW FACTOR DWELLINGS TOTAL
YEAR TYPE BUILDINGS UNITS FORMULA PER FACTOR POPULATION
*Due to economic conditions from 2008 to 2014 staff is not making a population estimate based new home
construction, however the 2010 Census data that was released in early 2011 showed Hutchinson's population was
14,178. The 2012 estimated population for Hutchinson from the U.S. Census Bureau is 13,929.
2015
Single Family Dwellings
20
20
20
Demo Single Family Dwelling
4
4
-4
16
14,580
2014
Single Family Dwellings
23
23
23
Demo Single Family Dwelling
2
2
-2
21
14,564
2013
Single Family Dwellings
12
12
12
14,543
2012
Single Family Dwellings
5
5
5
14,531
2011
Single Family Dwellings
4
4
4
14,526
2010
Single Family Dwellings
7
7
7
14,511
2009
Single Family Dwellings
4
4
4
14,515
2008
Single Family Dwellings
12
12
Twinhomes
3
6
18
14,511
2007
Single Family Dwellings
24
24
2.41
58
Twinhomes
4
8
2.41
19
Demo Single Family Dwelling
1
1
2.41
-1
76
14,493
2006
Single Family Dwellings
44
44
2.41
106
Twinhomes
7
14
2.41
33
Demo Single Family Dwelling
3
3
2.41
-7
138
14,423
2005
Single Family Dwellings
59
59
2.41
142
Twinhomes/Duplex
7
14
2.41
34
3 Family Dwelling or More
1
32
1.96
63
Demo Single Family Dwelling
21
21
2.41
-51
188
14,285
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 14
City of Hutchinson
New Housing Starts
2015
Site Address Sub Type Owner Name Valuation Contractor Issued
Date
1360 Bradford st SE
Single Family
Bruce Naustdal
$155,067
Bruce Naustdal
03/26/2015
955 Texas Cir NW
Single Family
Bruce Naustdal
$183,025
Bruce Naustdal
04/23/2015
141 Morningside Dr NE
Single Family
Crow River Habitat for Humanity
$34,000
John Lofdahl Carpentry
05/05/2015
830 Willow Dr SW
Single Family
Bruce Naustdal
$185,813
Bruce Naustdal
05/04/2015
404 Toronto Blvd SE
Single Family
Betker Homes
$248,000
Betker Homes
05/11/2015
1193 Bluejay Dr. SW
Single Family
Gustav Wurdell
$199,000
MP Builders
05/22/2015
1450 Calgary Ln SE
Single Family
Betker Homes
$198,000
Betker Homes
05/19/2015
270 Ottawa Ave SE
Single Family
Betker Homes
$205,000
Betker Homes
06/10/2015
274 Ottawa Ave SE
Single Family
Betker Homes
$205,000
Betker Homes
06/10/2015
823 Texas Ct NW
Single Family
Betker Homes
$168,165
Betker Homes
06/29/2015
1444 Heritage Ave NW
Single Family
Joe & Kristen Perrault
$233,700
Compton Anderson Const.
07/16/2015
1130 Prairie View Dr SW
Single Family
Gustav Wurdell
$159,000
Utecht Construction
07/24/2015
1140 Prairie View Dr SW
Single Family
Gustav Wurdell
$159,000
Utecht Construction
07/24/2015
113 Summerset Ln SE
Single Family
Merrill & Donna Johnson
$219,500
Framers Plus
08/11/2015
1800 Scenic Heights Ct SW
Single Family
Gustav Wurdell
$156,017
Utecht Construction
09/11/2015
1803 Scenic Heights Ct SW
Single Family
Gustav Wurdell
$156,017
Utecht Construction
09/11/2015
1205 Oakwood Ct NW
Single Family
Bart & Melissa Bradford
$197,000
Froemming Construction
10/23/2015
1460 Calgary Ln SE
Single Family
Betker Homes
$182,000
Betker Homes
10/16/2015
985 Texas Cir NW
Single Family
Bruce Naustdal
$188,000
Bruce Naustdal
10/28/2015
1440 Calgary Ln SE
Single Family
Betker Homes
$192,000
Betker Homes
11/19/2015
New Construction Count 20 Total Valuation $3,623,304
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 15
Vacant Lots -
January, 2016
Addition
Zoning
Year
Availability
Fairway Estates Addition
R
- 1 -
PD
1999
12 Lots
Park Meadows Addition
R
- 3
2005
7 Lots
Bridgewater Estates Addition
R
- 1
2000
28 Lots
Island View Heights Addition
R
- 2 -
PD
2004
13 Lots
Ravenwood West Addition
R
- 2
2005
5 Lots
Summerset Addition
R-2,
R-3
2005
109 Lots
Southwind Addition, 1st and 2nd
R
- 2
2003
2 Lots
Southfork Addition
R
- 3 -
PD
2004
49 Lots
Kottke Court Replat to RiverPointe Villas
R
- 2 -
PD
2008
10 Lots
Santelman's Addition
R
- 3 -
PD
1993
9 Lots
Stearnwood Addition
R
- 1
2004
5 Lots
Ravenwood
R
- 3
1999
1 Lot
Hunter's Ridge Addition
R
- 2
2004
1 Lot
Fraser Subdivision Addition
R
- 2
2005
1 Lot
Excelsior Addition
R
- 2
2007
5 Lots
Hellands Sixth Addition
R
- 2
1984
4 Lots
White Hawk Village
R
- 3
2014
2 Lots
Other - Misc
R
- 2
Unknown
1 Lot
Total
264 Lots
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 16
City of Hutchinson
Inspection Counts for 2015
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 17
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Total
Building
Certificate of Occupancy
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Consult with
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
2
3
1
0
0
9
Final Inspection
64
93
76
35
46
55
36
40
36
29
20
22
552
Footings
0
0
2
7
16
10
14
12
7
7
6
4
85
Foundation
1
1
0
1
5
3
9
8
1
6
5
1
41
Framing
10
15
10
4
11
15
24
15
20
12
14
1
151
Insulation
9
10
2
2
7
4
10
2
9
9
4
4
72
Lath
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
2
Manufactured Home
0
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
7
Other Inspections
1
3
0
1
1
3
0
0
2
0
0
0
11
Poured/Block Wall
0
1
1
4
5
6
3
1
0
0
0
1
22
Preinspection
3
1
5
17
16
22
18
22
17
17
9
4
151
Rated Fire Assemblies
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Reinspections
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Slab
3
1
0
1
0
3
6
0
0
0
0
0
14
Soils
1
1
1
0
8
5
1
8
0
1
0
0
26
Structural
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
Total
92
126
99
74
118
127
122
111
96
83
60
37
1,145
Fire
Air Test
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Aboveground
1
1
2
Alarm Test
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Final Inspection
0
3
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
8
Rough -in
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
0
4
0
5
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
13
Mechanical
Duct
3
6
1
0
2
4
1
2
1
2
1
0
23
Appliance Replacement
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
2
0
0
9
Final
19
9
16
15
14
15
10
8
9
16
7
12
150
Gas Piping
11
13
11
19
12
6
14
8
10
18
9
6
137
Insulation
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Other Inspections
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
5
Piping
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
2
Rated Fire Assemblies
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
Rough -in
3
1
1
1
0
1
6
3
3
3
2
1
25
Underground
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
36
31
29
36
28
28
36
25
23
41
19
19
352
Plumbing
Backflow Prevention
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Consult with
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Final
5
11
11
7
9
8
6
6
9
3
4
8
87
Other Inspections
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Rough -In
1
11
4
4
6
5
8
5
7
5
4
1
61
Sewer and Water
0
0
1
2
3
8
5
1
2
2
1
0
25
Underground
4
2
5
2
4
8
7
3
1
4
5
1
46
Total
10
24
21
15
22
29
27
15
19
14
14
10
220
Public Works
BMP Installation
0
0
5
3
5
1
13
2
1
0
2
1
33
Drainage Connection
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
0
5
Erosion & Sediment
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
5
Final
0
0
3
0
0
0
5
1
6
0
4
1
20
Total
0
0
12
4
5
1
20
4
9
1
6
2
63
Sign
Final Inspection
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
Footings
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Total
0
0
0
4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
5
Total Inspections
138
185
161
138
173
185
207
157
147
139
99
69
11798
Year -End Report — 2015
Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 17
G
Building Permit Summary for the Year of 2015
Description April May June July Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Totals
Est. Value 130,410.00 1 75,000.00 1 772,017.00 1 2,896,921.00 1 4,060,067.00 1 1,205,924.00 1 1,386,871.00 1 391,058.00 1 1,820,822.52 1 1,156,148.00 742,373.00 1 300,510.00 1 14,938,121.52
Surcharge 1 194.57 140.25 547.78 1,707.13 2,267.29 655.83 815.00 240.13 962.65 629.94 399.43 170.88 8,730.88
Blda. Dept. Fees
Permit Fee (New/Remodel)
1,034.04
1,615.06
5,696.74
19,837.70
25,704.93
9,277.03
8,864.96
4,775.99
12,691.09
11,931.14
6,717.95
3,114.76
111,261.39
Plan Check Fee
548.10
8,122.44
1,939.86
8,308.44
15,525.94
4,878.39
4,564.49
2,554.07
5,792.69
6,674.12
3,881.52
1,698.80
64,488.86
Excavation Fee
35.00
235.00
535.00
705.00
470.00
370.00
370.00
305.00
440.00
205.00
35.00
3,705.00
Set Fees (Residential)
500.00
685.00
1,250.00
3,425.00
3,000.00
2,300.00
2,600.00
2,750.00
2,750.00
2,750.00
1,000.00
300.00
23,310.00
Mfg'd Home
1
1,960.00
720.00
370.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
400.00
185.00
Const Water/Well Conversion 150.00
50.00
555.00
Moving
150.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
220.00
1,400.00
Total Permit Fees to Others 290.00
4,990.00
13,285.00
35,850.00
14,491.50
14,908.86
220.00
Demolition
225.00
11,925.00
126,019.22
300.00
125.00
125.00
300.00
1,075.00
Sign
120.00
240.00
120.00
240.00
660.00
240.00
692.00
358.00
622.00
381.00
180.00
60.00
3,913.00
Mechanical/Plumbing
1,000.00
578.00
3,199.88
2,518.11
4,611.55
1,743.00
6,725.28
1,112.00
1,126.50
2,348.44
1,548.25
1,411.50
27,922.51
Fire Sprinkling
449.98
450.00
454.41
520.63
1,875.02
Other
500.00
500.00
0.00
Total Bldg. Dept. Fees
1 3,877.12
11,725.50
12,441.48
36,188.66
50,427.42 1
18,908.42
24,116.73
11,920.06
24,117.91
24,649.70
13,832.72
6,620.06
238,825.78
Fees to other Departments
Plbg. Water Meter. 140.00
140.00
140.00
840.00
1,955.00
420.00
140.00
1,460.00
420.00
375.00
6,030.00
Parks & Playgrd.
135.00
725.00
430.00
388.86
173.86
485.00
175.00
2,512.72
Elect. Territory
800.00
1,600.00
1,600.00
800.00
800.00
5,600.00
SAC Connection
2,300.00
7,360.00
17,250.00
5,359.00
6,900.00
2,300.00
4,600.00
6,900.00
5,750.00
58,719.00
WAC Connection
1,750.00
5,600.00
13,125.00
4,077.50
5,250.00
1,750.00
3,500.00
5,250.00
4,375.00
44,677.50
Tree Fees
1
1,960.00
720.00
1,800.00
1,200.00
1,000.00
400.00
7,080.00
Const Water/Well Conversion 150.00
50.00
350.00
350.00
150.00
50.00
100.00
150.00
50.00
1,400.00
Total Permit Fees to Others 290.00
4,990.00
13,285.00
35,850.00
14,491.50
14,908.86
4,240.00
11,033.86
15,005.00
11,925.00
126,019.22
Total Permits Fees 1 $ 4,361.69 1 $11,865.75 1 $17,979.26 1 $ 51,180.79 1 $ 88,544.71 1 $ 34,055.75 1 $ 39,840.59 1 $ 16,400.19 1 $ 36,114.42 1 $ 40,284.64 1 $ 26,157.15 1 $ 6,790.94 1 $ 373,575.88
Total Building Permits 26 32 46 105 113 102 102 89 88 99 44 20 866
Total Mech & Plbg Permits 16 12 14 28 31 22 33 14 18 26 16 15 245
Total Permits Issued 42 44 60 133 144 124 135 103 106 125 60 35 1,111
Total Inspections 145 1 187 1 161 1 132 1 173 1 205 1 202 1 165 1 162 1 165 1 99 1 71 1 1,867
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Ordinance to sell City-owned land to Titanium Partners, Second Reading
Department: EDA
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Miles R. Seppelt
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Miles R. Seppelt
Reviewed by Staff ❑
Unfinished Business
Time Requested (Minutes): 0
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: No
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
The City has been approached by a developer who wishes to construct a 54-room hotel on the northeast corner of
State Hwys 7 & 15.
The first step in the process would be signing a Purchase Agreement with the developer, Titanium Partners.
City staff is proposing a sale price of $1 for the property, which encompasses all the lots from State Highway 7 over to
Prospect Street.
The developer is in the process of putting together a site plan for the project and a one-stop-shop is planned for
February 16th.
The developer is hoping to break ground on the project in early May and have the project completed by the end of
October.
