cp11-28-2006 cAGENDA
REGULAR MEETING — HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 2006
CALL TO ORDER — 5:30 P.M.
2. INVOCATION — Rev. Brian Brosz, First Congregational - UCC
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
5. MINUTES
(a) REGULAR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14, 2006
Action - Motion to approve as presented
6. CONSENT AGENDA
(a) REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
1. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 17, 2006
2. HUTCHINSON HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT BOARD AUTHORITY MINUTES FROM
OCTOBER 17, 2006
3. CITY OF HUTCHINSON INVESTMENT REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2006
4. CITY OF HUTCHINSON FINANCIAL REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2006
(b) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
I. RESOLUTION NO. 13080 — RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING FROM WASTEWATER, WATER
DEPARTMENTS AND 2006 IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION FUND TO GENERAL FUND
AND CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND FOR ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION FEES
2. RESOLUTION NO. 13081 — RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING $121,000 FROM WATER, SEWER &
REFUSE FUND TO GENERAL FUND & 2002C REFUNDING IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
3. RESOLUTION NO. 13082 — RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL
FUND AND ENERGY LOAN FUND TO HUTCHINSON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (EDA)
FUND
4. RESOLUTION NO. 13083 — RESOLUTION TRANSFERRING $321,500 FROM LIQUOR FUND TO
GENERALFUND
5. RESOLUTION NO. 13084 — RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE (PUMPS & LABOR, UNLEADED
GASOLINE)
(c) PLANNP_VG COMMISSION ITEMS
1. CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT SUBMITTED BY BRUCE NAUSTDAL LOCATED AT 1150
BLUEJAY DRIVE SW WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FAVORABLE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 13075)
2. CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT REQUESTED BY PAUL BETKER LOCATED AT 235
OTTAWA AVENUE SE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FAVORABLE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 13076)
3. CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW TOWING COMPANY OFFICE
WITH IMPOUND LOT LOCATED IN THE C4 (FRINGE COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT AT 700
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA —NOVEMBER 28, 2006
AIRPORT ROAD WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FAVORABLE PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 13077)
4. CONSIDERATION OF VACATION OF 10 FEET OF A 20 FOOT DRAINAGE AND UTILITY
EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, HANSON' S SUBDIVISION
OF PETERSON ESTATES, 320 JEFFERSON COURT WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND
FAVORABLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.
13078 AND WAIVE FIRST READING AND SET SECOND READING AND ADOPTION OF
ORDINANCE NO. 06 -0448 FOR DECEMBER 12, 2006)
5. CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OVER 1000 CUBIC YARDS OF
FILL IN FLOOD PLAIN FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACIILTY
EXPANSION WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND FAVORABLE PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDATION (ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 13079)
(d) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF AIRPORT HANGAR LEASE POLICY
(e) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF LEASE AGREEMENT WITH LIFELINK AT THE
HUTCHINSON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
(f) REAPPOINT MENT OF DON WALSER TO HUTCHIN SON UTILITIES COMMISSION TO DECEMBER
2011
Action — Motion to approve consent agenda
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS — 6:00 P.M. - NONE
8. COMMUNICATIONS, REQUESTS AND PETITIONS
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(a) CONSIDERATION FOR PROVIDING NOTICE OF OPEN ENROLLMENT FOR CITY OF
HUTCHINSON TOWING SERVICES AND ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES OF ELIGIBLITY FOR
OPEN TOWING
Action — Motion to reject — Motion to approve
(b) DISCUSSION OF TRUNK HWY 7/15/22 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ASSESSMENTS AT 465 NORTH
MAIN STREET
Action
10. NEW BUSINESS
(a) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF PROPERTY ACQUISITION OF LOT 8, BLOCK 2, CEDAR
ACRES SUBDIVISION AS REQUESTED BY HUTCHINSON AREA HEALTH CARE
Action — Motion to reject — Motion to approve
(b) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF CREATING CITY FUND TO BE KNOWN AS THE "TAX
RELIEF FUND"
Action — Motion to reject — Motion to approve
(c) DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CITY OF HUTCHINSON COMPENSATION PLAN
Action -
*11. MISCELLANEOUS
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA —NOVEMBER 28, 2006
(a) COMMUNICATIONS
0 CLAIMS, APPROPRIATIONS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS
13. ADJOURN
0
MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING — HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2006
CALL TO ORDER — 5:30 P.M.
Mayor Steve oo ca e t e meeting to order. Members present were Jim Haugen, Casey Stotts and Bill Arndt.
Member absent was Kay Peterson. Others present were John Rodeberg, Director of Public Works and Marc
Sebora, City Attorney.
2. INVOCATION — Rev. Brian Brosz, First Congregational — UCC, delivered the invocation.
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENTS
5. MINUTES
(a) REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 24, 2006
(b) SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 1, 2006
(c) SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 8, 2006
(d) BID OPENING MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 7, 2006
Motion by Stotts, second by Haugen, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried unanimously.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
• (a) REPORTS OF OFFICERS, BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
1. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BOARD MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 29, 2006
2. BUILDING DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2006
3. FIRE DEPARTMENT MONTHLY REPORT FOR OCTOBER 2006
4. PUBLIC ARTS COMMISSION MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 19, 2006
5. HUTCHINSON HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BOARD MINUTES OF
SEPTEMBER 19, 2006
6. HUTCHINSON PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 25, 2006
7. HUTCHINSON AIRPORT COMMISSION MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 28, 2006
8. PARKS, RECREATION, COMMUNITY EDUCATION BOARD MINUTES OF OCTOBER 2, 2006
9. HUTCHINSON UTILITIES COMMISSION FINANCIAL REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 2006
(b) RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES
1. RESOLUTION NO. 13068 — RESOLUTION CERTIFYING ASSESSMENTS OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON TO MCLEOD COUNTY
2. RESOLUTION NO. 13070 — RESOLUTION APPROVING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES
3. RESOLUTION NO. 13074 — RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE (COMPUTERS, LAPTOPS,
PEACHTREE SOFTWARE, AND DIESEL FUEL)
4. CONSIDERATION OF VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE EASEMENT LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH LINE OF LOT 14, RICE ADDITION, 630 DALE STREET SW WITH STAFF
5(¢)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES —NOVEMBER 14, 2006
RECOMMENDATION AND FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION (SECOND READING AND
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 06 -0446)
5. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO SECTION 154.062 OF THE CITY CODE ADDING
LANGUAGE TO ALLOW TOWING COMPANY OFFICE WITH IMPOUND LOT WITH STAFF
RECOMMENDATION AND FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION (SECOND READING AND
ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 06 -0447)
(c) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF SHORT -TERM GAMBLING LICENSE FOR CHRIST THE
KING CHURCH ON DECEMBER 2, 2006
(d) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF SHORT -TERM GAMBLING LICENSE FOR ST. ANASTASIA
CATHOLIC CHURCH ON DECEMBER 21, 2006
(e) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF IMPROVEMENT PROJECT CHANGE ORDERS
- CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, LETTING NO. 14- PROJECT NO. 06 -16 (HATS COLD STORAGE
BUILDING)
- CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, LETTING NO. 4- PROJECT NO. 06 -12 (SOUTH MILL POND TRUNK
SANITARY LINING)
- CHANGE ORDER NO. 2, LETTING NO. 3- PROJECT NO. 06 -03 (DENVER AVENUE)
CHANGE ORDER NO. 1, LETTING NO. 11- PROJECT NO. 06 -13 (AIRPORT T- HANGAR)
(f) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR WASTEWATER
TREATMENT SCADA PROJECT (LETTING NO. 13, PROJECT NO. 06 -15)
(g) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF ADVERTISING FOR BIDS FOR MAIN LIFT STATION
IMPROVEMENTS (LETTING NO. 9, PROJECT NO. 06 -11)
(h) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF DESIGN SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SEH
CONSULTING FOR NORTHEAST TRUNK STORM SEWER PHASES 2 & 3
(i) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH GOODPOINTE TECHNOLOGY FOR
PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT CONSULTING SERVICES
(j) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT WITH THE SOUTHWEST
METRO DRUG TASK FORCE
Items 6(e), 6(g), 6(h), 6(i) and 60) were pulled for separate action.
Motion by Stotts, second by Arndt, to approve consent agenda with the exception of the items noted above..
Motion carried unanimously.
Item 6(e) had further discussion. John Rodeberg noted that this is for a driveway that was inadvertently
omitted from the bid.
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to approve Item 6(e). Motion carried unanimously.
Item 6(g) had further discussion. John Rodeberg noted that this is for the lift station by Tartan Park. Staff
noted that this is to replace two of the three pumps.
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to approve Item 6(g).
Item 6(h) had further discussion. John Rodeberg noted that this agreement is to redesign the storm sewer up
to the TH 15/North High Drive intersection. This will include completing a preliminary storm water
engineering design report of the TH 15 storm sewer trunk line and storm water pond. City staff will then
complete the plans and specifications.
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to approve Item 6(h). Motion carried unanimously.
Item 6(i) had further discussion. Kent Exner, City Engineer, presented before the Council. Mr. Exner
5C
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES — NOVEMBER 14, 2006
explained that for the last three years staff has been developing a pavement management program. This
agreement would allow GoodPointe Technology to complete a detailed Pavement Condition Index (surface
• review) survey on approximately 80 centerline -miles of roadway. GoodPointe would also maintain the
system data and supply specific reports to the City through May 2008. The contract would be for a not -to-
exceed amount of $20,700.00.
Motion by Stotts, second by Arndt, to approve Item 6(i). Motion carried unanimously.
Item 60) had further discussion. Dan Hatten, Police Chief, presented before the Council. Chief Hatten
explained that the City has been involved with the Southwest Metro Drug Task Force since the late 1990s.
The task force is made up of eight agencies for the purpose of targeting felony level narcotics distributors
and the interdiction of narcotics traffickers within these agencies. The financial commitment associated with
the agreement is $8400.
Motion by Stotts, second by Haugen, to approve Item 60). Motion carried unanimously.
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS —6:00 P.M. -NONE
S. COMMUNICATIONS, REQUESTS AND PETITIONS
(a) REVIEW OF DEBT LEVY OPTIONS AND CLOSED BOND FUND — STEVE APFELBACHER,
EHLERS & ASSOCIATES
Ken Merrill, Finance Director, ppresented before the Council. Mr. Merrill explained that since three bond
issues are going to be defeased, there are options available for the 2007 tax levy. Steve Apfelbacher,
financial advisor, will present these options to the Council. Some funds will be freed up from the bond fund
as well.
Steve Apfelbacher, Ehlers & Associates, presented before the Council. Mr. Apfelbacher reviewed goals set
• by the Council last spring which included limiting the tax levy to $1.5 million per year, working toward a
debt structure that keeps debt levies constant from Year to year, increasing the debt levy 5% annually to keep
pace with growth, until stable levy is achieved in 2015 and review the best ways to use cash to achieve these
goals. Mr. Apfelbacher then reviewed the projected future debt levy with the series 2006A general
obligation improvement bonds and the target debt levy vs. the projected debt levy. Mr. Apfelbacher
explained that in 2006, the City retired three debt issues with available cash. The City will save $52,343 in
interest expense. The future debt levy is reduced by almost $600,000 which provides two options for future
levy reduction. Mr. Apfelbacher outlined the two different options for the Council to consider. The first is
short-term levy reductions and the second is to defer savings for long -term levy reductions. Mr. Apfelbacher
also explained that the City has approximately $722,000 available and uncommitted from a closed bond
fund. In addition, the City could be receiving $200,000 in LGA. These additional funds can be used for
priority projects to keep annual debt at or below $1.5 million, the City can establish a reserve to "buy down"
future levies and the City can add these funds to an undesignated fund balance. Mr. Apfelbacher
recommended conducting a debt study to best manage future debt. He also recommended continuing with
the debt levy plan, using fixture levy reductions to reduce peak levy in 2015 and thereafter and using cash for
capital projects, which would reduce future levies.
No action was required.
Ken Merrill the reviewed the funding commitments for 2006, which included an outcome -based budgeting
program and completing a citizens survey. He then reviewed projects that have been approved or are being
considered, which include the School Road underpass, Crow River Dam replacement, cold storage for the
water /sewer department, City Center parking, and a new fire truck.
Mayor Cook shared his thoughts on the recommendations and the proposed projects and how they should be
funded. His hopes are that there will be a tax relief for the citizens. The tax relief fund and the projects
listed above will be discussed at the next workshop scheduled for Nov. 28, 2006. A resolution creating a
debt service tax relief fund will be drafted for the Council's consideration at the next Council meeting.
•9. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
5W)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 2006
(a) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF DOCUMENTS RELATED TO RETIREMENT SAVINGS
ACCOUNT PROGRAM
Brenda Ewing, Human Resources Director, presented before the Council. Ms. Ewing reviewed the program
which allows employees to contribute pre -tax dollars into a fund that is held in trust which can then be used
to pay for eligible medical reasons once employment with the City is terminated. The City is looking at
entenng into a program with ICMA, whom will be the administrator of the program. Ms. Ewing reviewed
the dollars that could be used for contribution, which include the annual sick leave payout, vacation leave
payout upon termination, retirement/death sick leave payout and annual police holiday payout. Another
option is to make a one -time entry into the program wit annual reduction that could not be altered year -
to- year. The City does not currently have a retirement program that includes coverage of medical insurance
other than COBRA.
Motion by Haugen, second by Stotts, to approve documents related to retirement savings account program.
Motion carried unanimously.
(b) CONSIDERATION FOR PROVIDING NOTICE OF OPEN ENROLLMENT FOR CITY OF
HUTCHINSON TOWING SERVICES AND ESTABLISHING GUIDELINES OF ELIGIBLITY FOR
OPEN TOWING
Marc Sebora, City Attorney, presented before the Council. Mr. Sebora explained that earlier this year the
City was approached by a towin.& company, First Class Towing, that was interested in providing towing
services. Because of that, the City realized that the current contract with Modem Mazda had expired in
2001. Staff is proposing to open up towing services to a "call list" type of program that would allow
multiple towing providers to provide services. All providers would have to meet the requirements indicated
in the proposed resolution. Some benefits to having "open towing" would allow greater efficiency in
removing vehicles from traffic accidents, clearing parking lots, etc. Chief Dan Hatten clarified that there has
been no problems with the current contract. General discussion was held regarding explicit contracts versus
an open towing type program.
• Lowell Baumetz, Modern Mazda, presented before the Council. Mr. Baumetz stated he is not aware of any
problems that have occurred over the life of the current contract. Mr. Baumetz noted that the aspects of
AAA play into effect of towing services. Mr. Baumetz noted he is in favor of bidding out the contract.
Gordon Evenson, First Class Towing, presented before the Council. Mr. Evenson explained that be wishes
to provide a yood customer - service based company to the City of Hutchinson. He stated that he feels having
multiple towing service providers benefits the citizens of Hutchinson as well as the police officers on staff.
Marc Sebora, City Attorney, pointed out that if the Council will be terminating the services of Modern
Mazda, they must provide notice to them by December 1, 2006.
Motion by Stotts, second by Arndt, to table this item to the November 28, 2006, City Council meeting.
Motion carried unanimously.
(c) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY STEVE KNISLEY FOR A
POLE BARN /STORAGE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT IN GOEBEL'S ADDITION
Rebecca Bowers, Planning Director, presented before the Council. Ms. Bowers explained that this item was
discussed at the last Council meeting at which time the Council directed staff to iron out issues related to
maintenance and use of the site. The proposal is for a storage -unit development in the Industrial Park. One
major issue is that the proposal does not currently comply with zoning requirements. This proposal could be
developed via a Planned Development District only due to the variances in lot dimensions, building setbacks
and parkin.& and circulation setbacks. Staff drafted a definition of permitted uses within this development as
well as additional requirements and restrictions of the development. These included but were not limited to
limiting the maximum number of lots to 10, no outside storage, no sewer and water to the units, creating an
association responsible for outdoor maintenance and snow plowing, creating a subdivision development
• agreement, and requiring landscaping and screening. If this proposal would move forward, several steps
would yet to have to be taken.
Marc Sebora, City Attorney, stated that he has learned that Minnetrista and Corcoran have similar -type
4
6 ln-)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES —NOVEMBER 14, 2006
developments, however they are condominiumized. This means they are owned by the individual, however
they are part of an association and are, for the most part, all under one big building.
• Mayor Cook noted that he has thought about this development and the location of it. He feels that since the
C4 district already allows storage units, that may be the better fit, rather than in the Industrial Park which is
more designated for 'ob creation industries. He also likes the idea of storage only, and not providing water
and sewer services. Myer Cook noted he may be more in favor of a condominium -type idea. He is not in
favor of a Planned Development District.
Steve Knisely, applicant, presented before the Council. Mr. Knisely voiced some concerns with feedback he
had received from City staff. He noted that there is a very nice development being constructed in Litchfield
and there is one in Cold Spring that has been successful. Mr. Knisely also noted that providing sewer /water
services is a huge selling point to these units. He also noted that condominiums don't go over very well due
to liability issues.
Council Member Arndt voiced that he was in favor of the idea. Council Member Haugen voiced concerns of
having uniformity amongst the units with so many different owners. It was noted that lawn care services
should be part of the development. Mr. Knisely noted that an association could be formed for this
development. Council Member Stotts noted his concerns lie with maintenance of the development. Mr.
Knisely noted that maintenance issues could be addressed in the covenants.
Council Member Haugen suggested duplex units. Mr. Knisely noted that
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to approve sketch plan submitted by Steve Knisely for a pole
ban-/storage building development in Goebel's Addition in the Industrial Park which would include
water /sewer services in a Planned Development District. Included would be the requirement of a bond or
other protection and covenants. Roll call vote was taken: Haugen — aye; Arndt — aye; Stotts — aye; Cook —
nay. Motion carried 3 to 1.
�. NEW BUSINESS
(a) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF CITY UTILITY SAFETY PLAN DOCUMENT
Brenda Ewing, Human Resources Director, presented before the Council. Ms. Ewing explained that the City
and Hutchinson Utilities Commission have entered into a joint safety program. The document presented
outlines the basic components of the Safety Program. If adopted, the document will be distributed to all City
and HUC employees. In addition, several more documents will be coming to the Council in the future for
the Council's consideration.
Motion by Stotts, second by Amdt, to approve City Utility Safety Plan Document. Motion carried
unanimously.
(b) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF AWARDING THREE -YEAR PROPOSAL TO ABDO, EICK &
MEYERS FOR AUDIT SERVICES
Ken Merrill, Finance Director, informed the Council that the City's current audit firm, Abdo Eick & Meyers
have submitted a three -year proposal to provide services.
Motion by Arndt, second by Stotts, to approve awarding three -year contract to Abdo Eick & Meyers for
audit services. Motion carried unanimously.
Mayor Cook requested that the firm provide an executive summary next year as they did this past year.
(c) DISCUSSION OF HIGHWAY 7 PROJECT STATUS
Kent Exner, City Engineer, noted that a ribbon - cutting ceremony will be held Monday November 20, 2006,
• at 9:00 a.m. to open the new bridge. The roadways will be opened on Tuesday November 21, 2006.
Although the roadways will be opened, street lighting will be continued to be worked on. The bridge will
not be painted until next year due to the cold weather. Sidewalks along the highway will not be opened over
the winter. Talks of next year's phasing has begun.
5tPL)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES —NOVEMBER 14, 2006
• Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to set November 20, 2006, at 8:45 a.m. as an official meeting for the
Council Members to attend the ribbon- cutting ceremony. Motion carried unanimously.
(d) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH DONOHUE AND ASSOCIATES FOR
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS (TREATMENT/MBR IMPROVEMENTS)
John Rodeberg noted that this contract will cover bidding, contract evaluation & award, construction
contract administration, technical shop drawing review, answer contract clarification questions, final
inspections and punch list development, record drawing preparation, equipment & system start-up assistance,
equipment & system training, operation & maintenance manual development, resident project representative
services, preliminary sewer service charge system update, final sewer service charge system update and
phosphorous management plan update, for a total of $592,135.00.
Ed Nevers, Donohue & Associates, stated that the project is anticipated to begin construction Spring 2007.
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to approve contract with Donohue & Associates for Wastewater
Treatment Plant Improvements. Motion carried unanimously.
(e) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH BRAUN INTERTEC FOR DUMP SITE
REMEDIATION
This contract is for closure of the old City dump site. It appears that the total cost of the project will now be
$30,000 as opposed to originally estimated $20,000. There is required work that needs to be done as
mandated the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The not -to- exceed amount of the contract is requested at
$16,300.
Motion by Arndt, second by Stotts, to approve contract with Braun Intertec for dump site remediation.
Motion carried unanimously.
• (f) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF AWARDING CONTRACT FOR REVERSE OSMOSIS
MEMBRANE ELEMENTS (LETTING NO. 15, PROJECT NO. 06 -17)
Kent Exner, City Engineer, presented before the Council. Mr. Exner explained that this project was rebid
due to the first low bidder not having a bid bond included. The rebidding included another incory�pletc bid
(addendum not acknowledged) and the second lowest bidder was Goldeneye Solutions Inc. with a bid of
$338,000.00.
Marc Sebora, City Attorney, reminded the Council that on a previous project an irregular bid was received
which the City awarded. The City ended up getting sued for adjustin& bid numbers. Mr. Sebora'stated that
the lesson learned is that no adjustments are made to a bid once received.
This project cannot be delayed any longer. I
Motion by Cook, second by Stotts, to approve awarding contract for reverse osmosis membrane elements to
Goldeneye Solutions Inc. in the amount of $338,000.00.
A representative from Siemens, who had the irregular bid, approached the Council. He suggested going out
for a third bid that may allow for more competitive pricing.
Mike Gold, Goldeneye Solutions Inc., presented before the Council. Mr. Gold stated that his company
submitted the low bid and submitted the proper documentation.
Motion carried unanimously.
(g) DISCUSSION OF ASSESSMENTS AT 465 NORTH MAIN STREET AS REQUESTED BY JIM RILEY
Jim Riley, 465 North Main Street, presented before the Council. Mr. Riley stated that he is opposed to the
assessments against his property due to the Hwy 7 improvement project. Mr. Riley stated that a Mn/DOT
representative informed him that the state would be paying for all of the costs associated with the project.
5(c)
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES— NOVEMBER 14, 2006
He also does not believe that his property is gaining any benefit from the stormsewer assessments especially.
Mn/DOT put two storm sewers on his property that they said they would pay-for. He also noted that his
• storm water drains into a state -owned pond.
Kent Exner, City Engineer, stated that Mn/DOT did put a storm sewer pipe on Mr. Riley's property. Mr.
Exner stated that a cost -split was done on the storm water ponds between the City and the State. The
assessment policy states that the homeowner owns /pays for the storm water pipe from the street to their
home.
John Rodeberg commented that the City did pay for a portion of all the ponds and are maintained by the
City.
General discussion was held regarding meeting notices and procedures. Kent Exner also noted that he is
under the impression that a Mn/DOT right -of -way acquisitioner may have spoken with Mr. Riley early on
about acquiring his property.
The Council requested that City staff, Mn/DOT staff and Mr. Riley meet regarding this issue. If it is not
cleared up, Mr. Riley should come back to the Council.
(h) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF SETTING PUBLIC HEARING TO DISCUSS PROPOSED
NON - SMOKING ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON
Mayor Cook noted that for the past several months the City has been talking about a non - smoking ordinance.
The Council would like to gain public feedback to discuss this in more depth.
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to approve setting public hearing for November 30, 2006, at 7:00 p.m.
to discuss proposed non - smoking ordinance for the City of Hutchinson. Motion carried unanimously.
(i) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF SETTING COUNCIL WORKSHOP TO DISCUSS
EMPLOYEE PROCESS SELECTION AND ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE IN THE PUBLIC
WORKS DEPARTMENT
Gary Plotz suggested that he and other staff members could put together some proposals on options for the
organizational structure of the Public Works department now that John Rodeberg is leaving.
Motion by Stotts, second by Haugen, to approve setting Council workshop for December 12, 2006, at 3:30
p.m. to discuss employee process selection and organizational structure in the Public Works department.
Motion carried unanimously.
(j) CONSIDERATION OF RESCHEDULING ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW FOR CITY
ADMINISTRATOR GARY PLOTZ
Motion by Stotts, second by Haugen, to reset City Administrator performance review to December 12, 2006,
following the workshop at 3:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
(k) CONSIDERATION FOR APPROVAL OF SALE OF FORMER RAILROAD PROPERTY NOW OWNED
BY THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON
John Rodeberg, Public Works Director, presented before the Council. Mr. Rodeberg explained that Tom
Daggett owns property east of the McLeod County Household Hazardous Waste building that he would like
to swap with the City. The property that he would like to swap of a 30 foot strip of land near Daggett's
Hutch Manufacturing site. The proposal is to have the County purchase the land adjacent to the Household
Hazardous Waste facility at an agreed upon price with the City. The City would then transfer the 30 foot
strip of land to Mr. Daggett and the proceeds of the sale would go to the City to pay down the McLeod Rail
Authority debt. The proposed sale price is $16,650.00.
. Motion by Hau�en, second by Arndt, to approve the sale of former railroad property now owned by the City
of Hutchinson in the amount of $16,650.00. Motion carried unanimously.
11. MISCELLANEOUS
6 tc�
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES— NOVEMBER 14, 2006
.(a) COMMUNICATIONS
Resident of 45 4"' Avenue presented before the Council. The resident noted that he has no complaints
regarding the Hwy 7 project.
The resident voiced that he thinks the idea of opening up the towing services to an "open enrollment" is a
good idea. He feels open market competitiveness is a good thing.
David Nissan, 630 Shady Ridge Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Nissan stated that he feels Modern
Mazda may not always be the most efficient and it is a good thing to open up the market to other
competitors.
Marc Sebora — Mr. Sebora thanked John Rodeberg for his years of service and noted what a benefit he has
been to the City.
All the Council Members thanked John Rodeberg for his contributions to the City over the past 17+ years.
Gary Plotz— Mr. Plotz noted that he feels an individual should be temporarily appointed as the acting Public
Works Director until the organizational structure is determined. He recommended that Kent F.xner, City
Engineer, be appointed in this role.
Motion by Stotts, second by Haugen, to authorize Gary Plotz to make a temporary appointment based on
employee qualifications.
John Rodeberg bid farewell to the City
Mayor Cook noted that he feels the Council and staff need to develop a better process of review of projects
and funding. This will allow for prioritization and he hopes it is included in the visioning process for 2007.
�. CLAIMS, APPROPRIATIONS AND CONTRACT PAYMENTS
Motion by Arndt, second by Stotts, to pay claims, appropriations and contract payments. Motion carried
unanimously.
13. ADJOURN
i
Motion by Arndt, second by Haugen, to adjourn at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried unanimously.
0
5�
MINUTES
HUTCHINSON PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Hutchinson City Council Chambers
1. CALL TO ORDER 5:30 P.M.
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Dean Kirchoff at 5:30 p.m. with
the following members present: John Lofdahl, Jim Haugen, Lynn Otteson,
Mike Flaata, Robert Hantge and Chairman Kirchoff. Absent: Farid
Currimbhoy Also present: Rebecca Bowers, Planning Director, Kent Exner,
City Engineer, Marc Sebora, City Attorney and Bonnie Baumetz, Planning
Coordinator
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
a) Consideration of Minutes dated September 19, 2006
Ms. Otteson moved to approve the minutes of September 19, 2006 as
submitted. Seconded by Mr. Flaata. The minutes were approved
unanimously.
• 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a) CONSIDERATION OF VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE EASEMENT
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 14, RICE ADDITION, 630
DALE ST S.W.
i
Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 5:35 p.m. with the reading of
publication #7512 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on October 5,,
2006.
