Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
cp02-23-2016
C CITY OF HUTCHINSON MCLEOD COUNTY HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA Hutchinson City Center 11 l Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350-2522 Phone 320-587-5151, Fax 320-234-4246 NOTICE OF A SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP Tuesday, February 23, 2016 4:00 p.m. Council Chambers — Hutchinson City Center Notice is hereby given that the Hutchinson City Council has called a special workshop meeting for Tuesday, February 23, 2016, in the Council Chambers at the Hutchinson City Center, l 13 Hassan Street SE, l Iutchinson, Minnesota for the following purpose: r Review EDA Business Enterprise Project DATED; February 17, 2016 POS"rED: City Center YMatthew ]a c , City Admin s ator HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2016 CITY CENTER — COUNCIL CHAMBERS (The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in advance by city staff, committees and boards. Many decisions regarding agenda items are based upon this information as well as: City policy and practices, inputfrom constituents, and other questions or information that has not yet been presented or discussed regarding an agenda item) 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER— 5:30 P.M. (a) Approve the Council agenda and any agenda additions and/or corrections 2. INVOCATION — Faith Lutheran Church 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. RECOGNITION OF GIFTS, DONATIONS AND COMMUNITY SERVICE TO THE CITY (a) Resolution No. 14528 — Resolution Accepting Donation from Hutchinson Hospital Auxiliary to Hutchinson Police Department in the Amount of $3500.00 PUBLIC COMMENTS (]his is an opportunity or members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Ifyou have a question, concern or comment, please ask to be recognized by the mayor state your name and address for the record. Please keep comments under 5 minutes. Individuals wishing to speakfor more than five minutes should ask to be included on the agenda in advance ofthe meeting. All comments are appreciated, butplease refrain from personal or derogatory attacks on individuals.) 5. CITIZENS ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (a) Regular Meeting of February 9, 2016 CONSENT AGENDA (The items listedfor consideration will be enacted by one motion unless the Mayor, a member of the City Council or a city staff member requests an item to be removed. Traditionally items are not discussed.) 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA I (a) Consideration for Approval of Local Surface Water Management Plan (b) Consideration for Approval of Resolution No. 14529 — Resolution for Authorization to Execute Minnesota Department of Transportation Airport Maintenance and Operations Grant Contract (c) Consideration for Approval of Support of 42nd Annual Chamber of Commerce Arts & Crafts Festival on September 16 & 17, 2016 (d) Consideration for Approval of Dairy Day Celebration on June 3, 2016 (e) Consideration for Approval of Luce Line/River Corridor Parks Reforestation Community Tree Proj ect (f) Appointment of William Mose to Creekside Advisory Board to October 2019 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 2016 (g) Appointment of Juli Neubarth to Tree Board to January 2018 (h) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register A APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA 11 (a) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register B PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:00 P.M.) 9. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4 AND THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4-16 THEREIN AND THE ADOPTION OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR (a) Adopt Resolution No. 14530 —Resolution Adopting a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4; and Establishing Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 Therein and Adopting a Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefor (b) Adopt Resolution No. 14531 — Resolution Authorizing an Interfund Loan for Advance of Certain Costs in Connection with Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 COMMUNICATIONS REQUESTS AND PETITIONS (The purpose oj this portion oj the agenda is to provide the 7777—with information necessary to craft wise policy. Includes items like monthly or annual reports and communications from other entities.) 10. HUTCHINSON HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2015 YEAR END REPORT 11. PLANNING/ZONINGBUILDING DEPARTMENT 2015 YEAR END REPORT UNFINISHED BUSINESS 12. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-753 — AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO TITANIUM PARTNERS LLC (Second reading and consideration of adoption) NEW BUSINESS 13. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-754 — AN ORDINANCE SETTING THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS (First reading, Set Second Reading and Consideration of Adoption for March 8, 2016) 14. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-755 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 2.04 OF THE HUTCHINSON CITY CHARTER TO INCREASE MAYORAL TERMS TO FOUR YEARS (First reading, Set Second Reading and Consideration of Adoption for March 8, 2016) 15. REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS FOR OUTDOOR AQUATIC CENTER/POOL �a) Approve/Deny Plans & Specifications as Presented b) Approve/Deny Authorizing an Advertisement for Bids 16. APPROVE/DENY SETTING SPECIAL MEETING FOR FEBRUARY 29, 2016, AT 1:30 P.M. TO ATTEND THE LEGISLATIVE FORUM AT CITY CENTER 2 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FEBRUARY 23, 2016 GOVERNANCE (T e purpose o t is portion of the agenda is to deal with organizational development issues, including policies, performances, and other matters that manage the logistics of the organization. May include monitoring reports, policy development and governance process items.) 17. MINUTES FROM COMMITTEES, BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS a) Hutchinson HRA Board Minutes from January 19, 2016 b) City of Hutchinson Financial Reports and Investment Reports for December 2015 MISCELLANEOUS 18. STAFF UPDATES 19. COUNCIL/MAYOR UPDATE ADJOURNMENT CITY OF HUTCHINSON RESOLUTION NO. 14528 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS WHEREAS, the City of Hutchinson is generally authorized to accept donations of real and personal property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 465.03 for the benefit of its citizens, and is specifically authorized to accept gifts and bequests for the benefit of recreational services pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.17; and WHEREAS, the following person has offered to contribute the cash amount set forth below to the city: Name of Donor Hutch Health Hospital Auxiliary Amount Donation Date $3,500.00 1/14/2016 WHEREAS, such donation has been contributed to the Hutchinson Police department as a general donation. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that it is appropriate to accept the donation offered. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: THAT, the donation described above is hereby accepted by the City of Hutchinson. Adopted by the City Council this 23rd day of February 2016. ATTESTED: Matthew Jaunich City Administrator APPROVED: Gary T. Forcier Mayor HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2016 CITY CENTER — COUNCIL CHAMBERS (The City Council is provided background information for agenda items in advance by city staff, committees and boards. Many decisions regarding agenda items are based upon this information as well as: City policy and practices, inputfrom constituents, and other questions or information that has not yet been presented or discussed regarding an agenda item) 1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER— 5:30 P.M. Mayor Gary Forcier called the meeting to order. Members present were Chad Czmowski, Bill Arndt, Mary Christensen and John Lofdahl. Others present were Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, Marc Sebora, City Attorney and Kent Exner, City Engineer (a) Approve the Council agenda and any agenda additions and/or corrections Motion by Czmowski, second by Christensen, to approve the agenda as presented. Motion carried unanimously. 2. INVOCATION — Faith Lutheran Church 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. RECOGNITION OF GIFTS, DONATIONS AND COMMUNITY SERVICE TO THE CITY Council Member Arndt spoke about Winter Fest, Kiwanis Club providing hot chocolate at Rocket Hill and the VFW Commander being in town recently. PUBLIC COMMENTS (]his is an opportunity or members of the public to address the City Council on items not on the current agenda. Ifyou have a question, concern or comment, please ask to be recognized by the mayor state your name and address for the record. Please keep comments under 5 minutes. Individuals wishing to speakfor more than five minutes should ask to be included on the agenda in advance ofthe meeting. All comments are appreciated, butplease refrain from personal or derogatory attacks on individuals.) 5. CITIZENS ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL 6. APPROVAL OF MINUTES (a) Regular Meeting of January 26, 2016 Motion by Lofdahl, second by Arndt, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried unanimously. CONSENT AGENDA (The items listedJor consideration will be enacted by one motion unless the Mayor, a member of the City Council or a city staff member requests an item to be removed. Traditionally items are not discussed.) 7. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA I (a) Consideration for Approval of Issuing Short -Term Gambling License to 3M Club on March 31, 2016 (b) Consideration for Approval of Issuing Short -Term Gambling License to Hutchinson Rotary Foundation on April 15, 2016 (c) Consideration for Approval of Issuing Short -Term Gambling License to Crow River Habitat for Humanity on May 13, 2016 (d) Consideration for Approval of Change Order No. 1 — Letting No. 13, Project No. 15-13 (Wastewater Treatment Facility Forcemain Bypass Improvements) CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 (e) Consideration for Approval of Resolution No. 14527 — Resolution Adopting Revised Assessment for SA5079A (f) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register A Item 7(f) was pulled for separate discussion Motion by Czmowski, second by Christensen, to approve Consent Agenda II with the exception of Item 7(f). Motion carried unanimously. Council Member Lofdahl noted that there are a couple of large payments on the register that he wanted to note. These include $199,000 on a reconstruction project and another payment is for $86,000 for the pool project. Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to approve Item 7(f). Motion carried unanimously APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA 11 (a) Claims, Appropriations and Contract Payments — Register B Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, with Forcier abstaining, to approve Consent Agenda II. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Forcier moved Item 12 to follow the consent agenda. 12. FIRE DEPARTMENT 2015 YEAR END REPORT Chief Mike Schumann presented before the Council. Chief Schumann provided an overview of fire department highlights in 2015. The topics included goals/objectives, officers/roster, operational data, training, and equipment. The department's annual report is on the fire department's web site. Chief Schumann provided additional general information on the fire department. PUBLIC HEARINGS (6:00 P.M.) 9. 2016 PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT PROGRAM PHASE 1 PROJECT (LETTING NO. 1, PROJECT NO. 16-01) (a) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14523 - Resolution Ordering Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications (b) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14524 - Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids Kent Exner, City Engineer, presented before the Council. Mr. Exner explained that a neighborhood meeting was held February 8, 2016, and approximately two dozen properties were represented. This project includes pavement reconstruction/rehabilitation measures on segments of Linden Avenue, Madson Avenue, Milwaukee Avenue, Church Street, West Shore Drive and Grove Street. If the project is approved, it is anticipated to start in late spring/early summer of 2016. Mr. Exner spoke about specific streets, such as narrowing Madson Avenue and Linden Avenue and widening Grove Street. Council Member Arndt commented that the angle of the pavement markings on Grove Street should be angled better to allow the school buses better mobility in and out. Mr. Exner explained alternate bids for Grove Street and West Shore Drive. The estimated project cost is $3,599,000 with $700,000 coming from assessments. Mr. Exner reviewed briefly the City's assessment policy. Mr. Exner spoke of a geogrid method in reclaiming the streets. Mr. Exner reviewed the assessment rates that were assessed to Lynn Road two years ago. The rear yards of properties on the Grove Street project are on Lynn Road. The Grove Street assessments are more than double the Lynn Road rates. Staff is proposing to assess the Lynn Road rates to the Grove Street properties, in essence applying a corner credit to these properties. 2 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 The public hearing was opened at 6:27 p.m. Nan Crary, 46 Grove Street, presented before the Council. Ms. Crary noted that no seal coating or crack filling has been done in the last 20 years on Grove Street. She noted only patching has been done. Ms. Crary expressed that she feels the street does in fact need to be reclaimed and she looks forward to it being maintained regularly in the future. Ms. Crary also expressed that the Grove Street property owners all mainly use Lynn Road and the school district uses Grove Street as a parking lot twice a day to pick up students. Ms. Crary was in favor of the Lynn Road assessments being applied. Sandy McCormick, 120 Grove Street, presented before the Council. Ms. McCormick has concerns about the parking situation on Grove Street, especially in the winter with snow removal. Ms. McCormick noted that no one from the city or school district has ever contacted the property owners to see what concerns they may have. Ms. McCormick also raised concerns with the use of North and South Park. Ms. McCormick read from a vacation that was granted several years ago. Ms. McCormick questioned the details of the project. Bridget Peller, 26 Grove Street, presented before the Council. Ms. Peller noted that she is in favor of being assessed the lower Lynn Road assessment, however she questions the assessments on Grove Street and how they are not the same as Lynn Road. Ms. Peller feels that the school district has caused the majority of the deconstruction of the roadway. Ms. Peller's proposal is to leave the sidewalks as they are and not widen them. Motion by Czmowski, second by Lofdahl, to close public hearing at 6:42 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Mr. Exner noted that the main function of the Grove Street project is to make it mobility-friendly in today's functionality, with school buses loading/unloading, parking on the west side and having traffic flow through all at the same time. Mr. Exner noted that the street improvement could be pushed off a few years and have the street be minimally maintained until it is reclaimed. Council Member Arndt noted that he does not feel that the street has to be wider nor does a sidewalk have to be wider. The more important aspect is the angle of the bus parking for loading/unloading school children. Ms. McCormick informed the Council that there are legal issues with widening the street and widening the sidewalk. She also has concerns with the property owners not being consulted, nor the bus drivers being consulted, about this project. Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted that there are two resolutions before the Council for consideration. Mr. Jaunich noted that the Council couldpropose changes to the plans and specifications. Mr. Exner reminded the Council that staff relies on the expertise of the school district as far as the bus parking for loading/unloading. Council Member Arndt expressed that he feels Grove Street should be reconstructed, but he does not feel it should be widened nor should trees be removed. Grove Street would be bid as an alternate. Exner noted that he will research the possibility of decreasing the widening of Grove Street and will report back to Council. Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, to approve Resolution Nos. 14523 and 14524, however staff should look at alternatives on Grove Street and the width of the street. Motion carried unanimously. 10. 2016 STREET SEAL COATING PROJECT (LETTING NO. 3, PROJECT NO. 16-03)) (a) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14525 - Resolution Ordering Improvement and Preparation of Plans and Specifications (b) Approve/Deny Resolution No. 14526 - Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Ordering Advertisement for Bids Kent Exner, City Engineer, presented before the Council. Mr. Exner noted that multiple city street segments have been identified to be included in the 2016 street seal coating project. The project includes street surface seal coat applications by construction of bituminous material, aggregate and fog seal material. No assessments are on this project. Construction is anticipated CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 to begin June 20, 2016, with a completion date of August 9, 2016. The public hearing was opened at 7:10 p.m. Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, to close public hearing at 7:10 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Motion by Christensen, second by Arndt, to approve Resolution Nos. 14525 and 14526. Motion carried unanimously. 11. CITY OF HUTCHINSON LOCAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN John Paulson, Environmental Specialist, presented before the Council. Mr. Paulson explained that city staff has been utilizing the Stormwater Management Plan for Portions of the City of Hutchinson as a guide for storm water planning purposes. Numerous regulatory and technical changes have occurred related to municipal storm water. In 2007 the City of Hutchinson became a regulated Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System owner and is required to implement a variety of storm water best management practices ranging from public education to scheduled infrastructure inspections. The Local Surface Water Management Plan is a comprehensive collection of the various applicable regulations, local water resources, regulatory agencies, storm water system issues assessment and implementation plan. The Plan is a one stop guide for City storm water requirements. The Plan also serves as a planning tool used to identify routine ongoing storm water program implementation costs as well as capital improvements needed to address issues with water quality and water quantity throughout the City. The City's Resource Allocation Committee has briefly reviewed the Plan as well. Mr. Paulson highlighted items of the plan. Public hearing was opened at 7:21 p.m. Steve Cook, 728 Juul Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Cook questioned an item in Section 4.5(B). He asked about money being allocated for sediment in Otter Lake. Mr. Cook thought perhaps the sediment could possibly be used at Creekside if it is clean enough. Mr. Paulson noted that will be reviewed in soil analysis. General discussion was held regarding sediment cores and finding native bottoms. Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to close public hearing at 7:26 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. COMMUNICATIONS REQUESTS AND PETITIONS e purpose oJ this portion oJ the agenda is to provide the 777777ith information necessary to craft wise policy. Includes items like monthly or annual reports and communications from other entities.) 13. CREEKSIDE 2015 YEAR END REPORT Andy Kosek, Creekside Manager, presented before the Council. Mr. Kosek reviewed information such as source separated organics tonnages received in and raw material tonnages coming in. Mr. Kosek also reviewed the low volume model that the facility is implementing in 2016. Mr. Kosek also reviewed the facility's sales coverage area, as well as trends and challenges. Mr. Kosek also reviewed budget comparisons in the refuse and compost funds. Council Member Arndt asked about fill from road projects. Kent Exner noted that the top soil is what is best for Creekside — a nice, clean product. That doesn't always come from road projects, but more from ponding projects. It is the City's discretion as to where the loads are taken. Mayor Forcier moved Item 16 after the Creekside annual report. 16. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-753 — AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO TITANIUM PARTNERS LLC (First reading, Set second reading and consideration of adoption for February 23, 2016) .19 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 Miles Seppelt, EDA Director, presented before the Council. Mr. Seppelt explained that the City has been approached by a developer that would like to bring a new hotel to the community at the northeast corner of Hwy 7 and Hwy 15. The developer is proposing a mid-level hotel, similar in nature to the AmericInn. Mr. Seppelt explained that the proposed property is zoned appropriately and has the highest and best use. Mr. Seppelt provided benefits to the project, such as reduced city maintenance costs on the current vacant lots, gas & electric sales for HUC, water/sanitary sewer sales, job creation, drawing more people to downtown, additional lodging options and the project will use local contractors when possible. The developer would like to expedite the project with groundbreaking in May and opening this Fall. EDA staff is proposing to sell the property for $1.00. The return on the investment is the annual taxes generated times the life of the hotel generating total taxes of $4.6 million. Mr. Seppelt noted that this is the first inquiry on the property since it went up for sale nine years ago. Deb Johnson, 440 Rose Lane, presented before the Council. Ms. Johnson stated that she moved to her property eight years ago and does not want to live behind a hotel. Mr. Seppelt spoke about the required setbacks and screenings the hotel property will need to comply with. Ms. Johnson has concerns with where the parking lot will be located. Kyle Felber, 450 Rose Lane, presented before the Council. Mr. Felber suggested the developer look at the northwest corner of the intersection. Mr. Felber asked about the screening requirements. Marc Sebora, City Attorney, noted that city ordinance requires screening between commercial and residential neighborhoods. The Council encouraged Mr. Felber to provide his feedback at the Planning Commission meeting where a public hearing will be held. Mindy Anderson, 455 Rose Lane, presented before the Council. Ms. Anderson asked if there are requirements that the developer will have to meet to keep the city looking nice. Ms. Anderson also asked if they would have to develop a pond because the project is so close to the river. Mr. Seppelt explained that when Hwy 7 was reconstructed several ponds were constructed so the developer would only have to construct a pond if they cover more than 40% of the impervious surface. Steve Cook, 728 Juul Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Cook asked about the reversionary language in the purchase agreement. Mr. Cook noted that the developer has proposed 54 units and he asked what if they only construct a 30 unit property. The agreement notes that a mid-level structure is being developed and will be up to the developer and what the site can accommodate. It was also noted that there is language in the agreement that if the developer does not have a certificate of occupancy by October 2017, the property will revert to the City. Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to approve first reading of Ordinance No. 16-753. Motion carried unanimously. The Council recessed at 8:15 p.m. The Council reconvened at 8:22 p.m. 14. UPDATE BY STEVE COOK ON FOUNDERS' PARK AND SIGNAGE GRANT CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 Steve Cook, 728 Juul Road, presented before the Council. Mr. Cook informed the Council that he has researched various grants for signage and a founder's park. He has found a national grant available for placemaking. The EDA and Heart of Hutch have agreed to be the applicant for the grant. The grant encourages cities to incorporate arts and culture into their community development. The initialgrant application is due March 2, 2016. Finalists will be notified the end of May. Mr. Cook noted this is a very competitive grant. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 15. CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE NO. 15-749 — AN ORDINANCE APPROVING REVISIONS TO SECTIONS OF THE HUTCHINSON CITY CHARTER AS RECOMMENDED BY THE CHARTER COMMISSION (First Reading and Consideration of Adoption) Marc Sebora, City Attorney, presented before the Council. Mr. Sebora provided background on what the Council has discussed thus far. The amendments were initially presented to the Council on January 12, 2016. Because a full Council was not present at the January 26, 2016, Council meeting, the ordinance is before the Council this evening as a first reading. Council Member Lofdahl noted he would like no changes made to Section 2.09 and leave it as written. He suggested that the proposed ordinance be returned to the Charter Commission requesting that Section 2.09 be removed. He is fine with all other suggested changes. Motion by Lofdahl, second by Czmowski, to deny Ordinance No. 15-749. Discussion was held regarding the topic of four-year mayoral terms. Council Member Lofdahl suggested putting the four-year mayoral term on the ballot in November for the voters to vote on. Council Member Lfodahl requested that an ordinance be drafted for the next Council meeting for four-year mayoral terms. Roll call vote was taken: Christensen — aye; Lofdahl — aye; Arndt — nay; Czmowski — aye; Forcier — nay. Motion carried 3 to 2. 17. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-750 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 154 OF THE ZONING CODE — MICRO -DISTILLERY COCKTAIL ROOMS (Second Reading and Consideration of Adoption) Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted there have been no changes to the ordinance since the first reading. Motion by Czmowski, second by Lofdahl, to approve Ordinance No. 16-750. Motion carried unanimously. 18. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-751 — AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 154 OF THE ZONING CODE - ACCESSORY STRUCTURES (Second Reading and Consideration of Adoption) Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted there have been no changes to the ordinance since the first reading. Motion by Arndt, second by Czmowski, to approve Ordinance No. 16-751. Council Member Lofdahl commented that he is not in favor of 2000 square feet garages in city limits. He likes the changes regarding how things are sized and not having to follow a conditional use permit process. Roll call vote was taken: Christensen — aye; Lofdahl — nay; Arndt — aye; Czmowski — aye; Forcier — aye. Motion carried 4 to 1. 19. APPROVE/DENY ORDINANCE NO. 16-752 — AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY TO MACH1 PROPERTIES LLC (Second Reading and Consideration of Adoption) Matt Jaunich, City Administrator, noted there have been no changes to the ordinance since the first reading. rel CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 Motion by Arndt, second by Lofdahl, to approve Ordinance No. 16-752. Motion carried unanimously. NEW BUSINESS 20. APPROVE/DENY RESOLUTION NO. 14522 - RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FILING OF A PETITION TO REQUEST AMENDMENT TO THE MPCA RIVERINE STANDARDS John Paulson, Environmental Specialist, presented before the Council. Mr. Paulson explained that the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities and Minnesota Environmental Science and Economic Review Board authorized the filing of a petition for rulemaking with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency seeking to have the MPCA amend its newly adopted riverine standards based upon the post -rulemaking identification of new evidence, which demonstrates such rules have relied upon two factors flux and the five-day biochemical oxygen demand for purposes of identifying nutrient impairment not accepted by the scientific community or the US EPA for use for such purposes. The current MPCA riverine standards rule is significantly flawed and CGMC and MESERB desire to present such information to the MPCA in the form of a petition for rule amendments so that the MPCA can take the appropriate steps necessary to correct the rule. The City has been requested by the CGMC and MESERB to petition the MPCA to amend its Riverine Eutrophication Standards due to the standards not being based on sound science. Motion by Lofdahl, second by Christensen, to approve Resolution No. 14522. Motion carried unanimously. 21. APPROVE/DENY SETTING COUNCIL WORKSHOP FOR FEBRUARY 23, 2016, AT 4:00 P.M. TO DISCUSS PROPOSED HUTCHINSON ENTERPRISE CENTER WITH THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Matt Jaunich explained that this workshop is to discuss the business incubator project. Motion by Czmowski, second by Christensen, to set Council workshop for February 23, 2016, at 4:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. 22. APPROVE/DENY SETTING BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION FOR APRIL 20, 2016, AT 5:30 P.M. Motion by Lofdahl, second by Czmowski, to set Board of Appeal and Equalization for April 20, 2016, at 5:30 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. GOVERNANCE (The purpose o t is portion of the agenda is to deal with organizational development issues, including policies, performances, and other matters that manage the logistics of the organization. May include monitoring reports, policy development and governance process items.) 23. MINUTES FROM COMMITTEES, BOARDS OR COMMISSIONS �a) Library Board Minutes from December 28, 2015 b) Snow Removal — Ice Control Report for January 2016 MISCELLANEOUS 24. STAFF UPDATES 7 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 9, 2016 Kent Exner — Mr. Exner noted that the Water Tower bids will be received next week. Matt Jaunich — Mr. Jaunich noted that city offices will be closed next Monday for Presidents' Day. He also informed the Council that they should have received an invitation from the CGMC regarding Legislative Action Day. Mr. Jaunich mentioned that the City will be holding legislative forum on February 29, 2016, at 1:30 p.m. Lastly, Mr. Jaunich noted that upgrades are being made to the Council Chambers. 