No changes have been made to the ordinance or the purchase agreement since the last Council meeting at which this
was presented.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Approval of ordinance to sell land and authorization to sign purchase agreement
Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source: N/A
FTE Impact: 0.00 Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: No
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
ORDINANCE NO. 16-753
PUBLICATION NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF
MUNICIPALLY OWNED REAL PROPERTY
THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON ORDAINS:
Section 1. That the municipally owned real property legally described as follows:
That part of Tracts A, B, C, D and E described below:
Tract A. Lot 8, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for McLeod County, Minnesota;
Tract B. The south 146 feet of Lot 9, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North
Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; the title thereto
being registered;
Tract C. The south 200 feet of Lot 10 and the south 200 feet of the west half of Lot
1, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for McLeod County, Minnesota;
Tract D. The south 132 feet of the east half of Lot 11, Block 13, Townsite of
Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record
in the office of the Count Recorder in and for McLeod County,
Minnesota;
Tract E. The south 97 feet of Lot 12, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North
Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota;
Tract F. Lot 7, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for McLeod County, Minnesota;
which lies northerly of Line 1 described below:
Line 1. Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Corner B4 as shown on Minnesota
Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-46 as the same is
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said
County; thence northwesterly on an azimuth of 295 degrees 14 minutes 20
seconds along the boundary of said plat for 246.14 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B3; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said
plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 1492.40 feet and a delta
angle of 04 degrees 52 minutes 30 seconds, for 126.98 feet to Right of
Way Boundary Corner B2; thence on an azimuth of 290 degrees 21
minutes 51 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 97.59 feet to Right
of Way Boundary Corner B 1; thence deflect to the left along the boundary
of said plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 4417.08 feet and a
delta angle of 03 degrees 06 minutes 57 seconds, for 240.21 feet to Right
of Way Boundary Corner B4305 and the north and south quarter line of
Section 31, Township 117 North, Range 29 West, and there terminating;
together with that part of Tract F hereinbefore described, adjoining and westerly of the
above described strip, which lies northerly of Line 1 described above and easterly of Line
2 described below:
Line 2. Beginning at the point of termination of Line 1 described above; thence
northerly on an azimuth of 03 degrees 09 minutes 38 seconds along the
north and south quarter line of said Section 31 for 200.00 feet, more or
less, to Right of Way Boundary Corner B4401 as shown on Minnesota
Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-44 as the same is
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said
County; thence on an azimuth of 13 degrees 28 minutes 51 seconds along
the boundary of said Plat No. 43-44 for 152.49 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B 12 and there terminating;
Subject to the following restriction:
No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No. 7 or to Trunk Highway No. 15 from
the lands herein conveyed, except that access shall be permitted along the most
southeasterly line thereof by way of Prospect Street.
for good and valuable consideration in the amount of $1.00 is hereby transferred and conveyed to Titanium
Partners LLC.
Section 2. The City Administrator, Matthew Jaunich, or his designee is authorized to sign any
and all documents on behalf of the City to effectuate the closing of this transaction.
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication.
Adopted by the City Council this 23rd day of February, 2016.
Gary T. Forcier
Mayor
ATTEST:
Matthew Jaunich
City Administrator
VACANT LAND
PURCHASE AGREEMENT
This Vacant Land Purchase Agreement ("Agreement') is made by and between the City
of Hutchinson, a public body corporate and politic ("Seller') and Titanium Partners, LLC, a
Minnesota limited liability company, or its assigns ("Buyer') as of this 11th day of January, 2016
("Effective Date").
In consideration of this Agreement, Seller and Buyer agree as follows:
1. Sale of Proyerty. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy from
Seller, vacant real property located in the City of Hutchinson, County of McLeod, Minnesota,
described as fotlows:
That part of Tracts A, B, C, D and E described below:
Tract A. Lot 8, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for McLeod County, Minnesota;
Tract B. The south 146 feet of Lot 9, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North
Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; the title thereto
being registered;
Tract C. The south 200 feet of Lot 10 and the south 200 feet of the west half of Lot
1, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for McLeod County, Minnesota;
Tract D. The south 132 feet of the cast half of Lot 11, Block 13, Townsite of
Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record
in the office of the Count Recorder in and for Mcleod County,
M innesota;
'Pratt E. The south 97 feet of Lot 12, Block 13, "Townsite of Hutchinson, North
Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the
County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota;
Tract F. Lot 7, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat
thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and
for McLeod County, Minnesota;
which lies northerly of Line 1 described below:
Line 1. Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Corner B4 as shown on Minnesota
Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-46 as the same is
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said
County; thence northwesterly on an azimuth ot'295 degrees 14 minutes 20
seconds along the boundary of said plat for 246.14 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B3; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said
plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 1492.40 feet and a delta
angle of 04 degrees 52 minutes 30 seconds, for 126.98 feet to Right of
Way Boundary Corner B2; thence on an azimuth of 290 degrees 21
minutes 51 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 97.59 feet to Right
of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence deflect to the left along the boundary
of said plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 4417.08 feet and a
delta angle of 03 degrees 06 minutes 57 seconds, for 240.21 feet to Right
of Way Boundary Comer B4305 and the north and south quarter line of
Section 31, Township 117 North, Range 29 West, and there terminating;
together with that part of Tract F hereinbefore described, adjoining and westerly of the
above described strip, which lies northerly of Line I described above and easterly of Line
2 described below:
Line 2. Beginning at the point of termination of Line 1 described above; thence
northerly on an azimuth of 03 degrees 09 minutes 38 seconds along the
north and south quarter line of said Section 31 for 200.00 feet, more or
less, to Right of Way Boundary Corner B4401 as shown on Minnesota
Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-44 as the same is
on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said
County; thence on an azimuth of 13 degrees 28 minutes 51 seconds along
the boundary of said Plat No. 43-44 for 152.49 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Comer B 12 and there terminating;
Subject to the following restriction:
No access shall be permitted to Trunk flighway No. 7 or to Trunk I lighway No. 15 from
the lands herein conveyed, except that access shall be permitted along the most
southeasterly line thereof by way of Prospect Street.
together with all casements and rights benefitting or appurtenant to the Iand (collectively,
"Property' }. The purpose of this transaction is to allow Buyer to construct a mid-level (or
higher) hotel on the property.
2. Purchase Price and Manner of Payment. The total purchase price ("'Purchase
Price' } to be paid by Buyer to Seller for the Property shall be One Dollar ($1.00), and shall be
payable in cash or certified funds at closing. Buyer shall pay Two Thousand, Five Hundred
Dollars ($2,500.00) earnest money to Seller ("Earnest Maney'}, which will be held at Title
Company (defined below). Seller acknowledges and agrees that at Closing (defined below),
Buyer is entitled to a return of any Earnest Money remaining after payment of the Purchase Price
and any Buyer closing; costs.
3. Cl_ osin . The closing on the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement
(the "Closing') shall occur within 15 days after the end of the Due Diligence Period (as
hereinafter del ined), or such other time as mutually agreed to by the parties (the "Closing
Date"), at a title company reasonably selected by the parties ("Title Company"). Seller agrees to
deliver possession of the Property immediately after Closing.
4. "As Is" Sale. Seller and Buyer agree that upon Closing, the Property shall be
sold and that Buyer shall accept possession of the Property on the Closing Date "as is", where is,
with all faults, except as specifically warranted and represented by Seller in this Agreement.
5. Gaud Faith, The parties agree to cooperate and act in good faith in completing
this transaction as soon as reasonably possible.
6. Contin encies. The obligations of the Buyer under this Agreement are
contingent upon the following:
(a) Representations and Warranties. The representations and warranties of
Seller contained in this Agreement must be true now to the best of Seller's knowledge and
on the Closing Date, as if made on the Closing Date.
M Performance of Seller's Obligalions. Seiler shall have performed all of the
obligations required to be performed by Seller under this Agreement, as and when
required by this Agreement.
W Title Evidence. The condition of the Title Evidence (defined below) shall
be found acceptable to Buyer.
(d) Due_Diligence and Disclosures. The period of time commencing on the
Effective Date and ending on the date that is ISO days after the Effective Date, or such
earlier date as Buyer elects, at Buyer's sale option and discretion, is referred to herein as
the "Due Diligence Period'. Buyer shall have the right to conduct a due diligence inquiry
as to the condition of the Property and Buyer's intended use of the Property during the
Due Diligence Period. Such. investigation shall be at Buyer's expense, although Seller
shall provide reasonable cooperation, including, but not limited to, (i) permitting Buyer
or its agents to physically enter and inspect the Property, and (ii) providing Buyer with
copies of any and all surveys, appraisals, engineering reports and any and all other
documents in Seller's possession, if any, related to the condition and location of the
Property. Buyer shall repair and restore any damage to the Property caused by or
occurring during Buyer's inspection, and return the Property to substantially the same
condition as existed prior to such entry. If Buyer is dissatisfied with the results of the due
diligence investigations(s), Buyer may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice
to Seller on or before the Due Diligence Period. Buyer may close the Due Diligence
Period early, at Buyer's sole option and discretion, by providing Seller with written
notice that Buyer has completed due diligence and is electing to close on the purchase
and sale contemplated by this Agreement.
7. Termination. Buyer shall have until the end the Due Diligence Period to cancel
this Agreement for any failed contingency or any other reason, in Buyer's sole option and
discretion.
8. Documents to be Delivered to Buyer at Closing. On the Closing Date, Seller
shall execute and deliver to Buyer the following documents:
(a) Warran Deed. A Warranty Deed conveying marketable title to the
Property, subject to the following exceptions; (i) zoning laws, ordinances and regulations;
and (ii) agreements, easements, conditions, reservations, covenants and restrictions of
record, reasonably acceptable to Buyer.
(b) Other Documents. Any other document(s) reasonably determined by
Buyer or Title Company, to be necessary to transfer the Property, free and clear of all
encumbrances except as otherwise provided herein.
9. Items to he Delivered to Seiler at Closing. On the Closing Date, Buyer shall
execute and/or deliver to Seller the following:
(a) Purchase Price. The Purchase Price by cash, cashier's check or wire
transfer.
(l3) Other Documents. Any other document(s) reasonably determined by
Seller to be necessary to carry out the terms of this Agreement and close the transaction.
10. Evidence of Title. 'Within 30 days after the date of this Agreement, or such
longer period as the parties hereto may agree, Seller shall, at Seller's sole cost and expense,
deliver to Buyer the following:
(a) SMev. A current ALTA survey of the Property prepared by a registered
land surveyor in form acceptable to and including all information requested by the Buyer
(the "Survey"); and
(b) Title Commitment. A commitment from Title to issue an ALTA Owner's
Policy of Title Insurance, insuring Buyer's title to the Property (the `Title
Commitment"). Title Commitment shall have an effective date no earlier than the date of
this Agreement,
The Survey and the Title Commitment are sometimes referred to in this Purchase Agreement
collectively as the "Title Evidence,"
Buyer will have until the end of the Due Diligence Period to provide Seller with written
objections ("Objections") to the Property based upon the Title Evidence.
Seller will have 60 days from receipt of Buyer's written. Objections to cure the Objections
to the reasonable satisfaction of Buyer. Seiler will have 10 business days after it receives
the Objections to notify Buyer whether Seller intends to cure the Objections.
If Seller notifies Buyer that Seller intends to cure the Objections, then Closing will be
delayed for up to bQ [lays, pending cure of the Objections. Cure of the Objections by
Seller shall be reasonable, diligent, and prompt, Pending cure of the Objections, all
Payments required herein and the Closing will be postponed. If the only Objections are
for liens or encumbrances for liquidated amounts that can be released, then there will be
no delay in the Closing. If Seller does not notify Buyer that Seller intends to cure the
Objections or if Seller notifies Buyer that Seller intends to cure but the Objections are not
cured within the 60 day period provided for above, then, at Buyer's option: (i) this
Purchase Agreement shall be null and void and neither party shall be liable to the other,
and all Earnest Money paid by the Buyer will be refunded to Buyer or (ii) Buyer may
elect to proceed, subject to uncured Objections, in which event, Closing shall proceed.
11. Proration$ and Casts. Seller and Buyer agree to the following prorations and
allocation of costs regarding this Agreement:
(a) Title Insurance and Closing Fee. Seller will pay the cost of the title search
for obtaining the Title Commitment. Buyer will pay the premium for the cost of the
issuance of any Owner's Title Policy. Buyer will pay any reasonable and customary
closing fee or charge imposed by the Title Company,
(b) Deed Tax. Any and all deed tax shall be paid by Seller.
(e) Propm Taxes and Special Assessments. On or before the Closing Date,
all real estate taxes and special assessments shall be paid as follows:
i Seller shall pay all real estate taxes payable in all years prior to the
year of closing.
ii Seller shall pay all special assessments including, but not limited
to, sewer and water assessments payable in all years prior to the year of
Closing and the year of Closing.
iii General real estate taxes and special assessments payable in the
year of Closing shall be prorated between Seller and Buyer as of the Closing
Date.
iv Buyer shall pay all general real estate taxes and installments of
special assessments payable in all years following the year of Closing.
(d) Atlgrns' Fees. Each of the parties shall pay their own attorneys' fees,
except that a party defaulting under this Agreement shall pay the reasonable attorneys'
fees and court costs incurred by the non -defaulting party, including such fees and costs
incurred to enforce its rights regarding such default.
1.2. Representations and Warranties by, Seller. To the hest of Seller's knowledge,
Seller represents and warrants to Buyer as follows.
(a) Seller's Documents. The documents delivered by Seller to Buyer at
Closing will be valid and binding obligations of Seller, and will be enforceable in
accordance with their terms.
(b) Title toPronerty. Seller owns the Property which is, and/or at the time of
Closing will be, free from all liens and encumbrances, except as specifically indicated by
this Agreement or otherwise agreed to by Buyer.
(c) Authorily and Ca acit . Seller has full authority to enter into this
Agreement and complete capacity to understand the terms hereof.
(d) Risk f Loss. To the extent the Property suffers any damage prior to the
Closing Date, Buyer shall have the option of canceling this Agreement.
(e) FIRPTA. Seller is not a "foreign person," "foreign partnership," "foreign
trust," or "foreign corporation" under Internal Revenue Code Section 1445, and the rules
and regulations promulgated thereunder.
(f) MetharriphetgMi:ne Disclosure. Seller discloses and certifies that, to the
best of Seller's knowledge, methamphetamine production has not occurred on the
Property.
(g) Wells and Septic Systems. Seller certifies that Seller does not know of
any wells within the Property. Seller certifies that Seller is not aware of any septic
system or other private sewer system on the Property.
(h) Environmental Condition. To the hest of the Seller's knowledge, there are
no Hazardous Substances located on the Property; the Property is not subject to any liens
or claims by government or regulatory agencies or third parties arising from the release or
threatened release of Hazardous Substances in, on or about the Property; the Property has
not been used in connection with the generation, disposal, storage, treatment or
transportation of Hazardous Substances; and there have been no releases, spills or other
discharges of Hazardous Substances on the Property. For purposes of this Agreement, the
term "Hazardous Substance" includes but is not limited to substances defined as
"hazardous substances," "toxic substances" or "hazardous wastes" in the Comprehensive
Environmental Response Compensation Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C.