Ms. Bowers commented on the request to vacate 4 feet of the south 10
foot easement for the construction of a two story addition to the attached
garage. She explained the property owner asked to allow a 1.8 foot
cantilever over the easement area. She reported that staff is not in favor
of decreasing the easement and then allowing encroachment over the
easement. They would want to protect the easement area. Ms. Bowers
stated the Ordinance is not clear regarding allowing cantilevers or
overhangs. She commented on the following staff recommendations with
staff approval:
1. Overhangs may not encroach into the existing 6 foot
easement.
Discussion followed on revising the ordinance for clarification. Ms.
Bowers stated there are other areas to revise in the ordinance as well.
b Lo) I
Minutes
Planning Commission — October 17, 2006
Page 2
• Mr. Patrick, property owner, stated he could answer questions. There
were no further questions from the Planning Commissioners.
Mr. Lofdal will abstain from voting.
Ms. Otteson made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr.
Hantge the hearing closed at 5:41 p.m. Mr. Flaata made a motion to
recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations.
Seconded by Mr. Haugen. The motion carried unanimously. Ms.
Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent
agenda at their meeting to be held October 24, 2006 in the Council
Chambers at 5:30 p.m.
b) CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENT TO SECTION 154.062 OF THE
CITY CODE ADDING LANGUAGE TO ALLOW TOWING COMPANY
OFFICE WITH IMPOUND LOT
Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 5:43 p.m. with the reading of
publication #7513 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on October 5,
2006.
Ms. Bowers commented on the request and the proposed language to be
added. She explained the purpose of the C2 district is for automotive
uses. She commented on the staff discussion to add screened fencing.
She clarified the items in the C2 district are in the C4 district as
Conditional uses. She explained the site the applicant will be moving
the towing company to is C4. She showed a map with C2 and C4
districts. Ms. Bowers explained staff discussion was to add the towing
company to the C4 district as a conditional use permit. She explained
that C2 was more appropriate to the automotive district. The applicant
must come in for a conditional use permit in the C4 district.
Discussion followed on the verbage of wood fencing changing the
language to 100% opacity. The language should read completely fenced
to 100% opacity or screened enclosure to 100% opacity.
There was discussion on the proposed site and the opportunity for
cleaning it up.
Discussion followed with consensus that towing companies fit the C2
automotive district. Ms. Bowers stated there are few areas of C2 where a
towing business would be permitted. Ms. Bowers commented on the
changing business of towing. She explained the C2 stretch along Hwy 7
West will possibly be changing in zoning in the future.
Mr. Hantge made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Lofdahl
the hearing closed at 5:59 p.m. Mr. Haugen made a motion to
recommend approval of the request with staff recommendations.
• Seconded by Mr. Lofdahl to include the language change in the 100%
opacity fencing requirement. The motion carried unanimously. Ms.
(D Cc�) 1
Minutes
Planning Commission — October 17, 2006
Page 3
Baumetz stated this item will be placed on the City Council consent
agenda at their meeting held October 24, 2006 in the Council Chambers
at 5:30 p.m.
c) CONSIDERATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY
NEW DISCOVERIES MONTESSORI ACADEMY TO TEMPORARILY
OPERATE A SCHOOL IN THE C4 (FRINGE COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT
LOCATED AT 1354 HWY 15 SOUTH (OFFICE MAX BUILDING)
Ms. Bowers stated this item was withdrawn by the applicant.
d) CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
REQUESTED BY JANET VALEN, REMAX, TO REMODEL
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING FOR REAL ESTATE OFFICE LOCATED IN
THE I/C (INDUSTRIAUCOMMERCIAL) DISTRICT AT 255 HWY 7 EAST
Chairman Kirchoff opened the hearing at 6:00 p.m. with the reading of
publication #7516 as published in the Hutchinson Leader on October 5,
2006.
Ms. Otteson and Mr. Haugen abstained from the discussion and vote.
Ms. Bowers explained the request and the history of the property. The
• property is zoned I/C and any use requires a conditional use permit. She
explained the proposal to construct an addition to the present residential
building for a real estate office of 7300 sq. ft. The southerly secondary
entrance will be moved to the east. The revised site plan does show the
removal of the garage and the drainage from the parking lot. Ms. Bowers
stated the removal of the garage would create room for more parking.
The main entrance will be to the east side of the building. She
commented on the site plan and parking requirements. She reported the
parking requirements provided would be adequate for the use. There is ai
danger of over parking a site. She stated the City would require;
additional details on grading and drainage. She explained tha
recommended setbacks in the IC district. Staff reviewed the plan with the
owners and a one stop shop was held on Oct. 10th. She commented on
the following staff recommendations:
1. The proposed use would meet the standards for granting a CUP.
2. The proposed addition and site improvements would comply with the
standards of the I/C district.
3. The applicant shall provide detailed plans on the proposed grading and
drainage for the site to be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer
prior to construction on the site.
4. The applicant will work with utilities regarding proper disconnection and /or
relocation of services.
•
(v C(,JI
Minutes
Planning Commission - October 17, 2006
Page 4
Ms. Bowers reported staff would recommend approval.
Discussion followed regarding fire and emergency service access. It was
noted the Fire Inspector commented in the one stop shop minutes there
was not an issue for fire service. The fire hydrant is to the west of the
Marshall Concrete entrance.
Mr. Lofdahl made a motion to close the hearing. Seconded by Mr. Flaata
the hearing closed at 6:09 p.m. Mr. Flaata made a motion to recommend
approval of the resolution as recommended by staff adding language to
number 4 that the property owner would pay for any relocation of utility
services. Seconded by Mr. Lofdahl. The motion carried with Ms. Otteson
and Mr. Haugen abstaining. Ms. Baumetz stated this item will be placed
on the City Council consent agenda at their meeting held October 24,
2006 in the Council Chambers at 5:30 p.m.
4. NEW BUSINESS
a) DISCUSSION OF SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED BY STEVE KNISLEY,
FOR REPLAT IN GOEBEL'S ADDITION
Ms. Bowers explained the need for feedback from the Planning
Commission on this item. She commented on the request and the unique
idea. She reported the request does not fit into the zoning ordinance
allowance for the 1 -1 district. She stated it would be a stretch to do a
Planned Development District. She commented on the following
concerns by staff: lot coverage, the development meeting the ordinance
requirements, using a PDD, fire service access, highly traveled 5"' Ave.
and look of the industrial park in the future.
Mr. Knisely, commented on the concept and the information regarding the
Litchfield development. He stated this idea has gone over well in
Litchfield. He commented on the lots in Litchfield. He explained there is
crushed rock landscaping with a 5 foot side set back and the front
setback is 10 feet. All of the buildings are at the same front setback. He
explained the run off will be to the street or to the west. He stated the
radius on the turn is designed for the fire equipment. He commented on
the cost effectiveness of developing this property and explained the
demographics of the property. Discussion followed on locating in the
industrial park. Mr. Knisley stated the road will be maintained by an
association. He explained 20% of the property will be green space in the
Hutchinson development. There will be covenants and restrictions similar
to the development in Litchfield. He noted the development will need city
sewer, water, electric, gas, telephone and internet.
Mr. Exner commented on the run off and the determination of lot
coverage ratio for the size of the present pond. A stormwater analysis
may be required to determine ponding size. He stated they may need to
provide ponding on site. He explained the rear of the site is the obvious
area. Ponding would be in combination with storm sewer. Mr. Knisley
stated possible coverage will be approximately 50 %.
� (�-J
Minutes
Planning Commission — October 17, 2006
Page 5
Discussion followed on maintenance of the property mowing and snow
• removal. Mr. Knisley stated each lot will be owned by individuals to
maintain. He stated there will be covenants to address things like
maintenance. Ms. Bowers commented on her concerns in using a PDD
to circumvent the ordinance. She explained there are questions to be
worked out if this moves forward. There was discussion on the ability to
assess individual owners.
Ms. Bowers explained PDD's have been used in residential
developments. Discussion followed on concerns with associations.
Mr. Knisely stated the development in Litchfield is a PUD. Each unit has
sewer and water and drains in each building. Mr. Exner commented on
his concerns with what people be using these lots for. Ms. Bowers
stated there will need to be conditions in the PDD. She explained pole
type buildings presently require conditional use permits. Mr. Knisley
stated the covenants would state what uses would be allowed in the
development. There was discussion on the need for this type of concept.
Mr. Knisley stated no outside storage is allowed and the lots are to be
kept clean.
Ms. Bowers stated density and ponding is a concern. Mr. Knisley
explained the people that want these do not want large lots. He noted
this development would be 26 taxable properties for the City. Discussion
followed on the intent of the Industrial districts to create jobs. This type of
. development does not fit into the zoning ordinance requirements. Ms.
Bowers commented on her concern regarding the long term issues with
this type of development. Discussion followed on how to make this work
in changing times.
Atty. Sebora explained the process and that the developer would move
forward with the application. He stated the staff and Planning Commission
would make recommendations to the City Council. He suggested the;
developer move forward with his idea and see what will be allowed. He
stated he has reservations in allowing the use for storage of vehicles.
i
Ms. Bowers stated clear direction should be given to Mr. Knisleya
Discussion followed on the possibility of having a multi tenant building or
a PDD.
Orville Mackenthun, realtor, explained the history of the Goebel lots. He
stated this development would put the property to good use. Ms. Bowers
stated the development would take a Plat, PDD plan and drainage and
utility plans. The Planning Commission would like to see the project work
and directed the sketch go to the City Council for their feedback knowing
it will take engineered drainage for stormwater management.
b) DISCUSSION OF PROPOSAL FOR SKETCH PLAN SUBMITTED
BY EXCELSIOR HOMES
6Z-1
Minutes
Planning Commission — October 17, 2006
Page 6
Ms. Bowers commented on the sketch plan and feedback on the lot
depth difference. She explained the history of the property and the
request for 5 new lots. She stated the lot depth requirement is 120' and
two lot depths would be 90 feet requiring variances. She explained the
house would be modular homes with attached garages and full
basements. The cul -de -sac would be public and meets the city
standards.
Jeff Munsell, owner, commented on the costs. He stated this
development will be affordable housing.
Discussion followed on the need for affordable housing and this was a
good fit. Ms. Bowers stated the next step is to apply for a preliminary
plat and variance. Mr. Exner stated the platting alternatives are limited.
He reported these lots have more frontage than in Fairway Estates and
the sketch looks good. It is the consensus of the Planning Commission
to go ahead with the preliminary plat and variance applications.
5. OLD BUSINESS
6. COMMUNICATION FROM STAFF
Ms. Bowers suggested some new business items such as lot splits
be placed on the consent agenda to save time. She stated the
• Planning Commission could pull items off the consent agenda to be
placed at the end for discussion if needed. The consensus of the
Planning Commission is to use the consent agenda for the items
that would not need extra discussion.
Mr. Hantge suggested staff develop a cause and effect list to help
the Commissioners understand legal issues to be resolved on
requests.
Ms. Otteson commented on the APA conference and the seminars
on environmental impacts.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
•
L 4) k
Hutchinson Housing & Redevelopment Authority
Regular Board Meeting Tuesday, October 17, 2006, 7:00 AM
Minutes
1. CALL TO ORDER: Chairman Casey Stotts called the meeting to order. Members Present: Becky
Felling, LaVonne Hansen, Ruth Kimball and Joel Kraft. Staff Present: Jean Ward and Judy Flemming.
2. MINUTES OF THE HRA BOARD MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 19, 2006
Joel Kraft moved to approve the Minutes as written. Casey Stotts seconded and the motion carried
unanimously.
3. FINANCIAL REPORTS
a. Joel Kraft moved to approve the Financials. Becky Felling seconded and the motion carried
unanimously.
b. LaVonne Hansen said she would be interested in being on the Loan Review Committee. Joel Kraft
moved to nominate LaVonne Hansen to the Loan Review Committee and Becky Felling seconded
and the motion carried unanimously.
4. PARK TOWERS
a. Jean Ward reviewed with the Board the 2005 PHAS Audited Financial Score, 29.69 out of 30.
b. Jean Ward updated the Board on the facility assessment from the Center for Energy &
Environment.
c. Jean Ward reviewed with the Board the Vacancy Rate and Vacant Unit Turnaround Report.
d. Jean Ward updated the Board on the recertification status.
5. HHPOP
a. Jean updated the Board on the scattered site CASA Application. Becky Felling moved to approve
leverage funds for the CASA application. Joel Kraft seconded and the motion carried
unanimously.
I
i
6. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM UPDATE
a. Judy Flemming reviewed with the Board the cabinet proposal from the High School. Joel Kraft
moved to approve the High School's proposal as long as the price is close to the UBC bid, and the
contract is locked into a price and that they guarantee to have it completed by a certain time. Becky
Felling seconded and the motion carried unanimously.
7. UPDATE ON REHAB APPLICATION TO DEED
Jean Ward updated the Board on the status of the pre- application.
8. HOME RENTAL REHAB UPDATE
• The Evergreen Apartment project is 51% complete.
• Approached to possibly do the HOME Rental Rehab monitoring for one of the Carver County
projects.
9. CITY OF HUTCHINSON TRASH HOUSES
Casey Stotts and Becky Felling volunteered to be part of a discussion on Hutchinson trash houses.
October 17, 2006 Minutes Page I of 2 ( La),X
•10. CINGULAR LEASE DISCUSSIONS
Cingular has contacted Jean at Park Towers again about putting an antenna on the roof. Marc Sebora is
negotiating with them currently. Marc is very familiar with this process, because he has negotiated all
of the City's tower contracts.
•
•
11. COMMUNICATIONS
a. Ruth Kimball updated the Board on the Mid MN Transportation Survey meeting she went to in
Willmar.
b. The HRA Offices at the City Center have moved.
c. Jean will be getting QuickBooks for City Center finances.
d. FYI - Washington Update "Second Chance Act" introduced in Congress
12. ADJOURNMENT
Becky Felling moved to adjourn. Joel Kraft seconded and the motion carried unanimously. There being
no other business, Chairman Casey Stotts declared the meeting adjourned.
Recorded by Jean Ward, HRA Executive Director
Secretary/Treasurer
October 17, 2006 Minutes Page 2 of 2
� C�j�
• 22- Nov -06
L]
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
October 31, 2006
Date Date
Of Of
Purchase Maturity
Amount
Interest
Institution
Description
Rate
US BANK
FHLB
4.10%
Smith Barney
FHLMC med
4.00%
Smith Barney
FHLB C
4.50%
Smith Barney
FHLB C
4.500%
Smith Bamey
FHLB C
5.010%
Smith Barney
FHLM -C
4.650%
Smith Barney
FHLM -C
5.550%
Smith Barney
Rhinland (�me«
5.200%
Wells Investmen FHLN
5.279%
Wachovia
FHLB
4.00%
Wachovia
FHLB
4.00%
•
06126/13
400,000;00
Wachovia
FHLB
4.000%
Wachovia
FHLB
4.000%
Wachovia
FHLB step
4.500%
Wachovia
FHMA
5.350%
Wachovia
FHLB = step ul
5.330%
First Minnesota
2.670%
First Minnesota
12/19/06
4.650%
Home State
11/20/06
4.950%
L]
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT
October 31, 2006
Date Date
Of Of
Purchase Maturity
Amount
111312004
11/19/2008
375,000.00
7/30/2004
7/27/2012
300,000.00
step up
1/712004
7/30/2009
300,000.00
4128/2005
10/28/2008
750,000.00
4/26/2005
4/26/2010
270,000.00
11/21/2001
5/21/2007
300,375.00
3/1/2006
3/1/2011
500,000.00
9/28/2006
10/26/2006
3,518,674.58
03/22106
01/29/07
500,000.00
5/22/2003
5/22/2013
300,000.00
6/12/2003
6/12/2013
300,000.00
6/2612003
06126/13
400,000;00
7/16/2003
7/16/2013
200,000.00
2/9/2005
2/9/2007
625,OOb.00
step up
1
03/16/06
09/14/07
200,000.00
10/26/06
10/26/09
I
300,000.00
step up
11/16/04
12/19/06
400,000.00
11/18/05
11/20/06
750,000.00
10/13/06
12/12/06
500,000.00
$10,789,049.58
CDcc�3
L
•
0
200_61
163,304.05
-
_
2005
- --
October
October
1,668,204 77
-
342- 4410.76
1 475,448 80
1M
46,368.29
-
CITY OF HUTCHINSON_FINANCIAL REPORT
2006 2008 2008'. 2008 October
October YEAR TO ADOPTED BALANCE PERCENTAGE
-- -
MONTH DATE ACTUALI BUDGET• REMAINING USED
�
- 1 753 055.69 3 771,000 00 2,017,944.11 4g.gg %I
- - - - -- - -- - --
°
6 905 72 396 470.7 1 287,900 00 IN,370 17 1 138.09%vo
_.. 36.905.56
_ 353389.35 1730,003.87 2 631,300 00 901,296 13 65.75%
100 51596 1 105 474.33 1 600,815.00 495,340 67 69.06%I
'�__ 2 962.80 _ 384359 .0 68,000.00
%!
October
-,
-- -- -
,REVENUE REPORT - GENERAL
001 MAYOR
50 281 84
3,658.12
TAXES
_-
--
LICENSES
lPERMITS AND FEES
_
_ J
INT�OVERNMENTAL REVENUE
~CHARGES FOR SERVICES
-FINES & FORFEITS
315,67800
INTEREST I _
REIMBURSEMENTS
TRANSFERS
SURCHARGES - BLDG
PERMITS
(13,50041)' 201.73_ (5849.57
157,786.48 9096.27 246617.17
- 786,303.66 ! 270,552.05 _ 821,034.07
1,574.69 1 (4,378.62 _ _ 1,789.76
60,849'91
55,00000 60,849.57
243,422.00 (3,195.171
_164 ,5003 .001 822,465.93
1,789.76
_ _56._52
- 10.64%
101.31%
49.96 %1
TOTAL
17,700.00
4 538 56
5,525,792.10!
769,454.82
_6,125,810.23
io345,037.00
_
4219226.77
59.21%
97,402.78
_
79.83 %I
005 MOTOR VEHICLE
155,166 32
24,391 32
-
173,625.42
-175
214,442 00
-dA
40 816.58
_
006 ASSESSING ,
4 6124 00
481,57789
47 nn
nnn nn -
_ _ _
a7s nn i - -
OR �a°il
662,028
114
953 019.19
_
1 588,26 00 235,66.89
80.20%
160
CITY HALL ULLDING
63
355 15�
1930009 -_
2006
October
_
83.600 1
2005
_ _ _October
YTD
CITY OF_HUTCHINSON_ FINANCIAL
__ 20022 2008,
October_ YEAR_TO
- '-
_._.- MONTH DATE ACTUAL
_ -
REPORT
2006
ADOPTED
--
BUDGET'
- ..,
200_8
_ BALANCE
REMAINING
-.
!
October
EXPENSE REPORT - GENERAL
PERCENTAGE
USED
1 - _
90.25% I
11
-_ _
1
163,304.05
-
__1735947'
-
i 17 687.10 �.
151988.45,
133,373.82
.
175,07800 _ 23,068.55
---
177,855.00-1 44,481.18
86.81 °h�
- - - -J.
' 74.99 °,6i
008 PLANNING ' 149,095 25
001 MAYOR
50 281 84
3,658.12
61 521.01
58,688.00
(2,833-01)
176.51
ADMINISTRATOR
1002 CITY ADMINISTRATOR
224,64123
_ ,
3145222_
241,515.19
315,67800
74162.81
%I
76.51 %`
003
544 72
829.86
13,161.44
17,700.00
4 538 56
74.36%:,
004 FINANCE DEPARTMENT
355,024.87
44,114.92 !
385,571.22
-
482,974.00
97,402.78
_
79.83 %I
005 MOTOR VEHICLE
155,166 32
24,391 32
-
173,625.42
-175
214,442 00
-dA
40 816.58
80.97 %I
006 ASSESSING ,
4 6124 00
481,57789
47 nn
nnn nn -
_ _ _
a7s nn i - -
OR �a°il
007 LEGAL __ -
163,304.05
-
__1735947'
-
i 17 687.10 �.
151988.45,
133,373.82
.
175,07800 _ 23,068.55
---
177,855.00-1 44,481.18
86.81 °h�
- - - -J.
' 74.99 °,6i
008 PLANNING ' 149,095 25
009
INFORMATION SERVICES
117,072 28
25,713.44
181 949.64
254,317.00__ 72,367.36
71.54 %,
110
POLICE DEPARTMENT -1,9W,612.70
_ 283,810.30 ; 2,252,103.51
2 715,457 00 i 463,353W--
63 353.49
82.94 °k
115
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
18,281.61
_ 63.32 _
2
8 937.85
14,000 00 5,062.15
63.84 °Y.
116
120
SAFETY COMMITTEE
FIRE DEPARTMENT
8,745 74
342,913 95
466
55 071.86 384
16 539.37
879.46
_ _
17,850 00� 1,310.63
427,637 00 42,757.54
92.66 %1
90.00 °..i
INSPECTIONS _
_ _
150150
ENGINEERING
481,57789
4241922
1
662,028
114
953 019.19
_
1 588,26 00 235,66.89
80.20%
160
CITY HALL ULLDING
63
355 15�
1930009 -_
158440.63
189,52600 35,9( 085.3a
83.600 1
201 ECREATI ON ADMINISTR 158,743
RECREATION
173,280.18
12,696.67
9 959 29
182 303.81
72 524.71
201,998 00 19,894.19
61,013.00 (11,511.71)1
>�
1 - _
90.25% I
11
_202
203 SENIOR CITIZEN N CENTER 52,642.92
204
_CIVIC ARENA "_
209,603.28
-801,206.45--i-89,151-----
32,777.60
248,619.15'_
291,115.00' 42,49_5.85'!
85_40%
205
PARK DEPARTMENT
�� .79
659,292.57
785,374.00 126,081.43
83.95%
& POOI
'
159,898.64
25,167.22 .190
-- 59
220,475.150 25,245.41
-
208
EVERGREEN BUILDING
819.34350
00 ,538 66
75.34 %1
250
LIBRARY
144,336.54
33 581 88
147,,462A3
159,544 00 57 92.43 ;
301
CEMETERY
-
119,10303
_.._--
1 5,241 25
" 2609644
- -_
139,39964
- - - --
2791.25
_ _ _1_2',081 _
--
133,895.00 (5,504.64)= 104.11
- -_.
162,541.00 159,749 75 1.72 %'
-
310 DEBT SERVICE
320
AIRPORT
92,944 23
557,971 44
-
7.641 ,288.46
- -- 5,826.84
111,351.52
- - --
i .1,099.936.99 8.293.394.09
76.459A2
582 289.96
_
102,31600 25,856.58 74.
- _- - -- '
807,250 00 224,960.04 72.13%!
10345.037 00 � 051 F4� at . do i7 °i'
- -�-
350 UNALLOCATED GENERAL EXP
--
I TOTAL �
WIA
l J
•
2005
_
!CITY OF HUTC_HINSON FINANCIAL REPORT
October
2 0051
2006
_ __
REVENUE REPORT
ACTUL
ctober- YEAR O
PERCENTAGE
ADOPTED BALANCE
Year to Dete
MONTH DATE ACTUAL
BUDGET REMAINING
USED
AXES 1,668,_204771 0.00_._1 753,055.89 3,771,000.00 2,017,944.11 46.49 °.6,
_
LICENSES r 37,560.21 209.56 -38,779.45.q 44,900 00 6 120 55 86.37%
_ _ _ - _ _
PERMITS AND FEES_ 342,441 76 36,905 72 396 470.17 287,100.00 (109,370.17)'[-
109 370 17)j 138.09 %,
)NTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE _1.475,448.80{ 353,389 35 1,730,003.87 2 631,300 00 901,296.13 65.75°%.
- - -- - —, _
CHARGES FOR SERVICES 1,023,603.85 100 515.96. 1,105,474.33 1,600,815 00 495,340 67 69.0_6 °A.
FINES & FORFEITS 46,368 29 2 962.80 38,435.09 68,000.00 29,564 91 56.52%.
[INTEREST - - -- _ -
_(13,50041)L_ _ 201.73', (5,849.571' 55,000.00 6084957 - 10.64 °Ai
!REIMBURSEMENTS _ j 157,78648; 9096.27._ 246,617.17 243,42200 (3195.17j 101.31 °A'
TRANSFERS _+ 3687 03 66 270 552.05 821,03-
- 21,034.07 1,643,500 00 822,465.93 49.96 %',
--_ _'
SURCHA_ RGES - BLDG PERMITS _ 1_574.69 (4,378.62)1 1,789.76 000 (1,789.76) 0.00 %•
TOTAL { 5 525,792.10 { _ 769 45.4_.82 6 125,810.2_33 1_,037 00 �_ 4,219,226.77 59.21%
2008
_ _
-
I
October
2005, 2008 2006 2006
2008
BALANCE
October''
ERCE_NTAGE1
EXPENSE REPORT - GENERAL October October YEAR TO ADOPTED
SUMMARIZED
_ _ YTD. _ MONTH_DATEACTUAL BUDGET] REMAINING
USED
i
General Govt.
1 371,375 9 17 9 551.60 505 258.98
1,896,045.00 -390 786.02
3,423,652.00 583,459.77
Public Safe __
_ _
2,529,169.01 - 365,163.57 2,840,192.23
Streets & Alleys
Ys
_
,150,245 05 180,126.50 �i 1,375,157.44 1,762,392.00 387 234 56
78.03%
Parks & Recreation
1,939,583 54 257 906 96; 1 911,244.81 2 190,641 00 ' 279 596 19
87.24%1
Miscellaneous
_1
650,915 67 _ 11717836
7,641,288. 46 936 99 8,293,394.D9 10 345,037 0010 642.91
80.17%,
_ _
TAL _ _
-1,099
i,
l.0 J 1
RESOLUTION 13080
• TRANSFERRING
FROM WASTEWATER, WATER DEPARTMENTS,
AND
2006 IMPROVEMENT CONSTRUCTION FUND
TO GENERAL FUND & CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
FOR ENGINEERING AND ADMINISTRATION FEES
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON,
MINNESOTA:
THAT, $626,926 is hereby transferred by to the General Fund &
Capital Project Fund for project administration and engineer fees
as follows:
$115,733 from Wastewater Department for engineering fees
$63,353 from Wastewater Department for administration fees
$105,326 from Water Department for engineering fees
$64,548 from Water Department for administration fees
$166,090 from 2006 Improvement Bonds - Engineering fees
$111,876 from 2006 Improvement Bonds - administration fees
• AND
THAT, $59,945 of the administration fees be set aside in the
Capital Projects Fund for the purpose of Comprehensive
Planning
THAT, said transfers are hereby effective and to apply for the
2006 fiscal year.
Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of November 2006
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
• Administrator
(,W)
• CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RESOLUTION NO. 13081
TRANSFERRING $121,000 FROM WATER SEWERS REFUSE FUND
TO
GENERAL FUND 6 2002C REFUNDING IMPROVEMENT BOND FUND
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON,
MINNESOTA:
THAT $38,000 is hereby transferred from the Water
Department to the General Fund.
THAT $22,500 is hereby transferred from the Water
Department to the 2002C Refunding Improvement Bond Fund.
THAT $38,000 is hereby transferred from the Wastewater
Department to the General Fund.
THAT $22,500 is hereby transferred from the Wastewater
Department to the 2002C Refunding Improvement Bond Fund.
•
Adopted by the City Council
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
•
this 28th day of November 2006
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
• CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RESOLUTION NO. 13082
TRANSFERRING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND ENERGY LOAN FUND
TO HUTCHINSON COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (EDA) FUND
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON,
MINNESOTA:
THAT $110,000 is hereby transferred to Hutchinson
Community Development fund (EDA) from the following:
General Fund $100,000
Energy Loan Fund $10,000
THAT the named funds transfer is authorized for the fiscal
year 2006.
• Adopted by the City Council this 28th day of November 2006.