25. COUNCIL/MAYOR UPDATE Bill Arndt — Council Member Arndt stated that Region 6E will consider a Resolution in support of Hwy 212 Corridor if the City forwards one to them to consider. Steve Cook — Mr. Cook asked about Grove Street project. Mr. Cook spoke about the restriction on park use, however he realizes that parking lots and sidewalks are part of parks but this prof ect is not for park use. He strongly encouraged that the angle parking be looked at again instead of the street being widened. Mr. Cook also clarified Arndt's and Forcier's vote on the proposed ordinance for the Charter amendments. Council Member Lofdahl clarified that his motion was simply to deny the ordinance, however it got confusing because the Council then began discussing four-year mayoral terms. So the vote was not on four-year mayoral terms, but rather only on denying the ordinance. Mayor Forcier noted that it is his desire to listen to the boards and commissions that provide comments/suggestions to the Council. When asked by Cook if he was okay with overturning a public vote, since Section 2.09 was voted on by the people in 2000, Forcier indicated yes. General discussion was held about Section 2.09 of the City Charter. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Arndt, second Lofdahl, to adjourn at 9:05 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. N. HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Adoption of City of Hutchinson Local Surface Water Management Plan Department: PW/Engineering LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: John Paulson/Kent Exner Agenda Item Type: Presenter: John Paulson/Kent Exner Reviewed by Staff ❑ Consent Agenda Time Requested (Minutes): 0 License Contingency N/A Attachments: Yes BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: A Public Hearing was held at the 2/9/16 City Council Meeting to receive input on the Local Surface Water Management Plan (LSWMP). To date, no comments have been received from the public regarding the contents of the LSWMP. The LSWMP is a compilation of existing regulations that are already being implemented and enforced. It is a one stop guide for City of Hutchinson storm water requirements. It also serves as a planning tool used to identify routine on-going storm water program implementation costs as well as capital improvements needed to address issues with water quality and water quantity throughout the City. City staff will be available to present an overview of the plan and to answer any questions that you or the public may have. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Consideration of adoption of the Local Surface Water Management Plan. Fiscal Impact: Funding Source: FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: No PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: NO, NO, A, VAN, DECEMBER 2015 LOCAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN ............. WSB Project No. 2702-000 ............. all LOCAL SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA December 2015 Prepared By: WSB & Associates, Inc. 701 Xenia Avenue South, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 763-541-4800 763-541-1700 (Fax) Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Jacob Newhall, PE Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Reg. No. 49170 Certification TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page Certification Table of Contents SECTION 1: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY SECTION 2: LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY SECTION 3: AGENCY COOPERATION SECTION 4: ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS AND ISSUES SECTION 5: GOALS AND POLICIES SECTION 6: IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A — Figures Figure 1: Location Map Figure 2: Zoning Map Figure 3: Future Land Use Map Figure 4: Storm Sewer Map Figure 5: National Wetlands Inventory & DNR Lakes Map Figure 6: Soils Map Figure 7: Water Resource Problem Areas Map Figure 8: Floodplain Map Figure 9: Water Quality Monitoring Map Figure 10: Pollutant Sources Map Figure 11: Stormwater BMP Map Appendix B — MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization Appendix C — Stormwater Management Design Standards Local Surface Water Management Plan Table of Contents City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 SECTION 1 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. 1. Local Water Management Plan Purposes The City of Hutchinson's Local Surface Water Management Plan (Plan, City Plan, Local Plan) is a local management plan that has been written to be consistent with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes 10313.235, Minnesota Rules 8410. Minnesota Statute 10313.201 states that the purposes of the water management programs are to: • Protect, preserve, and use natural surface and groundwater storage and retention systems; • Minimize public capital expenditures needed to correct flooding and water quality problems; • Identify and plan for means to effectively protect and improve surface and groundwater quality; • Establish more uniform local policies and official controls for surface and groundwater management; • Prevent erosion of soil into surface water systems; • Promote groundwater recharge; • Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and water recreational facilities; and • Secure the other benefits associated with the proper management of surface and groundwater. The Hutchinson Local Surface Water Management Plan addresses these purposes. 1.2. Local Surface Water Management Responsibilities and Related Agreements The City of Hutchinson (the City) has not entered into any water management related agreements with its neighboring cities, the County, or the State of Minnesota, other than on a project -specific agreement for BMPs constructed to meet water quality requirements. The City is responsible for construction, maintenance, and operation of the City's storm water management systems (i.e., ponds, pipes, channels). 1.3. Executive Summary The Hutchinson Local Surface Water Management Plan is divided into six sections: • Section I Executive Summary provides background information and summarizes the Plan contents. • Section 2 Land and Water Resource Inventory presents information about the topography, geology, groundwater, soils, land use, public utilities, surface waters, hydrologic system and data, and the drainage system. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 1-1 SECTION 1 • Section 3 Agency Cooperation describes the City's ordinances and other governmental controls and programs that affect water management. • Section 4 Assessment of Problems and Issues presents the City's water management related problems and issues. • Section 5 Goals and Policies outlines the City's goals and policies pertaining to water management. • Section 6Implementation Program presents the implementation program for the City, which includes defining responsibilities, prioritizing, and listing the program elements. Table 6.1 outlines the projects, programs, studies, and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) activities that have been identified to address the problem areas contained in this Plan. 1.3.1. Background McLeod County adopted a Comprehensive Local Water Plan in 2013. The McLeod County Plan addresses water problems in the context of watershed units and groundwater systems. In addition, The City of Hutchinson is located in the south fork of the Crow River watershed, so the Crow River Organization of Water assists in guiding local water resources policies. The City is not located in a watershed district. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 1-2 SECTION 2 2. LAND AND WATER RESOURCE INVENTORY The City, located approximately 50 miles west of downtown Minneapolis, is surrounded by lakes, wetlands, and valuable water and land resources. Protecting and enhancing these important resources is a high priority for the City and the surrounding area. Information has been collected regarding land and water resources for the City from a variety of sources. This section of the Plan provides a general description and summary of the climate, geology, surficial topography, surface and ground water resource data, soils, land use, public utilities services, water-based recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, unique features, scenic areas, and pollutant sources. This section also identifies where more detailed information can be obtained. 2.1. Topography and Geology The City is located in the northwest area of McLeod County as shown on Figure 1, Appendix A. The area is characterized by nearly flat to gently rolling topography, with the highest ground being in the north central portion of the City. Hutchinson is bordered by Otter and Campbell Lake to the west and through the central portion of the city where it continues on as the South Fork Crow River past the Hutchinson Dam. All of the City's surface water drains to Otter Lake and the South Fork Crow River. The City has contour data that covers the entire City and is based on 2011 LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) Data. According to the McLeod County Geologic Atlas from the Minnesota Geologic Survey, the depth to bedrock in the Hutchinson area ranges from approximately 400-500 feet below ground surface. 2.2. Climate and Precipitation The climate for McLeod County, about one hour west of the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area, is described as a humid continental climate with moderate precipitation, wide daily temperature variations, warm humid summers, and cold winters. The average annual temperature is 44.3 degrees Fahrenheit. The total average annual precipitation is approximately 26.9 inches. The annual snowfall average is 42.9 inches and is equivalent to approximately 4.3 inches of water. Average monthly temperature and precipitation are shown in Table 2-1 below. Additional climatological information for the area can be obtained from the Minnesota State Climatology Office at http://www.climate.umn.edu/. The recurrence interval of a rainfall event is based on the probability that a particular storm event will reoccur in any given year. A 24-hour rainfall event having a 99% chance of occurrence is approximately 2.4 inches. A 24-hour rainfall event having a 1% chance of occurrence is approximately 6.9 inches. The 1%, 10 -day runoff is 7.1 inches (this is a combination of snowmelt and precipitation when the ground is frozen and no infiltration can occur and is from Figure 2-1 (A) of the National Engineering Handbook, Section 4, Hydrology, Soil Conservation Service, August 1972). Additional rainfall events and Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-1 SECTION 2 probabilities are listed in Table 2-2 below. The rainfall data was obtained from the Atlas 14 website produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Refer to http://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/ for additional information. TABLE 2-1 AVERAGE MONTHLY TEMPERATURE AND PRECIPITATION DATA FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON Months Average Temp (F°) Precipitation (inches) Snowfall (inches) January 11.8 0.7 8.5 February 17.1 0.6 7.2 March 3 0.3 1.5 8.7 April 45.7 2.4 2.9 May 5 8.3 3.4 0.0 June 67.8 4.3 0.0 July 72.3 3.4 0.0 August 69.6 3.7 0.0 September 60.8 2.7 0.0 October 48.4 2.0 0.6 November 32.4 1.3 5.9 December 17.6 0.9 9.1 Totals Year Avg.) 44.3 26.9 42.9 TABLE 2-2 RAINFALL EVENTS FOR THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON RECURRENCE INTERVAL EVENT DURATION PROBABLILITY OF OCCURRENCE IN ANY GIVEN YEAR RAINFALL AMOUNT (INCHES) 1 - Year 24 - Hour 99% 2.40 2 - Year 24 - Hour 50% 2.76 5 - Year 24 - Hour 20% 3.44 10 - Year 24 - Hour 10% 4.09 25 - Year 24 - Hour 4% 5.09 50 - Year 24 - Hour 2% 5.95 100 - Year 24 - Hour 1% 6.90 2.3. Soils The City is predominantly located in five different soil associations: Clarion -Harps -Glencoe, Clarion-Canisteo-Storden, Estherville-Coland-Biscay, Cokato-Storden-Muskego, and Cokato-Canisteo-Cordova. Soil textures, infiltration rates, and slopes can vary greatly between the different soil associations. Infiltration rates of soils affect the amount of direct runoff resulting from rainfall; the higher the Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-2 SECTION 2 infiltration rate for a given soil, the lower the runoff potential. Conversely, soils with low infiltration rates produce high runoff volumes and high peak discharge rates. More information about the local soils can be obtained from the Soil Survey ofMcLeod County or The McLeod County Comprehensive Local Water Plan. 2.4. Land Use and Zoning The City is approximately nine square miles with a 2014 population of 14,124. In Hutchinson, population size is growing at a faster rate than the city area, resulting in an increased trend in population density. The Current Zoning Map is shown in Figure 2. The Future Land Use Map is shown in Figure 3. The City of Hutchinson Comprehensive Plan was adopted on December 10, 2013. For more information on Land Use and Zoning within the City, refer to the Comprehensive Plan which can be found on the City website (http://www.ci.hutchinson.mn.us/). 2.5. Public Utilities Hutchinson provides sanitary and water service throughout the City. In 2008, the Hutchinson wastewater facility underwent a major expansion to help serve the needs of the City through the year of 2028, with a maximum capacity of 9.62 million gallons per day (mgd). The upgrade was designed to treat an average of 3.67 mgd using biological and membrane bioreactor (MBR) processes. Prior to discharging into the South Fork River, the water is treated with chemical phosphorus removal and ultraviolet disinfection. In addition to the treatment facility, there are also areas of the City that utilize individual Subsurface Sewage Treatment Systems (SSTS). Public water services are described in Subsection 2.7 Groundwater. Storm sewers, ditches, curbs, and gutters provide storm water drainage for the City. The storm sewer map (Figure 4) shows the City's storm water system of pipes, channels and ponds. Future street maintenance and redevelopment will likely dictate the extension or reconstruction of the storm drainage system. Mapping of storm water utilities will be updated as improvements of the system are completed to stay in compliance with MS4 requirements. 2.6. Surface Waters Figure 5 shows the major water resources in the City. The following table lists the named DNR -protected lakes and wetlands within the City and the associated ordinary High Water Level. Waterbod Name OHW Lake ID # Otter 1039.2 43 0085 00 Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-3 SECTION 2 The Wetland Conservation Act of 1991 (WCA) dictates that Local Government Units (LGUs) are responsible for administering the rules. The intent of the WCA is to promote no net loss of wetlands. McLeod County is the LGU responsible for administering WCA within the City. Refer to Figure 5 for the location of National Wetland Inventory (NWI) wetlands throughout the City. A soils map is also included for reference as Figure 6. 2.6.1. Water Quality Data Water quality data for the City has been obtained from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Environmental Data Access site. This database is utilized by participating agencies to compile water quality testing data and is almost entirely used for the storage of water quality parameters. This water quality monitoring information/data and monitoring locations can be found at the MPCA's Environmental Data Access site at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.php/water/water-monitoring-and-reporting/w ater-monitoring-and-reporting. html . 2.6.2. Impaired Waters The MPCA lists the following water bodies located within or near the City as being impaired: • Otter Lake (Main Basin ID — 43-0085-01) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish tissue and excessive nutrients/eutrophication • Otter Lake (South Arm ID — 43-0085-02 and North Arm/Campbells ID — 43-0085-03) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish tissue • South Fork Crow River (Headwaters to Hutchinson Dam: ID -07010205-540) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish, turbidity, fishes bioassessments and aquatic macroinvertab rate bioassessments • South Fork Crow River (Hutchinson Dam to Bear Creek: ID -07010205-510) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish and turbidity As of 2015, TMDL studies are currently underway for Otter Lake and the South Fork Crow River as part of a Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) study being conducted for the South Fork Crow Watershed. The locations of these impaired water bodies are shown on the water resource problem areas map, Figure 7, Appendix A. 2.6.3. Shoreland The City has an adopted a shoreland management ordinance. A copy of this ordinance can be found under Title XV: Land Usage in Chapter 152 at http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/ or obtained at City Hall. This ordinance requires setbacks from shoreland areas, and limits the type of development and use of the City's shoreland areas. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-4 SECTION 2 2.6.4. Flood Plain Management The City has adopted a flood plain management ordinance. A copy of this ordinance can be found under Title XV: Land Usage in Chapter 154 at http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson mn/ or obtained at City Hall. This ordinance generally regulates developments, land alterations and uses within each of the floodway, flood fringe, and general flood plain districts. 2.6.5 Storm Water Management The City has adopted a storm water management ordinance that can be found under Title V: Public Works in Chapter 54: Storm Water Management at http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson mn/ or obtained at City Hall. This ordinance identifies several features related to the City's storm water management and erosion control goals and controls. 2.7. Groundwater Various agencies are responsible for groundwater management and protection. The DNR regulates groundwater usage rate and volume as part of its charge to conserve and use the waters of the state. For example, suppliers of domestic water to more than 25 people or applicants proposing a use that exceeds 10,000 gallons per day or 1,000,000 gallons per year must obtain a water appropriation permit from the DNR. Many of the agencies charged with regulating water usage are currently involved in assessing and addressing concerns of water usage. When and where feasible the City will work with the associated agencies to be good stewards of water resources. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is the official state agency responsible for addressing all environmental health matters, including groundwater protection. For example, the MDH administers the well abandonment program and regulates installation of new wells. The MPCA administers and enforces laws relating to pollution of the state's waters, including groundwater. The Minnesota Geological Survey provides a complete account of the state's groundwater resources. The City is charged with general responsibilities for groundwater protection and use, but its role is limited to cooperating and assisting the DNR, MDH, and MPCA in their groundwater protection efforts. Continued research about infiltration impacts and groundwater recharge is ongoing with the goal to help develop a better overall understanding of this groundwater/infiltration interaction. The City owns and operates five wells located within City limits. The wells draw from an aquifer located approximately 100 feet below ground surface. The Hutchinson Water Treatment Plant uses membrane technology to soften the water and reduce ammonia; biological filtration to reduce iron and manganese; and ammonia to meet treatment requirements within its site constraints. Treated water from the biological pressure filters, Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-5 SECTION 2 which use nonpathogenic organisms to remove iron, manganese, and ammonia, is blended with the membrane permeate. The blended water's pH is increased to control corrosion. Disinfection and fluoridation complete the treatment process. Once treated, the pumped water is sent into the City's water distribution system. 2.8. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling The City's previous storm water management plan was drafted by Barr Engineering Company in 1996. The plan included modeling the water quality and water quantity issues for five specific portions of the City with the aid of PONDNET and HydroCAD software. The previous plan proposed recommendations based upon the plan's findings and identified expected outcomes. City-wide modeling has not been completed. 2.9. NPDES Phase II The City is required to have a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit through the MPCA's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Program. MS4s designated by rule are urban areas with populations over 10,000 or urban areas with populations greater than 5,000 with the potential to discharge to valuable or polluted waters. Permits for construction sites greater than one acre will also be required as part of Phase II. As an MS4, the City will be required to implement the following six minimum control measures: 1. Public Education and Outreach 2. Public Participation/Involvement 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 4. Construction Site Storm Water Runoff Control 5. Post -Construction Storm Water Management 6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations For more information on the MS4 Permit requirements refer to www.pca.state.mn.us. Refer to Appendix B for a copy of the City's MS4 SWPPP (Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan). 