§§9601, et seq., and substances defined as "hazardous wastes," "hazardous substances,"
"pollutants or contaminants" as defined in the Minnesota Environmental Response and
Liability Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 115B.02, et seq. The term "Hazardous
Substance" also includes asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, petroleum (including crude
oil or any fraction thereof), petroleum product or heating oil. Seller agrees that Seller
shall indemnify and hold Buyer, its officers, employees, attorneys, successors and
assigns, harmless from any costs, actions, damages, claims, liens, judgments or any
expenses of any type or nature whatsoever relating to or arising from any environmental
hazards, conditions or contamination or any hazardous waste or materials or substances
existing upon the Property on the date of Closing.
(i) Airport Zoning Disclosure. If airport zoning regulations affect the
Property, a copy of those airport zoning regulations as adopted can be viewed or obtained
at the office of the county recorder where the Property is located.
0) Rights of Others to Purchase Proyerty. Seller has not entered into any
other contracts for the sale of the Property, nor are there any rights of first refusal or
options to purchase the Property or any other rights of others that might prevent the
consummation of this Agreement on the terms herein.
(k) Proceedings. There is no action, litigation, investigation, condemnation,
or proceeding of any kind pending or threatened against Seller or any portion of the
Property.
13. Representations and 'Warranties by Buyer, Buyer hereby represents and
warrants to Seller (as of the date of this Agreement and as of the Closing Date) that Buyer has
full power, authority and capacity to enter into and perform this Agreement in accordance with
its terns.
14. Final Property Inspection. Seller covenants that between the date of the
execution of this Agreement and the Closing Date, Seller will continue to maintain the Property
in a fashion that is lawful and consistent with Seller's past practices. Seller will not change or
permit the change of the Property in any material way. In addition, Buyer shall be entitled to a
final inspection of the Property prior to Closing.
15. Condemnation. If, prior to the Closing Date, eminent domain proceedings are
commenced against all or any part of the Property, Seller shall immediately give notice to Buyer
of such act and this Agreement shall terminate, in which event neither party shall have any
further obligations under this Agreement and the Earnest Money shall be refunded to Buyer.
16. Damage. If, prior to the Closing Date, all or any part of the Property is materially
damaged casualty, the elements, or any other cause, Seller shall immediately give notice to
Buyer of such fact. If the property is damaged by casualty, the elements or any other cause, then
this Agreement shall be null and void at Buyer's option provided, however, that if Buyer desires
to proceed with its purchase of the Property, Seiler shall assign any available insurance proceeds
to Buyer.
1.7. Assignment. Either party may assign its rights under this Agreement before or
after the Closing.
18. Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party upon the other
is deemed delivered in accordance with this Agreement (a) four (4) business days after it is
deposited in the United States trail; (b) 24 hours after it is deposited with a nationally -
recognized over -night courier; (e) when it is personally delivered; or (d) when it is sent by
electronic transmission, and addressed as follows -
If L
o
ollows:
Imo Seller:
City of Hutchinson
Attn: Miles R. Seppelt
Economic Development Director
11 l Hassan Street SE
Hutchinson, MN 55354
Email: mse elt(iu ci.hutchinson,tnn.us
If to Buver:
Titanium Partners, LLC
Attn.: Brian ,Forcier
207 Misquah Rd.
Duluth, MN 55804
Email: bforcier a.titaniumpartnerslle.coin
With copy to:
Paul A. Loraas
Fryberger, Buchanan, Smith & Frederick, P.A.
302 W. Superior St., Suite 700
Duluth, MN 55802
Email: ploraas a.frybergencom
Notices shah be deemed effective on the date they are deemed to be delivered. Any party may
change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other
patty, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change.
19. Survival. Those provisions set forth in this Agreement relating to
representations, warranties, indemnification, proration and payment of expenses, and the
availability of attorney's fees upon default of the surviving provisions, shall survive the
termination of this Agreement.
20. Remedies. If Buyer defaults under this Agreement, Seller shall have the right to
terminate this Agreement by giving five (5) business days written notice to Buyer. If Buyer fails
to cure such default within 5 business days of the date of such notice, this Agreement shall
terminate and Seller may retain the Earnest Money and/or exercise any and all rights and
remedies available at law or in equity, including, but not lirnited to, the right to recover money
damages and seek specific performance.
If Seller defaults under this Agreement, Buyer shall give written notice to Seller. If
Seller fails to cure such default within five (5) business days, Buyer shall have the right to
terminate this Agreement without further notice and the right to seek recovery of money
damages or to seek specific performance of this Agreement.
If any dispute arises from the default of either party, the prevailing party shall be entitled
to recover their reasonable attorneys fees and expenses.
21. Binding Effect. This Agreement, including the reversionary clause contained in
Section 27, binds and benefits the parties and their successors and assigns.
22. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be subject to and governed by the laws of
the State of Minnesota and all questions concerning the meaning or intention of the terms of this
Agreement or concerning the validity thereof, and questions relating to the performance
hereunder shall be adjudged and resolved in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
23. Representation by Attorney, Seller and Buyer acknowledge that each has been
represented by an attorney of its own choice with respect to entry into this Agreement or has had
an opportunity to be represented by an attorney. Seller acknowledges and agrees that Fryberger,
Buchanan, Smith & Fredericks, P.A. is representing Buyer in regards to this Agreement, and has
not provided any legal advice to Seller.
24. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in all terms herein.
25. Scrivener's Errors. Seller acknowledge and agree that Buyer may correct any
typographical or scrivener's errors in this Agreement without the consent of Seller in order to
effectuate the terms of this Agreement. In the event Buyer makes any such revisions, Buyer will
provide a copy of the revised document(s) to Seller.
26. Entire Agreement; Modification; Counterparts and Electronic Signatures.
1 -his written Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the parties and supersedes
any prior oral or written agreements between the parties regarding the Property. There are no
verbal agreements that change this Agreement and no waiver or amendment of any of its terms
shall be effective unless in writing executed by the parties.
This Agreement or any amendments may be executed in counterparts, which, taken together,
shall constitute one original. The parties agree that this Agreement may be transmitted between
themselves by facsimile, email or other electronic means. The parties intend that scanned, faxed,
emailed or other electronically produced and/or transmitted signatures constitute original
signatures and that a faxed, emailed or other electronically produced and/or transmitted
agreement or counterparts containing the signatures of all the parties is binding upon the parties.
27. Reverter. Should Buyer fail to obtain a certificate of occupancy for a mid-level
hotel or greater prior to October 31, 2017, Buyer shall forfeit all right, title and interest in the
property, and any improvements thereto, and the property shall revert to Seller with Buyer
executing all documents, including a Warranty Deed in favor of Seller, in order to complete the
reverter.
Seller and Buyer have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above.
SELLER
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
By:
Its:
-and-
By:
Its:
BUYER
TITANIUM PARTNERS, LLC
By:
Brian Forcier
Its; ' r
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Ordinance on Mayor and Council Salaries
Department: Administration
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Matt Jaunich
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Matt Jaunich
Reviewed by Staff ❑
New Business
Time Requested (Minutes): 10
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: Yes
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
During the 2016 budget discussions late last year, it was requested by the Council that staff bring forth an ordinance
for consideration that addresses raising the salaries of both the Mayor and Council Members to a level that is similar
to our other regional centers.
Attached for your consideration is a first reading of that ordinance. The proposed ordinance would raise the Mayor's
salary from $8,247.20 annually to $9,247. It would also raise the salary of each council member from $5,279.04
annually to $6,279. The Mayor's per diem would also be raised from $60 for a half day to $65 and $95 for a full day
with a maximum per diem payment of $5,395 per year (up from $4,980). The increase is basically $1,000 across the
board with a minor adjustment to the Mayor's per diem.
The maximum financial impact this would have on the City would be an increase of about $5,415 which would go into
effect in 2017. It would have no impact on this year's budget.
Please note that the current salaries of the Mayor and Council Members have been in place and have not been
adjusted since 1994.
I have also included a copy of comparative salaries of the Mayor and Council Members of other regional centers,
along with areas that we have used as our "defined market" when it comes to comparing other salaries here at the
City.
Please note that I have simply tried to get the salaries of the Mayor and Council Members closer to the "average". If
there is a desire to raise or decrease those proposed salary adjustments, I would say that should be a decision at the
council meeting.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Consideration of first reading of ordinance and a request to set the second reading and consideration for adoption of
the ordinance at the March 8 council meeting.
Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: Yes
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
Ordinance No. 16-754
Publication No.
AN ORDINANCE SETTING THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS
The City Council hereby ordains:
WHEREAS, the Hutchinson City Charter, Section 2.08 notes that the salaries of the
elective officers shall be established by Minnesota Statute 415.11, as such statute may be
amended from time to time; and
WHEREAS, City Code, Chapter 30.33 notes that pursuant to the authority granted by
Minnesota Statute 415.11, as it may be amended from time to time, salaries shall be set by
ordinance and no change in the salaries shall take effect until after the next succeeding municipal
election; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 415.11 notes that governing bodies of home rule charter
cities may, by ordinance, fix their own salaries in such amount as they deem reasonable; and
WHEREAS, no such changes in salaries shall take effect until after the next succeeding
municipal election; and
WHEREAS, the next Municipal Election is scheduled to take place on November 8,
2016; and
WHEREAS, the City Council last raised the salary of the Mayor and Council Members
to its current level in October of 1993 which became effective in January of 1994; and
WHEREAS, the current annual salary of the Mayor is $8,247.20 and the current annual
salary of each Council Member is $5,279.04; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor is also allowed as additional compensation the sum of $60.00 as
per diem payment for each half day meeting, defined as a meeting lasting three hours or less in
length, and $90.00 as a per diem payment for each full day meeting, defined as lasting in excess
of three hours, attended by the Mayor on behalf of the City of Hutchinson. The per diem
allowance shall not be paid for City Council meetings and regular Board meetings and shall be
limited to a total per diem payment of $4,980.00 per year.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON, THAT
1) The annual salary of the Mayor shall be $9,247
2) The annual salary of each Council Member shall be $6,279
3) The Mayor shall be allowed as additional compensation the sum of $65.00 as per diem
payment for each half day meeting, defined as a meeting lasting three hours or less in
length, and $95.00 as a per diem payment for each full day meeting, defined as lasting in
excess of three hours, attended by the Mayor on behalf of the City of Hutchinson. The per
diem allowance shall not be paid for City Council meetings and regular Board meetings
and shall be limited to a total per diem payment of $5,395.00 per year.
4) The salaries provided herein shall be effective January 1, 2017
Adopted by the City Council this 8th Day of March, 2016.
Attest:
Matthew Jaunich, City Administrator Gary T. Forcier, Mayor
Mayor/Council Salaries
Regional Centers (2015)
Mayor
Additional
Council
Additional
City
Population
Salary
Compensation
Salary
Compensation
$60 meeting <3 hr;
$90 meeting >3 hr;
HUTCHINSON
14,073
$8,247
$4,980 max
$5,279
NA
Albert Lea
18,061
$12,000
NA
$8,000
NA
Alexandria
12,441
$7,964
NA
$6,124
NA
Austin
23,743
$9,000
NA
$6,600
NA
Bemidji
13,541
$12,000
$25 per 2 hr meeting
$10,000
$25 per 2 hr meeting
Brainerd
13,956
$7,800
NA
$6,600
NA
$40 for special
$40 for special
Fairmont
10,619
$4,800
meetings
$2,400
meetings
Faribault
23,312
$8,480
NA
$7,220
NA
Fergus Falls
13,733
$12,900
NA
$7,800
NA
Marshall
13,156
$8,579
NA
$5,426
NA
New Ulm
13,396
$10,500
NA
$8,000
NA
Northfield
19,786
$9,600
NA
$7,200
NA
Owatonna
25,433
$9,000
NA
$7,200
NA
Red Wing
16,294
$7,550
NA
$7,550
NA
$20/hr for Special
$20/hr for Special
Willmar
19,072
$12,000
Meetings
$7,500
Meetings
Winona
27,474
$9,407
NA
$6,696
NA
$50/meeting; max
$50/meeting; max
Worthington
11,405
$10,000
$50/day
$6,000
$50/day
Average
17,029
$9,402
$6,800
LMC Annual Wage Information - 2015 Study
Mayor
Defined Market - Cities
Search Results for Mayor. No comparison salary provided.
IMbert Lea
18,061
Southeast
1
$12,000.00
$1,988.53
$3,754.00
Champlin
23,934
Metro
1
$9,550.00
($461.47)
$1,304.00
0
.Chanhassen
23,629
Metro
1
$6,000.00
($4,011.47)
($2,246.00)
$50 per meeting
Chaska
24,177
Metro
1
$8,208.00
($1,803.4-7)
($38.00)
0
Cokato
2,760
Central
1
$3,000.00
($7,011.47)
($5,246.00)
$50
East 13ethe!
12,090
Metro
1
$6,300.00
($3,711 A7)
($1,946.00)
Farmington
18,959
Metro
1
$8,440.00
($1,971.47)
($206.70)
Glencoe
5,743
Southwest
1
$5,100.00
($4,911.47)
($3,146.00)
❑
Hastings
22,491
Metro
1
$8,400.00
($1,611.47)
$154.40
0
Hutchinson
14,073
Central
1
$8,246.00
($1,765.47)
$0.00
$603hr $4980max
Litchfield
6,813
Central
1
$6,000.00
($4,011.47)
($2,246.017)
Mankato
37,032
Southeast
1
$18,138.00
$8,126.53
$9,892.00
n/a
New Ulm
13,396
Southwest
1
$10,500.00
$488.53
$2,254.00
Northfield
19,785
Central
1
$9,600.00
($411.47)
$1,354.40
0
Norwood
.Young
3,637
Metro
1
$3,600.00
($6,411.47)
($4,646.40)
0
Olivia
2,528
Southwest
1
$3,600.00
($6,411.47)
($4,646.00)
$75
Owatonna
25,433
Southeast
1
$9,000.00
($1,011.47)
$754,00
Council Pres. = $9000.04
Prior Lake
23,335
Metro
1
$9,420.00
($591.47)
$1,174.04
$50.00 per meeting
Red Wing
16,294
Southeast
1
$7,550.40
($2,46..07)
($695.60)
Savage
27,567
Metro
1
$8,040.00
($2,011.41)
($246.04)
Shakopee
34,691
Metro
1
$15,000.00
$4,988.53
$6,754.00
0
St. Cloud
65,741
Central
1
$45,000.00
$34,988.53
$36,754.00
AVERAGE
20,099
$10,011.47
LMC Annual Wage Information - 2015 Study
City Council Member
Defined Market - Cities
.......................