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
•
(0UD)3
• CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RESOLUTION NO. 13083
TRANSFERRING $321,500 FROM LIQUOR FUND TO
GENERAL FUND
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON,
MINNESOTA:
THAT described in the 2006 adopted General Fund Budget
$321,500 is hereby transferred from the Liquor Fund to the General
Fund.
Adopted by the City Council this 28nd day of November 2006
• Steven W Cook
Mayor
•
ATTEST:
I
I
I
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
(P (L) `�
•
RESOLUTION NO. 13084
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
RESOLUTION FOR PURCHASE
The Hutchinson City Council authorizes the purchase of the following:
ITEM
COST
PURPOSE
DEPT.
BUDGET
VENDOR
Pumps & labor
$25.560
Replace EDQ basin pumps
WWTP
Yes 2007
Electric Pump
*Ire following items were authorized due to an emergency need:
ITEM
COST
PURPOSE
DEPT:
BUDGET
VENDOR
Unleaded gasoline
17,058
Use by MnDOT County &
City
HATS
YES
Cenex
Date Approved:
Wotion Made By:
Seconded By:
Resolution submitted for Council action
by:
Gcbb 5
RESOLUTION NO. 13075
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, RAVENWOOD WEST
Whereas, Bruce Naustdal, property owner, has requested approval to split Lot 4, Block 1, Ravenwood West,
legally described as follows:
Northerly Parcel: The northerly 43.00 feet of Lot 4, Block 1, Ravenwood West, according to the recorded pat
thereof. (8,905 acres)
Southerly Parcel: Lot 4, Block 1, Ravenwood West, according to the recorded plat thereof, except the
Northerly 43.00 feet of said Lot 4. (9,129 acres)
Whereas, the Planning Commission discussed and made recommendations on November 21, 2006, on the request
and considered the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, effects of the proposal on the health, safety, and welfare of
the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of
properties in the surrounding area and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and hereby recommends approval of
the request.
The City Council has considered the recommendation and findings of the Planning Commission and hereby does
recommend approval of the lot split, subject to the following findings and conditions:
1. The proposed lot splits would meet the standards of the R -2 zoning district,
subject to the conditions stated.
2" Moving or removing of services will be at property owner's expense.
3. Separate services are required for each lot.
4. This area is in the airport zone and the building square footage cannot exceed
. 30,240 total for all 8 lots. This would equal 3780 sq. ft. of building per lot.
5. Lots at 50% coverage will not be allowed to add sheds, patios, decks or
gazebos. The applicant shall provide written disclosure to the buyers that no
additional coverage will be allowed beyond the 50 %.
6. At the time of platting, money was escrowed for two trees per lot. However,
as money was not provided for the additional twin home lots, the new lot
division will require one additional tree per lot at $200.00 per tree. This will
be collected with the building permit fees.
Adopted by the City Council this 28" day of November, 2006.
ATTEST:
Gary D. Ploiz Steven W. Cook
City Administrator Mayor
0
(, Cc) l
0
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 22, 2006
TO: Hutchinson City Council
FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A LOT SPLIT REQUESTED BY BRUCE NAUSTDAL FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1150 BLUEJAY DRIVE S.W.
Request:
The applicant is requesting approval of a lot split for 1150 Bluejay Drive S.W., which is located
in the Ravenwood West development. There has been a previous lot split approv?d for this
development to allow twin -homes to be constructed on the lots. Additional details and
analysis on the proposal are contained in the attached staff report.
Planning Commission Meeting:
The Planning Commission considered the request at their November 21, 2006, meeting. There
were no property owners who made comment or objected to the request.
40 Recommendation:
The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the lot split with the
recommendations, findings and conditions as stated in attached Resolution # 13075.
(c) 1
DIRECTORS REPORT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
From: Brad Emans, Dolf Moon, Dave Hunstad, Miles Seppelt, Dan Sexton, Judy
Flemming, Jean Ward, John Rodeberg, P.E., Kent Exner, John Webster, John
Olson, Lenny Rutledge, Kyle Dimler, Mark Schnobrich, Marc Sebora, Gary
Plotz, Ken Merrill, Jim Popp, Dan Hatten, Dick Nagy, Rebecca Bowers, and
Bonnie Baurnetz (Persons in attendance at Planning Staff Meeting in bold)
Date: November 6, 2006 — Meeting Date: November 21, 2006
Subject: Lot Split for Property at 1150 Bluejay Drive S.W.
Applicant: Bruce Naustdal, property owner
LOT SPLIT
Brief Description
The property owner is requesting a lot split for construction of a twin home located in the
Ravenwood West plat. The lots were intended for twin homes and developed with 2 water and
sewer services to each lot, however were not platted as twin homes. This area is in the airport
zone and the building square footage cannot exceed 30,240 total for all 8 lots. This would equal
3,780 sq. ft. of building per lot. Lot coverage is limited to 50% per lot.
Area Map
l (c) 1
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning: R2 (Medium Density Residential)
40 Property Location: 1150 Bluejay Dr. S.W.
Lot Size: Northerly parcel — 8905 sq. ft.
Southerly parcel — 9129 sq. ft.
Existing Land Use: R2 (Medium Density Residential)
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning: R2 (Medium Density Residential) on the west, north and south
R3 (Medium -High Density Residential) on the east
Comprehensive
Land Use Plan: Mixed Use Residential Neighborhood
Zoning History: The property was annexed to the City of Hutchinson in April 1998. A
preliminary plat was approved in May of 2003. Ravenwood West final
plat was approved in July 2003 and contained 21 lots with an outlot.
The lots were platted as single family lots with the intention of splitting
them in the future as the lots developed. The total units would be 29
units if twin homes were constructed on the eastern side. Lot 3, Block
1, Ravenwood West was approved for lot split in July, 2006.
Applicable
Regulations: Section 153.05, City Code
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation: Bluejay Dr. S.W.
Analysis and
Recommendation: The proposed lot split would meet the requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance, therefore staff recommends approval with the following
recommended findings and conditions:
1. The proposed lot split would meet the standards of the R -2
zoning district, subject to the conditions stated and airport
zone building square footage requirements.
2. Moving or removing of services will he at property owner's
expense.
3. Separate services are required for each lot.
4. Lots at 50% coverage will not be allowed to add sheds,
patios, decks or gazebos.
5. At the time of platting, money was escrowed for two trees
per lot. The new lot division will require one additional tree
per lot at $200.00 per tree. This will be collected with the
building permit fees.
0 Cc: Bruce Naustdal, 1175 Dale St. S.W.
c0CC -�)
�_ r ✓ ✓ ✓ 1$, �� DESCRIPTION FOI
30f �p °TMW
Lot 2, 81ock 1, R
5 sad`
Northerly 41.00 f
N89 050'38 "E v' I gTA°p4' ' �o
35.17 N 5 1 Area 10,496 S,
m ✓ �j a,
sn Q
OO '� ✓ N0, , Sc
h _
O 50 a ° y�.70 p m
\ N S74" 4a L�7}
2 . �.-
Il ' 44 "r ✓ � ,
✓ ✓
I 3 �
BLOCK I I
I.,,-' ✓
S7a°Ci4 aA ^W
a - +
✓
T9
w
=✓ ^.. '
LLI
°skad,,,M
1<7 4 t�
II ST 1 �.2ti
ul
�
w 3 C
✓
w ✓ ✓. Co to J 1
• RESOLUTION NO. 13076
RESOLUTION APPROVING A LOT SPLIT OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, SOUTHWIND
Whereas, Paul Betker, property owner, has requested approval to split Lot 4, Block 1, Southwind, legally described
as follows:
Westerly Parcel: That part of Lot 4, Block 1, Southwind, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying west
of a line described as follows:
Commencing at the southwest comer of said Lot 4; thence easterly, along the south line of
said Lot 4 a distance of 43.51 feet to the beginning of the line to be described; thence
northerly, parallel with the west line of said Lot 4 a distance of 130.11 feet to the north line .
of said Lot 4 and said line there terminating.
Easterly Parcel: That part of Lot 4, Block 1, Southwind, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying east of
a line described as follows:
Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 4; thence easterly, along the south line of
said Lot 4 a distance of 43.51 feet to the beginning of the line to be described; thence
northerly, parallel with the west line of said Lot 4 a distance of 130.11 feet to the north
line of said Lot 4 and said line there terminating
Whereas, the Planning Commission discussed and made recommendations on November 21, 2006, on the request
and considered the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance, effects of the proposal on the health, safety, and welfare of
the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of
properties in the surrounding area and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and hereby recommends approval of
• the request.
The City Council has considered the recommendation and findings of the Planning Commission and hereby does
recommend approval of the lot split, subject to the following findings and conditions:
1. The proposed lot splits would meet the standards of the R -2 zoning district,
subject to the conditions stated.
2. Moving or removing of services will be at property owner's expense.
3. Separate services are required for each lot.
4. Lots at 50% coverage will not be allowed to add sheds, patios, decks or
gazebos. The applicant shall provide written disclosure to the buyers that no
additional coverage will be allowed beyond the 50 %.
5. At the time of platting, money was escrowed for two trees per lot. However,
as money was not provided for the additional twin home lots, the new lot
division will require one additional tree per lot at $ 200.00 per tree, for a total
of $ 400.00.
Adopted by the City Council this 28`s day of November, 2006.
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
(e Cc) C-�-
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 22, 2006
TO: Hutchinson City Council
FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF LOT SPLIT FOR 235 OTTAWA AVENUE S.E.
APPLICANT: PAUL BETKER, PROPERTY OWNER
Request:
The property owner submitted a request on November 6"' fora lot split located at 235 Ottawa
Avenue S.E. The application was submitted considerably past the application deadline
(October 18') for the November meeting and after the planning staff meeting was held.
However, due to the time of year and in an effort to keep the application moving through the
process, staff presented the request to the Commission to consider the lot split or table it until
the December meeting. Although the application was submitted after the Planning Commission
deadline, the proposed lot split would meet the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
• Additional details are included in the attached report to the Planning Commission.
Planning Commission Meeting: j
•
The Planning Commission considered the request at their November 21, 2006, meeting.j The
Commission discussed the issue of the late application, his behavior towards the Commission
and staff, and whether this item should be tabled until the next meeting. They emphasized the
importance of following deadlines and procedures and that other developers have been Oble to
comply. Mr. Betker debated with the Commission on the lot split process and expressed his
disagreement with having to get lot splits before construction and the two trees per lot
requirement. Staff stated both items are legally required by ordinance. The Commission also
discussed the 50% maximum coverage requirement and raised concern on whether additional
coverage in the future could be monitored as the properties are already at 50% coverage.
The Commission stated that they will allow the lot split to proceed to the Council on the
condition that the future lot split applications are turned in by the deadlines and that the
remaining lots are split ahead of time.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the lot split with the stated findings
and conditions in the attached resolution.
Le tc') �
U
•
DIRECTORS REPORT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
From: Rebecca Bowers, Planning Director, and
Bonnie Baumetz, Planning Coordinator
Date: November 13, 2006 — Meeting Date: November 21, 2006
Application: Lot Split for 235 Ottawa Avenue S.E.
Applicant: Paul Betker, property owner
LOT SPLIT
Brief Description
The property owner submitted a request on November 6'' for a lot split located at 235 Ottawa
Avenue S.E. The application was submitted considerably past the application deadline (October
18`') for the November meeting and after the Planning Staff meeting was held. However, due to
the time of year and in an effort to keep the application moving through the process, we contacted
Staff and Planning Commissioners via email regarding the application to obtain comments. We
have had some response from both Planning Commissioners and Staff. Several Commissioners
and staff members recommended that we follow specified deadlines and place the request on the
December agenda or charge the extra fee for the special consideration in November. As staff has
had several discussions with the applicant on this matter, this item is presented to the Commission
for action or tabling until the next meeting.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning: R2 (Medium Density Residential)
Property Location: 235 Ottawa Avenue S.E.
Lot Size: Westerly parcel — 5636 sq. ft.
Easterly parcel — 5686 sq. ft.
Existing Land Use: R2 (Medium Density Residential)
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning: R2 (Medium Density Residential)
Comprehensive
Land Use Plan: Traditional Residential Neighborhood
Zoning History: The preliminary plat, formerly known as Hutchinson Land Holdings,
was approved in 2003 for 95 lots and planned to contain a total of 128
homes, including 62 single family and 33 two family homes (66 units).
In 2003, a final plat for 48 lots plus an outlot was approved for the first
addition.
(o (C-)D,
•
n
U
•
Lot split
Paul Betker — 235 Ottawa Ave. S.E.
Planning Commission— November 21, 2006
Page 2
Applicable
Regulations: Section 153.05, City Code
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation: Ottawa Ave. S.E.
Parking: N/A
Analysis and
Recommendation: Although the application was submitted after the Planning Commission
deadline, the proposed lot split would meet the requirements of the
Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, if the Commission wishes to consider the
lot split at this meeting, staff recommends approval with the following
recommended findings and conditions:
1. The proposed lot split would meet the standards of the R -2
zoning district, subject to the conditions stated and airport
zone building square footage requirements.
2. Moving or removing of services will be at property owner's
expense.
3. Separate services are required for each lot.
4. Lots at 50% coverage will not be allowed to add sheds,
patios, decks or gazebos.
5. At the time of platting, money was escrowed for two trees
per lot. The new lot division will require one additional tree
per lot at $200.00 per tree. This will be collected with the
building permit fees.
Cc: Paul Betker, 37 Monroe St.
6 Lc)a
LOT 4, BLOCK I , SOUTHWIND
DESCRIPTION FOR WESTERLY PARCEL
That part of Lot 4, Block I, SOUTHWIND, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying west of a line described as
follows:
Commencing at the southwest corner of sold Lot 4; thence easterly, along the south line of said Lot 4 a distance
of 43.51 feet to the beginning of the line to be described; thence northerly, parallel with the west Una of said Lot
4 a distance of 130.1 1 feet to the north line of said Lot 4 and sold line there terminating.
DESCRIPTION FOR EASTERLY PARCEL
That part of Lot 4, Block I, SOUTHWIND, according to the recorded plat thereof, lying east of aline described as
follows:
Commencing at the southwest corner of sold Lot 4: thence easterly, along the south line of said Lot 4 a distance
of 43.51 feet to the beginning of the line t0 be described; thence northerly, parallel with the west line of said Lot
4 a distance of 130.1 1 feet to the north line of said Lot 4 and said line there terminating.
EDMONTON AVENUE
37.89 57.87 curb a putty 57.62 3721 57.04
.,57.9
x
x81.3 58.0
x
50.8
59.1
1 0 15 30 60
scale in feet
LOT AREA (westerly parcel)
5636 Square Feet
Building Footprint Area as shown
2224 Sq Ft
(does not Include dray)
x
60.2
LOT AREA (easterly parcel)
5686 Square Feet
Building Footprint Area as shown
2224 Sq Ft
(does not include drivewa )
t ODT �x
59.x
59.7
s�
O
ai
N
W
ti
0
0
Z
68.0
x ---
i
i
X
58.3
58.7
x Earrh 81% Berm 6a,e
S89e33'25eE 87.00
UI
0\
57.9 x
x 57.3
8 urabyy oa. m
5
� 59. . (60.5) 2 1
PROPOSED
58.38
PROPOSED
< HOUSE
HOUSE o
57.83 etaret curb 57.43
,
po
OTTAWA
AVENUE
50'10 09
5j°k
O Denotes Von monument set
PROPOSED TOP OF FOUNDATION • 1061.0
BENCHMARK
7.334
�B
68.1 0
t:
'61.7
x
m
t _
2,
5$.2 _ r7.33 y ;+i
O
OD
0 C Garage Z Garage Z
24 24 •3
�• t 69.2
(60.5) (60.5) +
CIO 4- -
:•43.51 _ o
4 - -' L • 43.48 -- 582
A ° 0559'27" L • 87.001 sssvke 57}7aPole
60.5
x
x
58.8
Existing
House
58.62
58.38
58.07
57.83 etaret curb 57.43
OTTAWA
AVENUE
• Denotes Iron monument found
O Denotes Von monument set
PROPOSED TOP OF FOUNDATION • 1061.0
BENCHMARK
Top nut of hydrant near the
x Denotes existing elevation
PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR
• 1060.7
southwest corner of Lot 4, .8
(No Basement)
cie,,,,.,,,,, _ me en (z
Betker Builders
37 Monroe ST SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350
November 26, 2006
To: Hutchinson City Council
Below please find some of my concerns regarding my building and developing the Southwind
Addition:
1. See Attachment A. 1.07 and Attachment B. Letter regarding "Pre - Construction Conference ":
This never occurred and perhaps if it had been arranged some things may have proceeded with less
frustration. I believe the 7 % Administration fee should have covered the responsibility of scheduling
• the meeting and making sure that it occurred.
2. When the Southwind project was started I had just finished developing and building twin homes on
the North side of Hutchinson (the Walnut Ridge Addition). Those twin homes had some issues with
lot coverage. So in the plans for developing Southwind, we made the lot sizes larger in order to
prevent the same problems. The plans were drawn up and everything was approved by the City.
0
Sometime after we started, the City informed me that they again had a problem with my twin home
plans and lot coverage. This is after the lot sizes were established and approved. The square footage
of my twin home plans have virtually stayed the same as the homes on the Walnut Ridge development.
So once again, after the fact, the City was telling me I was faced with the same issue.
2 When I went to pick up my 1' building permits, Barry, the Building Inspector at that time refused
to give them to me until I installed "silt fencing "and just demanded that I have it in before he would
grant me the permits. I was not opposed to complying with this issue but this had never been
mentioned to me before and why did it have to be mentioned at the last minute, As I looked around
town, other builders did not have any silt fencing installed and they were still building. Because I had
to have it done that day, I did not have time to check around for pricing and had to pay a premium
price to get it done. I really felt that Barry should have told me this when I brought the plans in,
called me or something but not just blurted it out the day I picked up my plans and the permits.
•3. See Attachment C - vases 1 & 2:
The lots, single family homes and twin home lots, were approved by the City from the beginning
agreement regarding the development Therefore, the City knew what was to be developed and how it
would occur. My concern is why so much time has to be taken to approve the splitting of the twin
home lots when the issue was known from the start of the development,
4. See Attachment D item #10 dated Dec. 17.2002:
This states the following: " There are a few significant trees in and around the edge of the previous
farm site, near Jefferson Street The developer should work with the forester to identify and preserve
these trees." Before I gave the city any money to start the project, ALL the trees were clear cut before
either the City or I (Paul Betker) gave the go ahead to do so. Therefore, I lost all the trees and never
did find out who gave the OK to cut them down.
5. Attachment E. item #4:
Also regarding the tree issue it states "The Developer will provide dollars to the City for the planting
of boulevard trees at a rate of $180 per tree (2 trees per lot), which equals $17,280."
Our understanding of the above is the following. Each lot gets 2 trees for a total of $360. Therefore,
as an example, Block 3 -Lot 4, is a lot that will have a twin home built on it and it will get 2 trees for a
total of $360. When I split the lot, the boulevard yard on each side of the twin home will have one tree
per half of Block 3 -Lot 4.
•6. Attachment F. vases 1 and 2:
These reflect the Cities agreement to provide the trees and plantings along Edmonton at their expense.
7 I have looked through all my communications from the City and cannot find anything that says
that the developer was required to pay for street lights. Therefore, that amount was a rather shocking
and unplanned cost of $24,000.00.
8. Also, I was not able to find anything in the agreement that the developer was responsible for
purchasing and installing street signs.
These are some of the issues that have caused my frustration. I am not opposed to working with the
City but I would also hope that the City would work with me in trying to reach a better understanding
and not waste time, energy and money for each of us.
1]
1.03.4 Work to be performed subsequent to the Work under th'
r
1. Building Construction
2. Watermain
3. Sanitary Sewer
4. Storm Sewer
t 5, Street Construction
.04 LOCATION: The project is located within the City of Hutchinson, in the area shown
n the drawings. Work shall be confined to areas where the Owner has right of entry or
)nslruction easements.
1.05 SPECIFICATION WHICH APPLY: Except as modified herein the following
specifications shall apply and are, where applicable, hereby included by reference:
The Standard Utilities Specification for Watermain and service Line
Installation and Sanitary Sewer and Storm Sewer Installation, prepared and
published by the City Engineers Association of Minnesota.
• The Minnesota Department of Transportation Standard Specifications for
Highway Construction, 1988 Edition, and all subsequent supplements, shall
apply where reference is made to them by special mention to MnDOT
Section.
TIME OF COMPLETION: Grading shall be complete no later than October 17, 2003.
7 PRE - CONSTRUCTION CONFERENCE: Prior to the beginning of any work under
contr�t, the Engineer will notify the Contractor of the time and place for a Pre -
islruction Conference. This meeting will be held for the purpose of coordinating the
,k with the others, to discuss construction needs and procedures, to determine the
iedule of work and to finalize other administrative details. The Contractor shall be
ponsiblefor having those individuals from his firm and from any sub - contractor firm, who
actually be on the site and in charge of the work, present at this conference.
presentatives of the engineer, owner, contractor, city, and public utility companies shall
present at this meeting.
1.08 NOTIFICATION OF INTENT TO BEGIN WORK: It shall be the Contractor's
-- responsibility to make any and all notifications of his intention to begin the work. These
notifications shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the City of Hutchinson, private
• utility companies, and residences which will be affected by his operations.
SCG -2
`I 11
u
August 21, 2003
Richard Hobbs
Simonson properties
2455 12" Street SE
St Cloud MN 56304
RE: Southwind Subdivision Agreement (Hutchinson Land Holdings L.L.C.)
Dear Mr. Hobbs,
Hutchinson City Center
I I I Hassan Street SE
Hutchinson, NIN 55350 -2522
320- 587- 5151/rax 320 -234 -4240
Enclosed, please find five copies of the above - referenced Subdivision Agreement. Please obtain all
signatures of fee owners and mortagees and return all five copies to this office for final execution by the
City. Note that all signatures must be notarized.
Upon final execution by the City, you will receive 4 copies, one copy for your files, one copy for Mr. Paul
Betker, one copy for Citizens Bank & Trust and one copy (marked City of Hutchinson Copy) for filing at
the County and returned to the City after recording..
• Additionally, the following items will need to be provided prior to the commencement of construction on
the property:
1. Tree escrow - $17,280.
2. 7% Engineering/Administration Fee - $48,517
3. 100% of project costs for security— either in bond or letter of credit form, in favor of the City.
4. Preconstruction Meeting must be held.
If you have any questions, please contact me. Thank you for your cooperation on this matter.
Sincer
Patrice Vander Veen
Engineering/Assessments
/pv
enc.
Bill Watkins
Home Builders Network
205 East Ridgeville Boulevard — Suite C
Mt. Airy, MD 21771
G APLANNING\Subd ivision\Agmements \CORRESOEV ELOP\.SIGNING \Southwind.do
Printed un mryded paper
•
•
CITY OF HUTCHINSON PLANNING STAFF REPORT
To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
Prepared By: Planning Staff: Brad Emans, Dolf Moon, Don Nelson, Lisa McClure,
Jean Ward, John Rodeberg, P.E., John Webster, John Olson, Lenny
Rutledge, Barry Greive; Mark Schnobrich, Marc Sebora, Gary Plotz,
Ken Merrill, Jimt Popp, Steve Madson, Dick Nagy, Julie Wischnack,
AICP, and Bonnie Baumetz
Date: December 9, 2002 — Meeting Date: December 17, 2002
Applicant: Hutchinson Land Holdings, LLC
SKETCH PLAN REVIEW
Brief Description:
In August, 2002 a petition to annex 41.3 acres in the Southeast area of the City (Shimek property)
was submitted to City Staff. The Planning Commission approved the request for annexation on
October 15`", with City Council approval on October 22nd. The request was submitted to the
Minnesota Planning Municipal Boundary Adjustments department and will be placed on their
December 13, 2002 agenda. On November 18'", the applicants presented their plan at a
predevelopment meeting and requested to be placed on the December Planning Commission
meeting to discuss the sketch plan at that time. The sketch includes a residential development
consisting of one and two family lots. There are 98 lots proposed which consist of 65 single
family lots and 33 duplex lots for a total of 131 units.
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning: RI (Low density residential)
Property Location: South of extended Edmonton Ave.
Lot Size: 41.3 Acres
Existing Land Use: Vacant
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning: Agriculture and Single Family Housing
Comprehensive
Land Use Plan: Low to Medium Density
Zoning History: NA
Applicable
Regulations: Section 1209 . Subd 1, Sketch Plan Review
i
CITY OFHUTCHINSONS PLANNING STAFF REPORT
• To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
Prepared By: Planning Staff. Brad Emans, Dolf Moon, Don Nelson, Miles Seppelt,
Amanda Alison, Jean Ward, John Rodeberg, P.E., John Webster,
John Olson, Lenny Rutledge, Barry Greive, Mark Schnobrich, Marc
Sebora, Gary Plotz, Ken Merrill, Jim Popp, Steve Madson, Dick
Nagy, Julie Wischnack, AICP; and Bonnie Baumetz
Date: February 3, 2003 —Meeting Date: February 18, 2003
Applicant: Paul Betker and Hutchinson Land Holdings, property owners
REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT
Brief Description
The applicants are requesting to plat 95 lots located in the newly annexed property (Shimek
property). The lots will be single and two family lots. Approximately 33 lots will be two family
leaving 62 single family lots, for a total of 128 units in the development. A new plat name will
be chosen by final plat action. There are no street names listed as yet. Staff is working with the
developer to name the streets. The applicants are requesting to rezone the entire area from R to
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning RI (Low Density Residential — Single Family)
Property Location: South of Edmonton Ave. SE and West of Jefferson St. SE
Lot Size:
Existing Land Use: Agriculture
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning: Agriculture to the south; Low to Medium Residential to the north;
Fringe Commercial to the west and rural residential to the east.
Comprehensive
Land Use Plan: Traditional Residential Neighborhood
Zoning History: The property was annexed to the City of Hutchinson in December, 2002.
Property annexed to the City comes m zoned RI district.
Applicable
Regulations: Section 6.05 Rezonings
Section 12.10 Preliminary Plat
C -py7,
L�
Sketch Plan Review
Hutchinson Land Holdings
Planning Commission— December 17, 2002
Page 3
4. The lilat provides for a number of outlots with no specific purpose.
The plat should,identify the purpose and the owners of these outlets.
5. The timing of Edmonton Avenue construction and water extension
from the Summerset plat are two scheduling issues. The timing of
this development will be based on the availability of the other two
projects.
6. A wetland delineation report and storm water detention details Will
need to be addressed in the preliminary plat.
7. A phasing plan must be presented during the preliminary plat to
provide an indication to the City about accessibility of the
development.
8. The development will be privately financed and will require
administrative fees for monitoring the development.
9. There are many tile lines that in the property. Commitment about
maintaining the tiles or plans for relocation, must be clearly
identified during the platting of the property.
10. There are a few significant trees in and around the edge of the
previous farm site, near Jefferson Street. The developer should work
with the forester to identify and preserve these trees.
Cc: Hutchinson land Holdings, U.C, Bill Watkins, 205 E. Ridgeville Blvd Ste. C, Mt. Airy MD 21711
Marty Campion, Otto and Assoc., 9 west Division SL, Buffalo MN 55313
Paul Betker, 37 Monroe St.,
• John Brunkhorst, Comity Highway Engineer -
•
---- ---- --
standards shall be the Subdivider's responsibility. All costs to make these repairs shall be the
Subdividers responsibility for a period of two (2) years after the project is completed and the City
• has agreed to accept the improvements. Costs incurred by the Subdivider to oversize sanitary
sewer and watermain (costs to increase size above standard 8" diameter lines) shall be
reimbursed by the City to the Subdivider at an approved upon rate.
3. All work noted in paragraph 1 above must be designed and constructed under the direction of a
registered professional engineer. The Subdivider shall have the private engineer inspect all work
and complete a "Letter of Compliance" stating that, to the best of his knowledge and expertise,
the work was completed in conformance with all applicable city, state and federal specifications
and regulations. The engineer shall also provide the City with as -built drawings in AutoCad
format. After compliance review by the City Engineering Department, a "Letter of Acceptance"
shall then be prepared and signed by the City and the Subdivider.