2.10. Water Resource Problem Areas Water resource problem areas were identified through information obtained from City staff, residents, and other agencies. Each problem was analyzed and potential solutions to address the problems were developed as detailed in Section 4. Refer to Figure 7 for the location of site-specific problem areas. The following is a list of some of the water resource problem areas within the City: Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-6 SECTION 2 1. South Central Drainage Area 2. Otter Lake Outfall Sediment Removal and Potential Relocation 3. Northeast Drainage Area Flooding 4. Bradford Street Flooding Area 5. Low Area at Ridgewater College - Future Outlet 6. Potential Regional Ponding Location 7. Drainage Capacity and Maintenance Concerns 8. Low Point Flooding 9. Pond Maintenance Guidance 10. Nutrient TMDL — Otter Lake 11. Turbidity TMDL — Crow River 12. Downtown Storm Water Water Quality Improvements 2.11. Flood Insurance Studies A Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Study (FIS) was completed for the McLeod County in 2014. A FEMA floodplain map is included as Figure 8. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 2-7 SECTION 3 3. AGENCY COOPERATION There are a number of local, state, and federal agencies that have rules and regulations related to local water management. The City recognizes the roles of these other agencies and will cooperate, coordinate, and when possible partner with these agencies. This Plan is in conformance with but does not restate all other agency rules that are applicable to water resource management. The following agencies deal with or regulate water resources throughout the City: e Minnesota Department of Health www. health. state. mn.us e Minnesota Pollution Control Agency www.pca.state.mn.us e Board of Water and Soil Resources www.bwsr.state.mn.us and the Wetland Conservation Act www.bwsr.state.mn.us/wetlands/wca/index.html e Minnesota Department of Natural Resources www.dnr.state.mn.us e US Army Corps of Engineers http://www.mvp.usace. army. mil e Minnesota Department of Agriculture www.mda.state.mn.us e US Fish and Wildlife Service www.fws.gov e McLeod County www.co.mcleod.mn.us e Crow River Organization of Water www.crowriver. e Minnesota Environmental Quality Board www.egb.state.mn.us While these other agencies' rules, policies, and guidelines are not all restated in this Plan, they are applicable to projects, programs, and planning within the City. The MPCA Minnesota Stormwater Manual, which is a document intended to be frequently updated, is also incorporated by reference into this Plan and can be found at www.pca.state.mn.us/water/stormwater/stonnwater-manual.html. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 3-1 SECTION 4 4. ASSESSMENT OF PROBLEMS AND ISSUES Outlined below is an assessment of existing and potential local water resource -related problems that are known as of 2015. These problems have been identified based on an analysis of the land and water resource data collected during the preparation of this Plan and through information provided by the City, its residents, and other organizations. A description of any existing or potential problem within the City has been listed and potential future corrective actions have been incorporated into an implementation plan. Refer to Figure 7 for the location of many of the problem areas discussed below. Figure 9 depicts water quality monitoring locations, Figure 10 depicts known pollutant sources, and Figure 11 depicts storm water BMPs. 4.1. Water Quality Problems Problem 4.1.A The City discharges to the following impaired waters as listed by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA): • Otter Lake (Main Basin ID — 43-0085-01) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish tissue and excessive nutri ents/eutrophi cation. • Otter Lake (South Arm ID — 43-0085-02 and North Arm/Campbell ID — 43-0085-03) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish tissue. • South Fork Crow River (Headwaters to Hutchinson Dam: ID -07010205-540) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish, turbidity, fishes bioassessments, and aquatic macroinvertab rate bioassessments. • South Fork Crow River (Hutchinson Dam to Bear Creek: ID -07010205-510) is listed as impaired for mercury in fish and turbidity. • South Fork Crow River (Hutchinson Dam to Bear Creek: ID -07010205-510) is anticipated to be added to the impaired list for E. coli. Corrective Action 4.1.A The MPCA completed a statewide mercury TMDL in 2007. As storm water point sources account for less than 1% of the mercury (majority is atmospheric), the City contributes an insignificant amount to this TMDL. As of 2015, TMDL studies are currently underway for Otter Lake and the South Fork Crow River as part of a Watershed Restoration and Protection Strategy (WRAPS) study being conducted for the South Fork Crow Watershed. Once the WRAPS report is finalized, the City will work with neighboring communities, Crow River Organization of Water (CROW), and the MPCA to meet its waste load allocation for Otter Lake and the South Fork Crow River. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-1 SECTION 4 Problem 4.1.B Implementation of storm water quality improvements in downtown Hutchinson. Corrective Action 4.1.B The City and MnDOT have plans to reconstruct Trunk Highway 15 (2" d Avenue N to 5th Avenue S) in the next five to ten years. Storm water quality improvements will be implemented in conjunction with this project. A storm water study will be completed to help determine feasible improvement options. The City will also investigate other storm water quality improvements in the downtown area as opportunities arise. 4.2. Flooding and Storm Water Rate Control Concerns Problem 4.2.A The South Central Recreation Center (RC) Area and S. Grade Road have experienced localized flooding dating back to at least 1993 for moderate to heavy storms (approximately 2 inches or greater depending on intensity). Corrective Action 4.2.A A detailed Hydrology/Hydraulic Analysis was completed for the South Central Recreation Center (RC) Area and S. Grade Road by SEH in 2012. The primary contributors to the flooding were determined to be: 1) an under capacity local storm sewer within the RC area, and 2) lack of downstream storm sewer capacity in combination with the lack of natural surface overflow paths and detention within the RC area. The following is a list of recommendations provided in the study to mitigate flooding. The actions are listed in order of priority. 1. Install new storm sewer system on west side of the RC area, 2. Install detention basins for the RC area in the existing ball field area, 3. Install a new, separate storm sewer system on the east side of the RC area (the existing storm sewer system is to remain and be utilized concurrently with the new, separate system), Additional details and preliminary costs estimates for each recommendation are provided in the report. Further analysis is ongoing and due for completion in early 2016. Problem 4.2.B Clifton Heights flooding and surcharging at low point on Michigan Street. Corrective Action 4.2.B The City plans to construct a large regional storm water basin upon the development of land near Arch Street and Michigan Street NE. This land is currently designated as agricultural. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-2 SECTION 4 Problem 4.2.0 Drainage capacity and maintenance concerns in Market Street Ditch east of Fairgrounds. Corrective Action 4.2.0 The City will investigate upstream storm water capacity opportunities as well as maintenance considerations and/or conversion of the ditch. Problem 4.2.D Flooding near Bradford Street. Corrective Action 4.2.D The City will investigate opportunities to reduce flood potential in this area. A feasibility study will be completed to determine possible improvement options and a recommendation for addressing the flood concerns. Problem 4.2.E Low area near Ridgewater College is susceptible to standing water. Corrective Action 4.2.E The City will investigate the possibility of constructing a regional pond with an outlet to this landlocked area. This will include analyzing downstream capacity and future development needs in the area. Problem 4.2.F Localized flooding on 8th Avenue (storm water surcharges from School Road). Corrective Action 4.2.F The City will investigate connecting to the pond at the south end of the golf course or other feasible improvements to reduce the flood potential in the area. 4.3. Impacts of Storm Water Quality on Fish and Wildlife Resources Problem 4.3.A Recurring winter fish kill in Otter Lake. Corrective Action 4.3.A. The City will take measures to reduce the discharge of excess nutrients to Otter Lake in accordance with the WLA allocations determined upon the completion of the Otter Lake TMDL study. The DNR has historically measured winter oxygen concentrations and completed winter fish kill assessments to guide lake management. 4.4. Adequacy of Existing Regulations and Programs to Address Adverse Impacts on Local Water Resources Problem 4.4.A The City has adopted a floodplain ordinance, prohibited discharge ordinance, storm water ordinance, and shoreland ordinance which require enforcement and periodic updates. These ordinances can be found in Section 2.6. Corrective Action 4.4.A The City will continue to enforce and update all ordinances as necessary as required by their MS4 Permit. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-3 SECTION 4 Problem 4.4.B The adequacy of existing capital improvement programs to correct problems. Corrective Action 4.4.B The implementation program located in Section 6 of this Plan presents the projects and other implementation tasks that are considered to actively manage local water resource issues in the City. The City will incorporate into its annually updated CIP these storm water proj ects/tasks and any future proj ects/tasks. 