Search Results for Council Member, No comparison salary provided.
1
Albert Lea
18,061
Southeast
6
$8,000.00
$1,810.71
$2,722.00
Champlin
23,934
Metro
4
$6,610.00
$420.71
$1,332.00
0
Chanhassen
23,629
Metro
4
$4,800.00
($1.,389.29)
($478.00
$50 per meeting
Chaska
24,177
Metro
4
$6,948.00
$758.71
$1,670.00
0
Cokato
2,760
Central
4
$2,100.00
($4.089.29)
($3,178.00)
$50
East Bethel
12,090
Metro
4
$5,700.00
($489.29)
$422.00
Farmington
18,959
Metro
4
$7,020.00
$830.71
$1,742.00
Glencoe
5,743
Southwest
5
$4,200.00
($1,989,29)
($1,078.00)
0
Hastings
22,491
Metro
6
$6,000,00
{$189.29)
$722.00
0
Hutchinson
14,073
Central
4
$5,278.00
($911.29)
$0.00
Litchfield
6,813
Central
6
$3,600.00
($2,589.29)
($1,678.00)
Mankato
37,032
Southeast
6
$9,068.00
$2,878.71
$3,790.00
n/a
New Ulm
13,396
Southwest
5
$8,000.00
$1,810.71
$2,722.00
Northfield
19,786
Central
6
$7,200.00
$1,010.71
$1,922.00
0
Young
America
3,637
Metro
4
$2,400.00
($3,789.29)
($2,878.00)
0
Olivia
2,528
Southwest
4
$2,550.00
($3,639.29)
($2,728.00)
$75
Owatonna
25,433
Southeast
7
$7,200.00
$1,010.71
$1,922.00
Prior Lake
23,335
Metro
4
$7,440.00
$1,250.71
$2,162,00
$50.00 per meeting
Red Wing
16,294
Southeast
7
$7,550.40
$1,361.11
$2,272.40
Savage
27,567
Metro
4
$6,000.00
($189.29)
$722.00
0
Shakopee
34,691
Metro
4
$7,500.00
$1,310.71
$2,222.00
0
St, Cioud
65,741
Central
7
$11,000.00
$4,810.71
$5,722.00
AVERAGE
20,099
$6,189.29
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: Consideration of Ordinance No. 16-755 - Amending Section 2.04 - City Charter
Department: Administration/Legal
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Matt Jaunich/Marc Sebora
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Matt Jaunich/Marc Sebora
Reviewed by Staff ❑
New Business
Time Requested (Minutes): 10
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: Yes
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
At the last City Council meeting, staff was directed to prepare a proposed ordinance to change the length of the
mayor's term of office from two years to four years with the understanding that the ordinance would be forwarded on
to the voters to vote on at this Fall's general election.
The enclosed ordinance provides for the change to a four year mayoral term and contemplates the change being
voted on by the people this fall. Of particular note, the proposed ordinance would have the changes go into effect with
the mayoral election in 2018. The Council certainly has the prerogative to change the effective date to 2020 or some
other election year as the Council sees fit.
Procedurally, as we talked about the last Council meeting, the Charter Commission has the right to review the
proposed ordinance and suggest changes to it before it gets forwarded onto the people to vote on. That review period
can extend up to 150 days.
Finally, for the sake of convenience, I have taken the liberty of also incorporating changes in the same ordinance that
the Charter Commission already forwarded to you with regard to when the terms of office for elective officers shall
commence. Our current Charter says that the term of office shall commence the first business day in January. The
Charter Commission had already recommended changes to have that change to be the first Monday in January or if
the Monday is a holiday than the first Tuesday. I simply incorporated those changes into this ordinance.
Staff will be available for any questions you have about this proposed ordinance at the Council meeting.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
First reading of Ordinance 16-755, set second reading and consideration of adoption
Fiscal Impact: Funding Source:
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: No
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
Ordinance No. 16-755
Publication No.
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING REVISIONS TO SECTION 2.04 OF HUTCHINSON
CITY CHARTER
The City Council hereby ordains:
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 410.12, Subd. 5 permits amendments to a City Charter
by way of an ordinance proposed by the City Council; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to that statute, said ordinance is to be reviewed by the City's
Charter Commission; and,
WHEREAS, after such Charter Commission review, the City Council may submit the
Charter change contained in the ordinance to the voters for approval,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON, THAT
1. The Hutchinson City Charter be amended as follows:
Section 2.04 ELECTIVE OFFICERS. The elective officers of the City shall be
registered voters of the City and shall consist of a mayor who shall serve for two
years and four council members elected at large who shall serve for four years. The
term of office of each elective officer shall begin the first business da Monday in
January following the city election and qualification of such elective officer and shall
continue until a successor is elected and qualified. If the first Monday is a holiday,
the term of office shall then begin the first Tuesday in January.
2. Upon passage of this ordinance it shall be forwarded to the Hutchinson Charter
Commission for its review and comment.
3. Following the review of the Charter Commission, the City Council may submit the
question of this Charter amendment to the voters at the November 8, 2016, General
Election.
4. Upon approval of this Charter amendment by a majority of the voters, the change in
the mayoral term shall commence with the mayoral election in 2018 and be effective
when the mayor commences his or her duties in January 2019.
Adopted by the City Council this day of , 2016.
Attest:
Matthew Jaunich, City Administrator
Gary T. Forcier, Mayor
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action
79 M-W
Agenda Item: Review of Construction Documents for Aquatic Center/Pool Project
Department: Administration
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Matt Jaunich
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter: Matt Jaunich/Others
Reviewed by Staff ❑
New Business
Time Requested (Minutes): 15
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: Yes
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
Please see the attached memo and related documents in regards to this agenda item. I'll walk you through these
documents on Tuesday.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Fiscal Impact: Funding Source:
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: Yes
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
Memo
To: Mayor Forcier and City Council Members
From: Matt Jaunich, City Administrator
Date: 2/19/16
Re: Memo for Aquatic Center Agenda Item
Office of the City Administrator
111 Hassan Street SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350-2522
320-234-4241/Fax 320-234-4240
Back in May of 2015, the City hired USAquatics to execute a Design Development Agreement
for a new outdoor pool and aquatic center. Following a series of meetings and an open house for
the public to view and comment on the proposed project in August of 2015, the Council
approved the final study phase and conceptual design with a five-year Pro Forma in October of
2015. That same month, the Council entered into an agreement with USAquatics to proceed with
Construction Documents for the proposed project. Staff has worked with USAquatics over the
past 3-4 months to finalize the Construction Documents which are being presented to you on
Tuesday for final approval.
On Tuesday, staff from the City and USAquatics will review the proposed construction
documents for the new Aquatic Center/Pool with the Council. Staff will also go through the
updated cost estimate for the project including funding sources and a project time line. I'll touch
on some of those additional items and a couple of other items down below.
Preliminary Budget Estimate
Aquatic Center/Pool Costs
Lobby/Bathhouse/Locker Room Costs
Admin/Professional Fees
Subtotal Costs:
Alternative Bid Costs
Total Overall Costs:
October 2015
$3,457,840
$518,300
$1,014,250
$4,990,390
$532,450
$5,522,840
February 2016
$3,924,090
$743,400
$1,086,956
$5,754,446
$557,383
$6,311,829
When looking at the costs, please take into consideration the following two items. One, the total
overall costs include a contingency amount of $228,397 (4.5% of construction costs). Two, the
total costs also include $81,500 in City/HIJC fees for utilities and building permits. A more
detailed breakdown of the project costs has been included with this memo.
Preliminary Budget Estimate Changes from October
As you will see, there have been some significant changes to the estimated project costs since we
last met in October. Here is a breakdown of those changes:
In regards to the aquatic center/pool portion which increased by $466,250:
• $50,000 was added for utility extensions and hook-ups
• $20,000 was added to replace the sidewalk on the south side of the pool
• $180,000 was added to correct the soils after a soils report was received
• The remaining cost increase are due to estimated square footage costs increasing by $10-
$15 a square foot
In regards to the lobby/bathhouse-locker room area which increased by $225,100:
• $85,000 was added for a new air handler and boiler system
• $45,000 was added for additional roof work
• $35,000 was added for anew fire alarm system
• The remaining cost increase are due to estimated square footage costs increasing by $10 a
square foot
Please remember that all of these costs are simply estimates by our professionals working on the
project. We won't know final numbers until we bid the project out.
Bidding Process for this Project
Bidding for this project will be done through a bid deduct process which will more or less allow
us to "drop" portions of the project if they do not meet our budget needs. The two areas noted in
red above would be where we would look to drop portions of the project if costs get to high. As
staff worked through this process we felt it would be prudent of us to incorporate the best
possible project noting the needed work to the bathhouse/locker room area at the rec center. On
top of this, we had budgeted roughly $300,000 in 2018 & 2019 within our capital projects fund
for improvements on the roof at the rec center. From an economy of scales perspective, we
moved those projects up to be included within this project resulting in some of the increase in
costs.
Items within the project that are identified as "alternatives" and/or that may be "dropped"
because of costs will be pursued from the third part/sponsorship angle or will be included as a
"future" project item to be added at a later date. Staff has done its best to be respectful of the $5
million dollar budget set by the Council, but we also want to be able to present you with a project
that is done right. Staff feels that to do this project right, additional funds should be allocated to
the bathhouse/locker room area. Once again, we won't know final costs until we bid the project
out and we still have some security locked into the process with our ability to drop portions of
the project through the bid deduct.
Funding Sources for this Project
Most of the funding sources for this project have remained relatively the same since we
identified those sources back in May of 2015. The one addition (noted in read below) is the
identification of future capital dollars that we are recommending to be moved up to help cover
4
the costs for the repairs to the roof at the rec center. Here is that breakdown:
Unspent hospital money from the Community Improvement Fund
Non -designated money from the Community Improvement Fund:
2016 Facilities Money from the Capital Projects Fund:
Non -designated money from the Capital Projects Fund:
2018 & 2019 Facilities Money from Capital Projects Fund:
(Money was designated for Rec Center Roof Repairs)
Excess General Fund Balance Reserves:
Total Overall Funding Sources Identified:
$1,350,000
$1,150,000
$700,000
$800,000
$300,000
$1,000,000
$5,300,000
At this time, staff feels comfortable in noting that $5.3 million is available for this project. Any
projects costs coming above the $5.3 million would have to be properly vetted. In the end,
depending on final project costs, we may have to drop portions of the project, seek sponsorships
or 3rd party sources for funding, or have a discussion on additional funding sources.
Remaining Projected Project Timeline
Council Approve Construction Documents and Call for Bids
Advertisement for Bids go Out
Deadline for Bids
Council Approve Bids and Award Contract
Start of Construction
Substantial Completion of Bathhouse/Locker Room
Final Completion of Bathhouse/Locker Room
Substantial Completion of Aquatic Center/Pool
Final Completion of Aquatic Center/Pool
Grand Opening
Action Requested
February 23 (Tuesday)
March 2
March 29
April 12
May
November 29
December 1
May 10, 2017
May 24, 2017
May 29, 2017
At Tuesday night's meeting, staff will be seeking two actions from the City Council. One will be
to approve the proposed construction documents (plans & specs) for this project. A summary of
those documents has been included with this memo. If you would like a full -copy of the
documents (42 pages) please let me know. Staff has reviewed the plans including our building
official and we are comfortable with what has been provided. The second action item will be to
authorize the advertisement for bids on this project.
If you have any questions and or concerns, or if you need any additional information, please
don't hesitate to ask.
Thanks!
Matt
Estimate
Date: 2118/2016
' Project: Hutchinson Aquatics
Bid Date: TBD
- Revised Outdoor Layout
Descriptlon Oct. 2015 81dg Work Alternates
Demo $ 70,000 $ 10,000
5T Site Work including soils corrections $ 120.000 $ - $
ST -1 Landscaping Allowance $ 10,000 $ - $ 10,000
ST -2 Utility extentions and hook-ups $ 50,000 $ -
ST -3 Sidewalk replacement, on South Side $ 20,000 $
Additional Soils Corrections and Engineered Fill $ 180,000 $
Per Soils Report
SP Aquatics
Lap pool 5,220 sqft @ $170 sqft
$
887,400
$
-
$
ADA ramp area 220 sqft @ $270 sqft
$
59.400
$
$
-
Splash Pool 3,300 sqft @ $165 sqft
$
544,500
$
$
Plunge Pool 1,100 sq fl. @$165 sgft
$
181,500
$
$
-
Lazy River 2,800 sqft 0$225 sqft
$
630,000
$
$
-
SP -F Features
Pop Jets
$
2,200
$
-
$
-
Geysers
$
5,500
$
-
$
-
1 M & 3M Diving
$
40,000
$
-
$
-
Climbing Wall
$
-
$
-
$
38.000
Splash Area Feature Allowance
$
30,000
$
$
65,000
Tot Slide
$
15,000
$
-
$
-
Lazy River Feature Allowance
$
7,000
$
-
$
30.000
Zip Line
$
28,000
$
-
$
-
Play Feature Mech.
$
40,000
$
-
$
Enclosed Bodyslide wl Tower
$
225,000
$
$
Open Flumeslide
$
95,000
$
_
$
InnerTube Waterslide
$
-
$
$
205,000
Slide Mechanical
$
45.000
$
-
$
-
A Building Remodel 3660 sqft @ $115 sqft
$
420.900
$
-
$
A-1 Mechanical Bldg 1.050 sqft @ $180
$
190,800
$
$
A-2 Building Canopy 900 sqft @ $75
$
67,500
$
$
-
A -3q Built-up Roof Replacement
$
125,000
$
E Flectrical
$
173,320
$
-
$
-
E-1 Night Lighting
$
3,500
$
-
$
45,000
E-3 Security and PA system
$
2,500
$
-
$
25,000
MP Mech & Plumb.