4. The Developer will provide dollars to the City for the planting of boulevard trees at a rate of
$180 per tree (2 trees per lot), which equals $17,280. The City will keep these dollars in reserve
until a majority of the development has buildings then plant the trees within the boulevard areas.
The location of trees shall be determined by the City Forester_
5. It is understood and agreed that the Subdivider shall pay an engineering and administrative fee to
the City to cover expenses related to review, inspection and acceptance of privately installed
infrastructure that is proposed to be turned over to the City of Hutchinson. This rate shall be as
noted in the approved City policy at the time of construction. The current rate is 7% of
construction cost, which shall only apply to those infrastructure items to become the property of
• the City. The Subdivider, or the Subdivider's contractor, shall also provide a bond or letter of
credit in favor of the City, in the amount of 100% of the private project improvements. The bond
or letter of credit and engineering/administration fee are due prior to the commencement of
construction.
6. It is understood that the following City of Hutchinson expenses and improvements are proposed
to be assessed to the subdivision in 2003, as noted in paragraph No. 1 above:
a. Half the cost to purchase the adjacent right -of -way for Edmonton Avenue SE in 2001:
$29,510 (2.27 acres at $13,000 per acre).
b. 25% of the cost to construct the previously installed trunk sanitary sewer line in 2001 (lateral
value only) adjacent to the plat: $8,906.25_
c. 25% of the cost to construct Edmonton Avenue SE improvements in 2003 and 2004 adjacent
to the plat: $92,582.06.
7. It is understood that improvements to Jefferson Street adjacent to the plat will be made in the
future, and that current policies call for 25% of the cost of these improvements to be assessed to
the adjacent property.
0 A- 337474
Sm&Y&YdSubdiviWA (—City Conuuil- August 12 ,2003 — final oopypMWAugusf21, 200
2. The Subdivider shall provide all turf establishment and erosion control necessary to protect the
utilities, pond and ditch areas and street improvements beyond the boulevard areas. The
• Subdivider shall complete all required permitting and provide all erosion control during site
grading work, prior to infrastructure construction, necessary to meet local and state
requirements. The entire site shall be planted with perennial rye grass, or other erosion control
plantings, following completion of site grading. It is understood and agreed that the City
reserves the right to complete the work necessary to meet local, state and federal regulations and
invoice the Subdivider if they are found to be in violation of these regulations.
3. Both parties have indicated an interest in reviewing the potential for constructing a landscaped
berm adjacent to the plat along Edmonton Avenue SE. The City of Hutchinson agrees to
provide trees and seeding in this area as part of the Edmonton Avenue SE project, and the
Subdivider agrees to complete grading of the berm prior to this landscaping.
4. It is agreed and understood that natural gas or electric distribution mains and services will not
be scheduled for installation until all provisions of paragraphs 1 of this section have been met.
Staging of this work must be approved, and will only be allowed with the written approval from
Hutchinson Utilities and Hutchinson Telephone.
5. It is understood and agreed that it shall be the Subdivider's responsibility to provide survey
. control points for all infrastructure and site construction.
5. It is understood and agreed that the Subdivider shall be responsible for maintaining the
condition of the infrastructure during building construction. The Subdivider shall be required to
• maintain and clean the roadways and storm sewers on a regular basis, and shall repair or replace
any street, storm sewer, sanitary sewer or watermain infrastructure damaged by operations
related to building construction on the site. The City reserves the right to complete this work
and invoice the Subdivider after 10 days written notice of work to be completed.
11. ASSESSMENTS/IMPROVEMENTS
1. The plat of Southwind has been platted to include Lots 1 -9, Block 1; Lots 1 -17, Block 2; Lots 1-
8, Block 3; Lots 1 -11, Block 4; Lots 1 -3, Block 5, Outlots A and B). The Preliminary Plat
indicates 94 lots total within all phases of the complete plat. 48 lots are proposed to be included
in the first phase of the development. It is proposed that all assessments to this subdivision are
divided on a per lot basis. Based on this assumption, all assessments noted will be divided by 94
units and spread per proposed lots to each lot, parcel and outlot in the subdivision.
2. The Subdivider hereby agrees to construct lateral sanitary sewermains and appurtenances, lateral
watermain and appurtenances, sanitary sewer service leads, water service leads, lateral and trunk
storm sewer and appurtenances, curb and gutter, site grading, ponding, street signs and lighting,
restoration and appurtenances to serve the entire plat. The City shall approve all construction
documents and shall have overview and final approval of all infrastructure proposed to be turned
over to the City. The City reserves the right to reject work that is not in conformance with its
standard specifications. It is understood and agreed that the cost of repairs, upgrades,
maintenance or other improvements required to bring the infrastructure work up to City
• SmWwndSubdWffAwuwwM — CiVCwnd- August 12, 2003— figloopypdnWAugust21,2003 A- 337474
.opmenl notes
ber 18, 2002
cJti�tu�e.���i-
an R. questioned the outlots. He stated SAC/WAC charges will increase next year. This area is in the electric
• ervices territory which is $800 per unit. These costs will be collected with the building permit.
John R. stated 25% of the cost of the road improvements will be assessed and the stormwater is a regional cost and
accessed differently. Accesses in the development look good.
Julie W. stated the outlot on Edmonton should be reserved for a possible road. Marty C. stated they may plat the lot
lines with wider easements.
John R. stated there will be a deep trunk line in that area.
Discussion followed on traffic patterns in the development.
Mark Schnobrich commented on boulevard plantings. Bill W. stated they advocate boulevard trees.
Mark S. explained the City is beginning to amend soils after development.
John R. stated plantings on Edmonton will be part of the State Aid program.
SMark S. stated there should be buffering on Jefferson St. also. Marty C. stated there is a natural screening along
ZJefferson St_ and that will remain. Mark S. will look at the trees there now. Bill W. stated they will try to save the
trees on the lots.
Marty C. stated they will be ready to present the conceptual plan to the Planning Commission on December 17'b.
Julie W. explained there will be parkland contribution of $175. per unit in the R2 district. She will check with Dolf
• Moon regarding land acquisition. She stated R2 meets the comprehensive plan.
Jim Popp commented on the need for emergency access and water supply during construction. Julie W. stated
there will be weekly updates on construction.
Don Nelson stated the main line electric is at no cost. There is a cost for the individual service connections. There
is electric and gas main line expense after it freezes.
Julie W. explained the stormwater /wetland issues must be resolved.
Roger B. stated the existing well and septic must be abandoned as per State codes. The well must be sealed and the
septic pumped and removed or crushed and buried.
0
0 RESOLUTION NO. 13077
RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY MODERN MAZDA TO
ALLOW A TOWING COMPANY OFFICE WITH IMPOUD LOT LOCATED IN THE C4 (FRINGE
COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT LOCATED AT 700 AIRPORT ROAD SW
Whereas, Modem Mazda Towing, applicant, has requested approval of a conditional use permit for property
located at 700 Airport Road S.W., legally described as follows:
That part of the North Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section Thirteen (13) Township
One Hundred Sixteen (116) North of Range Thirty (30) West, described as follows, to-
wit: Beginning at a point, said point being the intersection of the Westerly 75 foot right -
of -way line of Minnesota State Trunk Highway No. 15, with the North line of said
Northeast Quarter of Section Thirteen (13); thence Westerly along said North line of
Northeast Quarter, 1356.61 feet; thence Southerly on a line parallel with the said
Westerly 75 foot right -of -way line, 208.71 feet; thence Easterly on a line parallel with the
North line of said Northeast Quarter, 1147.9 feet; thence Southerly on a line parallel with
the said Westerly 75 foot right -of -way line 730.49 feet; thence Laste.'; en i 'iue parallel
with the North line of said Northeast Quarter, 208.71 feet to the said Westerly 75 foot
right -of -way line; tbence North along said right -of -way line, 9392 feet to the point of
beginning; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTH 208.71 feet AND That part of the
East Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section Twelve (12) in Township One Hundred
Sixteen (116) North of Range Thirty (30) West described as PARCEL NUMBER FIVE
(5) OF MCLEOD COUNTY HIGHWAY RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 26 EXCEPTING
THEREFROM any portion thereof included in Application to Registered Land Document
No. 145736
Whereas, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on November 21, 2006 on the request and considered
the effects of the proposal on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and:
anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and consistency with th0
Comprehensive Plan, and hereby recommends approval of the request.
The City Council has considered the recommendation and findings of the Planning Commission and hereby does
recommend approval of the conditional use permit and site plan, subject to the following findings and conditions:!
1. City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the
proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and the effect of
the use on the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The Council has determined that the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent ofithe
Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The property owner shall combine the two lots at the County.
Adopted by the City Council this 28a' day of November, 2006.
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz Steven W. Cook
City Administrator Mayor
0C�
0
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 22, 2006
TO: Hutchinson City Council
FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW ATOWING
COMPANY OFFICE WITH IMPOUND LOT LOCATED IN THE C4 (FRINGE
COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT AT 700 AIRPORT ROAD
APPLICANTS: BERNIE MCRAITH, PROPER T Y lOWNER, AND
LOWELL AND BONNIE BAUMETZ, APPLICANTS
Request:
The applicants are requesting a conditional use permit to allow a towing company office with a
fenced impound lot located at 700 Airport Road S.W. Section 154.064 of the City Code was
recently amended to conditionally permit towing companies in the C4 District. The applicant
• proposes to have an office in a portion of the building and construct a 110' x 75' fenced and
paved impound lot. The fence would be at least 6 feet in height, constructed of wood, and
100% opaque. The attached site plan identifies the location of the impound lot.
Planning Commission Meeting:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the request attheir November
21, 2006, meeting. There were no property owners who objected to the request. Initially staff
had recommend that the paved impound lot be moved to the south off the main parking lot in
order to not use existing parking spaces, however due to the location of the septic tank, the
paved lot cannot be moved further south. Therefore, the paved lot should be located as shown
on the attached site plan. Staff stated thatthe site contains surplus parking spaces beyond the
requirements of the ordinance. The applicant stated that they will be working with the property
owner to clean up the site and will keep cars into the fenced area.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the conditional use permit
with the stated findings and conditions included in the attached resolution.
(P (C)I3
J
0
•
K
w
tR
O
N
® SCALE. 1- = 50'-0'
� C�J3
DIRECTORS REPORT — PLANNING DEPARTMENT
To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
From: Brad Emans, Dolf Moon, Dave Hunstad, Miles Seppeit, Dan Sexton, Judy Flemming,
Jean Ward, John Rodeberg, P.E., Kent Exner, John Webster, .John Olson, Lenny
Rutledge, Kyle Dimler, Mark Schnohrich, Marc Sebora, Gary Plotz, Ken Merrill, Jim
Popp, Dan Hatten, Dick Nagy, Rebecca Bowers, and Bonnie Baumetz (Persons in
attendance at Planning Staff Meeting (in bold)
Date: November 13, 2006 —Meeting Date: November 21, 2006
Subject: CONDITIONAL, USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TOWING COMPANY OFFICE
WITH IMPOUND LOT LOCATED IN THE C4 (FRINGE COMMERCIAL)
DISTRICT AT 700 AIRPORT ROAD
Applicant: Bernie McRaith, property owner
Lowell and Bonnie Baumetz, applicants
Description of Conditional Use Permit Regn:;t:
The property owner and applicants are requesting a conditional use permit to allow a towing company office
with a fenced impound lot located at 700 Airport Road S.W. Section 154.064 of the City Code was recently
amended to conditionally permit towing companies in the C4 District. The applicant proposes to have an
office in a portion of the building and construct a 110' x 75' fenced and paved impound lot. The fence would
be at least 6 feet in height, constructed of wood, and 100% opaque.
Area M
Conditional Use Permit
Towing Company in the C4 District
700 Airport Road SW
. Planning Commission— November 21, 2006
Page 2
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning:
C4 ( Fringe Commercial)
Property Location:
700 Airport Road SW
Lot Size:
Approximately 2 acres
Existing Land Use:
Automotive Repair
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning:
I/C ( Industrial Commercial) to the South and West
C4 ( Fringe Commercial) to the North and East
Comprehensive
= -
Land Use Plan:
Urban Commercial Design
Zoning History:
The property was annexed to the City in 1998. A conditional use permit was granted
in 2002 to allow an automobile repair shop in a portion of the building. A conditional
use permit to allow outdoor storage was granted in 2003.
Applicable
Regulations:
Section 154.064 of the City Code
•
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation:
Airport Road SE
Parking: 5.5 per 1,000 sq. ft. of office space
I
100% opacity fence area impound lot
Analysis and
Recommendation:
I
Approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) is required in order to allow a towing office with an impomr lot
in the C-4 district. A CUP shall be granted only if evidence is presented to establish the following:
(a) The proposed building or use at the particular location requested is necessary or desirable to
provide a service or a facility which is in the interest of the public convenience and will contribute
to the general welfare of the neighborhood or community;
(b) The proposed building or use will not have a substantial or undue adverse effect upon adjacent
property, the character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, utility facilities and other matters
affecting the public health, safety and general welfare; and
(c) The proposed building or use will be designed, arranged and operated so as to permit the
development and use of neighboring property in accordance with the applicable district
regulations.
The proposal was reviewed at the November 6, 2006, staff meeting. Planning staff suggested that the fenced
• impound lot be moved further south off the main parking lot in order to not use existing parking spaces. As
the impound lot is proposed to straddle a property line, staff recommends that the two lots be combined
to `C�3
Conditional Use Permit
Towing Company in the C4 District
700 Airport Road SW
. Planning Commission— November 21, 2006
Page 3
into one lot. Staff discussed that the fencing would provide adequate screening and the proposal may be an
opportunity to move some of the vehicles currently being stored outside into the fences area to improve the
appearance of the property. Also discussed was that the location of the septic tank and field must he verified
before construction of the fenced parking area.
Staff finds that the request would meet the requirements of granting a conditional use permit (Section
154.170) and recommends approval subject to the findings and conditions listed in the draft findings in
Resolution 13062, including these specific conditions:
1. The paved impound lot shall be moved south off the main parking lot in order to not use existing
parking spaces.
2. The property owner shall combine the two lots at the County.
3 The location of the septic tank and field shall be verified prior to construction of Lhe Im ctd
parking area.
Cc: Bernie McRaith, 600 Tyler St. S.W.
Lowell and Bonnie Baumetz, 15717 — 160'h Street
�J
•
(C)3
• PUBLICATION NO.
ORDINANCE NO. 06 -0448
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA VACATING UTILITY AND
DRAINAGE EASEMENTS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1, HANSONS
SUBDIVISION OF PETERSON ESTATES, 320 JEFFERSON COURT S.E.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON. MINNESOTA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Notice of hearing was duly given and publication of said hearing was duly made and
was made to appear to the satisfaction of the City Council that it would be in the best interests of
the City to vacate utility and drainage easements located in Hanson's Subdivision of Peterson
Estates.
Section 2. That the utility and drainage easements to be vacated are described a0bllows:
Description for proposed easement vacation Lot 4, Block 1, Hanson's Subdivision of
Peterson Estates in Hutchinson:
Vacate the North 10.00 feet of the dedicated 20.00 foot wide drainage and utility easement lying
northerly of and adjoining the south line Lot 4, Block 1, Hanson's Subdivision of Peterson
Estates, according to the recorded plat thereof The westerly line of said part of the easement to
be vacated being the being the southeasterly line of the Northwesterly 10.00 feet of said Lot 4 and
• the east line of said part of the easement to be vacated being the west line of the East 10.00 feet of
said Lot 4.
•
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect from and after passage and publication.
Adopted by the City Council this 12c' day of December, 2006.
ATTEST:
i
I
i
Gary D. Plotz Steven W. Cook
City Administrator Mayor
c0 &Ju
• RESOLUTION NO. 13078
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINDINGS OF FACT FOR VACATION OF 10 FEET OF A 20
FOOT DRAINANGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT 320 JEFFERSON COURT
S.E.
Whereas, Wade Padmos, property ower, has submitted a request to vacate a 10 footportion of easement along the south side
of 320 Jefferson Court S.E.
Whereas, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on November 21, 2006 on the request and considered the
effects of the proposal on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and consistency with the
Comprehensive Plan, and recommended
The City Council has considered the recommendation and findings of the Planning Commission, and after further
considering the vacation, hereby app -oyes of the request ;rah the following recommendations:
1. City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect of the proposed
use on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic
conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area and the effect of the use on the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The Council has determined that the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the
Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
• 3. Subject to a written agreement between the property owner and the City to allow and make accommodations
for the City crews to access the stormwater pond adjacent to their property if maintenance of the pond is
necessary by the City. This arrangement would end when the parcel to the south is developed and appropriate
infrastructure with corresponding easements is constructed.
4. The detached garage may not be placed in the remaining easement area and all regulations must be followed
regarding detached garages.
Adopted by the City Council this 28h day of November, 2006.
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
u
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
to Cc,) l
0
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 22, 2006
TO: Hutchinson City Council
FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF VACATION OF A PORTION OF THE EASEMENT
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 4, BLOCK 1 HANSONS
SUBDIVSION OF PETERSON ESTATES, 320 JEFFERSON COURT
APPLICANT: WADE PADRNOS, PROPERTY OWNER
Request: c —
The property owner has applied for the vacation of 10 feet of the 20 foot drainage and utility
easement on the south line of lot 4, block 1, Hansons subdivision of Peterson Estates, to
construct a detached garage in the rear yard located at 320 Jefferson Court S.E. Engineering
and Utilities staff met with the property owner on -site and determined the vacation could be
allowed contingent on an agreement the property owner would allow and make
• accommodations for the City crews to access the stormwater pond adjacent to their property if
maintenance of the pond is necessary by the City. This arrangement would end when the
parcel to the south is developed and appropriate infrastructure with corresponding easements
is constructed.
Planning Commission Meeting:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the request at their November
21, 2006, meeting. There were no property owners who objected to the request. The
following conditions were recommended by the Planning Commission and staff forthe vacation
of the easement:
1. Subject to a written agreement between the property owner and the City to allow
and make accommodations for the City crews to access the stormwaterr pond
adjacent to their property if maintenance of the pond is necessary by the City. This
arrangement would end when the parcel to the south is developed and appropriate
infrastructure with corresponding easements is constructed.
2. The detached garage may not be placed in the remaining easement area and all
regulations must be followed regarding detached garages.
Recommendation:
• The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the vacation of
easements with the stated findings and conditions and recommends approval of the
attached Ordinance.
DIRECTORS REPORT -- PLANNING DEPARTMENT
To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
From: Brad Finans, Dolf Moon, Dave Hunstad, Miles Seppelt, Dan Sexton, Judy
Flemming, Jean Ward, John Rodeberg, P.E., Kent Exner, John Webster, John
Olson, Lenny Rutledge, Kyle Dimler, Mark Schnobrich, Marc Sebora, Gary
Plotz, Ken Merrill, Jim Popp, Dan Hatten, Dick Nagy, Rebecca Bowers, and
Bonnie Baumetz (Persons in attendance at Planning Staff Meeting (in bold)
Date: November 6, 2006 — Meeting Date: November 21:, 2006
Subject: Vacation of Easements for 320 Jefferson Court S.E.
Applicant Wade Padrnos, Property Owner
VACATION OF EASEMENTS
Brief Description:
The property owner has applied for the vacation of ten feet of the 20 foot drainage and utility
easement on the south line of Lot 4, Block 1, Hansons Subdivision of Peterson Estates to
construct a detached garage in the rear yard located at 320 Jefferson Court S.E. Engineering and
Utilities staff met with the property owner on -site and determined the vacation could be allowed
contingent on an agreement the property owner would allow and make accommodations for the
City crews to access the stormwater pond adjacent to their property if maintenance of the pond is
necessary by the City. This arrangement would end when the parcel to the south is developed and
appropriate infrastructure with corresponding easements is constructed.
3
(.0CC-) Ld
0
•
0
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning: RI ( Single Family Residential)
Property Location: 320 Jefferson Crt. S.E.
Lot Size: .96 acres
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning: RI ( Single Family Residential)
Comprehensive
Land Use Plan: Traditional Residential Neighborhood
Applicable
Regulations: City Charter
SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation: Jefferson Street and Jefferson Court S.E.
Analysis and
Recommendation: The request to vacate a ten foot portion of the drainage and utility
easement met positive reaction by the staff present. Staff would
recommend approval of vacating 10 feet of the 20 foot drainage and
utility easement with the following conditions:
1. Subject to a written agreement between the property owner and
the City to allow and make accommodations for the City crews
to access the stormwater pond adjacent to their property if
maintenance of the pond is necessary by the City. This
arrangement would end when the parcel to the south is
developed and appropriate infrastructure with corresponding
easements is constructed. j
2. The detached garage may not be placed in the remaining
easement area and all regulations must be followed regarding
detached garages.
Cc: Wade Padrnos, 320 Jefferson Court S.E.
c0 ((J)
ti m
i
W'
OM
N �
� Y
� 17
=I I
..
I Z
N 1
a ,
1
t
1
ee I
1
1
I
A t
t i
1
1
1
i
1
L-
O N
� W
L1 a
Nq9. 0250• 236.00 f-
3
\\ W
i S W
7y' 90. 40 2�, /51 18 S O
M Pyp R.6p 00 nc238 id2-b`' ^• q, W`i �NNi �.r N
C. 4.7
42'04- 1
O
4
s
ca
.9
v
rn
dcl'
N
4-
O
N
dJ
IT
10
d 1
yryyy.
6 % el 3
.3tih
.,,• �p�
,y
y.
saves •E N•2w,w
KAH►
B�.
CIRCLE
C =109.08 OB•�' ; I
ol
N 86.58' 10- W
AUD. PLAT OF LOT 15 OF AUD. PLAT , OF SEC. 7,
NI \I I \\ to
272.00 y0
T116, R.29 \
C
Drainage and utility easements are snovn thus,
N
,^ I
s
.Q I •
I
I
0
0
RESOLUTION NO. 13079
RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUESTED BY THE CITY
OF HUTCHINSON TO ALLOW OVER 1000 CUBIC YARDS OF FILL IN THE FLOOD PLAIN
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WASTE WATER TREATMENT FACILITY EXPLANSION AT
1300 ADAMS STREET S.E.
Whereas, the City of Hutchinson, property owner, has requested approval of a conditional use permit
for property located at 1300 Adams Street S.E., legally described as follows:
All that part of the Nortbweat Quarter of Section 8, Township 176 North,
Range 29 Kest, McfcNd County, Minnetwta described as follows, Beginning
at w point on tha Krst line of mid Section 8 a distance of 432.2 feet
dice birth (nssu*ed lwarJog) or the &,ct1:..eat 1'ulner Of said gortbxest
quarter; thence_ due North, along said Wont, li4io, a distance of 1132,65
feet, thence South 54' 62' %aaL a distance or 2496.25 Feet to a point .
of tsngmcy with a curve, rw ncave to the Southwest and having a radius
of 5$7%.59 toot.; thencr- Southeasterly, along said curve, to a point
PTA the -South line of said Northwest quarter; thence South 89' 22' XOSt;
along said South line, a distance of 2035.96 feet; thtm" North 17' 44'
keMat a distance of 183.6 feet; thonty North 52' 44' Kest a distance or
262 feet; thence North 44' 34' Kest a distaner„ of 27.8 feet to th€ ,point
of beginning, containla6 53.1 acres wore or less
2Xff, PrfN6 TRERFAWN THE FOLLOWING 118SCR19i3} LAND:
That part of the Northwest quarter of 3e0.lon 8, Tcuniship 116 'North, Range 24 Kest,
XcLeod County, Ninncsaota, described as folloun:
Cowwencio$ at the southwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence ;South 83 degrees
i
29 ainutm 61 aeorxeds Ewt, assaaed bearing, along the south line of said Ndrthwent
Quarter a distance of 943.58 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described;
thence North 0 deffireea 00 ainotss 53 secontin west 1105.75 feet to the southwesterly
lime+ of the forger right of way of the Chicago, llilwankee, St. Paul mA Pacific Railroad;
thence southaentrerly. along said southv�oterly ,line, 1835.44 Feet to said south line of
Anrthw"t Quarter; thence North 89 de*grcrn 28 winotes 51 aw�onds W"t, shag said �
south Line, 1454.22 feet to the point of hegianirag.
I
Whereas, the Planning Commission has held a public hearing on November 21, 2006 on the request and
considered the effects of the proposal on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the
surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the
surrounding area and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and hereby recommends approval of the
request.
The City Council has considered the recommendation and findings of the Planning Commission and
hereby does recommend approval of the conditional use permit and site plan, subject to the following
findings and conditions:
1. The City Council has considered the recommendation of the Planning Commission and the effect
of the proposed use on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands,
existing and anticipated traffic conditions, and the effect on values of properties in the
• surrounding area and the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan.
l.0 ((a5
Conditional Use Permit
City of Hutchinson —1300 Adams St SE
Fill in Flood Plain
Pg 2
• 2. The Council has determined that the proposed use is in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
3. The Council has determined the request meets the standards for granting a conditional use permit
in the floodplain.
4. Written documentation of approval from the DNR, McLeod County and the Army Corps of
Engineers.
Adopted by the City Council this 28'h day of November, 2006.
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
•
0
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
Cc-Js
n
u
9
•
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 22, 2006
TO: Hutchinson City Council
FROM: Hutchinson Planning Commission
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OVER 1,000 CUBIC YARDS OF FILL
IN THE FLOOD PLAIN FOR AN EXPANSION AT THE WASTE WATER
TREATMENT PLANT LOCATED AT 1300 ADAMS STREET S.E.
APPLICANT: CITY OF HUTCHINSON
Request:
The City of Hutchinson is requesting a conditional use permit to allow placement of over
1,000 cubic yards of fill in the flood plain for construction of an addition to the Waste Water
Treatment Facility. This addition would include an MBR (membrane bio- reactor) treatment
building with associated treatment basins on the south side of the facility and would be
located within the 100 year flood plain. Approximately 3,600 cubic yards of fill is required to
elevate the addition above the floodplain. The fill for the project will be obtained on site j
from the excavation for the building /basins. The main floor of the MBR building will be at an
elevation of 1036.50 and the top wall of the additional treatment basins will be at an
elevation of 1043.50', which both sufficiently exceed the 100 -year flood elevation of
1033.88'. Additional information is contained in the attached staff report to the Planning
Commission.
Planning Commission Meeting:
I
The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the request attheirNovember
21, 2006, meeting. There were no property owners who objected to the request. Staff stated
that written approval of the project by the Army Corp. of Engineers has been received and
verbal approvals have been received by the DNR and McLeod County. The Commission
recommended that copies of written approvals from the three agencies should be submitted to
the City Council as a condition of approval. After discussing the request, the Commission
unanimously recommended approval.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission unanimously recommends approval of the conditional use permit
with the stated findings and conditions included in the attached resolution..
� LcA C-"
Plli `
r I ti o
I
d,
GENERAL NOTES:
i
PLAN tnTEE& Q
iv wscuar®
a P� s ma um. a v¢ >roa miw .o vepo
v
5�'ryY4'OZ � t011 LOIIIMX� , A\
1
j - o p
I�� 1
3
B
F_
F�
i
j
a
it
I°
i I �
1
•a
Q
I
i
14
02CW
•
Page 1 of 1
Rebecca Bowers \ A^(�(�ro vo-�Q- d
From: Kent Exner ___
Sent: Monday, November 20, 2006 12:06 PM
To: 'Robert Collett'; Randy Devries; Brian Mehr; Rebecca Bowers; John Rodeberg
Subject: FW: City of Hutchinson VVWTF Improvements
Fyi - Good news, see below.