4.5. Impacts of Erosion and Sedimentation on Local Water Resources Problem 4.5.A Presence of a sediment delta at the Alan Street outfall of Otter Lake. Corrective Action 4.5.A The City may provide maintenance on this area to ensure the outfall continues to function as intended and remove the deposited material. In addition, the City will investigate sources of sediment and possible upstream treatment options to help localize maintenance efforts. Problem 4.5.B Presence of sediment deltas within Otter Lake and Crow River. Corrective Action 4.5.B The City plans to take sediment samples and perform maintenance to remove sediment/debris at outfalls. The City may also investigate overall depth management within the east arm of Otter Lake to help mitigate deposited material throughout the basin. 4.6. Impact of Land Use Practices and Development on Local Water Resource Issues Problem 4.6.A Future land use is anticipated to increase storm water runoff volumes and pollutant loads to local water bodies. Corrective Action 4.6.A The City will investigate opportunities to implement water quality and volume reduction BMPs during future reconstruction projects. In areas where project specific BMPs will be unfeasible, the City will look into completing regional water quality improvement projects to help meet future storm water management requirements. Problem 4.6.B The majority of the City is served by a sanitary sewer collection system that conveys sanitary sewage to a treatment plant. However, there are areas which contain subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS) in operation within the City. Corrective Action 4.6.B The City will continue to work with the County to ensure that the SSTS remains in compliance and requires that connection to City sewer occur when available. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-4 SECTION 4 4.7. Education Program Problem 4.7.A The City recognizes the need for local water education programs to increase public awareness of local water management and improve the quality of storm water runoff. Corrective Action 4.7.A The City will continue to provide educational content and opportunities to residents, businesses, developers, and others. These efforts may include regular notices in the City's monthly newsletter, articles in the local paper, postings on the City website, and flyers in the utility bill. The City may work with CROW or McLeod County to improve the efficiency of educational efforts and reduce duplication. Educational topics may include but are not limited to: • Wetland buffers • Yard/pet waste management • Illicit discharge to storm water • Utility easements • Storm water pond function • Controlling invasive species 4.8. Identification of Potential Problems Which are Anticipated in the Next 20 Years. Problem 4.8.A Inspecting and maintaining existing storm water infrastructure throughout the City. Corrective Action 4.8.A The City is responsible for maintenance of its storm water system in conformance with the MCPA's MS4 Program. This includes maintenance of pipes, constructed ponds, lakes, wetlands, ditches, swales, and other drainageways. Proper maintenance will ensure that the storm water system continues to provide the necessary flood control and water quality treatment. Refer to Appendix B for a copy of the City SWPPP. Other units of government are responsible for maintaining the storm water systems under their control. For example: MnDOT is responsible for maintenance of storm sewer along Trunk Highway 7; City of Hutchinson is responsible for maintaining storm sewer catch basins and leads in the county roads; Owners of private storm water facilities are responsible for maintaining their facilities in proper condition, consistent with the original performance design standards. Responsibilities include removal and proper disposal of all settled materials from ponds, sumps, grit chambers, and other devices, including settled solids. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-5 SECTION 4 Problem 4.8.B Prioritizing inspection and maintenance of storm water ponds, BMPs, and outfalls as well as determining the performance of existing storm water ponds and BMPs throughout the City. Corrective Action 4.8.B The City will develop a program to identify pond, BMP, and outfall maintenance activities. This program will need to be updated to result in an updated prioritization of inspection and maintenance activities. In addition, the program will estimate the current treatment provided by each pond/BMP to determine if the desired amount of treatment is being achieved. This program will help meet the new MS4 permit requirements related to the management of storm water ponds. Problem 4.8.0 Maintenance of pond sediment and volunteer vegetation on pond adjacent to Montana Street. Corrective Action 4.8.0 The City will complete an inspection and determine the appropriate amount of sediment and vegetation management to be performed to allow the pond to have appropriate water quality and water quantity volumes. Maintenance/construction may then be performed. Problem 4.8.D Accumulation of debris and material on City streets. Corrective Action 4.8.D The City uses pre -wetting with a brine solution in winter which results in less material accumulation and uses sand when necessary to improve traction. The City will continue to sweep debris and salt from City streets in the spring, summer, and fall. The entire City takes approximately two to three weeks to sweep. More information regarding street sweeping activities can be found in the SWPPP which is located in Appendix B. Problem 4.8.E Erosion and drainage issues adjacent to Bridgewater Pond. Corrective Action 4.8.E The City will complete an inspection and determine the necessary erosion repairs around the perimeter of Bridgewater Pond. Sediment accumulation and vegetation will be removed east of Eighth Avenue SW where positive drainage is being obstructed. Installation of stormwater infrastructure will be required when Eighth Avenue SW is extended to the east to improve drainage functionality. 4.9. Availability and Adequacy of Existing Technical Information to Manage Local Water Resources. Problem 4.9.A Atlas 14 (updated precipitation probability information) was released by NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) in 2013. Corrective Action 4.9.A Previously developed areas within the City (designed to meet TP -40 hydrologic demands) will continue to operate under this design criteria. New development, redevelopment, and areas where problems may exist will be evaluated (as Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-6 SECTION 4 needed) by completing a risk assessment using Atlas 14. The City may update its policies, codes, ordinances, and other appropriate documents accordingly. Problem 4.9.B The City has mapped a vast majority of its storm sewer system. As new and redevelopment projects are completed, the storm sewer GIS database needs to continually be updated. Corrective Action 4.9.B The City will annually update its storm sewer GIS database to incorporate recent projects and associated storm sewer improvements. Problem 4.9.0 Clear design guidance for developers is not available for post -construction design standards. Corrective Action 4.9.0 The City will incorporate design standards into the Plan; see Appendix C for design standards. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -4-7 SECTION 5 5. GOALS AND POLICIES 5.1. General The goals in Hutchinson's Local Surface Water Management Plan appear to be consistent with the goals of the McLeod County Water Management Plan and the Crow River Organization of Water (CROW), while addressing the more specific and changing needs of the City. The goals of this plan are also consistent with the guidelines contained in Minnesota Statutes 103B and Minnesota Rules 8410. The City recognizes that McLeod County and the CROW will continue to seek an active role regarding water resources in the City. McLeod County's most recent Water Management Plan can be found at http://www.co.mcleod.mn.us/department_ files/EnvironmentalSery/McLeod%20Count y%20Water%2OPlan%202013-2023%20[6-18-13l.pdf. Additional goals and policies of the City are contained throughout this section. A general priority of the City is to cooperate, collaborate, and partner with other entities such as McLeod County, CROW, and the MPCA as much as possible as the City implements this plan. Cooperation, collaboration, and partnering results in projects that are less likely to conflict with the goals of the affected entities, better able to meet long-term goals, and generally are more cost-effective. In addition to the goals and policies contained in this section, the City will annually review and update its Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to effectively manage its storm water system and be in conformance with the NPDES MS4 Program. The MS4 General Permit and Construction Permit also apply. Refer to Appendix B for the most recent version of the City SWPPP. The rules and policies identified may be amended from time to time. Any updates to rules and policies will become effective upon approval and shall be used in place of those identified herein. 5.2. Water Resource Ordinances The City has a Storm Water Management Ordinance (Chapter 54, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/). Refer to this ordinance for requirements relating to application, review, and approval standards and the associated storm water management plan components and requirements. It also outlines suspensions, revocations, stop work orders, and associated enforcement/penalty. Consistent with the Storm Water Management Ordinance (Chapter 54, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/), the policies in this section are triggered for all projects disturbing more than one acre. Likewise, the City Engineer may waive this requirement if it is determined the requirements cause a hardship or are Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-1 SECTION 5 contrary to the City's goals and objectives. In addition, the City has adopted a Shoreland Ordinance (Chapter 152, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchinson_mn/) and a Floodplain Ordinance (Chapter 154, http://www.amlegal.com/codes/client/hutchin son_mnto regulate uses within shoreland and floodplain areas. 5.3. Water Quality 5.3.1. Goal Work with McLeod County and the CROW to maintain and/or enhance the water quality of the City of Hutchinson's lakes, wetlands, streams, and other water resources in the City. Utilize regional storm water facilities where possible to enhance water quality by removing sediment and nutrients from runoff. 