$
173,320
$
-
$
-
New air handler and boiler
$
85,000
$
_
Fire Alarm system replacement
$
35,000
$
-
SF Site Flat work 17,000 sqft @ $6
$
102,000
$
-
$
-
5 Sod/Seeding 8000 sqft @ $3
$
24,000
$
$
F Fencing 870 If 2 $45
$
39,150
$
$
-
Total construction contracts:
$
4,162,490
$
505,000
$
418,000
Owner Direct Costs
Budget
Costs
Bldg Work
Alternates
Owner direct general conditions (2%)
$
83,250
$
10,100
$
8.360
State Health plan review (.5%)
$
20,812
S
_
$
_
Permits and inspections
$
25,000
$
4,500
$
2.000
Fixtures, Furniture & Equipment
$
30,000
$
30,000
$
-
Shade Structure (8)
$
-
$
-
$
32,000
Cantilever structures (3)
$
-
$
-
$
13,000
Contingency (4.59'x)
$
187.312
$
22,725
$
18,810
Total Owner Direct Costs
$
346,374
$
67,325
$
74,170
Construction Cost Including Owner Direct Cost; $
4,508,864
$
572,325
$
492,1170
USAquatics fee thru construction documents (5.75%)
S
259,260
$
32.909
$
28.300
USAquatics fee thru bidding and construction (2%)
$
90.177
$
11,447
$
9,843
Signature Aquatics Management fee (4.25%)
$
191,627
$
24,324
$
20.917
City Fee (1,25%)
$
58,361
$
7,154
$
6.152
Total Professional Fees
$
597,425
$
75,833
$
65,213
Total Project Costs $ 5,106,289 $ 548,158 $ 557,383
Total Project Costs wl Alts. & =Building Work $ 61311,829
bk
AOU.
V IA
IA
-Alums-
Lq m
pp
oop
AREA
�r�
'OT Fit
eui�oor�Z F
/ � r
�re
e�evicr�rn���
j lel 8
y
i
I
o vcsvmiFr �c
Arvx i _
1
n m I
� I
m
---—
� � I � -- �rvEw corvc ecce
i
v
fi ®� axe Noecr scA�iis
-_ - - - - iaEMoo.Eoa
1-1 IT
rva�ARea w��FOE��
� �
x
-zes.�6P>aK�s�m�
DEMOLITION KEY NOTES' O
11 �111NI 111K CIINTEI IND IETI —ETI
IND ITZIILEAUL�7��Nl
Dowr"D,Giz" um. —1ED,D Drums. IEE PLI-NO D-1— IL.PE
".11-11 'oa s ,o T-11 ru�lIL I—M — of
PLAN GENERAL NOTES:
MEA1oA /111Ea�A, oN a ,AE E�IE,INI AONSAo111oK
N111"' III 1IN11
IEIIINIEI�Tl .1 TIE I.NT.Ilol.
'A"E" 'ENT Al lElllEl 11 1111 AllEll 11 TIE
E' NZEIAl"Al4l' �1511% 11H
PLAN KEY NOTES: 0
1-11
z=aN: 3�oo�N000wE� Mo ExI NI
EN
I .IIE ,N as EAogEA'�IN P o''1' .11 'N' I
�E wnu zE-`es'NaN.�NNaN� a,�N o aE�, .aP aE
1 111E
NE1111-1 N Il, — IANNAID
E. P a.P
NI -1 I.NTNIII eE �l
NI
11 ,i. ---E A
N�E'n�, iE�o',s 11P1w
1— .11. IEE 1-11 11A4,o r eoNo EEA.o ,oP of
E. N1,w�No. 11 III 1111 111111 lEAl I Ewes — 1111 — -I
N.z
7 axva Ew —.Nay IENwc. EEE
N11a�iA9,A s/' N1AwN�
n. ax /I uwEE A, NEI -D uAmNev
oE1NNN. E 11111E ,/_0 _ a ND,
,o. .AmNav EPENNI sn.'l —EE A, NE—E—EEED
NEI ,i 1,aNN,AwA 111"1 ah,00N ,1lEE
I E— E,N 1111
it 11
9 4oN� ND epi®�� �a� - PRMRL N ,AI KEN 11.
����. v �a„=j.-®o
ROOF PLAN GENERAL NOTES:
11EATI�NA A�A 1 sI NI D111 IT FF, _F, 111AIoE1
1, E
11EAT1�NI PRATE ANT aNIIo -A TAP aE �NT0aT�AN
T- "TNN1 ANE"ILILN FE F' A 1115N
AAA£ ILII
T11 N1=
1,1,1L 11
IN
IF IR�n'FE111'1 AN N�ME�TMaEa ' Ao BE-
IF�>
LAI ENFEN IAL LAI P.ENT ANN PENELIANNI Al FEEL III
ILL IIINIINID IND ON I` I.F T11 -NAN
111N FILL LINITI 11�A'E'l.,111111 111111 11 NIELF
,EE/R TEPN _ 11 _ RENIS PE, ALN"AI�NN" w�E,
TEA 11s 1 11111ITS 11 411 TEA "FEAR aT
1111111T G ��11 PIIIN m0
ROOF
=T�NII�NA=EIRMELAN KY �AEAT11-ELI M.
Ell
ARE
E���..
ILIIAE NSAL�oN �s Ta e„ IEA
�,�AN �S Ta BE�„P'APEA ELI.
,ALL FF
LA
P"T
'LIFE
�o —E. TEOTE AE �NTOLAT�AN Ta REI'/I TEa
_11 -STINA
NEI 1101- LEEIATIN NIL NEI ARE- ELA E -TIN,
,�aPPRE-F,N�IEo METAL nAENo�NI IEAM IIoF nnEM.
11, L0 -NN FF D-NSP101
INILEEE
IAIIEN,N11111,1,1 IA NNETEIIEEDAIME T1,1
All NIL LANI - AE LEFT IN EET:EA
IAAF N e;z,Ek TT AT
NAPPA�T ANN`INAT:EA EAI I MAELAPN.
P. WE won I mamom— -ol i'
74—)10:1�
� AaI 1N. OLIF I
IVA Ly
�ool
�o
� T �
ON
IIx .,.se
p
ROOF
=T�NII�NA=EIRMELAN KY �AEAT11-ELI M.
Ell
ARE
E���..
ILIIAE NSAL�oN �s Ta e„ IEA
�,�AN �S Ta BE�„P'APEA ELI.
,ALL FF
LA
P"T
'LIFE
�o —E. TEOTE AE �NTOLAT�AN Ta REI'/I TEa
_11 -STINA
NEI 1101- LEEIATIN NIL NEI ARE- ELA E -TIN,
,�aPPRE-F,N�IEo METAL nAENo�NI IEAM IIoF nnEM.
11, L0 -NN FF D-NSP101
INILEEE
IAIIEN,N11111,1,1 IA NNETEIIEEDAIME T1,1
All NIL LANI - AE LEFT IN EET:EA
IAAF N e;z,Ek TT AT
NAPPA�T ANN`INAT:EA EAI I MAELAPN.
P. WE won I mamom— -ol i'
M
WE
n M m
AIR
� AaI 1N. OLIF I
IVA Ly
�ool
�o
� T �
ON
IIx .,.se
p
LxJ x J
o.00 o.00
RooTSEA .g.
� Ea a.000 IF � o
F� -J Gm
M
WE
n M m
I�oaoe`R�°MEr"6`.."PRP�PM�A ME„�
4i —NN nwn�@b 1,
oroLn Ia z /a. oc N. cc viE �o rec I--
ION11-11 —Y -11IN3 1.NN
mll
ouP uoUSEh
ElE 1— BneuT ou ALL h
100 NAILS O 8” O.C.
�zxq
CSEEUJsT
4MVP6ETH®DSE4�VHG G BRSECTION
11 If FT
----------------
U AEWLHPMfflT HOUSE LOOKING NOKNH
I I
s11. v,
ISNT
01-1
-�
z r °
B—K °
L—�
LEIEL
I E°°nT
E�H�H�VL EIEWH ,-�E�Q9'®°9VPNNEIfT HOUSE RRILINIG
�O SZAIEa H®E°
�O
a�
J INN
N <N`� a
eANiN Es°
ppp1:,OI
®O EQUIPT
HOUSE
I00
O
PH TANK
10
0
O O e
Q O
CI TNZK
Elle P3HH T
U SQTlBE:1/9me�°�
PLAN NOTES GENERAL
NLY
-E`N MMN °N�a/NZN:N,M EF oFFI-INI IIN 211 o o° �
C£EE PLRN
STALE: NO SCRNE
„z. °� s, °nE t12 z ,TE E,NTE °� 1/2° TAIIµ;51c„° A NIS
Ta aE 11.
B SECTION
1,/z'oi .
P1
IE"DEDNTE IL I IE I—LE
To o2'iio.s o 11 16 2 El w
Tl
1� o M, ll Na aNK °a°
° NE,°,° s, n�TE
INNI-E IL.
A PLAN �. L
HMDIIFII ®PRITISET
a
�NM�NNM TTaa N°ESN°
a a =1
C-N
-1
ME
°°N°aETE sin
PIOIIDE Ba .11 E.1
w
w
s:woNaRwE PPEa ====e==
TVIP COAL STAIR TPER1® TYP RALLINC,
�O SZPLE: L W2W °-G° STRLE:1 99�e9.,E
J
E®MVMT G➢®➢1ME M®41TH E4ENMTVE
U M4MLE: ➢/Ems➢°�
E�UDVMT �J GI ME ST ELEMMITIEN IM
E�➢DVM'T G➢®"RTH ELET"M ON
U WOE�BDV�A MT 1-0 jg WST ELE RTV®IM
LF ➢/gym=➢°A1�
ELEVATION KEY NOTES:
IAIINI Al 11 1111 11111— 1— —11
ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES: 0
IINI ETE —1 IN 111 11 111,
NII
1,E, NEI INE IN IE E` lElIl 111NI IEAE NE- INII.
NII —El— 111INI .11NNI
NII 11IN1111 —11 11-1 11-
11 NII 11-11
sa. Ilf 1.° °r NIN I .o s:oPre oP , .11oeeo
TI—E—El IN
11, E—NNI ElEIlIllAl —El
11.Tee. ,I —lEE sua°ueo e+,re�
». o��. . °ro° re°oI I °E, mreM "I"
MC ®4➢Vl®Vud� IME TV➢ E4EN RMN
W ®l➢VE®VPd� �PPTV-0 E4E➢9MTV®N
U fE.1/�me ?
U Sm 7 ELEVffrDN
W
8
a
HAY DOBBS
©o°° re�ore=s reESE
NJ
P:
a
G9
W
NUJ g
�6
az
w
Ag0
i1
.. . . ............ . . ....
....... ....
... ..... ... -
......... . . ......... . ...... .
...........
. .........
... .........
6
.... .. ..... ... .
......... ...
.. .... ........
PR E L M N R -r
H,
N6T
—NOT FOR C-1
........... .
..........
.... ..... .....
............... .
..........
.....
. .....
..................
..... .. ....... ...........
...............
o
. .................
Lg...........
11.11, 17
----------
- ------- --
J J
..... . ......
...... . . . ........
....... ... .
.............
11.2"Ill"IVIII P1101 _PIM
11
PRE0 M N
-NOT FOF
Q MU.IYIbJSl MR11
`%uie=rte
J
HVAC GENERAL DEMO NOTES HVAC KEYNOTES: HVAC GENERAL NOTES
� P�P.��o���o..ER�o.a.�E�����a,�o�aRE E�e..�P�P.�a.o�.o����o�eeo�.a.Eo�Ra�.ew° Q
O �*
O
H,;CPP EQVNTBUIlNG
LE IEET
z zi z 11 Z
LI -- ----— ------
—4N
z w
i 21
W 0
z C) U)
E E
—
----------
u u
F— c)
-- V ------ ----
--max
ml
------ ----
Revisions
Notes
10
v
. 0
= Of
00
CIC, H,;l g�
o
—LE IEET —LE IEET
CHECKSET M3.0
HRA
HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND
REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Regular Board Meeting Tuesday, January 19, 2016, 7:00 AM
Minutes
CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairman Steve Jensen called the meeting to order. Members Present: Gary
Forcier and LouAnn Holmquist. Staff Present: Jean Ward and Judy Flemming. Visitor: Pat Lembcke
2. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING ON DECEMBER 15, 2015
Gary Forcier moved to approve the Minutes of the regular board meeting as written. LouAnn
Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
3. FINANCIAL REPORTS
a. Gary Forcier moved to approve the City Center General Fund payments of $11,245.60 for checks
8718 to 8726. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
b. LouAnn Holmquist moved to approve the Park Towers operating account payments of $143,443.85
for checks 13476 to 13513 and approval of Park Towers Security Account payments of $876.93 for
checks 1534 to 1536. Gary Forcier seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
c. LouAnn Holmquist moved to approve the November 2015 Park Towers financial statements. Gary
Forcier seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
4. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2016-1 TO ADOPT 2016 CITY OF HUTCHINSON
COMPENSATION PLAN
Gary Forcier moved to approve Resolution #2016-1 to Adopt 2016 City of Hutchinson Compensation
Plan. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
5. PARK TOWERS UPDATE
a. Occupancy Report: one vacant apartment at the beginning of the monthly but will be filled by the
end of the month.
b. Elevator Project --- Gary Forcier moved to approve Change order #I and 2016-2 Resolution to
approve $6,437.81 additional operating funds for a total revised construction contract of
$425,232.81 (Construction Sources as follows: POHP funds $234,000 CFP $90,525 Operating
Reserves of $100,707.81). LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
c. Gary Forcier moved to approve the revised Resident Handbook. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and
the motion carried unanimously.
d. FYI: Park Towers January 2016 Newsletter
6. CONSIDERATION OF BUDGET AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR 445 ADAMS STREET
Jean Ward reviewed with the Board the budget and purchase agreement for 445 Adams Street. Gary
Forcier moved to approve the budget and accept the purchase agreement. LouAnn Holmquist seconded
and the motion carried unanimously.
7. REVIEW OF DRAFT TIF HOUSING APPLICATION FORM
Jean Ward reviewed with the Board past housing TIF projects and the draft TIF Housing Application
form. LouAnn Holmquist moved to approve the TIF Housing Application form. Gary Forcier
seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
8. 2015 YEAR END RENTAL REHAB UPDATE
Judy Flemming reviewed with the Board the 2015 Year End Rental Rehab Programs Update.