Kent Exner, PE
City Engineer
City of Hutchinson
111 Hassan Street SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350 -2522
ke_x_nef Q�cl,hutchiflson.mn us
320.234.4212 Direct
320.583.5663 Cellular
320.234.4240 Fax
From: Denali, Sarah MVP [mailto: Sarah .Denali @mvp02.usace.army.mil)
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 9:04 AM
To: Kent Exner
Cc: roger.berggren @co.mcleod.mn.us
Subject: City of Hutchinson VA TF Improvements
I
Kent,
In response to your November 7 letter requesting a timely review and feedback for the W WTF
Improvements:
i
After discussions with the City of Hutchinson, and review of the project, the removal of material from
the designated project area on the northwest end of the previous gravel pit, does not require a permit
from the Corps. If you have any fw-ther questions or we can be of ftirther assistance, please give pie a
call.
Thanks.
Sarah Denali
Project Manager
US Army Corps of Engineers OP -R
190 Fifth St. East
St. Paul, MN 5 5101-163 8
651- 290 -5357 (office)
651-290-5330 (fax)
11/22/2006 co
DIRECTORS REPORT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT
To: Hutchinson Planning Commission
From: Brad Emans, Dolf Moon, Dave Hunstad, Miles Seppelt, Dan Sexton, Judy Flemming,
Jean Ward, John Rodeberg, P.E., Kent la xner, John Webster, John Olson, Lenny
Rutledge, Kyle Dimler, Mark Schnobrieh, Marc Sebora, Gary Plotz, Ken Merrill, Jim
Popp, Dan Hatten, Dick Nagy, Rebecca Bowers, and Bonnie Baumetz
(Persons in attendance at Planning Staff Meeting (in bold)
Date: November 6, 2006 —Meeting Date: November 21, 2006
Subject: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW OVER 1000 CUBIC YARDS OF
FILL IN THE FLOOD PLAIN LOCATED AT 1300 ADAMS STREET S.E.
Applicant: City of Hutchinson
Description of Conditional Use Permit Request:
The City of Hutchinson is requesting a conditional use permit to allow placement of over 1,000 cubit:
yards of fill in the flood plain for construction of an addition to the Waste Water Treatment Facility.
This addition would include an MBR (membrane bio- reactor) treatment building with associated
treatment basins on the south side of the facility and would be located within the 100 year flood plain.
Approximately 3,600 cubic yards of fill is required to elevate the addition above the floodplain. The fill
for the project will be obtained on site from the excavation for the building/hasins_ The main floor of the
MBR building will be at an elevation of 1036.50 and the top wall of the additional treatment basins will
be at an elevation of 1043.50', which both sufficiently exceed the 100 -year flood elevation of 1033.88'.
Area
(0 CC-)S
t
4
(0 CC-)S
Conditional Use Permit
1300 Adams St S.E.
Planning Commission— November 21, 2006
• Page 2
GENERAL INFORMATION
Existing Zoning: I -2 (Heavy Industrial)
Property Location: 1300 Adams St. S.E.
Lot Size: Approximately 30.2 acres
Existing Land Use: Waste Water Treatment Facility
Adjacent Land Use
And Zoning: I -2 (Heavy Industrial
Across the river is residential
Comprehensive
Land Use Plan: Industrial
Zoning History: The property was rezoned to I -1 in 1986. The Zoning Ordinance was updated
in 1992 to add language for an I -2 district. The I -2 district replaced the previous
I -1 district in some areas of the City. The Waste Water Treatment Facility
opened in 1988.
Applicable
Regulations: Sections 154.096, 154.085, and 154.068
• SPECIAL INFORMATION
Transportation: Adams Street
Analysis and
Recommendation:
i
Approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) is required in order to allow fill in excess of 1,000 cubic
yards in the floodplain. As noted, approximately 3,600 cubic yards of fill is required to elevate the
addition above the floodplain. Section 154.096 contains the requirements for granting a CUP within the
floodplain. The factors which shall be considered are the following:
Section 154.096 Planning Commission; Conditional Uses (floodplain)
(1)
The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by
encroachments;
(2)
The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of
others or that they may block bridges, culverts or other hydraulic structures;
(3)
The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to
prevent disease, contamination and unsanitary conditions;
(4)
The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect
of this damage on the individual owner;
(5)
The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community,
(6)
The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location;
• (7)
The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use;
(8)
The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development
anticipated in theforeseeablefuture;
(9)
The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive Plan and flood plain
management program for the area; r
Conditional Use Permit
1300 Adams St S.E.
Planning Commission— November 21, 2006
• Page 3
(10) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency
vehicles;
(11) The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise and sediment transport of theflood
waters expected at the site; and
(12) Other factors which are relevant to the purposes of this subchapter.
Staff reviewed the CUP at the November 6`s planning staff meeting and supports approval of the CUP for
the project. Staff previously met with the DNR Hydrologist and the County Environmentalist to review
the permits that are required for the proposed project. The City has received verbal approval of the
required permits and an exception from the Army Corp. of Engineers for public utilities projects. Due to
the technical nature of the project, the City Engineer will provide additional explanation of the project at
the meeting.
Conclusion:
Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit, subject to the stated findings in the draft
resclution.
•
1
IO (d 5
November 22, 2006
City of Hutchinson
Public Works Department
Maintenance Operations
1400 Adams St SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Phone (320) 234 -4219 Fax (320) 234 -6971
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council members
From: John Olson, Public Works Superintendent
Subject: Airport Hangar Lease Policy
Prior to construction of a public hangar this fall, public hangar space had not been constructed since 1988.
Airport Commissioners have spent considerable time and effort evaluating the current policy. The
Airport Commission understands there will be several hangar transactions in the near future, once the 8-
unit T -hangar is completed late this year or early next year.
Their desire was to model the Hutchinson policy after those common at other airports by making several
changes, including:
• 1)
Available hangars will first be offered to existing hangar tenants.
2)
If no existing hangar tenants take the available hangar, the hangar will be offered to people on the
waiting list.
3)
If no one on the waiting list takes the available hangar, the hangar will be offered to the public.
4)
Once a tenant leases a hangar, their name will be removed from the waiting list. They may
reapply for placement on the waiting list if they desire to have two hangars.
5)
There will be one waiting list for all parties interested in obtaining hangar space at Hutchinson.
The in -town and higher out -of -town lease rates will remain intact.
•
These changes to the policy should make management of the waiting list simpler, more efficient and the
waiting list will be a more true indication of the need for additional hangar space in the future.
The Airport Commission unanimously recommended approval of this policy at their November 16, 2006
meeting.
�cd�
AIRPORT HANGAR LEASING POLICY
The City of Hutchinson is responsible for management, general operations, maintenance and repair of
Hutchinson Municipal Airport — Ken Butler Field. The City of Hutchinson has constructed, at Federal,
State and City expense, a series of aircraft storage hangars that are available for lease to house aircraft.
There are not sufficient hangars to accommodate all who wish to lease hangars. Therefore, the City
desires to establish a policy governing the offering of available hangars for lease to interested parties.
To assist with management of the Airport, the City has established an Airport Commission and the City
Council has delegated the duties and responsibilities outlined in this policy to the Airport Commission.
When the Airport Commission is unable to perform described duties and responsibilities, the duties and
responsibilities revert to the City Council.
Disclaimer. This policy describes intended procedures for offering available hangar space for lease.
The City Council and/or Airport Commission may deviate from this policy at any time to offer
available hangar space in a manner deemed most beneficial to the Airport or City. Leases for
available hangar space are made only by the Airport Commission. Lease agreements are valid only
after having been approved by the Airport Commission. The City Council has final authority on
any matter relating to this policy.
Special Use Hangars
The City may designate certain hangars for special use. Generally, these hangars are not charged lease
rates or are charged reduced lease rates. Tenants of special use hangars are not eligible to accept
available hangar space without approval and then must enter into a paying lease agreement at full rates.
The vacated hangar then becomes available to others.
. Available Hangar Space. Hangar space usually becomes available when an existing hangar tenant
voluntarily terminates their lease with the City. Available hangar space can also result from eviction of
an existing tenant, either for non - compliance with the lease agreement or by other action of the City
deemed to be in the best interest of the Airport or City.
All available hangar space will be reported to the Airport Manager and the Airport Commission Chair.
Written notice of available hangar space will be posted in a prominent place or places at the Airport.
Available hangar space will be first offered to existing hangar tenants, then to persons or entities on the
waiting list, and finally to the general public.
The Airport Manager may, at his/her discretion, use the available hangar space for any municipal purpose
or may offer any available hangar for short-term rental from the time it is vacated until it is leased by
another tenant,
Existine Hangar Tenants. No tenant may lease more than two hangars without permission from the
Airport Commission. Specific authorization granted by the Airport Commission for more than two
hangars may not exceed one year.
Existing hangar tenants shall have first priority to move into available hangar space. Upon posting notice
of a vacancy, existing hangar tenants will have until the next Airport Commission meeting to make
application for the available hangar. If notice of the vacancy is posted less than one week prior to the
next Airport Commission meeting, the deadline will then be the following Airport Commission meeting.
The Airport Commission will review all applications for available hangar space at their next regularly
scheduled meeting or at an advertised meeting open to the public.
(' w)
Should more than one existing hangar tenant make application for the same available hangar space,
priority will be given to the existing tenant with the longest lease relationship with the Airport. If
longevity prioritization is unable to be determined, the Airport Commission will determine an appropriate
manner for selection, considering the best interest of the Airport.
Upon selection for the available hangar, existing hangar tenants must sign a lease document and provide
all necessary documentation. The tenant must prepay one month lease rate on the new hangar before
vacating their existing hangar. If prepayment is not made within two (2) weeks, the hangar will again be
considered vacant. Tenants will have no more than two (2) weeks to move out of their old hangar into the
new hangar.
No Application from Existing Hangar Tenants. If no existing hangar tenant makes application to
move to the available hangar space, the hangar is then considered to be available to persons or entities
whose names appear on the hangar waiting list maintained by the City.
Waiting List. The City maintains a waiting list for applicants. It is the City's intent to use the waiting
list to determine eligibility for available hangar space. The City reserves the right to establish procedures
other than those described herein they deem necessary and beneficial to Airport operations.
Applicants for the waiting list may be individuals, corporations, flying clubs, non -profit organizations,
and entities other than private individuals.
Names are added to the waiting lists when applicants notify the City of Hutchinson of their desire to be
placed on a waiting list, provide contact information, other required information and pay a refundable
deposit established by the City of Hutchinson.
• Applicants may identify their preference for the type of hangar they will consider. Applicants may
indicate they prefer only being notified of available enclosed hangar space, open hangar space, or either,'
type of space.
Names are removed from waiting lists once applicants lease a hangar and the applicant's refundable
deposit is applied to initial lease rates. Names are removed from the list when applicants voluntarily
withdraw their names and receive refund of the required deposit. Names are removed when a
person/entity refuses to rent a hangar three consecutive times, except as noted, applicants may identify
with their application to the waiting list their desire for specific types of hangar space. Names may also
be removed and deposits refunded by action of the City Council for any reason deemed to be in the best
interest of the Airport or the City.
Existing hangar tenants with one hangar are eligible to reapply to be on a waiting list as soon as they lease
their fast hangar. Upon leasing a hangar, tenants desiring a second hangar will be required to reapply to
be on a waiting list. Upon application, their name will be listed on the waiting list by the date of their
reapplication, not their original date of application. Once a tenant has two hangars, they are ineligible to
reapply for placement on a waiting list.
Waiting List Prioritization. Applicants are listed on waiting lists in ascending order by the date on
which their application was made. Priority is generally given to the person/entity whose name has been
on a waiting list the longest time.
Offering Available Hangar Space to the Persons/Entities on the Waiting Lists. In priority order, by
• date of application, persons or entities on the waiting list will be offered available hangar space fitting
their identified preference.
(, W)
• Reasonable attempts will be made by City staff to contact applicants, using contact information supplied
by the applicant. If no answer is received within one week, City staff may contact the next appropriate
applicants down the priority list.
Applications for available hangar space are made to the Airport Commission. The Airport Commission
will review applications from waiting list applicants at their next regularly scheduled or advertised
meeting open to the public. The Airport Commission may accept or deny the application.
This process will continue until the available hangar space is leased, or until the names on the
resident/property owner list are exhausted.
No Application from Waiting List Applicants. If no waiting list applicants lease the available hangar
space, the hangar is then considered available to the public.
Offering Available Hangar Space to the Public. The Airport Manager will advertise the available
hangar to the general public in any manner deemed reasonable. The Airport Manager may offer the
hangar to any person or entity able to comply with lease provisions. The Airport Commission may
authorize an incentive reduction to lease rates for the available hangar, provided the lease rate does not
drop below seventy-five percent (75 %) of the existing lease rates for comparable hangar space and
provided that offer does not last more than one year.
As a last resort, the City Council may authorize leasing hangar space for uses other than aircraft storage
on a month -by -month basis until the hangar is able to be used in a manner complying with the standard
hangar lease agreement.
• Rules and Regulations. All persons and entities on waiting lists shall comply with rules and regulations
established by the City of Hutchinson and other government agencies with jurisdiction over airport
operations. Failure to comply with rules and regulations may include, but not be limited to, forfeiture of
the privilege of remaining on the waiting lists.
No Property Right. Nothing in this policy shall be construed as creating any property right, under any
State or Federal law, by any individual or entity applicant by virtue of inclusion on or exclusion from any
waiting lists or offerings for hangar space at the Hutchinson Municipal Airport — Ken Butler Field.
•
•
•
C
November 22, 2006
City of Hutchinson
Public Works Department
Maintenance Operations
1400 Adams St SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350
Phone (320) 2344219 Fax (320) 234 -6971
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council members
From: John Olson, Public Works Superintendent
Subject: Lease with Life Link III
Attached is a one -year extension of the lease with Life Link III.
New to the lease are the following provisions:
1) Term is one year.
2) Life Link III will install a concrete pad for their aircraft before May 31, 2007
3) An electrical service comtections will be made to the concrete pad
4) Life Link III may install aircraft monitoring devices on airport property
ht discussions with the Airport Commission, Life Link III has indicated they are happy with the
facilities and performance in Hutchinson and would intend to be housed in a more permanent
location in the near future.
(' (" P-)
• LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF
HUTCHINSON AND LIFE LINK III MOBILE INTENSIVE CARE SERVICES
This agreement, made this 28'" day of November, 2006, by and between the CITY OF
HUTCHINSON (the "City ") and Life Link III Mobile Intensive Care Services (the "tenant "), is for
the purpose of outlining the rights and responsibilities of the parties to this Agreement. The
parties to this Agreement do agree as follows:
Lease of airport property: The tenant leases from the City a lot and spaces appropriate for
the placement of a temporary office trailer, a concrete pad with electrical connection to be
installed by May 31, 2007 and necessary aircraft monitoring equipment. The lot being
described on a map located at the City Public Works Department office.. The lot is situated
upon the Hutchinson Municipal Airport, Butler Field, an airport owned by the City. The lot is
leased together with land and any improvements that may have been placed on it. The lot is
described in an attachment to, and a part of, this Agreement.
2. Use of the airport: The tenant has the privilege of using public portions of the airport in
common with other users. Use of the airport by the tenant is subject the rules and conditions
as row exist or may be enacte: in the future by the Federal, State or City governments. -The -
tenant is subject to customary charges for such use as may be established from time to time
by the Federal, State or City governments.
Use of space at the airport that is under lease to tenants other than Life Link III requires
separate agreement between Life Link III and the other tenant.
3. Term of this agreement: The term of this lease is one year. The terms of this agreement
begin the date on which this agreement has been signed and approved by the City Council.
• 4. Lease payments: The tenant agrees to pay to the City:
A sum of $0.25 per square foot, payable annually, as determined by the dimensions of the
temporary trailer and concrete pad, assumed by agreement to be 1,800 square feet. Lease
payments for the duration of the lease are due upon execution of the lease. The tenant shall
pay $450 upon execution of the lease. The lease payment shall not be refundable.
The City reserves the right to negotiate or amend rates related to this lease. Rate revisions
shall be reasonable and uniform as compared with other fees and rents charged at the City's
airport. The City shall give rate revisions due regard to the value of the property leased, the
improvements used, and the expense to the City of the tenant's operations. Rate revisions
shall be adopted by the City Council.
5. Placement of trailer on leased property:
A) The tenant agrees that the trailer and appurtenances shall be placed and maintained
at no cost to the City. In the event the trailer is moved or falls into disrepair or disuse
during the terms of this agreement, the City may terminate the lease without further
obligation to the tenant.
B) Any trailer placed upon leased property shall be constructed and maintained in
compliance with applicable building codes. The trailer and any attachments and
appurtenances thereto, excluding publicly accessible apron, ramps, parking areas,
and driveways up to and associated with the hangar, shall be considered as being
located entirely upon the leased premises.
•
(, (0-
• C) Tenant shall ensure the trailer conforms to design standards described by the City.
These design standards may include, but are not limited to, color, style, size, signs
and placards, and other aesthetic requirements; as well as engineering requirements
including, placement of the trailer upon the lot, drainage considerations, apron or
approach design standards, prescribed floor elevations, placement of utility services,
and firewalls. Construction and significant improvements may not begin before
receiving written authority from the City.
D) The tenant shall obtain the necessary regulatory authority and permits from the City.
Placement of and modifications to the trailer and construction of associated utilities
shall be in a good and workmanlike manner and shall be in compliance with codes,
ordinances, and other regulations applicable to the City and Hutchinson Municipal
Airport.
E) Prior to modification of the trailer now existing on leased property, the tenant shall
furnish to the City, for review and approval, the plans for the building, and provide the
estimated cost of completing the building. The tenant shall not be eligible to receive
the damage deposit of $500.00 until the lease is terminated and satisfactory
restoration ofihe lot and associated utility construction is completed. A list of
conditions for required appurtenances and satisfactory restoration are attached and
made a part of this agreement.
F) During placement of or modification to the trailer, the tenant and /or tenant's
contractor shall provide a certificate of insurance showing liability limits in an amount
acceptable to the City and shall name the City as an additional insured. The City
must approve insurance coverage before any modification or construction begins.
The tenant and /or tenant's contractor shall protect the City from liability to persons or
• property for damages arising out of the construction or customary use of the building
prior to obtaining an occupancy permit from the City.
G) Tenants shall pay the entire cost of such modification or construction, and shall pay
the entire cost of utility services and other services for the trailer. The tenant shall
pay all site improvement costs not provided by the City, including but not limited to,
filling, grading, gravel, bituminous, concrete, utility installations, and any other
improvements required to properly place the trailer on the leased property.
H) The tenant is required to connect to water and sewer utilities on the premises. The
tenant shall pay $360 for water and sewer utility services upon execution of this
agreement. The water and sewer service charge shall be for the entire duration of
the lease and shall not be refundable upon termination of the lease.
6. Use and maintenance of leased property: Tenant, at their own cost and expense, shall
take good care of the leased property and any facilities placed thereon.
A) Any trailer placed shall be used primarily for the conduct of mobile intensive care
services. Use of the premises for purposes other than those described herein shall
be described in writing and be approved by the City. Uses other than those
described herein that are not approved by the City shall constitute a default on the
tenant's part.
`,f' ()
• B) Tenants shall keep and maintain the property in good order and repair and in a
clean and neat condition. Tenants shall not permit any waste or nuisance on the
leased property nor permit anything on the leased property to interfere with the
rights of other tenants of the City or users of the airport. In the event the property is
not properly maintained, the City may, after notifying the tenant, cause the property
to be maintained. The costs of maintenance and an administrative fee will be billed
to the tenant and become their responsibility. Unpaid billings constitute a default.
B) Tenants may not store any property outside the building, except for property
commonly stored outdoors, including but not limited to refuse containers, liquid
petroleum tanks, etc., provided such property is properly secured.
C) The cost for customary maintenance routinely performed by the City, related to
areas affecting the value or use of leased properties are included in the lease costs
charged for the property, including snow removal, grounds maintenance and
maintenance of public apron areas.
D) The City performs snow removal throughout the City on a priority basis. The City
reserves the right to perform snow removal functions irrwhatcvcr ma ne It deerrs
necessary. The City intends to provide service up to a reasonable and safe
distance from the tenant's premises. In any case, snow removal immediately
adjacent to the tenant's premises is the tenant's responsibility. The City is not
required to perform any snow removal function on leased property, but may plow
snow on or adjacent to leased properties to expedite other snow removal operations
at the airport.
E) Mowing and weed control immediately adjacent to the tenant's premises are the
• tenant's responsibility. The City reserves the right to perform mowing and weed
control functions in whatever manner it deems necessary. The City intends to
provide service up to a reasonable and safe distance from the tenant's premises.
The City may mow or perform weed control on or adjacent to leased properties to
expedite other maintenance operations.
F) The City shall establish the standards by which public apron, ramp areas, and other
paved surfaces are maintained. The City intends to provide service up to a
reasonable and safe distance from the tenant's premises. In any case, the tenant is
responsible for maintaining ramp areas and other paved surfaces immediately
adjacent to the tenant's premises.
G) The tenant must allow the City to access to the premises for the purpose of
conducting inspections of the premises to determine whether the tenant is
complying with the provisions of this agreement. The occupant may be a party to
any compliance inspection, and the City is required to notify the occupant, under
Section 15 of this agreement, and make reasonable accommodation to the tenant
before conducting compliance inspections.
7. Taxes, assessments, and other charges:
A) In addition to other charges identified in this agreement, the tenant shall pay any
taxes, assessments, licenses, fees, or other charges that may be levied or assessed
upon the tenant's business, property or premises, or as a result of any activity of the
tenant. If the City incurs costs on the tenant's behalf, those costs shall be billed to
the tenant. Upon request by the City, the tenant shall provide proof of such
payment.
•
(0 (Z)
• B) The tenant shall establish their own accounts for utilities, and pay all rates and
charges for any utility used or consumed in connection with gr in the leased property
during the term of this agreement. The tenant shall install an appropriate electrical
meter and pay billings for electrical service prepared by the City, based upon rates
paid to the electrical service provider by the City. Upon request by the City, the
tenant shall provide proof of such payment.
C) In the event the tenant fails to pay the lease payments, taxes, assessments, fees, or
other charges due, the City shall notify the tenant of the default. If the tenant fails to
cure such default, the City shall have the right to terminate this lease in accordance
with section 8 of this Agreement.
8. Termination provisions:
A) At the termination of this lease the tenant has the privilege of removing the trailer
and associated properties placed upon the leased lot. The tenant shall obtain all
required permitsand rcgula' ,)Z, authorf y. The tenant shall hay; e a p °riod of thirty
days (30 days) from the termination date to remove property. In the event the
tenant cannot complete the removal within thirty days (30 days), the City may grant
a reasonable extension of time, if the tenant can demonstrate the reasons for failure
to remove property within the thirty-day (30 day) period are beyond the control of the
tenant. If the tenant does not remove the property within the period granted by the
City, the City may retain ownership of the building and property for any municipal
purpose or otherwise cause the building to be removed at the tenant's expense.
• B) If the leased premises becomes deserted, abandoned or vacated, the City may
terminate the lease. If the tenant's interest in the property is taken by process of
law, the City may terminate the lease. If the buildings or properties on the premises
are destroyed, the City or tenant shall have the right to terminate this agreement
upon giving written notice, with response, to the other party.
C) Should the tenant default in the performance of any terms, conditions or covenants
of this agreement not otherwise specified, and should the default continue for a
period of more than thirty (30) days after the City serves the tenant with written
notice, the City may terminate the lease. Serving the tenant with written notice
includes reasonable attempts by the City to contact the tenant, and may include use
of certified mail with return receipt and /or personal service. This may be done with
or without terminating this agreement and without prejudice to any other remedy for;
lease payments or breach of covenant. In any such event the City may terminate
this agreement by giving written notice of the termination. The rights and remedies'
given to the City are, and shall be deemed to be, cumulative, and the exercise of
one shall not be deemed to be an election excluding the exercise by the City at any
other or different time of a different or inconsistent remedy. Penalties described in
the current approved version of Hutchinson Municipal Airport — Minimum Standards
for Aeronautical Activity may also be imposed as described.
D) Should the leased property be declared condemned, either because the airport is
closed to the public, or the property is needed for another municipal purpose, the
City shall reimburse the tenant for all lease payments received from time the lease
was signed until the property is vacated. The City shall provide the tenant with at
least ninety-days (90 days) notice of such action.
•
(, CO
\J
C�
•
9.11-lablllty provisions:
A) The tenant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless, including reasonable
attorneys' fees, the City and all its agents and employees from any and all claims,
demands, actions or causes of action of whatever nature or for loss of or damage to
property or injury to persons occurring on or about the above described premises
arising out of or by reason of the execution or the performance of the services
provided in accordance with this agreement. The City shall not be liable to any
extent for, nor will the tenant make any claim against the City for or on account of
any injury, loss or damage resulting from the tenant's property or use thereof,
Including any claims by third parties.
B) The tenant shall obtain and keep current a liability insurance policy with the City as
a named additional insured and shall be in a form acceptable to the City. Inability to
keep adequate insurance coverage shall be considered a default. At a minimum,
the tenant shall provide Airport General Liability: $500,000 Combined Single Limit
including $100,000 per person, and Products Liability: $500,000 Combined Single
Limit $100,000 per person.
C) The tenant shall obtain, and provide upon request verification of, all licensure
requirements of the City of Hutchinson, State of Minnesota and/or the United States
Government to legally conduct operations at Hutchinson Municipal Airport and to
comply with this agreement.
10. Transferring, subletting, selling: The tenant shall not transfer, sublet or sell any interest in
this agreement or in the improvements located on the property without first obtaining the
written consent of the City.
11. Amendments: This agreement shall not be amended except by written document signed by
all parties to this agreement.
12. Discrimination provision: The tenant, in the use of the Hutchinson Municipal Airport, shall
not discriminate or permit discrimination against any person or group of persons on the
grounds of race, color, or national origin or in any manner prohibited by Part 21 of the
Regulations of the Office of the United States Secretary of Transportation, and the tenant
further agrees to comply with any requirement made to enforce such regulation which may be
demanded of the City by the United States Government under authority of said Part 21.
13. Laws, rules and regulations: The tenant shall abide by and conform with all laws, rules, and
regulations, including future amendments thereto, controlling or in any manner affecting the
tenant relative to the use or occupancy of the tenant.
14. Venue for causes of action: The laws of the State of Minnesota shall govem this lease and
the venue for any causes of action shall be McLeod County, Minnesota.
(n (�)
• 15. Notices: All notices under this agreement shall be sent to the following addresses. Tenant is
responsible for notifying the City of mailing address changes.
If to the City: City of Hutchinson
Airport Manager
Hutchinson Municipal Airport — Butler Field
111 Hassan St SE
Hutchinson, MN 55350
\J
If to the tenant: Andrew Kirchoff, RN, President & CEO
Life Link III Mobile Intensive Care Services
3010 Broadway St NE
Minneapolis, MN 55350
CITY OF HUTCHINSON: Dated:
By: (Steve Cook, Mayor)
Attest: (Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator)
TENANT: Dated:
By: (Tenant)
Andrew Kirchoff, RN
6
Required installations by tenant
• 1) Trailer to house office space and quarters, with restrooms
2) Concrete pad for vehicles and equipment used to transport helicopter
3) Electrical hookup for helicopter by construction of an underground connection
Restoration of the site upon termination of use shall include:
1) Trailer must be completely removed from the premises within the time prescribed in the lease.
2) Capping the sewer service at approximately one inch below grade with a metal cap so it can be
located using a magnetic locator.
3) Water service shall be restored by installing an appropriate freeze- protected water hydrant at a
minimum height of 32°
4) Removal of all footings, foundation work or o--her material- ;,laced ender or at radc.
5) Topsoil shall be restored to a smooth grade, similar to the original condition. Sod is not required.
Appropriate grass seed shall be placed upon restoration of the topsoil and grade.
6) Removal of all temporary utility connections and restoration of Electrical Distribution Building to
its original condition, including, but not limited to, removing all stored items and sealing holes
that were drilled in the building.