January 19, 2016 Minutes Page l of 2
9. 2415 YEAR END OWNER OCCUPIED REHAB/HOME IMPROVEMENT LOAN PROJECTS
Judy Flemming reviewed with the Board the 2015 Year End Owner Occupied Rehab/Home
Improvement Loan Projects.
10. OTHER COMMUNICATIONS
a. FYI: 2015 Year End Preliminary Numbers for foreclosures & resale values
b. FYI: Steve Cook is looking into the feasibility of arts spaces and tiny homes in Hutchinson.
11. ADJOURNMENT
LouAnn Holmquist moved to adjourn and Gary Forcier seconded. Where beim; no other business, Vice
Chairman Steve Jensen declared the meeting adjourned.
Recorded by Jean Ward, HRA Executive Director
Gary F4cier, Secretary/Treasurer
January 19, 2016 Minutes Page 2 of 2
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f�
Request for Board Action 79 M-W
Agenda Item: December 2015 Financial and Investment Reports
Department: Finance
LICENSE SECTION
Meeting Date: 2/23/2016
Application Complete N/A
Contact: Andy Reid
Agenda Item Type:
Presenter:
Reviewed by Staff ❑
Governance
Time Requested (Minutes): 0
License Contingency N/A
Attachments: Yes
BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM:
Attached are the preliminary 2015 financial reports for the General fund and Enterprise funds. As we progress
through the audit preparation over the next two months we may have some adjustments but I do not anticipate any
material changes.
Overall, 2015 was a good year for each fund as we added cash and fund balance in each fund except Water and
Sewer. Those two funds incurred substantial capital costs with the planned automatic meter reading project and solar
array. In the sewer fund, the solar grant was not received by year-end so we have a receivable on the books for the
grant proceeds of $958,369.
Feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you.
BOARD ACTION REQUESTED:
Fiscal Impact: Funding Source:
FTE Impact: Budget Change: No
Included in current budget: No
PROJECT SECTION:
Total Project Cost:
Total City Cost: Funding Source:
Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source:
General Fund — 2015 Preliminary Financial Results
Summary
The preliminary 2015 financial statement for the General fund is positive with a surplus of
$126,707. These results are preliminary and subject to change as we prepare for the 2015 financial
audit, however I don't anticipate any material adjustments.
Total revenues exceeded expectations by $135,924 while expenses came in under budget by
$175,341. We amended our 2015 budget during the year to account for the construction of the
cemetery columbaria shelter, using reserves to fund the project. The amended budget reflects a net
deficit of $(184,558). The $126,707 surplus results in a positive variance of $311,265 from
budgeted expectations so we were able to absorb the columbaria cost and still add a moderate
surplus.
Each year we expect a moderate surplus due to budgeting conservatively for operational revenue
and expenses in addition to the reality of employee turnover. While the surplus may seem fairly
substantial to some, it represents only 1.1% of our general fund budgeted expenses.
Actual Budget Variance % Used
Total Revenues $11,316,368 $11,180,444 $135,924 101.2%
Total Expenses $11,189,661 $11,365,002 $175,341 98.4%
Net Revenue $ 126,707 $ (184,558) $311,265
Revenues
Total revenue exceeds the budget in most revenue categories. The positive results are driven by
higher than expected revenues in the following areas, with amounts in parentheses representing the
revenue in excess of the budgeted amount:
Building Permits ($71,773) Police Pension Aid ($34,158)
Motor Vehicle Fees ($23,519) Transfer from Refuse ($55,000)
There are a few revenue accounts that underperformed during the year. The following revenue
failed to meet budgeted levels, with the deficiency in parentheses.
Recreation Activity Fees ($38,855) Building Rentals ($10,908)
Civic Arena Fees ($8,13 8)
Expenditures
Total expenses are under budget by $175,341, or 1.5% of total budgeted expenses. The mild
weather helped to keep utilities under budget by $55,285 and lower gas prices resulted in a fuel
expense savings of $57,490. A portion of the gas savings can also be attributed to the mild weather
as less gas was consumed in the lighter than average snow removal operations. Other expenses
coming in under budget are as follows, with the savings in parentheses:
Small Tools & Minor Equip ($20,866)
Contracted Snow Removal ($18,197)
Automotive R&M ($34,857)
Street Maintenance Materials ($11,837)
Travel/Conference Expense ($26,607)
The expenses that exceeded the budgeted amounts are as follows:
Other Professional Fees ($41,597) Software & Licensing ($30,629)
Workers Comp Audit ($29,428) Contracted R&M ($19,318)
The single largest expense category in the General fund is Wages & Benefits with a total 2015
expense of 7,434,109. Currently the total expense is under budget by $57,887, or a 0.8% savings.
Regular full-time and part-time wages came in under budget by $223,510 while wages and fringes
related to Temporary employees exceeded the budget by approximately $45,000. The expense
savings in regular wages is attributed to several vacant positions that were backfilled later in the
year than what was budgeted in addition to employee turnover. Overtime, which includes premium
pay and comp -time paid, exceeded the budget by $83,699. The majority of the overtime excess is
in the Police department ($50,991) as the department dealt with officer turnover and the many
special events in the community. Several other departments incurred unbudgeted overtime during
the year as well.
The Wages & Benefits category was able to absorb the HSA Contributions of $113,763. We did
not budget for HSA contributions in the past more as a mechanism to temper the budget for
anticipated employee turnover. This budgeting philosophy was changed for 2016 to include the
budgeted expense for the HSA contributions and temper the budget with a vacancy factor in wages
and benefits to account for anticipated turnover.
We did budget a transfer of $39,000 from the Self Insurance fund to cover the increased HSA
contributions that resulted from the council approved increase in employee medical deductibles.
The higher deductibles helped to mitigate the increase in medical premiums and in return the City
increased the HSA contributions to help offset the higher cost exposure to the employees. The
transfer of $39,000 has been made and is reflected in total revenue.
Departmental Results
The following departments have exceeded their annual budgeted expenditures by the amounts
shown in parentheses:
Legal ($31,485)
Building Inspections ($17,618)
IT ($23,386)
Senior Center ($12,814)
Fire ($12,930)
Park & Recreation Admin ($6,909)
Parks ($4,499)
Recreation Bldg & Pool ($2,606)
Senior Dining ($1,917)
Unallocated Expenses ($39,575)
Library ($5,636)
While the above departments incurred unbudgeted HSA contributions, most also exceeded the
budget in Overtime, Temporary Wages, and Services & Charges. There were several big projects
that occurred during the year that may have factored into the expense overage, such as the BS&A
software conversion, website redesign, email server issues and ordinance recodification. The
recodification was budgeted in 2014 but only a portion of the expense was incurred in that year with
the remainder of the service and cost being recognized in 2015. Building Inspections was budgeted
to convert to the Caselle software system however due to issues with the product we decided to stay
with the LOGIS product which cost substantially more at approximately $19,000 annually. This is
no longer an issue in 2016 as we have converted to the BS&A software that has an adequate product
for Building Inspections at a substantially lower annual cost. Building Inspections also paid out the
vacation balance to Lenny Rutledge upon his resignation. Unallocated Expenses was hit with an
additional $29,428 in workers compensation expense related to the audit of the 2014 premiums.
The League has reclassified certain employee positions across all cities, moving classes of
employees out of the lower premium "municipal employee" category to higher premium categories
more accurately reflecting the potential liability associated with more demanding physical duties.
State Aid for fire pensions came in $8,100 higher than expected. The State Aid is a pass-thru of
revenue to the pension fund and has a net zero impact on our financial statement, however we do
show the funds received as revenue and the pass-thru to the pension fund as expense.
Fund Balance
The fund balance for the General fund increased by $126,707 to a total of $6,861,233. This equates
to a 60% fund balance as compared to the 2016 budgeted expenditures. The State Auditor
recommends a fund balance for working capital be approximately 40% to 50% of planned
expenditures. Our 60% fund balance is very healthy and is still an effective funding option for a
portion of the planned aquatic center.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
GENERALFUND
TAXES
OTHER TAXES
LICENSES & PERMITS
INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUE
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
TRANSFERS -IN
FINES & FORFEITURES
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TOTAL Revenues
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
TOTAL Expenditures
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
4,514,125
4,491,446
(22,679)
100.5
4,500,826
4,491,446
100.2
264,610
257,500
(7,110)
102.8
271,034
245,000
110.6
324,082
267,900
(56,182)
121.0
283,487
240,000
118.1
1,260,580
1,225,766
(34,814)
102.8
1,172,473
1,094,270
107.2
2,031,488
2,031,070
(418)
100.0
2,064,128
2,045,923
100.9
660,497
666,225
5,728
99.1
706,842
646,500
109.3
2,215,537
2,160,537
(55,000)
102.6
2,121,653
2,066,653
102.7
45,449
55,000
9,551
82.6
59,737
50,000
119.5
-
25,000
25,000
-
-
-
-
11,316,368
11,180,444
(135,924)
101.2
11,180,179
10,879,792
102.8
7,434,109
7,491,996
57,887
99.2
6,865,625
7,009,709
97.9
664,248
782,636
118,388
84.9
788,237
781,887
100.8
2,293,381
2,303,346
9,965
99.6
2,286,618
2,262,536
101.1
510,543
498,116
(12,427)
102.5
597,829
533,068
112.2
96,850
96,850
-
100.0
143,776
96,000
149.8
190,530
192,058
1,528
99.2
13,800
-
100.0
11,189, 661
11, 365, 002
175,341
98.5
10, 695, 885
10, 683, 200
100.1
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES 126,707 (184,558) (311,265) 68.7 484,294 196,592 246.3
General Fund Expenditures by Department
2015 2015 2015 Budget 2014 2014
Department Actual Budqet Balance % Used Actual Budqet % Used
Mayor & City Council
38,892.16
46,380.00
7,487.84
83.9%
48,215.07
48,823.00
98.8%
City Administrator
390,260.09
410,458.00
20,197.91
95.1%
356,599.09
412,884.00
86.4%
Elections
7,950.04
7,378.00
(572.04)
107.8%
15,713.96
15,962.00
98.4%
Finance Department
367,024.44
428,830.00
61,805.56
85.6%
271,317.26
295,894.00
91.7%
Motor Vehicle
180,939.01
184,836.00
3,896.99
97.9%
274,111.85
254,100.00
107.9%
Assessing
60,910.50
60,911.00
0.50
100.0%
60,963.00
60,963.00
100.0%
Legal
274,982.27
243,497.00
(31,485.27)
112.9%
257,585.73
256,142.00
100.6%
Planning
144,729.95
145,943.00
1,213.05
99.2%
135,892.56
135,012.00
100.7%
Information Services
437,674.42
414,288.00
(23,386.42)
105.6%
395,346.68
427,012.00
92.6%
City Hall Building
94,353.69
95,343.00
989.31
99.0%
87,081.98
83,494.00
104.3%
Police Department
3,024,430.87
3,072,077.00
47,646.13
98.4%
3,159,940.85
3,197,339.00
98.8%
Hospital Security
275,935.27
291,299.00
15,363.73
94.7%
_
_
0.0%
Emergency Management
6,585.88
14,388.00
7,802.12
45.8%
5,833.18
14,839.00
39.3%
Safety Committee
9,516.35
9,590.00
73.65
99.2%
8,583.96
13,276.00
64.7%
Fire Department
305,128.75
292,199.00
(12,929.75)
104.4%
271,112.36
273,924.00
99.0%
Protective Inspections
250,865.50
233,248.00
(17,617.50)
107.6%
193,029.86
178,407.00
108.2%
Engineering
385,290.70
452,058.00
66,767.30
85.2%
401,835.41
424,543.00
94.7%
Streets & Alleys
1, 361, 023.43
1, 409, 089.00
48, 065.57
96.6%
1, 422, 457.96
1, 374, 733.00
103.5%
Park/Recreation Administration
230,874.76
223,966.00
(6,908.76)
103.1%
211,598.10
218,929.00
96.7%
Recreation
210,042.07
222,940.00
12,897.93
94.2%
211,492.91
218,072.00
97.0%
Senior Citizen Center
87,608.65
74,795.00
(12,813.65)
117.1%
81,571.91
68,620.00
118.9%
Civic Arena
323,170.75
324,826.00
1,655.25
99.5%
310,257.70
309,957.00
100.1%
Park Department
844,320.40
839,821.00
(4,499.40)
100.5%
788,000.59
794,003.00
99.2%
Recreation Building & Pool
191,337.96
188,732.00
(2,605.96)
101.4%
187,987.99
190,756.00
98.5%
Events Center
229,326.62
234,707.00
5,380.38
97.7%
218,879.12
219,027.00
99.9%
Evergreen Building
14,604.78
12,688.00
(1,916.78)
115.1%
14,385.08
17,393.00
82.7%
Library
204,359.59
198,724.00
(5,635.59)
102.8%
190,940.22
190,606.00
100.2%
Cemetery
289, 882.30
301, 398.00
11, 515.70
96.2%
109, 056.71
107, 072.00
101.9%
Airport
84,630.17
107,159.00
22,528.83
79.0%
88,544.48
99,776.00
88.7%
Unallocated General Expense
863,009.35
823,434.00
(39,575.35)
104.8%
917,549.01
781,642.00
117.4%
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
11 189 660.72
11 365 002.00
175 341.28
98.5%
10 695 884.58
10 683 200.00
100.1%
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
Water Fund
SALES
LOCAL SALES TAX
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TOTAL Revenues
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
DEBT SERVICE
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
2,382,210
2,300,000
(82,210)
103.6
2,324,418
2,381,500
97.6
608,704
725,000
116,296
84.0
661,476
650,000
101.8
56,979
50,000
(6,979)
114.0
48,454
42,500
114.0
85,890
84,153
(1,737)
102.1
68,426
84,192
81.3
-
-
-
-
835,319
-
100.0
3,133,783
3,159,153
25,370
99.2
3,938,104
3,158,192
124.7
455,693
500,766
45,073
91.0
424,594
427,480
99.3
126,861
123,250
(3,611)
102.9
105,327
124,250
84.8
483,178
457,724
(25,454)
105.6
515,852
409,618
125.9
13,138
16,700
3,562
78.7
10,800
22,000
49.1
277,058
43,145
(233,913)
642.2
315,507
43,145
731.3
728,980
543,750
(185,230)
134.1
-
250,000
-
1,122,000
1,104,000
(18,000)
101.6
1,093,809
1,105,500
98.9
389,687
1,312,414
922,727
29.7
417,019
1,229,916
33.9
3,596,595
4,101,749
505,154
87.7
2,882,908
3,611,909
79.8
(462,812) (942,596) (479,784) 49.1 1,055,196 (453,717) 232.6
Local sales tax still has the final December payment to receive from the State. Tax revenue for 2015 is substantially below last year
due to significant capital equipment refunds made to various local companies.
Transfers -Out include the funding of a portion of the year's roadway projects.
Capital Outlay includes the cost of the automatic meter reading project.
Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet
to reduce the bond payable.
Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
Sewer Fund
SALES
LOCAL SALES TAX
LICENSES & PERMITS
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TOTAL Revenues
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
DEBT SERVICE
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
3,336,356
3,203,000
(133,356)
104.2
3,237,624
3,132,000
103.4
608,704
725,000
116,296
84.0
661,821
650,000
101.8
6,100
7,000
900
87.1
6,700
7,000
95.7
958,369
-
(958,369)
100.0
-
-
-
3,584
4,000
416
89.6
7,691
7,000
109.9
83,152
101,153
18,001
82.2
110,010
84,192
130.7
-
-
-
-
573,254
-
100.0
4,996,265
4,040,153
(956,112)
123.7
4,597,101
3,880,192
118.5
598,745
679,626
80,881
88.1
605,415
608,184
99.5
187,609
249,300
61,691
75.3
196,910
249,810
78.8
681,596
762,511
80,915
89.4
746,169
743,765
100.3
22,266
24,000
1,734
92.8
31,900
26,100
122.2
79,025
43,145
(35,880)
183.2
147,520
43,145
341.9
1,693,900
691,250
(1,002,650)
245.1
-
350,000
-
1,492,000
1,495,000
3,000
99.8
1,571,081
1,589,300
98.9
337,635
1,573,470
1,235,835
21.5
373,716
1,590,266
23.5
5,092,776
5,518,302
425,526
92.3
3,672,709
5,200,570
70.6
(96,511) (1,478,149) (1,381,638) 6.5 924,391 (1,320,378) 70.0
Local sales tax still has the final December payment to receive from the State. Tax revenue for 2015 is substantially below last year
due to significant capital equipment refunds made to various local companies.
Intergovernmental Revenue consists of the Xcel grant received for the Solar project. The actual dollars will be received in 2016 but the
revenue is being recognized in 2015 as the project is complete.
Transfers -Out include the funding of a portion of the year's roadway projects.
Capital Outlay includes the solar array project costs and a portion of the automatic meter reading project costs.
Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet
to reduce the bond payable.
Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
Refuse Fund
SALES
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
TOTAL Revenues
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
DEBT SERVICE
COST OF SALES
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
1,146,344
1,133,700
(12,644)
101.1
1,142,108
1,138,287
100.3
12,608
12,500
(108)
100.9
12,600
12,500
100.8
6,506
2,500
(4,006)
260.2
13,602
2,500
544.1
1,165,458
1,148,700
(16,758)
101.5
1,168,310
1,153,287
101.3
183,349
179,288
(4,061)
102.3
171,718
153,350
112.0
54,054
65,400
11,346
82.7
65,474
68,500
95.6
698,126
702,650
4,524
99.4
738,266
720,873
102.4
5,169
3,250
(1,919)
159.0
3,068
1,250
245.4
55,000
55,000
-
100.0
55,000
55,000
100.0
75,083
159,418
84,335
47.1
-
110,000
-
121,000 131,500 10,500 92.0 121,877 116,100 105.0
2,139 24,261 22,122 8.8 2,984 24,260 12.3
- - - - 2,640 - 100.0
1,193,921 1,320,767 126,846 90.4 1,161,026 1,249,333 92.9
(28,463) (172,067) (143,604) 16.5 7,284 (96,046) 7.6
Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet
to reduce the capital equipment payable.
Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
Liquor Fund
SALES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
TOTAL Revenues
COST OF SALES
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
DEBT SERVICE
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
Gross Margin on Sales
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
5,850,584
5,695,000
(155,584)
102.7
5,612,731
5,395,000
104.0
3,705
3,000
(705)
123.5
3,117
3,000
103.9
5,854,290
5,698,000
(156,290)
102.7
5,615,848
5,398,000
104.0
4,399,681
4,271,071
(128,610)
103.0
4,236,118
4,045,650
104.7
537,857
521,408
(16,449)
103.2
524,203
502,400
104.3
19,027
16,600
(2,427)
114.6
17,626
15,600
113.0
205,526
196,793
(8,733)
104.4
206,559
186,264
110.9
3,920
5,500
1,580
71.3
3,572
5,500
65.0
465,000
465,000
-
100.0
450,000
450,000
100.0
24,164
27,000
2,836
89.5
-
27,000
-
82,000
82,075
75
99.9
77,965
73,600
105.9
27,951
128,305
100,354
21.8
32,045
128,385
25.0
5,765,126
5,713,752
(51,374)
100.9
5,548,088
5,434,399
102.1
89,164 (15,752) (104,916) 566.1 67,759 (36,399) 186.2
24.8% 25.0% 24.5% 25.0%
Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet
to reduce the interfund loans to the Water and Sewer fund. The loans were used to fund the 2005 store upgrades.
Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
Compost Fund
SALES
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
TOTAL Revenues
COST OF SALES
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
INVENTORY COST ADJUSTMENT
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
3,034,891
2,729,160
(305,731)
111.2 3,007,552
2,508,850 119.9
62,164
58,500
(3,664)
106.3 142,856
133,500 107.0
19,617
6,000
(13,617)
327.0 37,187
6,000 619.8
3,116,672
2,793,660
(323,012)
111.6 3,187,594
2,648,350 120.4
2,336,524
2,357,500
20,976
99.1
2,357,752
1,947,380
121.1
718,417
797,164
78,747
90.1
699,553
571,684
122.4
127,118
154,500
27,382
82.3
174,182
134,500
129.5
295,201
344,350
49,149
85.7
445,672
540,555
82.5
12,363
13,500
1,137
91.6
43,943
13,000
338.0
110,000
110,000
-
100.0
102,847
102,847
100.0
152,104
250,000
97,896
60.8
-
157,888
-
126,000
142,600
16,600
88.4
132,600
140,500
94.4
(986,638)
(1,054,568)
(67,930)
93.6
(1,122,409)
(972,802)
115.4
554,565
757,546
202,981
73.2
2,834,139
2,635,552
107.5
533,648 (321,386) (855,034) 166.0 353,455 12,798 2,761.8
Creekside recently completed a software conversion and is in the process of working through some issues. This fund
may have some adjustments in the Cost of Sales and Inventory Cost Adjustment categories as we finalize the books
the books for the audit.
Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
Storm Water Utili
SALES
LICENSES & PERMITS
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
TOTAL Revenues
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
TRANSFERS -OUT
CAPITAL OUTLAY
DEPRECIATION EXPENSE
DEBT SERVICE
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
793,095 790,200 (2,895) 100.4 729,105 719,500 101.3
4,552 - (4,552) 100.0 1,780 - 100.0
630 - (630) 100.0 - 1,000 -
13,864 6,000 (7,864) 231.1 17,118 1,250 1,369.4
- - - - 559,630 - 100.0
812,141 796,200 (15,941) 102.0 1,307,633 721,750 181.2
189,914
241,318
51,404
78.7
177,918
208,737
85.2
18,525
34,175
15,650
54.2
35,845
33,150
108.1
134,994
146,350
11,356
92.2
130,748
146,450
89.3
9,983
11,250
1,267
88.7
8,642
8,050
107.4
127,454
-
(127,454)
100.0
-
-
-
-
128,000
128,000
-
-
128,000
-
128,000
116,000
(12,000)
110.3
124,220
111,200
111.7
14,780
193,992
179,212
7.6
50,244
193,932
25.9
623,650
871,085
247,435
71.6
527,617
829,519
63.6
188,492 (74,885) (263,377) 251.7 780,015 (107,769) 723.8
Transfers -Out include the funding of a portion of the year's roadway projects.
Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation.
Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet
to reduce the capital equipment payable.
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON
PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015
ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL
DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014
HATS Operation
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES
TRANSFERS -IN
TOTAL Revenues
WAGES & BENEFITS
SUPPLIES
SERVICES & CHARGES
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
CAPITAL OUTLAY
TOTAL Expenditures
NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES
BUDGET % BDGT
2015 USED
151,138
151,500
362
99.8
147,070
147,070
100.0
279,547
546,000
266,453
51.2
521,223
535,000
97.4
11,550
3,250
(8,300)
355.4
36,799
3,600
1,022.2
96,850
96,850
-
100.0
94,030
94,030
100.0
539,085
797,600
258,515
67.6
799,122
779,700
102.5
57,958
57,898
(60)
100.1
52,447
52,235
100.4
291,881
546,925
255,044
53.4
511,659
536,825
95.3
149,644
159,700
10,056
93.7
157,599
147,500
106.9
5,060
6,550
1,490
77.3
6,515
5,100
127.7
35,910
26,527
(9,383)
135.4
83,277
37,960
219.4
540,453
797,600
257,147
67.8
811,496
779,620
104.1
(1,368) - 1,368 100.0 (12,374) 80 15,467.4
Low fuel prices and a mild winter resulted in substantially lower fuel expense (Supplies category) which ultimately resulted in
lower fuel sales to the various entities (Charges for Services).
N
Executive summary
as of December 31, 2015
Asset allocation review
Value on % of
12/31/2015 ($) portfolio
A Cash
3,079,164.32
22.10
Cash
3,079,164.32
22.10
B Fixed Income
10,850,725.47
77.90
us
10,610,544.38
76.17
International
240,181.09
1.73
C Equity
0.00
0.00
D Commodities
0.00
0.00
E Non -Traditional
0.00
0.00
F Other
0.00
0.00
Total Portfolio
13,929,889.79
100%
Balanced mutual funds are allocated in the 'Other' category
Equity sector analysis
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
Expected cash flow
$ Thousands
54
45
36
27
0A 18
9
B 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2016 2016
Taxable income
Total taxable income: $217,353.58
Total expected cash flow: $217,353.58
Cash flows displayed account for known events such as maturities and mandatory puts.
Portfolio does not contain applicable holdings - exhibit
intentionally left blank.
Credit quality of bond holdings
Value on % of
Effective credit rating Issues 12/31/2015 ($) port.
A Aaa/AAA/AAA 6 4,847,873.14 44.63
B Aa/AA/AA 3 1,532,792.08 14.07
C A/A/A 0 0.00 0.00
D Baa/BBB/BBB
0
0.00
0.00
E Non -investment grade
0
0.00
0.00
F Certificate of deposit
20
4,470,060.24
41.30
G Not rated
0
0.00
0.00
Total
29 $10,850,725.47 100%
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 1 of 3
N
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
summaryIncludes all fixed-rate securities in the selected porfolio. Average yields and durations exclude Structured Product, Pass -Through, Perpetual Preferred, and Foreign securities.
as of December 31, 2015
Bond overview
Total quantity
10,799,000
Total market value
$10,800,788.51
Total accrued interest
$49,936.96
Total market value plus accrued interest
$10,850,725.47
Total estimated annual bond interest
$212,498.25
Average coupon
1.97%
Average current yield
1.97%
Average yield to maturity
1.75%
Average yield to worst
1.74%
Average modified duration
3.06
Average effective maturity
4.52
Credit quality of bond holdings
Value on
% of
Effective credit rating Issues 12/31/2015 ($)
port.
A Aaa/AAA/AAA 6 4,847,873.14
44.63
B Aa/AA/AA 3 1,532,792.08
14.07
C A/A/A 0 0.00 0.00
D Baa/BBB/BBB 0 0.00 0.00
E Non -investment grade
0
0.00
0.00
F Certificate of deposit
20
4,470,060.24
41.30
G Not rated
0
0.00
0.00
Total
29
$10,850,725.47
100%
Investment type allocation
Investment type
Taxable ($)
Tax-exempt /
deferred ($)
Total ($)
% of
bond
port.
Certificates of deposit
4,470,060.24
0.00
4,470,060.24
41.20
Municipals
2,016,133.75
0.00
2,016,133.75
18.58
U.S. federal agencies
4,364,531.48
0.00
4,364,531.48
40.22
Total
$10,850,725.47
$0.00
$10,850,725.47
100%
Bond maturity schedule
$ Millions
2.5
18.7% 18.5%
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2026 + Other
0 Effective maturity schedule
Cash, mutual funds and some preferred securities are not included.
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 1 of 2
N
as of December 31, 2015
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
SIncludes all fixed-rate securities in the selected porfolio. Average yields and durations exclude Structured Product, Pass -Through, Perpetual Preferred, and Foreign securities.