. 7) Other items identified by airport management as being required to reasonably restore the site to its
original condition.
•
• 1 RESOLUTION NO. 13059
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWING COMPANIES TO PROVIDE TOWING
SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON
WHEREAS, from time to time it becomes necessary for Hutchinson Police Services, the
Hutchinson Public Works Department and other departments to have vehicles towed because of
accidents, snow removal and other public safety reasons; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Hutchinson has had an exclusive contract with the same towing
company for the past six years; and,
WHEREAS, due to the increase of the number of vehicles in the city on a daily basis,
there is a need to have more than one towing company providing towing services to continue to
clear vehicles from accident scenes and in other situations efficiently; and,
WHEREAS, multiple towing companies have expressed interest in providing towing
services for the city,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
• HUTCHINSON:
I That the current towing contract that the City of Hutchinson has will not be
renewed and will expire by its terms on December 31, 2006.
2. That persons or companies interested in providing towing services for the City of
Hutchinson shall contact the Director of Police/Emergency Services or his/her
designee to be placed on a call list of individuals or companies providing towing
services for the City of Hutchinson.
3. Those individuals wishing to be placed on the towing call list for the City of
Hutchinson shall submit all required paperwork in satisfactory form to the
Director of Police/Emergency Services for the City of Hutchinson by December
15, 2006, and by the 15' day of December every year thereafter. The effective
dates for the towing call list shall be from January I — December 31 of each year.
4. The individuals or companies wishing to provide towing services for the City of
Hutchinson shall be placed on the list of qualified towing providers subject to the
following conditions:
A. All towing providers shall have in full force and affect a comprehensive
general liability insurance policy insuring against liability imposed by law
for bodily injury or death, in the sum of $500,000 for any one person and
in the sum of $500,000 for two or more persons for the same occurrence,
and for damages in the sum of $500,000 or $500,000 combined single
limit.
•
9 C4
B.
All towing providers shall have in full force and affect all workers'
compensation insurance and employer's liability insurance as required by
•
law.
C.
All towing providers shall have in full force and affect automobile liability
and property damage insurance, including coverage for non -owned and
hired vehicles, and limits as for comprehensive general liability coverage
above.
D.
All towing providers shall have in full force and affect garage- keepers
liability coverage of at least $25,000.
E.
The City of Hutchinson shall be named an additional insured on all
insurance policies required by this resolution and that coverage may not be
terminated or changed by the insurer except upon ten days written notice
to the City Administrator.
F.
No insurance policy shall contain any provisions for exclusions from
liability other than provisions for exclusion from liability forming part of
the standard basic unamended and unendorsed form of policy, except that
no exclusion will be permitted in the event if it conflicts with a coverage
expressly required by this resolution, and in addition, no policy shall
contain an exclusion from bodily injury to or sickness, disease or death of
the employee of the towing provider which would conflict with or in any
way impair coverage under the contractual liability endorsement of the
liability of the towing provider for this resolution.
G.
All endorsements shall apply to both bodily injury or death and property
damage coverage.
• H.
Prior to the towing provider being placed on the call list, the provider shall
furnish to the City certificates or copies of these policies of insurance,
approved by the City Administrator, showing that such insurance is in
force.
I. All towing service operators and their employees shall have all licenses
required by the State and Federal government, including having
Department of Transportation health cards on file with Hutchinson Polio
Services and a form E filing with the State of Minnesota.
J. By requesting to be placed on the call list, the towing provider agrees th4t
it shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents and
employees from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, !
including attorneys' fees, which may be suffered for or which they may be
held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of
any claims, debts, or obligations in consequence of the performances of
this agreement by the towing provider, their employees, agents, or
subcontractors, whether or not caused in part by a party to be indemnified
under the terms of this resolution.
K. All towing operators shall have access to a fenced, secure impound lot
within two miles of the City of Hutchinson available for vehicle storage.
Operators must be able to release vehicles to their proper owners (upon
payment of applicable fees) at least between the hours of 8:00 a.m. — 5:00
p.m. seven days a week.
Any vehicle impounded at the direction of the City of Hutchinson shall not
• be released unless so ordered by the City Administrator or Hutchinson
Police Services. During the time the vehicle is impounded the towing
g(a)
qL0-
operator shall not permit the owner or any other person to take or remove
from the vehicle any parts or change or repair any parts..
•
Any vehicle directed to be impounded, from the time it is taken possession
of by the towing provider and during the time it is impounded, and until it
is reclaimed, shall be considered to be in the custody of the law, and no
work shall be done on it by the towing provider, nor shall the towing
provider permit anyone to do any work on it until the car has been
reclaimed. All cars when ordered released by the City Administrator or
Police Department shall be released to the owner without other charge
than the impounding and storage fees.
The towing provider during the time the vehicle is impounded shall not
permit the owner or any other person to take or remove from the vehicle
any parts or change or repair any parts. All vehicles which have been
involved in criminal proceedings, and which are designated by the Police
Department as being held for that reason, shall be held and stored inside
garages or on the designated fenced -in storage area.
L.
The City shall have the right to remove a towing provider from the call list
in the event that the towing provider fails to fulfill the requirements of this
resolution necessary to be on the call list.
M.
All towing services shall be conducted with equipment and personnel
which are adequate to ensure the satisfactory towing of vehicles under all
adverse conditions of weather, breakdown and similar hindrances, which
on other work might be regarded as "acts of providence" and do not
relieve the towing provider of the responsibility for carrying out the work.
• N.
The Director of Police/Emergency Services may implement a maximum
response time for towing providers to respond to a call for service. If such
a requirement is imposed and the towing provider fails to respond in a
timely manner, a different towing provider may be contacted to provide
the requested service.
O.
The Director of Police/Emergency Services is authorized to implement
other regulations and procedures which will promote efficiency for towing
services in the City of Hutchinson while at the same time giving operators
on the call list a fair and equitable opportunity to provide towing services
within the City of Hutchinson.
P.
The towing providers agree to comply with administrative procedures as
may be set forth by the City Administrator and/or the Director of
Police/Emergency Services or their designees.
Adopted by the City Council this day of 2006.
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
ATTEST:
• Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
qL0-
• RESOLUTION NO. 13059
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TOWING COMPANIES TO PROVIDE TOWING
SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON
WHEREAS, from time to time it becomes necessary for Hutchinson Police Services, the
Hutchinson Public Works Department and other departments to have vehicles towed because of
accidents, snow removal and other public safety reasons; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Hutchinson has had an exclusive contract with the same towing
company for the past six years; and,
WHEREAS, due to the increase of the number of vehicles in the city on a daily basis,
there is a need to have more than one towing company providing towing services to continue to
clear vehicles from accident scenes and in other situations efficiently; and,
WHEREAS, multiple towing companies have expressed interest in providing towing
services for the city,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
. HUTCHINSON:
1. That the current towing contract that the City of Hutchinson has will not be
renewed and will expire by its terms on December 31, 2006.
2. That persons or companies interested in providing towing services for the City of
Hutchinson shall contact the Director of Police/Emergency Services or his/her
designee to be placed on a call list of individuals or companies providing towing
services for the City of Hutchinson.
3. Those individuals wishing to be placed on the towing call list for the City of
Hutchinson shall submit all required paperwork in satisfactory form to the
Director of Police/EmerFency Services for the City of Hutchinson by December
15, 2006, and by the 15 day of December every year thereafter. The effective
dates for the towing call list shall be from January I — December 31 of each year.
4. The individuals or companies wishing to provide towing services for the City of
Hutchinson shall be placed on the list of qualified towing providers subject to the
following conditions:
A. All towing providers shall have in full force and affect a comprehensive
general liability insurance policy insuring against liability imposed by law
for bodily injury or death, in the sum of $500,000 for any one person and
in the sum of $500,000 for two or more persons for the same occurrence,
and for damages in the sum of $500,000 or $500,000 combined single
• limit.
�(a)04)L'CC4
B.
All towing providers shall have in full force and affect all workers'
compensation insurance and employer's liability insurance as required by
•
law.
C.
All towing providers shall have in full force and affect automobile liability
and property damage insurance, including coverage for non -owned and
hired vehicles, and limits as for comprehensive general liability coverage
above.
D.
All towing providers shall have in full force and affect garage - keepers
liability coverage of at least $25,000.
E.
The City of Hutchinson shall be named an additional insured on all
insurance policies required by this resolution and that coverage may not be
terminated or changed by the insurer except upon ten days written notice
to the City Administrator.
F.
No insurance policy shall contain any provisions for exclusions from
liability other than provisions for exclusion from liability forming part of
the standard basic unamended and unendorsed form of policy, except that
no exclusion will be permitted in the event if it conflicts with a coverage
expressly required by this resolution, and in addition, no policy shall
contain an exclusion from bodily injury to or sickness, disease or death of
the employee of the towing provider which would conflict with or in any
way impair coverage under the contractual liability endorsement of the
liability of the towing provider for this resolution.
G.
All endorsements shall apply to both bodily injury or death and property
damage coverage.
• H.
Prior to the towing provider being placed on the call list, the provider shall
furnish to the City certificates or copies of these policies of insurance,
approved by the City Administrator, showing that such insurance is in
force.
1.
All towing service operators and their employees shall have all licenses
required by the State and Federal government, including having
Department of Transportation health cards on file with Hutchinson Police
Services and a form E filing with the State of Minnesota.
J.
By requesting to be placed on the call list, the towing provider agrees that
it shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents and
employees from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses,
including attorneys' fees, which may be suffered for or which they may be
held liable, arising out of or resulting from the assertion against them of
any claims, debts, or obligations in consequence of the performances of
this agreement by the towing provider, their employees, agents, or
subcontractors, whether or not caused in part by a party to be indemnified
under the terms of this resolution.
K.
All towing operators shall have access to a fenced, secure impound lot
within two miles of the City of Hutchinson available for vehicle storage.
Operators must be able to release vehicles to their proper owners (upon
payment of applicable fees) at least between the hours of 8:00 a.m. — 5:00
p.m. seven days a week.
•
Any vehicle impounded at the direction of the City of Hutchinson shall not
be released unless so ordered by the City Administrator or Hutchinson
Police Services. During the time the vehicle is impounded the towing
operator shall not permit the owner or any other person to take or remove
from the vehicle any parts or change or repair any parts.
•
Any vehicle directed to be impounded, from the time it is taken possession
of by the towing provider and during the time it is impounded, and until it
is reclaimed, shall be considered to be in the custody of the law, and no
work shall be done on it by the towing provider, nor shall the towing
provider permit anyone to do any work on it until the car has been
reclaimed. All cars when ordered released by the City Administrator or
Police Department shall be released to the owner without other charge
than the impounding and storage fees.
The towing provider during the time the vehicle is impounded shall not
permit the owner or any other person to take or remove from the vehicle
any parts or change or repair any parts. All vehicles which have been
involved in criminal proceedings, and which are designated by the Police
Department as being held for that reason, shall be held and stored inside
garages or on the designated fenced -in storage area.
L.
The City shall have the right to remove a towing provider from the call list
in the event that the towing provider fails to fulfill the requirements of this
resolution necessary to be on the call list.
M.
All towing services shall be conducted with equipment and personnel
which are adequate to ensure the satisfactory towing of vehicles under all
adverse conditions of weather, breakdown and similar hindrances, which
on other work might be regarded as "acts of providence" and do not
relieve the towing provider of the responsibility for carrying out the work.
• N.
The Director of Police/Emergency Services may implement a maximum
response time for towing providers to respond to a call for service. If such
a requirement is imposed and the towing provider fails to respond in a
timely manner, a different towing provider may be contacted to provide
the requested service.
O.
The Director of Police/Emergency Services is authorized to implement
other regulations and procedures which will promote efficiency for towing
services in the City of Hutchinson while at the same time giving operators
on the call list a fair and equitable opportunity to provide towing services
within the City of Hutchinson.
P.
The towing providers agree to comply with administrative procedures as
may be set forth by the City Administrator and/or the Director of
Police/Emergency Services or their designees.
Q.
All towing providers must agree to maintain proper records of all
vehicle received. The record keeping system shall meet the approval of
the Hutchinson Police Chief and records are to be available at all times
for inspection by authorized City officials. The records must include a
copy of the police impounding report. A report shall be submitted
monthly to the Director of Police/Emergency Services detailing all
vehicles stored or released during that current month. All contents of
such reports shall meet the approval of the Hutchinson Chief of Police.
The initial report from any towing provider will include their towing
•
services price list and the towing provider shall notify the Director of
Police/Emergency Services within 10 days of any pricing changes.
R.
This Resolution may be rescinded and any towing services program
derived from it shall be cancelled at any time without notice for any
reason. Towing providers operating under this Resolution expressly
• waive all claims and agree to hold the City harmless for such
cancellation.
Adopted by the City Council this day of 2006.
Steven W. Cook
Mayor
ATTEST:
Gary D. Plotz
City Administrator
•
•
r
• CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA
CAR IMPOUNDING CONTRACT
AGREEMENT made as of January 1, 2000, between Modern Mazda, hereinafter referred
to as "Contractor," and the City of Hutchinson, hereinafter referred to as "City."
The City and the Contractor agree as follows:
1.1 The Contractor agrees to remove, impound, and transport or tow to storage facilities large
enough to accommodate at least 24 automobiles, at Hutchinson, Minnesota, from January
1, 2000 to December 31, 2001, all stolen, abandoned, damaged or illegally parked
automobiles found in the public streets or elsewhere, as a 24 -hour per day service, in the City
of Hutchinson, and to care for and store all such cars when requested by the Police
Department, and to preserve and deliver them to the owners or persons entitled to the
possession of them upon payment of towing and storage fees, all in accordance with the
• provisions of the City ordinances. In all cases where the Contractor shall fail to respond to
any call for tow trucks within 30 minutes, the City shall have the right to call other parties
to perform such services and the Contractor agrees to pay any additional cost over and above
the contract price.
i
1.2 This agreement shall take effect January 1, 2000, and shall continue in effect until Decenber
31, 2001, subject to termination of either party by notice in writing to the other on or b4ore
December 1, or any year, effective as of December 31 of that year.
1.3 The Contractor shall provide a fenced -in storage area for impounded vehicles of not less than
7,500 square feet.
Towing charges shall be divided into three types as follows:
Type I - All tows which involve a vehicle which is on or immediately adjacent to a public
street or alley and which can be secured for towing with the usual type of winching.
Tyne II - All tows which involved a vehicle which is not on or immediately adjacent to a
public street or alley and which required an unusual amount of winching to secure it for
• towing by one tow truck.
9c�
• Type U1- All tows which involved a vehicle that requires, and for which a specific request
has been made, two or more tow trucks.
The designed charge and type of tow performed shall be made by the duly authorized agent
of the City. Any disagreement with this designation shall be made in writing to the City
Administrator within 24 hours.
The following flat charge shall be made for each tow:
From 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. $ 5.00
From 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. or after 1:00 p.m.
on Saturdays, Sundays and Holidays $15.00
Police Department Vehicles I N.C.
Vehicles Impounded for Evidence Purposes $15.00
2.2 Type II To
• From 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. $10.00
(Per Hour or Fraction Thereof)
From 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. $16.00
(Per Hour or Fraction Thereof)
LL. is
From 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. $10.00
(Per Hour or Fraction Thereof)
From 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. $16.00
(Per Hour or Fraction Thereof)
2.4 The applicable rates for each tow shall be based upon the time the tow is requested by the
City.
2.5 Use of Doll v - In the event it shall be necessary to use a dolly in connection with any tow,
no charge shall be added to the towing charge.
• 2
qCO-
• 2.6 Storage Char e - A charge of $2.00 shall be added for the first 24 hours or less of storage,
and $3.00 for each day thereafter, payable by the vehicle owner or operator to the Contractor.
111Y • + •►Y :ail•:
3.1 The Contractor further agrees to pay all persons furnishing labor, supplies, equipment, space
or material to the Contractor in and about the performance of this contract, these persons to
be paid first out of the amount due the Contractor, its agents or assigns.
3.2 The Contractor shall take immediate possession of any vehicle duly ordered impounded and
shall tow such vehicle to the impounding place. No such vehicle shall be released without
authorization by the City Administrator or Chief of Police.
3.3 Where a police officer has tagged a vehicle to b^ impounded on account of a parking - —
violation, and where the owner or operator appears before the tagged vehicle has been
hooked to the tow truck and the wheels hoisted from the ground, the tow truck operator shall
release the vehicle without the payment of any fee or towing charge.
Where the tow truck operator has a tagged vehicle on the tow truck hoist and the wheels
raised from the ground before the owner or operator appears, he shall release the vehicle
• upon payment of a service fee not to exceed $3.00, and give a receipt for the payment.
Where a request has been made by the Police Department for a tow truck at a specified
location, and the make and license number of the vehicle to be removed has been designated
and the owner or operator appears at any time after the wheels of the towed vehicle have
been raised off the ground and requests permission to remove the vehicle before it is towed
away, the operator shall release the vehicle upon payment of service fee of $5.00 and 4ive
a receipt for such payment.
I
3.4 The Contractor agrees to keep safely all impounded cars, accessories and personal proPerty.
I
4. TOW TRUCK OPERATOR IDENTIFICATION CERTIFICATE
The Chief of Police and the Contractor shall jointly require that every tow truck operator
answering a request by the Police Department for the towing and impounding of any vehicle
shall have in his possession an identification certificate, issued by the City Administrator.
No person shall act as a tow truck operator in answering any request from the Police
Department for the towing of any vehicle to be impounded without having in his possession
such identification certificate, and the tow truck operator shall exhibit his identification card
to the owner of the vehicle or his agent upon his request, and shall answer any questions
pertaining to the impounding of the vehicle.
• 3
gCa)
AML
mr
31 VIIJ91 1 R 1/ 31 i
Any vehicle directed to be impounded, from the time it is taken possession of by the
Contractor and during the time it is impounded, and until it is reclaimed, shall be considered
to be in the custody of the law, and no work shall be done on it by the Contractor, nor shall
he permit anyone to do any work on it until the car has been reclaimed. All cars when
ordered released by the City Administrator or Police Department shall be released to the
owner without other charge than the impounding and storage fees.
The Contractor during the time the vehicle is impounded shall not permit the owner or any
other person to take or remove from the vehicle any parts or change or repair any parts. All
vehicles which have been involved in criminal proceedings, and which are designated by the
Police Department as being held for that reason, shall be held and stored inside garages or
on the designated fenced -in storage area. -
A 1 :u
At the time of return of the vehicle, the Contractor shall give a release in writing which shall
state the date of such release together with the charges enumerated thereon and the purpose
for which the charges were made. The release shall be made in one original and three
copies, all of which shall be signed by the Contractor and the person to whom the release is
made. The Contractor shall retain the original of the release and shall deliver one copy to
the owner of the vehicle and two copies to the Police Department.
WEEEFWTN-1 R pa I 1► :. 1
The Contractor agrees during the life of this contract not to discriminate against any
employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, sex, creed, national origin, or
ancestry. The Contractor will include a similar provision in all subcontracts entered into for
the performance of this contract. This contract may be canceled or terminated by the City,
and all money due or to become due hereunder may be forfeited for a second or subsequent
violation of the terms or conditions of this paragraph. This paragraph is inserted in this
contract to comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Section 181.59.
This contract shall not be in effect until the Contractor shall have executed and delivered to
the City Administrator a performance bond executed by a corporate surety company
authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota in the sum of Ten Thousand Dollars
($10,000) to secure the faithful performance of this contract by said Contractor conditioned
that the Contractor shall well and truly perform and carry out the covenants, terms and
4
9ta)-
• conditions of this agreement in strict accordance with its provisions. This contract shall be
subjected to termination by the City at any time if said bond shall be canceled or the surety
thereon relieved from liability because of failure to pay the premium or termination of the
period of the bond without renewal thereof.
MEMEMINFRITMILM
The following insurance shall be taken out and maintained by the Contractor:
9.1 Comprehensive general liability insurance insuring against liability imposed by law for
bodily injury or death, in the sum of $500,000 any one person and in the sum of $500,000
for two or more persons for the same occurrence, and for damages to property in the sum of
$500,000 or $500,000 combined single limit.
9.2 Workman's compensation insurance and employer's liability insurance as required by law.
9.3 Automobile liability and property damage insurance, including coverage for non -owned and
hired vehicles, in limits as for comprehensive general liability coverage above.
9.4 Garage keepers liability coverage of at least $25,000.
• The City shall be named as an additional insured in these policies, which shall provide that
the coverage may not be terminated or changed by the insurer except upon 10 days written
notice to the City Administrator. Failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall
automatically suspend the contract until the insurance has been reinstated. 1j
All endorsements shall apply to both bodily injury or death and property damage cover�ge.
Prior to the commencements of the contract, the Contractor shall furnish the City cert ificates
or copies of these policies of insurance, approved by the City Administrator showing i'that
such insurance is in force.
No policy shall contain any provisions for exclusions from liability other than provisions for
exclusion from liability forming part of the standard basic unamended and unendorsed form
of policy, except that no exclusion will be permitted in any event if it conflicts with a
coverage expressly required in this contract, and in addition, no policy shall contaim any
exclusion from bodily injury to or sickness, disease, or death of any employee of the
Contractor which would conflict with or in any way impair coverage under the contractual
liability endorsement of the liability of the Contractor under this agreement.
Ashk
Mr
� (90
• Compliance by the Contractor with the foregoing requirements to carry insurance and furnish
certificates shall not relieve the Contractor from liability assumed under any provisions of
this contract.
UI 010 01 1 ►
The Contractor shall indemnify and hold harmless the City and its officers, agents and
employees from and against all claims, damages, losses or expenses, including attorney fees,
which may be suffered or for which they may be held liable, arising out of or resulting from
the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence of the
performances of this agreement by the Contractor, his employees, agents or subcontractors,
whether or not caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder.
MENSWINURFUIVI I►
The City shall have the right to terminate this contract in the event of breach thereof by the
Contractor, and a continuing breach shall not be deemed to be waived because not followed
by prompt termination. This contract shall terminate, and neither party nor the officers of
the City shall be liable for further performance after such termination, if it shall become
invalid by reason of any present or future law other than an ordinance by the City.
• The work shall be done with forces which are adequate to insure the satisfactory towing of
vehicles under all adverse conditions of weather, breakdown and similar hindrances which
on other work might be regarded as :`acts of providence," shall not apply to relieve the
Contractor of responsibility for carrying out the work.
Alk
MW
The Contractor agrees to comply with the administrative procedures as outlined by the City
Administrator.
The Contractor binds himself jointly and severally, his successors, executors, administrators
and assigns to the City in respect to all covenants of this agreement, or subject as a whole,
nor shall the Contractor assign any monies due, or to become due, without the City's written
consent.
Cd
a(O
./. 1 : ul ►Y
This agreement embodies the entire agreement between the parties including all prior
understandings and agreements and may not be modified except in writing signed by all the
parties.
EXECUTED as of the day and year first above written.
i1
U
hxontract
i
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
By:
Mayor
City AdministAtor
MODERN MAZDA
l�.7.�. ��
_
ac)
0
E
Alk
w
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
TOWING, IMPOUNDING AND STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES
Proposal Release Date:
Proposal Due Date:
RFP Contact:
Chief Dan Hatten
Hutchinson Police Department
10 Franklin St. S.
Hutchinson, MN 55350
(320) 587 -2242
�ca)
ntroduction
e City of Hutchinson, Minnesota, hereby issues a Request for Proposal for the intended purpose of retaining
a service to provide Towing, Impounding and Storage of Motor Vehicles for the City 24 hours per day, 365
days per year, on an as needed and directed basis. Such direction is to be by the Chief of Police, the Fire
Chief, the Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Zoning of the City of Hutchinson or
their authorized and legal representatives.
Interested parties in the Towing service business may submit a proposal for Towing, Impounding and Storage
of Motor Vehicles services. Each proposal must be submitted in a sealed envelope. To be considered a valid
proposal, all interested Towing service businesses must submit proposals consistent with the terms and
conditions outlined herein or by P.M., A copy of the RFP may be
received by contacting Chief Dan Hatten, Hutchinson Police Department, 10 Franklin Street South,
Hutchinson, MN 55350.
The contract for service shall commence on , _, and terminate on
RFP Process and Limitations
Prospective Towing service businesses please note that this is a request for proposal process and not a request
for bids. The City of Hutchinson will take all factors into consideration when determining the appropriate
service provider for Hutchinson. This RFP outlines minimum terms and conditions that must be met in order
*0 be considered a viable proposal. Towing service businesses have the option of making a proposal that is
above and beyond the minimum terms and conditions. There will be no public bid opening.
This RFP does not commit the City of Hutchinson to award or pay any costs incurred in preparation of'a
Towing service business's proposal. The City may modify any part of the RFP at any time prior to co tract
selection. The City will modify the RFP only by issuing a written addendum. Addenda will be consecutively
numbered in the order they are issued. The City reserves the right to reject all proposals. The City reserves the
right to cancel this RFP if it is in the best interest of the City. The selection of this contract is contingent upon
the approval of the Hutchinson City Council.
I
Any addenda issued by the City will be mailed to all that are specifically known by the City to have received
an original RFP. The City is not responsible for a Towing service business who does not receive an addenda.
Affik
1W
Each Towing service business may supplement their proposal once in response to each addendum.
Towing service businesses may also clarify their proposals in response to a written request by the
City for supplemental information. The City will consider no other proposal supplements.
All submissions by the Towing service business will become part of the selected Towing service
business's contract with the City.
2 r
*any proposal received after _ P.M., _ will not be considered and will be
returned to the Towing service business unopened. Once the proposals are received by the City,
Towing service businesses cannot modify or withdraw their proposal, unless directed by the City.
All proposals become the property of the City of Hutchinson, and will be considered public
information after a proposal has been selected. Towing service businesses may label certain
sections as "Proprietary, "as allowed by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, and those
sections will not be made public.
RFP Questions and Contact
Questions relative to the RFP contained herein should be directed to:
Chief Dan Hatten
Hutchinson Police Department
If) Franklin St. South - --
Hutchinson, MN 55350
(320) 587 -2242
Requests for clarification(s) will be considered until ten (10) working days prior to proposal
opening date.
Terms and Conditions
01. In order to qualify for consideration under these terms and conditions, the potential contractor's
proposal must state what satisfactory equipment the Towing service actually owns or is planning
to rent at the time the proposal is submitted. The potential contractor must also have direct access
to trained, available personnel at the time the proposal is submitted, in order to provide immediate
and prompt service as ordered and requested by the authorized City officials. The qualifying of
proposals to meet this will not be permitted, such as the acquisition of equipment being dependent
upon proposal selection, etc.
2. The successful contractor must own or have available within a 10 -mile radius of the City of
Hutchinson the following equipment as a minimum:
A. To tow passenger vehicles, including cars, light trucks, vans, utility vehicles, 4x4's and
motorcycles, one truck having a manufacturer's gross vehicle weight rating of 12,000 lbs., to
be equipped with a crane and winch, and further equipped to control movement of the towed
vehicle, and
B. To tow vehicles of /< ton to 1 '/� ton capacity, one truck having a manufacturer's gross vehicle
weight rating of 16,000 lbs., to be equipped with a crane and winch, and further equipped to
control movement of the towed vehicle, and
Adik C. One truck having a manufacturer's gross vehicle 'weight rating of 52,000 lbs., to be equipped
M
q CO-
with a crane and winch, and further equipped to control movement of the towed vehicle, and
D. Equipment sufficient and designed to move vehicles not amenable to towing or to move a
completely demolished vehicle by means of dollies or low bed trailers.
E. Equipment for 2 -way communications with Hutchinson Police Department Communications
(Dispatch).
A listing of all equipment to be utilized shall be submitted with the proposal. Such listing shall show the make
and model of all equipment available for use under this contract, along with size and all other pertinent
information, such as specialized equipment not necessarily herein specified, but which may be a factor in
performing effectively and efficiently.
All equipment to be used by the contractor under this contract shall be maintained in good repair and condition.
The City reserves the right to inspect the equipment from time to time for the purpose of determining that
equipment condition is in conformance with the terms and conditions of+hezcnt =act.
3. In order to be in consideration for proposal selection, all storage and parking lot facilities and all equipment
to be used by the contractor under this contract must be located within a 10 -mile radius of the City of
Hutchinson. The storage and parking lot facilities must meet all of the applicable State building code standard
and municipal zoning requirements, including those relating to screening and landscaping of the City in which
the facility is located.
The facilities proposed to be utilized under this contract must have the capability of storing a minimum of
one (1) vehicle inside and a further capability of providing storage for a minimum of thirty (30) vehicles
outside. Inside storage will be necessary only when so requested or directed by an authorized official of the
City of Hutchinson as identified in these terms and conditions. When a direction is given to store a unit
inside, such directions may be accompanied by certain instructions for security measures to be employFd.
The security responsibilities become the responsibility of the storing agent while the unit is in his/her
keeping.
5. The Contractor performing under this contract shall assume all and full responsibility for the conduct of
his/her employees. The Contractor guarantees that all of the employees performing under this contract will be
adequately trained in their profession, will respond promptly to all calls, will provide safe and adequate
equipment (as herein specified), be clean and neat in appearance, use decent language, free of profanity and
treat the public courteously at all times. Request for service from the Hutchinson Police Department must be
given first priority by all towing dispatchers serving as agents for the Contractor. Failing to meet any or all of
the requirements of this section may result in cause for terminating the contract at any time as per the
conditions specified for contract termination.
6. The Contractor will be solely responsible for loss or damage to any vehicle, including all equipment and
contents, from the time direction is given by the authorized City representative turning the vehicle over to the
Contractor or his Agency and until such time as the vehicle is legally released to the registered or actual owner
or legal agent thereof.
AiN7. The performing contractor must agree to maintain proper records of all vehicle received. The record
MW
9Oa,
keeping system shall meet the approval of the Hutchinson Police Chief and records are to be available at all
Omes for inspection by authorized City officials. The records must include a copy of the police impounding
report. A report shall be submitted monthly to the Hutchinson Chief of Police detailing all vehicles stored or
released during that current month. All contents of such reports shall meet the approval of the Hutchinson
Chief of Police.
8. All vehicles towed or impounded are to be released only upon receipt of the proper legal release form to
be issued by the Hutchinson Chief of Police, except for private tows.
9. While performing under this contract and under these terms and conditions, the Contractor
or his /her designated representative(s) must be present at the storage facility for the purpose of
releasing vehicles to authorized persons six (6) days a week, Monday through Saturday, between the hours of
8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. (excluding legal holidays). The Contractor or his/her designated representatives
must also be available as needed between 12:00 P.M. (noon) and 2:00 P.M. on Sundays and all legal holidays.
It is not necessary that the Contractor or his/her designated representatives be physically present at the storage
facility between 12:00 P.M and 2:00 P.M. on Sundays -and all legal holidays, but the City must be able to
contact the Contractor on an as needed basis during these times. Providing the City with a home phone
number where the Contractor can be reached during these times would be adequate for purposes or this
paragraph.
10. It shall be agreed under this contract that motor vehicles will not be driven at any time during the towing
procedure. In the event that the vehicle is without tires or has flat tires, the performing Contractor agrees to tow
the vehicle without damaging the wheels and further agrees not to tow any vehicle on its rims, on wheels
Without tires, or on flat tires.
11. Upon arrival at the scene of a tow where a vehicle accident has occurred, the performing Contractor, in
addition to the physical removal of the vehicle, assumes full responsibility for removing any vehicular
parts or other debris, excluding liquids and other commercial cargo, resulting from the accident. This
clean-up is to be completed without any additional compensation.
12. The performing Contractor shall be entitled to a charge for his/her towing and storage services pursuant to
the fees submitted in the accompanying proposal. The Contractor shall agree that neither the City nor any
Department thereof is responsible for any charges as a result of towing and/or storage and that the Contractor
assumes all liability for any and all unpaid charges. NOTE: This provision and these terms and conditions
are in no way a law or regulation relating to "price, route, or service of any motor carrier... with respect to the
transportation of property" under 49 U.S.C. Sec. 14501(c)(1)(1997).
13. If an involved private owner /operator makes a timely request for a tow by other than our Contractor, such
request shall be honored by the Police Department. In either instance, the owner /operator is solely
responsible for all associated charges.
14. For vehicles identified by the Police Department as subject to forfeiture, and subsequently released to
the Police Department pending the outcome of forfeiture proceedings, the performing contractor shall
indicate a flat rate charge per forfeited vehicle. The flat rate shall include the towing, storage on the date of
the tow, and three days of storage after the date of the tow. The flat rate applies to all cars, vans, small trucks,
r4 -wheel drive vehicles, utility vehicles, and motorcycles identified by the Police Department as subject to
M
5
forfeiture by the City.
015. Should the Contractor fail to appear at a designated tow point within twenty (20) minutes after receiving
a call for a tow, the City reserves the right to call another towing service to perform the work.
If the Contractor is called and is unable to respond due to conditions beyond his/her
Control, the authorized City officials shall be immediately so informed, and the right is hereby reserved to
call another service to perform the work.
In the event that at any time it becomes necessary for the City to request the services of another towing service
for the reasons detailed above, the City retains the right to hold the Contractor retained under this contract
responsible for any additional charges over and above the fee schedule recorded in this proposal. Such charges
shall be assessed only if the response time is due to negligence or laxity on the part of the contractor, which
negligence might include equipment failure.
16. The Contractor performing under this contract shall operate and maintain its — - - -
Parking and storage facility in compliance with the terms of this contract and all State and City applicable laws,
ordinances, rules and regulations that are presently in effect or which may hereafter be adopted. Pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes sections 16813.06, subdivisions 1 and 2, it is the responsibility of the Contractor taking a
vehicle in custody to give notice of the taking within five (5) days to the vehicle owner and/or lien holder(s).
17. No alterations or modifications of the terms of this contract shall be valid unless made in writing and
signed by authorized representatives of both parties hereto.
08. In the event of a breach by the Contractor of any terms or conditions of this agreement, the City shall
have, in addition to any other legal recourse, the right to terminate this agreement forthwith. I
19. Either party may terminate this contract upon the serving of such termination notice to the other, irk
writing, ninety (90) days prior to the intended termination date. I
i
20. A copy of this contract, along with the authorized fee schedule, shall be posted in a conspicuous place in
the Contractor's place of business.
Insurance
The successful Contractor shall not commence work under this contract until the specified insurance
coverages have been obtained. The Contractor shall file, within seven (7) days following notification of
proposal selection, with the Hutchinson City Administrator, all certificates of insurance or documentation
thereof indicating that all specified insurance have been obtained and are in full force. The City of
Hutchinson shall be named as an additional insured on said comprehensive general liability policy.
The following coverages are required as minimums:
R
9C�
0
A. 1. Public Liability Insurance: $1,000,000 Comprehensive General Liability (including assault and
battery).
2. Business Auto Policy with all coverages (all vehicles) with 1,000,000 limits.
3. Garage Keepers Legal Liability.
B. Workers' Compensation Insurance covering all employees of the Contractor, or his agents, working
under this contract in accordance with the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Law.
The Contractor shall agree to provide to the Hutchinson City Administrator 30 days prior written notice in
the event any policy is canceled or a material change is effected and -each po"c—, nust-zontain a provision _
that the insurer notify the Hutchinson City Administrator immediately if a policy is canceled or a material
change has been effected.
Performance Bond
On or before the date that the contract between the City and the Towing service becomes effective, the
`ontractor shall file with the Hutchinson City Administrator an acceptable Corporate surety bond in the
amount of $10,000, payable to the City of Hutchinson and subject to the approval by the Hutchinson City
Attorney for the faithful performance of all duties and obligations imposed under the terms and conditions of
the contract.
Proposal Evaluation and Selection of Contract
It is the intent of the City to enter into a contract with the Towing service that will best serve the City's needs
and who meets all of the terms and conditions set forth herein. In addition, the City will evaluate proposals in
a manner consistent with the following:
All Towing service proposals will be evaluated on their ability to provide the following services and the cost
that each Towing service business will charge for providing each service. The towing and storage services
listed below have been given a point total based on estimated frequency of use during the past 12 months.
Proposals can score a maximum of 26 points. The Towing service business that offers to provide each service
for the lowest cost shall receive the highest point value for that service. The Towing service business with the
highest aggregate point total is the low proposal in terms of cost, but is not necessarily the Towing service that
will best serve the City's needs.
Ask
MW
Charge for towing of passenger vehicles; including cars, light trucks, (3/4 ton to less, vans, utility
vehicles, 4X4's, motorcycles) (10 points possible)
qce�
2. Charge for towing of vehicles 3/4 ton to 1 '/x ton capacity (2 points possible)
0 3. Charge for towing of vehicles larger than 1 '/2 ton capacity (2 points possible)
Roll back charges (2 points possible)
5. "Hook up" or "Impound" Charge (1 point possible)
6. "Loaded Mile" Rate for transporting vehicle to Impound Lot (1 point possible)
Charge for each 24 hours of storage:
Inside storage (1 point possible) Outside storage (5 points possible)
8. Flat rate charge for designated forfeiture vehicles released to the Police Department (2 points
possible)
All prices or rates for these services contained in a Towing business's proposal are considered the prices that
will be used when the City enters into the contract for Towing services with the Contractor. The Contractor
may not change, modify, alter, or amend the prices or rates for services contained in its proposal when
entering into the contract for Towing services. The Contractor also may not change, modify, alter, or amend
the prices or rates for services contained in its proposal for the duration of the contract period, unless such
change, modification, alteration, or amendment is made in writing and approved by both the City and the
Contractor.
ehe City retains the right to waive any informality or irregularity in any proposal or proposals received; and to
select the proposal or proposals which in its judgment is in its own best interest. Upon selection, the Towing
service shall negotiate with the City for the purpose of entering into a contract implementing the terms of the
proposal. Unsuccessful Towing service businesses will receive notification within ten (10) working dais after
the selection of the Towing service.
I
Admk
1W
A Class Towin
175h Ave NW
Hutchinson, MN
55350
November 24, 2006
Hutchinson City Council:
N w�
Phone: 320-587-2886
Fax: 320 -587 -2862
Toll Free 1 -966- 5808697
Is' Class Towing has reviewed the resolution #13059 and has concluded
that the resolution is the fairest way to provide towing services for the
City of Hutchinson. We agree with the Police Chief that Hutchinson can
benefit from having more than one towing service. We do not
understand why anyone would not see the benefit of the Hutchinson
• Police Department utilizing all services available to them. We are not
looking to run anyone out of business, however if you vote No, to
resolution #10359, you are in effect telling the citizens of Hutchinson
that you don't care to make these services better. We realize that there
has been a working relationship between the City of Hutchinson, our
competitor, and his family. This important decision should not be made
because of friendships, but should be made for Public Safety.
The current contract as it is written allows for only 1 towing company to
serve the Police Department. The contract has not been followed for
many years. Please give an explanation of how the contract should be
interpreted.
Our competitor, Modern Mazda has stated that they have four trucks and
can handle every service call. How can they do this with only one person
on call after 5pm? I" Class Towing is seeking to share the contract with
Modern Mazda. We feel that an open contract will provide better service
MVto the community and to the Police Department. Modern Mazda has
R &0
monopolized the city contract for many years, although they have
provided good service for the City of Hutchinson.
When Mazda started their business, there were many towing services in
town. The high costs of vehicles and insurance has caused all of them to
close their towing services, along with the City contract not allowing
any other companies to be utilized. Before 1st Class Towing opened,
other towing companies around the surrounding areas had to come to
Hutchinson to service the community.
As far as equipment, 1St Class towing has 2 vehicles. A 21 ft. Flat Bed
and a Wrecker with an auto lift. The flat bed can haul 2 vehicles and the
wrecker 1 vehicle. We are also looking for another wrecker for the
Hutchinson area, and the State Patrol has approved all equipment.
1St Class Towing offers 24 -hour service, 7 days a week for all towing
services. We Do Not want to put anyone out of business, we only want
• to work together with Modern Mazda to make our Community safe and
give the people the best service in town. With two companies there can
be a quick response time for the Police and for the general public.
1St Class Towing follows all laws for the State of Minnesota, such as
Form E File with the Department of Transportation and carry health
cards required by the State.
Currently our company has given outstanding services to the cities of
Gaylord and Winthrop, also Sibley County Sheriff's Department and the
State Patrol out of our Gaylord location.
Thank you for you time and consideration,
1St Class Towing, Inc.
Gordon Evenson
= David Hahn
q (a),
November 23, 2006
To the Mayor and City Council:
I appreciate your willingness to take a second look at the impound towing for the City of Hutchinson.
I would lice to take this opportunity to comment on some things from the November 14' City Council
meeting and our experience over the past years in the towing business and with AAA.
The statement of more cars in Hutchinson does not necessarily mean more tows. According to our
AAA district manager, the AAA statistics reflect towing has dropped by 40 %.
It is a requirement of AAA that we complete a background check for felons on all our drivers.
I do believe we are the best qualified towing company in Hutchinson. Our impound lot is within the
city limits. Being closer is more convenient for the Police Department, vehicle owners and ourselves.
We can do more runs in less time. From our experience, our lot is the size needed for our business.
Most importantly we provide EXPERIENCE!
WINCHING- We have performed underwater recovery, recovered vehicles from houses (one truck
in basement), recovered an airplane from a slough and many vehicles from creeks and rivers as a few
examples. We have the number of trucks and the equipment to do the job right.
Where does my experience come from? My farming background has given me experience in freeing
tractors and implements sometimes working in muddy fields and in all kinds of weather.
My staff and I use our rollback trucks for winching many times. This is due to experience. Within 90
days, my rollbacks will be equipped with even more winching capacity making wreckers obsolete. I
do not believe there is another towing company in Hutchinson better equipped with as much
experience and proven track record.
A note of clarification. Towing companies are not called to the scene until the officer in charge is
ready for vehicle recovery. My staff and I have been told many times upon arriving at the scene, "That
was quick", "I didn't expect you to get here this soon", "We're not quite done, please wait ". Law
enforcement does not want us in the way until they are ready and sometimes that means they don't
need us for an hour or more. When they are ready, we respond as quickly as possible. In the
approximately 2 %2 months Mr. Evenson worked for us, we were not more than one hour behind
schedule the few times the weather was bad.
Towing is our business and I would ask the Council to consider us when deciding on awarding the
impound contract. Thanks again for your support and the decisions you make for the City of
Hutchinson.
Sincerely
Lowell Baumetz
Modem Mazda Towing
cc: Gary Plotz, Marc Sebora and Dan Hatton
CG.
0
R
TO: Mayor & City Council
FROM: Kent Earner, City Engineer
RE: Discussion of TH 7/15/22 Improvement Project Assessments at 465 North Main
Street (Letting No. L:'roject No. 06 -01)
DATE: November 28, 2006
As previously directed by Council, City staff and MnDOT are have arranged a joint meeting with Mr. Jim
Riley to discuss TH 7/15/22 project improvements, finances and associated property assessments. A brief
summary of this meeting will be presented at the Council meeting.
• Attached is an overview of our "Assessment Manual" policies and procedures. As noted in this overview,
the City maintains the right to assess properties based on the resulting benefits incurred by a property upon
project completion.
City staff believes that we have been reasonable and fair in developing an assessment criteria for the TH
7/15/22 project. The basis of this criteria is that the City has over $5,000,000.00 of improvements within
this project and all properties along the improved TH 7/15/22 have obvious benefits when the project is
ultimately completed. Based on this a rate of $44.73 per lineal foot of roadway parcel frontage was
developed, significantly lower than similar full reconstruction projects at $65 - $80 LF (see attached
project Public Hearing presentation that communicated approximate assessments). Mr. Riley's property
has almost 200 LF of improvement frontage (see property location map). Due to access limitations and lot
configuration, the City has reduced the assessment to 66 LF.
We request direction in proceeding with the Improvement Project Assessments at 465 North Main
Street.
cc: GaryPlotz— City Administrator
•
N&J
htip: / /gis.logis.org /serti, let/ com. esri. esrimap. Esriiiiap ?ServiceName =hu_LOGISMap_OV... 11/22/2006 `it
0
IN
0
I- r—b T-6 I u--lb T-6 -1 1 1 L vj I p
licv & Proc®
Gui
• • s
THE LAW= M_S_A 429 -051
"The cost of any improvement, or any
part thereof, may be assessed upon
property benefited by the improvement,
based on the benefits received"
• This Manual based on MN Statute §429 and the "Local
Improvement Guide "as developed by the League of
Minnesota Cities
• It is understood and agreed that the City maintains the
right to vary from the following policies based on the
principles set forth in the Guide and in the law:
11
• •
• Neither the Constitution nor the Statute specifies any
method or formula to be used in making the assessment,
although under the Constitution special assessments
"shall be as nearly equal as may be..,."
• Any formula used must operate so that the assessments
on all parcels are roughly in the same proportion to
actual benefits. Any formula must be only an attempt to
get at the real measure of benefits: the increase in the
Market Value as a result of the improvements.
• The City Council has broad discretion in determining
benefits and its findings will not be upset by the Courts
except where they result in clear discrimination or
inequality.
Improvements Included
The City of Hutchinson reserves the right to assess for all
improvements as allowed by the Statute.
In Qeneral, f
these shall include:
• Street and sidewalk (including trails & paths) improvements
• Storm and sanitary sewer systems
• Street lights
• Water work systems (watermain)
;r items that may be assessed include
• Planting, maintenance and trimming of trees
• Parks, open space areas, playgrounds and recreational
facilities
• Nuisance abatement
• Dikes and flood control works
• Other items-as allowed-bylaw
9 0 0
Contents
• Terms and Definitions
• Assessment Policies
oReplacement of Existing Infrastructure
oNew Development /Improvements
■ Bare Land
■ Developed/Annexed Areas
• Sanitary Sewer/Water Availability Charges (SAC /WAC)
• Other Policies and Information
oPublic Hearing /Payment Information
oInterest Rate Calculations
oComplete "Newly Annexed Platted..." Policy
o "Tax Delinquent/Forfeited Property Policy"
oImprovement Project Expense Rates
oProject Development Deadlines
oDisclaimer
DISCLAIMERS!
• The City reserves the right to vary from, modify and/or
amend the policies and procedures in conformance with
local, state and federal rules and regulations.
• This Assessment Manual (Policy and Procedures Guide) is
intended to be a guide and each application to the City
Council for relief from assessments will be decided by the
City Council on a case -by -case basis. Policies and
Procedures may be amended, modified or abandoned in
tneir entirety, in ine sole aiscretion oI ine k-,ity k-,ouncn.
Nothing in this policy shall be construed to give any
property owner or applicant a right to a change in the
assessment burden imposed on any specific property.
11
Highway 7 Central Project
Includes work on Trunk Highways 7, 15 and 22
Assessment Hearing. April 11, 2006
Estimated Total Project Costs
Construction Cost (cty stam) $ 4,410,000
City Proled Expenses $ 857 000
Estimated Total Project Cost $ 5,267,000
Costs tactcH servtoy saner &7d eela-,#,SbiWbbs butt nuhu,
saMlaysewer made Sevvkm,, SbWWARW 03kCw ✓na»nahr
drpsabmrLS VbbiV sus street,wubutkn sd�ft;
trel/k'syFtsy sysfensmdMtnfanaR ExmttUn
Improvement Cost Sharing
a City Pays For:
• Trunk /lateral sanitary sewer and watermain
system reconstruction
• Traffic Signal Systems (at Nun sc & school Rd.)
• General Street/ Drainage Assessments along all
City/Park/State properties, Intersections and
side street right -of -way frontages
• Dkecoy access we C, lomW soe"Wnvad sum
sre/tranaw Mgoromart mss
• Td Inca eunwa a "far previously paid assasmas
Project Status
• Mn/ DoT Has Awarded Contract to CS.McCYwsan,
Inc with a total bid of $20.8 Million
• Mn /DOT Anticipates Starting Constructlon Week of
April 24d
• Schedule Remains the Same Except for Main St.
Bridge Early Start Possibility
• Project Area:
• Highway 7 from High St/5h Ave on east end to Shady
Ridge Road on west end
• Highway 15 from 5h^ Avenue N to 2w Avenue North
• Includes CRldd8t9 Roadway and Bridge
Rmonstrvction, and Major Utility upgrades
Estimated City Funding
Trunk Sanitary Sewer Fund $ 1,588,000
Trunk Watemhain Fund $ 1,795,000
City Bonding $ 976,000
Assessments (Street/Drainage) $ 733,000
Assessments (Udlb Serviced $ 175.000
Estimated Project Financing $ 5,267,000
Prpetyaisrnca6am Jrls am 1696 orMe low
0tYp JLdo2Stde{pnmt A*39a cdtnetudJpeJect
cust
Improvement Cost Sharing
. Property Owner pays for:
• Sanitary sewer& water service replacements
and /or upgrades
• Generel Street/ Drainage Assessments along
private property frontages
• �Idde9e tti O)StS of pabdWrby sbk s
� nrm
• By Policy, stxxad reflect costs for Standard city shads, and
he no larger then non -state aid rolls
• � , slmld reflect aced lxneet (additional value) to the
li LO
0
9
Estimated Assessments
. Sanitary Sewer & Water Services:
$3,000 — #5,000
. General Street /Drainage Assessments:
$45— $55/ FF
General Street/Drainage
Assessment Criteria
. Total Length of Im{xovement Frontage:
35,458 LF
. Total Cost of Str"Dralnage Improvements:
$1,585,999.23
• Calculates to$44.73 /LF
• Total Length of Assessable Frontage:
16,392 LF
• Total Amount of Street/Drainage Assessments:
$733,236.24
Typical Assessments
Based on $".73 /LF and ;2,074.20 /services:
• Es6matM typical 10D LF of frontage: $ 6,54720
• Esdmalyd typical 200 LF of 6mtage : $ 11,020.31
• Esemaeai typical 300 LF of frontage: $ 15,493.20
• E9Nmhd typical 400 LF of 6pYage : $19,966.20
Notes
• Marty properties have addMwal utility services with some of
the coats heft deferred
• Some properties hme a combirwUM of frontage si uffh K
• Dndted number of "Irks re0 kig °'°°s: Bhdl R
propefOCs, Non Oda Gast
• Formal Appeals: Homick properties, ]essa Truska
` Calculated Assessments
S 11r Water Service: 51,204.10 /Each
. 6° Sanitary Sewer Service: ;870 /Each
. 6° Water Servke: g2,295/Each
. General Street/ Drainage Ataessinents:
$44.73/LF
. Comparisons:
Golf Carve Rd.: ST F (m) & $10KF (MM) plus 33,0134anim
D!f $64.%U(SK44 In 2006 $)
Y AmDaa St: 566.421E (M.N h 2006 $) plus $1AfteMcas
General Street/Drainage
Assessment Criteria
Miller
Properly Dnemres:
kvtfp FrpmareRSM df —cr am d
�-100x. or Rate Aasased
F111" fnpmarcib on tie Fra Arad a bedit In
MpGar.YY.S ntla[ ev>s- xaX a Rea Arased
Assetwiedn l6el20yearsfaadw prprian o*ofa
Ioml sbeC 11 M Rea Arrsaed a aaproprlaae vMR
dearml,W
mrr�i�deduaeeM1mFinaow�Rapotaas [aoaase
A>Sa�bYabbvas Rohr romribb6' Me ro god af
amisq N ae emu ea mias n>nYax/ M® kxiw bar
pnoa4'
Assessment
Process /Information
• Assessment Hearing to resume following Proposed
Open House on April 20a
• Closure of Assessrnerrt Hearing and Aocepting 61ds
would occur at the April 24m City Coundl meeting
• Assessments to be spread over 10 years, with equal
principal, starting In 2007
Reap" ovacs may aLw pay a V pert of � by
rw IW X05
. IntereR rile wa be based m the rate Me Dry rimes ran po1aG
• barida, estlme[etl at 5 -69f
Deferments are available for property owners
meeting Income guidelines who are either over 65
years old or disabled
q(�
CF
Minnesota Department of Transportation
District 8 - Hutchinson
HATS Facility
1400 Adams Street SE
Hutchimon, MN 55350
November 28, 2006
Kent Exner
City Engineer, City of Hutchinson
111 Hassan Street
Hutchinson, MN 55350
RE: SP 4302 -44 TH 7
Dear Mr. Exner:
Office Tel: 320 -234 -2589
877 - 682 -8249
Fax: 320 - 234-6971
w .dot.state.ma.us
As you requested, this letter is being written to clarify Mn/DOT's Cost Participation Policy
responsibility regarding the TH 7/22 and TH 15 project in Hutchinson. It is my understanding
that the primary point of clarification was regarding if Mn/DOT assesses Adjacent
Landowners for Trunk Highway Improvements. Mn/DOT does not assess Adjacent Land
Owners for the Trunk Highway improvements. However, Mn/DOT does have a policy for
cost participation with local government units, like the City of Hutchinson, when there is a
City & State Cooperative Construction Project.
• The aforementioned project is a Cooperative Construction Project and the City & State have
both individual and shared costs. The City and State's cost share is based upon Mn/DOT's
state policy titled Policy and Procedures for Cooperative Construction Projects with Local
Units of Government dated April 2004. This policy provides standard guidelines for which
Mn/DOT and Local Units of Government participate in costs when performing work within a
municipality. This policy is the basis for how the cost share of the TH 7/22 & TH 15 project
was determined. From this determination, a Municipal Agreement between the city and state
is inplace which identifies both the shared and individual costs. Mn/DOT's policy is and
always had been, not to assess Adjacent Land Owners for the Trunk Highway improvements.
Mn/DOT strives to communicate this policy uniformly with each project.
Mn/DOT has no involvement in how the City of Hutchinson determines to pay for their share
of the project and has refrained from commenting on any individual City's policy and/or
procedure for funding their share of the project.
If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me at 320 -234 -2589.
Sincerely,
KelKel y�� oral, P.E.
Project Engineer
An equal opportunity employer 6/W
cc: Adam Ahmdt, Right of Way Engineer
• Barry Anderson, Land Management Engineer
Todd Broadwell, Assistant District Engineer
Dave Johnston, Regional Engineer
Dave Solsrud, Assistant District Engineer
File
•
M equal opportunity employer �� /
November 22, 2006
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR STEVE COOK AND
HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
RE: Consideration of Land Purchase
Dear Mayor Cook ano City Council Members,
The Hutchinson Area Health Care (HAHC) Board of Directors met in closed session last evening to
review the proposed purchase of property situated adjacent to the HAHC campus at 211 Freemont
Avenue SE (Regional Eye Specialists clinic property).
The following is an excerpt of the drafted minutes reflecting that discussion:
Property Acquisition — Lot 8 Block 2 Cedar Acres Subdivision:
Ms. Wells reviewed the history of the negotiations regarding this acquisition. The Board of HAHC
and the City Council had previously approved the purchase of the property at the price of
$635,000. However, the owners have determined that their required price is $700,000.
Appraisals were completed showing a range of $600,000 to $740,000. The Board also reviewed
the terms and conditions proposed by Abel Realty Advisors. Given the strategic location of this
property to the hospital, management recommends that the property be purchased at the asking
price of $700,000.
• Following discussion, motion was made by Mr. Steve Snapp, seconded by Mr. Bernie Knutson, to
forward a recommendation to the City Council to amend the original approval and enter into a
purchase agreement for $700,000.00 to purchase the Regional Eye Clinic property. All were in
favor. Motion carried.