Summary of bond holdings
Maturity
Year
Issues
Quantity
Est. annual
income ($)
Current Yield to
yield (%) maturity (%)
Yield to Modified
worst (%) duration
Adjusted
cost basis ($)
Unrealized
gain/loss ($) Mkt. value ($)
2015
0
0
NA
NA
NA
2016
4
865,000
8,772.50
1.01%
0.89 %
0.89 %
0.85
865,000
763.95 867,213.481
2017
7
1,996,000
49,308.75
2.43%
1.06 %
1.06 %
1.27
2,013,317.59
13,574.19 2,045,653.651
2018
3
736,000
9,564.00
1.31%
1.55 %
1.55 %
2.30
736,000
-4,609.92 733,838.991
2019
5
1,327,000
29,145.50
2.18%
2.03 %
2.03 %
3.60
1,332,299.95
2,315.25 1,341,127.071
2020
2
1,500,000
30,450.00
2.02%
1.97 %
1.90 %
1.48
1,499,995
4,020.00 1,507,423.331
2021
2
1,145,000
12,062.50
1.07%
NA
NA
NA
1,144,100
-11,488.35 1,133,661.651
2022
2
490,000
10,045.00
2.07%
2.63 %
2.63 %
6.27
490,000
-5,000.45 485,706.691
2023
2
2,000,000
44,750.00
2.24%
2.38 %
2.38 %
6.81
1,999,250
1,727.50 2,014,410.141
2024
1
500,000
13,000.00
2.70%
3.09 %
3.09 %
7.77
486,750
-5,575.00 483,341.671
2025
1
240,000
5,400.00
2.27%
NA
NA
NA
240,000
-1,651.20 238,348.801
2026
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2027
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2028
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2029
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2030
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2031
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2032
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2033
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2034
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2035
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2036
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2037
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2038
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2039
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2040
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2041
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2042
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2043
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2044
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
2044+
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
Other
0
0
NA
NA
NA
1
Total
29
10,799,000
$212,498.25
1.97%
1.75 %
1.74%
3.06
$10,806,712.54
$-5,924.03 $10,850,725.47
% of bond portfolio maturi
- S.02 %
1 S.77
- 6.77%
12.36%
- 13.93%
- 10.49%
.4.49%
16.53%
.4.45%
2.21%
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 1 of 7
N
Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued)
Details of bond holdings
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/ income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/ Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon
maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal. g/I ($) price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
10,799,000 1.97%
07/06/2020 NA $212,498.25
1.75% 3.06
$10,806,712.54 NA
$10,800,788.51
100%
Total Bond Portfolio
1.97%
1.74%
$-5,924.03
$49,936.96
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2016
$10,850,725.47
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 2 of 7
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2016
AMERICAN EXPRESS C NY US RT
CD
145,000
1.25%
08/09/2016
1,812.50
0.73% 0.60
145,000.00
100.315
145,456.75
1.35%
01.2500% MAT 08/09/16 FIXED
1.25%
0.73%
456.75
715.07
RATE CD /NY
BMW BANK NORTH AME UT US
CD
240,000
0.95%
11/14/2016
2,280.00
0.89% 0.87
240,000.00
100.051
240,122.40
2.22%
RT 00.9500% MAT 11/14/16
0.95%
0.89%
122.40
293.59
FIXED RATE CD /UT
CAPITAL ONE BANK U VA US RT
CD
240,000
1.00%
11/14/2016
2,400.00
0.94% 0.87
240,000.00
100.051
240,122.40
2.22%
01.0000% MAT 11/14/16 FIXED
1.00%
0.94%
122.40
322.19
RATE CD /VA
FIRSTBANK P R SANT PR RT
CD
240,000
0.95%
12/12/2016
2,280.00
0.92% 0.95
240,000.00
100.026
240,062.40
2.22%
00.9500% MAT 12/12/16 FIXED
0.95%
0.92%
62.40
118.69
RATE CD /PR
Total 2016
865,000
1.01%
11/06/2016
$8,772.50
0.89% 0.85
$865,000.00
$865,763.95
8.02%
1.01%
0.89%
$763.95
$1,449.53
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2017
MASSACHUSETTS DEPT TRANS
Aa3/AA-/NR
500,000
2.41%
01/01/2017
12,040.00
1.00% 0.98
505,334.84
101.398
506,990.00
4.69%
TAX SR B RV BE/R/ 2.408
NR/NR/NR
2.37%
1.00%
1,655.16
6,020.00
010117 DTD 113011 /MA
FED FARM CREDIT BANK 04.875
Aaa/AAA/AA+
431,000
4.88%
01/17/2017
21,011.25
0.97% 1.01
442,982.75
104.048
448,446.88
4.15%
% DUE 011717 DTD 010907 FC
NR/NR/NR
4.69%
0.97%
5,464.13
9,571.79
07172007
STATE BK INDIA NY US RT
CD
248,000
2.00%
04/27/2017
4,960.00
1.11 % 1.30
248,000.00
101.170
250,901.60
2.32%
02.0000% MAT 04/27/17 FIXED
1.98%
1.11 %
2,901.60
883.29
RATE CD /NY
COMENITY BANK DE US RT
CD
200,000
1.15%
06/19/2017
2,300.00
1.56% 1.45
200,000.00
99.400
198,800.00
1.84%
01.1500% MAT 06/19/17 FIXED
1.16%
1.56%
-1,200.00
176.44
RATE JUMBO CD /DE
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 2 of 7
N
Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued)
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
Maturing 2018
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
CD
248,000
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
247,151.84
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2017
1,078.63
/UT
GE CAP BK UT US RT 01.7500%
CD
130,000
1.75%
08/03/2017
2,275.00
1.26% 1.57
130,000.00
100.770
131,001.00
1.21%
MAT 08/03/17 FIXED RATE CD
248,000.00
99.658
247,151.84
2.29%
1.74%
1.26%
1,001.00
168.29
1.30%
/UT
-848.16
1,130.61
FIXED RATE CD /NY
GE CAP RETAIL BK UT US RT
CD
247,000
1.75%
08/03/2017
4,322.50
1.26% 1.56
247,000.00
100.770 1
248,901.90
2.30%
01.7500% MAT 08/03/17 FIXED
3,240.00
1.80%
2.70
240,000.00
1.74%
1.26%
1,901.90
MAT 10/04/18 FIXED RATE CD
1,764.53
RATE CD /UT
1.37%
1.80%
-2,913.60
239.67
/UT
SUN NATL BK NJ US RT
CD
240,000
1.00%
10/03/2017
2,400.00
0.56% 1.74
240,000.00
100.771
241,850.40
2.24%
01.0000% MAT 10/03/17 FIXED
736,000
1.30%
05/09/2018
$9,564.00
0.99%
0.56%
1,850.40
177.53
6.77%
RATE CD /NJ
1.31%
1.55%
$-4,609.92
$2,448.91
Total 2017
1,996,000
2.49%
04/19/2017
$49,308.75
1.06% 1.27
$2,013,317.59
$2,026,891.78 18.77%
% of
Underlying rating
2.43%
1.06%
$13,574.19
income ($)/
$18,761.87
cost basis ($)/
Effective rating/
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
Est. annual
Quantity
Adjusted
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
% of
Unreal.g/I ($)
Underlying rating
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2018
ALLY BK UT US RT 01.2500%
CD
248,000
1.25%
02/26/2018
3,100.00
1.41%
2.11
248,000.00
99.658
247,151.84
2.29%
MAT 02/26/18 FIXED RATE CD
1.25%
1.41%
-848.16
1,078.63
/UT
GOLDMAN SACHS BK U NY US
CD
248,000
1.30%
02/26/2018
3,224.00
1.46%
2.11
248,000.00
99.658
247,151.84
2.29%
RT 01.3000% MAT 02/26/18
1.30%
1.46%
-848.16
1,130.61
FIXED RATE CD /NY
ENERBANK UT US RT 01.3500%
CD
240,000
1.35%
10/04/2018
3,240.00
1.80%
2.70
240,000.00
98.786
237,086.40
2.20%
MAT 10/04/18 FIXED RATE CD
1.37%
1.80%
-2,913.60
239.67
/UT
Total 2018
736,000
1.30%
05/09/2018
$9,564.00
1.55%
2.30
$736,000.00
$731,390.08
6.77%
1.31%
1.55%
$-4,609.92
$2,448.91
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2019
RIVERSIDE CA CMNTY COLGE
Aa2/NR/AA
500,000
2.35%
08/01/2019
11,725.00
1.81%
3.40
505,299.95
101.858
509,290.00
4.72%
TAX SR B BE/R/ 2.345
NR/NR/NR
2.30%
1.81%
3,990.05
4,885.42
080119 DTD 052914 /CA
AMERICAN EXPRESS F UT US RT
CD
247,000
2.15%
11/13/2019
5,310.50
2.16%
3.68
247,000.00
99.960
246,901.20
2.29%
02.1500% MAT 11/13/19 FIXED
2.15%
2.16%
-98.80
698.37
RATE CD /UT
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 3 of 7
N
Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued)
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 4 of 7
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2019
CIT BK SALT LAKE C UT US RT
CD
240,000
2.10%
11/13/2019
5,040.00
2.16% 3.69
240,000.00
99.776
239,462.40
2.22%
02.1000% MAT 11/13/19 FIXED
2.10%
2.16%
-537.60
662.79
RATE CD /UT
BARCLAYS BK DE US RT
CD
240,000
2.05%
12/17/2019
4,920.00
2.15% 3.78
240,000.00
99.629
X39,109.60
2.21%
02.0500% MAT 12/17/19 FIXED
2.06%
2.15%
-890.40
188.71
RATE CD /DE
AMERICAN EXPRESS C UT US RT
CD
100,000
2.15%
12/18/2019
2,150.00
2.19% 3.78
100,000.00
99.852
99,852.00
0.92%
02.1500% MAT 12/18/19 FIXED
2.15%
2.19%
-148.00
76.58
RATE CD /UT
Total 2019
1,327,000
2.20%
10/13/2019
$29,145.50
2.03% 3.60
$1,332,299.95
$1,334,615.20
12.36%
2.18%
2.03%
$2,315.25
$6,511.87
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2020
MASS ST GO CONSOL LN TAX SR
Aa1/AA+/AA+
500,000
2.09%
05/01/2020
10,450.00
1.90% 4.11
499,995.00
100.773
503,865.00
4.67%
B BE/R/ 2.090 050120 DTD
NR/NR/NR
2.07%
1.90%
3,870.00
1,741.67
052814 /MA
FHLMC NTS 02.000 % DUE
NR/AAA/AA+
1,000,000
2.00%
11/25/2020 02/25/2016
20,000.00
2.00% 0.15
1,000,000.00
100.015
1,000,150.00
9.26%
112520 DTD 113015 FC
NR/NR/NR
100.00
2.00%
1.90%
150.00
1,666.67
05252016
Total 2020
1,500,000
2.03%
09/17/2020
$30,450.00
1.97% 1.48
$1,499,995.00
$1,504,015.00
13.93%
2.02%
1.90%
$4,020.00
$3,408.33
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal. g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2021
FNMA NTS STEP-UP 01.000 %
Aaa/AAA/AA+
900,000
1.00%
11/19/2021 05/19/2016
9,000.00
NA NA
899,100.00
98.804
889,236.00
8.23%
DUE 111921 DTD 111915 FC
NR/NR/NR
100.00
1.01%
NA
-9,864.00
1,050.00
05192016
MIZRAHI TEFAHOT BK CA US RT
CD
245,000
1.25%
11/30/2021 05/30/2016
3,062.50
NA NA
245,000.00
99.337
243,375.65
2.25%
01.2500% MAT 11/30/21 STEP
100.00
1.26%
NA
-1,624.35
0.00
RATE CD /CA
Total 2021
1,145,000
1.05%
11/22/2021
$12,062.50
NA
$1,144,100.00
$1,132,611.65
10.49%
1.07%
NA
$-11,488.35
$1,050.00
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 4 of 7
N
Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued)
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 5 of 7
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2022
DISCOVER BANK DE US RT
CD
245,000
2.45%
11/18/2022
6,002.50
2.63% 6.27
245,000.00
98.860
242,207.00
2.24%
02.4500% MAT 11/18/22 FIXED
2.48%
2.63%
-2,793.00
707.14
RATE CD /DE
WELLS FARGO BK NA CA US RT
CD
245,000
1.65%
11/23/2022 11/23/2018
4,042.50
0 NA NA
245,000.00
99.099
242,792.55
2.25%
01.6500% MAT 11/23/22 STEP
100.00
1.67%
NA
-2,207.45
0.00
RATE CD /CA
Total 2022
490,000
2.05%
11/21/2022
$10,045.00
2.63% 6.27
$490,000.00
$484,999.55
4.49%
2.07%
2.63%
$-5,000.45
$707.14
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2023
FHLB BOND STEP-UP 02.000 %
Aaa/NR/AA+
750,000
2.00%
06/20/2023 03/20/2016
15,000.00
NA NA
749,250.00
100.122
750,915.00
6.95%
DUE 062023 DTD 062013 FC
NR/NR/NR
100.00
2.00%
NA
1,665.00
458.33
12202013
FFCB BOND 02.380 % DUE
Aaa/AAA/AA+
1,250,000
2.38%
07/24/2023
29,750.00
2.38% 6.81
1,250,000.00
100.005
1,250,062.50
11.57%
072423 DTD 072412 FC
NR/NR/NR
2.38%
2.38%
62.50
12,974.31
01242013
Total 2023
2,000,000
2.24%
07/12/2023
$44,750.00
2.38% 6.81
$1,999,250.00
$2,000,977.50
18.53%
2.24%
2.38%
$1,727.50
$13,432.64
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2024
NEWYORK CITY TRANSITION
Aa1/AAA/AAA
500,000
2.60%
11/01/2024 11/01/2022
13,000.00
3.09% 7.77
486,750.00
96.235
481,175.00
4.45%
TAX C-3 RV BE/R/ 2.600
NR/NR/NR
100.00
2.70%
3.09%
-5,575.00
2,166.67
1 10124 DTD 120412 /NY
Total 2024
500,000
2.60%
11/01/2024
$13,000.00
3.09% 7.77
$486,750.00
$481,175.00
4.45%
2.70%
3.09%
$-5,575.00
$2,166.67
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/
income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/
Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P)
Quantity
Coupon
maturity Call price ($)
Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal.g/I ($)
price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
Maturing 2025
HSBC BANK USA DE US RT
CD
240,000
2.25%
03/11/2025 03/11/2020
5,400.00
NA NA
240,000.00
99.312
238,348.80
2.21%
02.2500% MAT 03/11/25 STEP
100.00
2.27%
NA
-1,651.20
0.00
RATE CD /DE
Total 2025
240,000
2.25%
03/11/2025
$5,400.00
NA
$240,000.00
$238,348.80
2.21%
2.27%
NA
$-1,651.20
$0.00
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 5 of 7
m% UBS
Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued)
Prepared for City of Hutchinson
RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account
Risk profile: Conservative
Return Objective: Current Income
Effective rating/
Est. annual
Adjusted
% of
Underlying rating
Effective Call date/ income ($)/
YTM (%)/ Modified
cost basis ($)/ Market
Mkt. value ($)/
bond
(Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon
maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%)
YTW (%) duration
Unreal. g/I ($) price ($)
Accr. interest ($)
port.
10,799,000 1.97%
07/06/2020 $212,498.2V
1.75%3.06
$10,806,712.5
NA
$10,800,788.51
100%
Total Bond Portfolio
0 1.97°
1.74%
$-5,924.03
$49,936.96
$10,850,725.47
Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 6 of 7