Sincerely,
HUTCHINSON AREA HEALTH CARE
Mary Ellen Wells
President and CEO
MEW:Ih
Attachment
•
�occ�
• RESOLUTION NO. 13085
RESOLUTION CREATING A CITY FUND TO BE KNOWN AS THE
"SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FUND"
WHEREAS, the City of Hutchinson ( "City ") periodically lets bonds for the construction
of City improvements; and,
WHEREAS, the City makes annual payments to defense these bonds; and,
WHEREAS, the City is able to make these bond payments through the collection of
assessments to individual property owners and tax levies; and,
WHEREAS, assessment payments accumulated between bond payments and excess
assessments have not heretofore been specially designated in a fund by the City; and,
WHEREAS, due to state law and other factors, from time to time there are excess funds
available after an improvement bond is closed out,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HUTCHINSON-
• 1. THAT all excess monies from the City's improvement bond funds be
accumulated in a fund to be known as the "Special Assessment Fund ".
2. THAT $500,000 of the Special Assessment Fund monies are to be transferred to'
the Tax Relief Fund for the purpose of reducing the levy of the City's taxpayers;
3. THAT beginning in the year 2007, 50% of any new excess bonds funds shall be'
deposited into the Tax Relief Fund and 50 % shall be deposited into the Special
Assessment Fund for primarily capital projects for the City.
4. THAT the City Council may use or not use the accumulated Special Assessme�t
Fund and Tax Relief Fund monies in its sole discretion and as it deems
appropriate. However, with regard to the Tax Relief Fund, not more than 25 0/q of
that fund may be withdrawn annually.
5. THAT so that the City Council can have as an accurate assessment of the City's
finances as possible, no decisions about withdrawals from the Tax Relief Fund
may formally be made prior to November of each year.
Adopted by the City Council this day of 2006.
Steven W. Cook, Mayor
ATTEST:
• Gary D. Plotz, City Administrator
Io('6) voi�,4
0 November 21, 2006
Dear City Council Members,
At the end of 2005 the city adopted a new Compensation Plan. One aspect of the
plan was the implementation of an open salary range that would allow for maximum
flexibility in administrating the plan instead of using defined or pre - calculated steps. The
open salary concept rewards good and exceptional performers and advances employees to
the market rate more quickly.
If you recall, at the council meeting where this plan was adopted last year, I stated
that I thought there needed to be some adjustments because I believed the plan rewarded
some mediocre performance. I also believe that, while both are important to recognize,
there was not enough distinction between good performance and those that exceed
expectations. I stated at that meeting that I would like to revisit the plan in 2006. I also
brought this up a couple of months ago.
Enclosed is information on the old compensation plan, the current plan, the
recommendation of the compensation consultant, and a proposed amendment that I
drafted. I think you will see that the amendment meets all the objectives of the current
plan, but places higher expectations on the lower performers, still suitably rewards those
who meet expectations, and further rewards those who exceed expectations.
This amended plan is also pretty similar to the consuham's recommendation,
except that the achievement levels are adjusted in more defined ranges that better
• represent what actually happens on the performance reviews. The amendment also
contains many similarities to the current plan until you get to the higher wage levels,
where performance becomes an even greater factor for attaining further advances.
I did present this to the wage committee on November 21". Their continents will
be discussed as part of the discussion at our council meeting on November 28d.
Sincerely,
Steve Cook, Mayor
•
Iac�
0
11
•
2005 & Previous Pay Plan
Market - 100%
• 6 Steps starting at 80%, 4% increments per year
• Usually 6 years to get to market (usually start at 80%)
• Overall evaluation rating of 1 or 2 normally made employee ineligible for any
scheduled wage adjustment.
Exceptional Service Pay - after reaching market rate (100 %)
• 0.25 -5% increase possible
• Salary increase to 105%
• Lump sum possible yearly from 105 -110%
➢ Did not carry over from one year to the next
➢ Did not build on previous year
• Harder to attain
➢ All of the following criteria had to be met
❖ Shared Values
❖ Effort
Consistency
Quality
❖ Performance appraisal
* Majority "Exceeds Job Requirements"
* No "Needs Improvement"
➢ At least one additional criteria needed to be met
Quantity
❖ Originality
Cost Savings/Revenue Generating
❖ Efficiency
� c) (-C)-
0
•
9
Consultants Recommendation
Achievement Level
1 2 3 4 5
Compa -Ratio
85 -89.9
00/0
4%
5%
6%
7%
90 -94.9
00/0
3%
4%
5%
6%
95 -99.9
00/0
2%
3%
4%
5%
100 - 104.9
00/0
00/0
2%
3%
4%
105- 109.90p%
0%
0%
2%
3%
1 10-1 15
00/0
00/0
0010
00/0
2%
Possible salary increase for various performance levels - for comparison purposes
89
90%0
91
92
93
94
96
98
96
98
100
103
98
101
103
107
100
103
106
110
105
108
112
110
114
115
Ib(c)
• Proposed Pay Plan
Achievement Level
Possible salary increases for various performance levels - for comparison purposes.
0 to
2.3 to
2.8 to
3.4 to
4.0 to
• 86%
2.29
2.79
3.39
3.99
5.0
Compa -Ratio
1000/0
900/0
98%
101%
104%
80 -84.9
00/0
3%
5%
6%
7%
85 -89.9
0%
2%
5%
6%
7%
90 -94.9
00/0
1%
4%
5%
6%
95 -99.9
00/0
0%
3%
4%
5%
100 -104.9
00/0
00/0
2%
3%
4%
105 - 109.96
00/0
00/0
(r
20/0
3%
110 -115
00/0
00/0
00/0
00/0
2%
Possible salary increases for various performance levels - for comparison purposes.
83%
85%
86%
87%
• 86%
900/0
92%
94%
88%
94%
97%
1000/0
900/0
98%
101%
104%
91%
101%
104%
108%
92%
103%
107%
111%
93%
105%
1090/0
113%
94%
111%
115%
95%
Target 95%
105%
1100/0
115%
•
➢ '/2 Merit increase if any category rated "Needs Improvement" or "Unsatisfactory"
when current pay scale above 1001/o
➢ '/2 Merit increase if any category rated "Unsatisfactory" when current pay scale below
100%
)0CG/
• Current Pay Plan
"Merit" Increase Guide for Open Salary Range
Achievement Level
Compa -Ratio
0 to
1.1 to
2.0 to
2.76 to
3.51 to
4.26 to
94
1.0
1.99
2.75
3.5
4.25
5.0
80 -84.9
0%
00/0
4%
5%
6%
7%
85 -89.9
00/0
00/0
4%
5%
6%
7%
90 -94.9
0" /0
00/0
3%
4%
5%
6%
95 -99.9
00/0
00/0
2%
3%
4%
5%
100 - 104.9
00/0
00/0
00/0
2%
3%
4%
105 -109.9
0° /a
00,10
00/0
1%
2%
1%
110 - 115
00/0
00/0
00/0
00/0
2%
3%
Possible salary increases for various performance levels - for comparison purposes only
84
85
86
88
90
92
• 92
94
97
95
98
101
97
101
104
99
103
107
101
105
109
106
111
107
113
108
115
109
110
Evaluation Levels of Performance:
1 - Unsatisfactory
2 - Needs Improvement
3 - Meets Expectations
4 - Exceeds Expectations
• 5. Outstanding
87
94
100
104
10'8
1�1
1 4
115
i
i
i
I
0
1]
E
R55APPYRV
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
By Check Number
AP Payment Register with Voids
Check Dates I
11/162006
-
CkDate
Type
Check#
Vendor
Name
Amount
11!162006
PK
139585
' 115855
JEFF MEEHAN SALES INC.
1,364.45
11/1612006
PK
139586
102649
MPCA
3,850.00
11/20/2006
PK
139587
122919
BRYAN STREICH TRUCKING
2,586.64
11202006
PK
139588
102530
HUTCHINSON CO -OP
696.97
11/202006
PK
139589
102038
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
212,000.00
11202006
PK
139590
103099
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
990.47
11202006
PK
139591
102573
MCLEOD COOP POWER
212.26
11202006
PK
139592
103046
MCLEOD COUNTY RECORDER
101.20
1120/2006
PK
139593
102787
MCLEOD COUNTY TREASURER
2,052.60
11/20/2006
PK
139594
102425
MIDWEST WIRELESS COMM.
2,547.56
11202006
PK
139595
103887
MINNESOTA CLE
175.00
1120/2006
PK
139596
121176
REINER ENTERPRISES, INC
216.D0
111202006
PK
139597
122922
STRETCH TRUCKING
2,771.14
229,564.29
Account Nu
#
229,564.29
Void Amou Payment T,
Check Pay
Check Pay
Check Pap
Check Payl
Check Pay
Check Pap
Check Pay
Check Pap
Check Payl
Check Payl
Check Pay
Check Pay
Check Pap
229564.3
229564.3
MEMO
11120/06 .
TO: CITY STAFF & BANK OFFICIALS
FROM: KEN MERRILL , FINANCE DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: DECEMBER WIRE TRANSFER
The following funds need to be wired - interest payments
December 1, 2006
Chase NYC ABA # 021 - 000 -021 to credit the account of Cede &
Co. c/o THE DEPOSITORY TRUST COMPANY for Dividend Deposit
Account # 066 - 026776 OBI FIELD - PA 50317950
1992 Tax Increment Bonds
2001 Capital Notes
8,345.00
2,791.25
11,136.25
The following funds need to be wired - PRINCIPAL payments
Chase NYC ABA # 021 - 000 -021 to credit the account of Cede &
Co. c/o THE DEPOSITORY TRUST COMPANY for Redemption Deposit
for 12/1 City of Hutchinson, Mn, Account # 066 - 027 -306
OBI FIELD - PA 50317950
2001 Capital Notes 145,000.00
145,000.00
(FAX of bond document must be made at same time for principal payment)
•
r5l4riLS
11/13106
CITY STAFF & BANK OFFICIALS
FROM: KEN MERRILL , FINANCE DIRECTOR
fi]XN�2d 7� 1591:7�i7_VF9y� 7�7�9yF7311JN_ \i�3�7 i'irIril
The following funds need to be wired - interest payments
12/01/06
Chase NYC ABA # 021 -000-021 to credit the account of Cede &
Co. Uo THE DEPOSITORY TRUST COMPANY for Dividend Deposit
Account # 066 - 026776 for 2/1 City of Hutchinson, MN
OBI FIELD - PA 50317951
INTEREST 1996 Improvement Bonds 2,133.33
1997 Improvement Bonds 8,494.16
1998 Improvement Bonds 4,920.83
15,548.32
The following funds need to be wired - PRINCIPAL payments
Chase NYC ABA # 021 - 000 -021 to credit the account of Cede &
Co. do THE DEPOSITORY TRUST COMPANY for Redemption Deposit
Account # 066-027 - 306 2/1 City of Hutchinson MN
OBI FIELD - PA 50317950
1996 Improvement Bonds 130,00D.00/
1997 Improvement Bonds 545,000.00
1998 Improvement Bonds 350,000.00
TOTAL Principal 1,026,000.00
TOTAL Wire $1,040,548.32
•
`J
Finance Director Approval
11
PAYROLL DATE: November 24, 2006 Regular and Police Holiday
Period Ending Date: November 18, 2006
FOR COUNCIL LIST ONLY - ELECTRONIC TRANSFER
TO STATE AND IRS
•
DO NOT ISSUE CHECKS FOR THIS PAGE
AMOUNT
ACCT# NAME DESCRIPTION
$29,303.45
9995.2034 WITH. TAX Employee Contribution - Federal Tax
ACCOUNT
$13,069.63
9995.224 Employee Contribution - Soc. Security
$4,158.94
9995.2242 Employee Contribution - Medicare
$46,532.02
Sub -Total - Employee Contribution
$13,069.63
9995.224 Employer Contribution - Social Security
$4,158.94
9995.2242 Employer Contribution - Medicare
Per Journal Entries
Difference
Fica
$ 26,139.26
$17,228.57
Sub -Total - Employer Contribution
Medicare
$ 8,317.88
Withholding
$ 29,303.45
$63,760.59
Grand Total - Withholding Tax Account
Total
$ 63,760.59
$0.00
$12,620.46
9995.2035 MN DEPT OF REVENUE
State Tax
$ 12,620.46
$0.00
•
$17,308.36
9995.2241 PERA Employee Contribution - Pension Plan
$21,392.78
9995.2241 Employer Contribution - Pension Plan
i
$38,701.14
Sub -Total - PERA
i
l
$15.86
9995.2243 PERA -DCP Employee Contribution - Pension Plan
$15.86
9995.2241 Employer Contribution - Pension Plan
Pera
$ 36,717.00
$31.72
Sub - Total - DCP
DCP
$ 15.86
$38,732.86
GRAND TOTAL - PERA
Total
$ 38,732.86
$0.00
Finance Director Approval
11
•
•
0
R55APPYRV
CITY OF HUTCHINSON
By Check Number
AP Payment Register with Voids
Check Date
11128/2006
-
Ck Date
Type
Check#
Vendor
Name
Amount `
11/28/2006
PK
139598
121152
3D SPECIALTIES
570.78
11/28/2006
PK
139599
121847
3M
200.00
11128/2006
PK
139600
105651
AAA STRIPING SERVICE CO
5,678.00
11/28/2006
PK
139601
123573
AARP
290.00
11/28/2006
PK
139602
102271
ABM EQUIPMENT & SUPPLY
228.81
1112812006
PK
139603
122891 JADVANCED
ENGINEERING & ENVIRON
14,025.00
11/2812006
PK
139604
102217
AEM MECHANICAL SERVICES, INC
113.58
11128/2006
PK
139605
123644
AES- ASSESSCO ENVIRONMENTAL SER
3,900.00
11/28/2006
PK
139606
123643
ALSLEBEN, MELINDA
20.00
11/28/2006
PK
139607
105204
ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE INC
168.00
11/2812006
PK
139608
102367
BELLBOY CORP
3,490.09
11/28/2006
PK
139609
101916
BERNICK COMPANIES, THE
190.10
11/28/2006
PK
139610
120738
BERTELSON'S
88.67
11/2812006
PK
139611
123645
BETKER,JEFF
48.00
11/28/2006
PK
139612
123672
BLACK BOX CORPORATION
1,818.07
11/28/2006
PK
139613
119938
BLACKWELL, DAN
60.00
11/28/2006
PK
139614
119212
BLOCK FARMS & TRUCKING
9,479.96
11/28/2006
PK
139615
102148
BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK & AS
5,148.00
11128/2006
PK
139616
101987
BRANDON TIRE CO
17.70
11/28/2006
PK
139617
102752
BRAUN INTERTEC CORP
9,770.25
11/28/20D6
PK
139618
122919
BRYAN STREICH TRUCKING
1,818.32
1112812006
PK
1396191
123664
BRYAN, WADE
80.00
11/28/2006
PK
139620
102136
BUSINESSWARE SOLUTIONS
9,326.96
11/2812006
PK
139621
123342
C & C STRIPPING & SEALING
220.D0
11/2812006
PK
139622
102456
C & L DISTRIBUTING
50,628.95
11/28/2006
PK
139623
120432
CARLOS CREEK WINERY
648.00
11128/2006
PK
139624
102253
CENTRAL MCGOWAN
20213
11/28/2006
PK
139625
102179
CLAREYS SAFETY EQUIP
110.30
11/28/2006
PK
139626
123646
CORNERSTONE COMMONS /NEW ULM G
5,000.00
11/2812006
PK
139627
102484
CORPORATE EXPRESS
662.58
11/28/2006
PK
139628
- 121640
CREEKSIDE SOILS
7.21
11/28/2006
PK
139629
119229
CROUSE -HINDS AIRPORT LIGHTING
229.12
11128/2006
PK
139630
102050
CROW RIVER AUTO
1,403.26
11128/2006
PK
139631
102220
CROW RIVER PRESS INC
148.19
11/2812006
PK
139632
104884
CULLIGAN
32.D0
11/28/2006
PK
139633
119458
DAVE'S PALLET SERVICE
1,980.00
1 112 8 /2 0 06
PK
139634
102488
DAY DISTRIBUTING
7,516.90
11128/2006
PK
139635
1 119502
DELANO CEMETERY SERVICES, INC
1D0.00
11/28/2006
PK
139636
102698
DEVRIES, RANDY
18.60
11/28/2006
PK
139637
105182
DOBRATZ, CHRIS
41.15
11/28/2006
PK
139638
104084
DONOHUE & ASSOC
78,127.75
11/28/2006
PK
139639
113181
DROP -N -GO SHIPPING, INC
32.85
11 f2 812 006
PK
139640
104095
DUECO
44.34
11/28/2006
PK
139641
102236
DUININCK BROS INC.
124,897.84
11/28/2006
PK
139642
102647
DYNA SYSTEMS
24.54
11/28/2006
PK
139643
102495
EBERT, PAT
20.51
11/28/2006
PK
139644
102726
ECOLAB PEST ELIM
51.12
11/28/2006
PK
139645
1 105555
EHLERS & ASSOC
175.00
✓oid Amou
11/28/2006
PK
139646
102326
ELECTRIC MOTOR CO
31.24
11/28/2006
PK
139647
102648
ELVIN SAFETY INC
' 253.88
11/28/2006
PK
139648
121312
ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS
787.07
11/2812006
PK
139649
120855
EVENT SOFTWARE
900.00
11/2812006
PK
139650
110034
EXTREME BEVERAGE
128.00
11128/2006
PK
139651
104137
FASTENAL COMPANY
125.67
11/28/2006
PK
139652
123647
FROEMMING, TERRY
30.50
11/28/2006
PK
1396531
110023
GLENCOE EQUIPMENT INC
3622
11/28/2006
PK
139654
123363
GMS INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES INC
160.57
1111812006
PK
139655
105562
GRANIT BRONZ
163.71
11/28/2006
PK
139656
101874
GRIGGS & COOPER & CO
21,249.16
11/2811006
PK
139657
108668
GRUFRUFF DESIGN
555.00
11/28/2006
PK
139658
102528
HAGER JEWELRY INC.
15.97
11/28/2006
PK
139659
102451
HANSEN DIST OF SLEEPY EYE
2,950.70
11/28/2006
PK
139660
102089
HANSEN GRAVEL
1,948.20
11/28/2006
PK
139661
102701
HENRY'S WATERWORKS INC
623.24
11/28/2006
PK
139662
102531
HENRYS FOODS INC
1,598.53
11118/2006
PK
139663
116866
HEWLETT - PACKARD CO
2,696.58
11/28/2006
PK
139664
102518
HILLYARD FLOOR CARE/HU T CHINSON
372.51
11118/2006
PK
139665
102530
HUTCHINSON CO-OP
17,058.03
11128/2006
PK
139666
102541
HUTCHINSON TELEPHONE CO
1,015.55
11/28/2006
PK
139667
101869
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
150.00
11118/2006
PK
1396681
102072
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
29,661.00
11128/2006
PK
1396691
103099
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
1,952.31
11118/2006
PK
1396701
102779
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST. #423
31,267.21
11/28/2006
PK
139671
103051
INFRATECH
1,295.00
11/2811006
PK
139672
103520
INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS OF
290.53
11/28/2006
PK
139673
111836
JACOBSEN, SEPTEMBER
15.98
11/2812006
PK
139674
121990
JAY MALONE MOTORS
453.89
1112812006
PK
139675
102554
JERABEK MACHINE SERV
107.89
11128/2006
PK
139676
119782
JESCO INDUSTRIAL SUPPLIES, INC
42.00
11/28/2006
PK
139677
101907
JIM'S GARDEN SERVICE
482.00
11/28/2006
PK
139678
101938
JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO.
33,186.23
11/28/2006
PK
139679
123283
JUNGCLAUS CARQUEST
207.09
11/28/2006
PK
139680
123648
KALENBERG, RANDAL
2,985.32
11/28/2006
PK
139681
123344
KEEPRS, INC
34.95
11/28/2006
PK
139682
102561
L & P SUPPLY CO
27.50
11/28/2006
PK
139683
104521
LEIDER, THERESA
100.00
11/28/2006
PK
139684
120903
LEXISNEXIS
1,209.26
11/28/2006
PK
1396851
101984
LOCHER BROTHERS INC
29,250.55
11118/2006
PK
139686
102145
M-R SIGN
65.06
11/28!2006
PK
139687
120802
M. AMUNDSON LLP
557.46
11/28/2006
PK
139688
102571
MACQUEEN EQUIP INC
4,792.50
11/28/2006
PK
139689
123417
MADINA HOSPITALITY GROUP LLC
150.00
1112812006
PK
139690
102987
MAKI, CONNIE
16.13
11/28/2006
PK
139691
105140
MARSHALL CONCRETE PRODUCTS
114.06
11/28/2006
PK
139692
123649
MAUS, DENICE
2,985.32
11/28/2006
PK
139693
123650
MCCONNELL, DAWN
2,985.32
11/28/2006
PK
139694
102573
MCLEOD COOP POWER
4,000.00
11/28/2006
PK
139695
112400
MENARDS - HUTCHINSON
747.40
11/28/2006
PK
1 1396961
102131
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY
44.41
11118/2006
PK
1 1396971
108403
MINNCOR INDUSTRIES
3,336.50
0
0
•
C�
r1
U
11/28/2006
PK
139698
111312
MINNEAPOLIS CONVENTION CENTER
88.00
11/28/2006
PK
139699
102826
MINNESOTA DEPT OF AGRICULTURE
400.00
1112812006
PK
139700
101947
MINNESOTA DEPT OF LABOR & INDU
20.00
11/28/2006
PK
139701
101826
MINNESOTA DEPT OF NATURAL RESO
75.00
11/28/2006
PK
139702
105157
MINNESOTA SHREDDING
140.86
1 1 /2 812 0 06
PK
139703
102583
MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LAB
31.00
11/28/2006
PK
139704
102655
MODERN MAZDA
85.70
11/28/2006
PK
139705
102016
MURPHY GRANITE CARVING
240.00
11/28/2006
PK
139706
120252
NEW CENTURY CHARTER SCHOOL
969.50
11/28/2006
PK
139707
120856
NFPA
697.50
11/28/2006
PK
139708
102591
NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC
433.10
11/28/2006
PK
139709
123651
OELLERICH, NANCY
28.00
1 1 /2 812 006
PK
139710
122948
OFFICE DEPOT
78.95
11/28/2006
PK
139711
123652
OLD COUNTRY BUFFET
495.00
11/28/2006
PK
139712
102592
OLSON'S LOCKSMITH
125.00
11 r2 812 0 0 6
PK
139713
108859
PARTS ASSOCIATES INC
151.14
11/28/2006
PK
139714
102187
PAUSTIS & SONS WINE CO
601.00
11/28/2006
PK
139715
101853
PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS
39,076.76
11/28/2006
PK
139716
102373
PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING
321.25
11/28/2006
PK
139717
102167
PITNEY BOWES
1,332.00
11/2812DD6
PK
139718
102593
PLOTZ, GARY D.
51.43
11/28/2006
PK
139719
105520
PONATH CONSTRUCTION
700.00
11/2812006
PK
139720
102445
POSTMASTER
165.00
11/28/2006
PK
139721
123653
POWELL, RYAN
60.52
11128/2006
PK
139722
102598
QUADE ELECTRIC
431.16
11128/2006
PK
139723
102052
QUALITY WINE & SPIRITS CO.
16,088.96
11/28/2006
PK
139724
102398
R & R EXCAVATING
9,758.90
11/28/2006
PK
139725
102604
R & R SPECIALTIES INC
119.17
11/28/20C)6
PK
139726
102205
R.J.L. TRANSFER
1,412.20
11/28/1006
PK
139727
102432
REED BUSINESS INFORMATION
212.00
11/28/2006
PK
139728
102395
REINER IRRIGATION & SEPTIC INC
200.00
11/28/2006
PK
139729
123654
REINERT, BUD
346.00
11/28/2006
PK
139730
123667
RESOURCE PROFESSIONALS ALLIANC
448.00
11!28/2006
PK
139731
121677
RUCKS, CAMERON D.
2,135.90
11/28/2006
PK
139732
119208
RUNKE, DOREEN
280.00
11/28/2006
PK
139733
103137
RUTHERFORD PUBLISHING
240.00
11/2812006
PK
139734
104748
S & T OFFICE PRODUCTS
1,134.23
11/28/2006
PK
139735
1 120907
SALTMAN LLC
52.19
11/28/2006
PK
139736
123418
SANDSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO.
214.50
11/28/2006
PK
139737
102436
SARA LEE COFFEE & TEA
288.34
11/28/2006
PK
139738
109801
SCOTT'S WINDOW CLEANING SERVIC
85.20
11/2812006
PK
139739
109801
SCOTTS WINDOW CLEANING SERVIC
63.90
11/28f2006
PK
139740
101892
SEH
5,417.85
11 t28/2006
PK
139741
123655
SHERATON HOTEL- MINNEAPOLIS
465.56
11/28/2006
PK
139742
102609
SHOPKO
19.15
11/28/2006
PK
139743
102611
SORENSEN'S SALES & RENTALS
408.12
11/28/2006
PK
1397441
1 120410
SPECIALTY WINES
1,14921
1 112 8/2 0 06
PK
139745
120514
SPRINT
274.86
1112812006
PK
139746
102242
SRF CONSULTING GROUP
11,744.18
11/28/1006
PK
139747
123656
SSC -STATE SUPPLY COMPANY
106.86
11/28/2006
PK
139748
102612
STANDARD PRINTING
7.19
11/28/2006
PK
139749
123568
STOCKMAN TRANSFER, INC.
12,619.48
11128/2006
PK
139750
102671
STOTTS, CASEY
751.96
11/18/2006
PK
139751
123663
STRUCTURAL BUILDINGS INC
6,000.00
11/28/2006
PK
139752
103220
SWANSON, MARILYN M.
80.10
11/28/2006
PK
139753
123657
TODNEM, DIANE
2,985.33
11/28/2006
PK
139754
119159
TOTAL FIRE PROTECTION
750.00
11/28/2006
PK
139755
12D205
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY APPAREL
128.98
11/28/2006
PK
139756
102454
TRI- COUNTY BEVERAGE & SUPPLY
348.80
11/28/2006
PK
139757
109289
TWIN CITY GARAGE DOOR CO
590.33
1112812006
PK
139758
102619
TWO WAY COMM INC
684.57
11/28/2006
PK
139759
102624
UNITED BUILDING CENTERS
570.63
11/28/2006
PK
139760
102627
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
300.00
11/2812006
PK
139761
120919
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
500.00
11/28/1006
PK
139762
101974
VIKING BEER
6,677.15
11/28/2006
PK
139763
102132
VIKING COCA COLA
727.50
11/28/2006
PK
139764
121147
VSS- VERTECH SOLUTIONS & SERVIC
63.85
11/28/2006
PK
1397651
105064
WASTE MANAGEMENT- SPRUCE RIDGE
35,397.46
11128/2006
PK
139766
102639
WEST PUBLISHING PAYMENT CTR
385.48
11/28/2006
PK
139767
103452
WINE COMPANY, THE
1,012.00
11/2812006
PK
139768
102452
WINE MERCHANTS INC
821.50
11/2812006
PK
139769
123658
WRIGHT COUNTY SHERIFF
100.00
11/28/2006
PK
139770
120777
YOUNG, RETT
384.00
11/28/2006
PK
139771
102634
ZIEGLER INC
67.52
1112812006
PK
139772
101919
AMERICAN FAMILY INS CO.
184.73
11/28/2006
PK
139773
101872
H.R.LA.P.R.
313.25
11/28/2006
PK
139774
102633
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
8,507.47
11/2812006
PK
139775
102635
HUTCHINSON, CITY OF
767.06
11/28/2006
PK
139776
101873
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST
4,001.53
11128/2006
PK
139777
101876
ING LIFE & ANN CO.
1,350.00
11128/2006
PK
139778
102449
1 MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PAYMEN
471.15
11/18/2006
PK
139779
101875
ORCHARD TRUST COMPANY, LLC
300.00
11/28/2006
PK
139780
1020961
PRUDENTIAL MUTUAL FUNDS
30.00
731,408.60
Account Nu
731,408.60
•
r1
0