5.3.2. Policies The City's preferred means of protecting water quality is to infiltrate and provide volume control for storm water runoff The City requires storm water volume control (infiltration, reuse, or other) equivalent to one inch from new impervious surfaces (increase from existing conditions) or 50% phosphorus removal if infiltration is determined to be unfeasible or undesirable (refer to Policy 2 of NPDES Construction permit regarding infiltration constraints). In addition, Wellhead protection areas should also be reviewed when considering infiltration (see Section 5.7.2.1). 2. Infiltration will not be required nor allowed in areas where there are known groundwater contaminants, soils are not suitable for infiltration (unsuitable soils are those with infiltration rates less than 0.3 inches/hour), or in areas where there is less than three feet of separation between the bottom of the infiltration system and the groundwater or bedrock. Percolation tests shall be required to verify the infiltration rates of on-site soils following the construction of infiltration BMPs. 3. Pretreatment of storm water is required prior to discharge to an infiltration system. This pretreatment shall collect sediment and be easily accessed for inspection and maintenance. 4. A pond buffer extending twenty feet outward and two feet up from the high water level must be provided around the entire pond. The developer must provide signs denoting pond buffer limits as deemed necessary and as approved by the City. Pond buffers should be maintained as a meadow, Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-2 SECTION 5 prairie, or forest with no more than two mowings annually at a height of no less than four inches (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances 54.23 (F)). Inspections for non -routine maintenance items on all storm water management systems must occur at a minimum of once every five years. (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances 54.24) 6. Sediment cleanout must occur when 50% of the permanent pool storage volume is sediment. (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances 54.24) 7. Newly constructed storm water outfalls to public waters must provide for filtering or settling of suspended solids and skimming of surface debris before discharge (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.24 (B)). New storm water management BMPs (e.g. ponds, infiltration systems, swales) constructed as part of private development shall be covered by drainage and utility easements or outlots that are dedicated to the City. Maintenance responsibilities for these areas will be spelled out in the developer's agreement. 5.4. Runoff Management and Flood Control 5.4.1. Goal Protect, preserve, and expand (where possible) the storm water storage and detention systems to control excessive runoff volumes and rates, prevent flooding, protect public health and safety, and minimize public capital expenditures. 5.4.2. Policies 1. The City's preferred flood control strategy is to reduce the volume of runoff through regional storm water facilities and reuse or infiltration proj ects. 2. Consideration shall be given to reduce the need for storm water management system facilities by incorporating the use of natural topography and land cover such as wetlands, ponds, natural swales, and depressions as they exist before development to the degree that they can accommodate the additional water flow without compromising the integrity or quality of these natural features. (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances § 54.23 (B)) 3. Under no circumstances shall the 2-, 10-, or 100 -year developed peak flow exceed the 2-, 10-, or 100 -year existing peak flow without prior Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-3 SECTION 5 written approval by the City Engineer (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances § 54.23). 4. The regulatory flood protection elevation shall be an elevation no lower than one foot above the elevation of the regional flood plus any increases in flood elevation caused by encroachments on the flood plain that result from designation of a floodway (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 154.086 (C)). All structures, including accessory structures, must be elevated on fill so that the lowest floor is at or above the regulatory flood protection elevation. The finished fill elevation for structures shall be no lower than one foot above the regulatory flood protection elevation and the fill shall extend at that elevation at least fifteen feet beyond the outside limits of the structure erected thereon (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 154.089 (B)). 6. Adjacent to floodplain, the lowest floor including basement shall be placed at least two feet above the 100 -year flood level. 7. Adjacent to storm water ponds or BMPs, the lowest opening shall be placed at least two feet above the 100 -year high water level. An emergency spillway (emergency outlet) from ponding areas shall be installed a minimum of one foot below the lowest building opening and shall be designed to have a capacity to overflow water at an elevation below the lowest building opening at a rate not less than the anticipated 100 -year peak inflow rate to the basin. 9. Residential basement construction shall not be allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation and non-residential basements may be allowed below the regulatory flood protection elevation provided the basement is structurally dry flood proofed in accordance with division § 154.089 (D) (3) (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 154.089 (D) (2)). 10. All new principal structures must have vehicular access at or above an elevation not more than two feet below the regulatory flood protection elevation (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 154.089 (E)(1)). 11. Lateral and collector systems shall be designed to accommodate a 10 -year return frequency storm event. These systems shall be defined as storm sewer that collects and conveys runoff from catch basins or other inlets from a localized drainage area to a trunk system or ponding facility. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-4 SECTION 5 12. Trunk systems shall be designed to convey the anticipated 100 -year critical event storm water flow rate. A trunk system shall be defined as the main channel of the storm water system that receives water from multiple laterals or collectors or serves as an outlet and downstream conveyance system for a storm water storage facility. 13. An overland overflow should be provided for all lateral, collector, and trunk systems to accommodate the 100 -year critical duration rainfall event and prevent structural inundation should an obstruction occur in these systems. 14. No orifice having a diameter less than four inches is allowed in the design of rate control structures within the City. 5.5. Wetlands 5.5.1. Goal Achieve no net loss of wetlands including acreage, functions, and values. Where practical improve the functions, values, biological diversity, and acreage of existing wetlands. 5.5.2. Policies 1. Wetland alterations must be in conformance with the Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and will be administered by McLeod County which is the Local Governing Unit (LGU) for WCA in Hutchinson. 2. Water quality treatment to NPDES standards is required prior to discharge into a wetland. 3. Grading or filling in any type 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 wetland must be evaluated to determine how extensively the proposed activity would affect the following functional qualities of the wetland. This evaluation must also include a determination of whether the wetland alteration being proposed requires permits, reviews, or approvals by other local, state or federal agencies such as a watershed district, the State Department of Natural Resources, or the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant will be advised to consider: i. Sediment and pollutant trapping and retention; ii. Storage of surface runoff to prevent or reduce flood damage; iii. Fish and wildlife habitat; Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-5 SECTION 5 iv. Recreational use; v. Shoreline or bank stabilization; and vi. Noteworthiness, including special qualities such as historic significance, critical habitat for endangered plants and animals, or others. (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (C) (4) (a)) 4. No person shall deposit grass clippings, leaves, or other vegetative materials, with the exception of normal mowing or weed control, within natural or man-made watercourses, wetlands, or within wetland buffer areas (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.04 (A) (3)). 5.6. Erosion and Sediment Control 5.6.1. Goal Protect the capacity of the City's storm water management system, prevent flooding, and maintain water quality by preventing erosion and sedimentation from occurring, and correct existing erosion and sedimentation problems. 5.6.2. Policies 1. All persons, subject to meeting the requirements and needing to obtain a NPDES permit. shall apply for coverage and file a copy with the City Engineer (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.30 (A)). 2. The construction grading and erosion/sediment control plans, in a format acceptable to the City Engineer, shall contain a drawing or drawings delineating the features incorporated into the SWPPP including details of perimeter protection, construction phasing, storm drain inlet protection, erosion control measures, temporary and final stabilization measures, including all BMPs. In addition, the construction specifications shall contain technical provisions describing erosion, sedimentation, and water control measures to be utilized during and after construction as well as to define the entities responsible for the installation and maintenance of the BMPs. The project SWPPP must be incorporated into the construction specification documents (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 54.31 (B)). 3. The City will conduct erosion control inspections on a regular basis of all projects that require an erosion and sediment control plan. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-6 SECTION 5 4. Alterations of vegetation and topography will be regulated to prevent erosion into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping and protect fish and wildlife habitat (Hutchinson, AN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (A)). 5.7. Groundwater 5.7.1. Goal Protect the quality and quantity of groundwater resources. 5.7.2. Policies Encourage groundwater recharge efforts and protect recharge areas from potential sources of contamination. Provide increased green space, native vegetation, and pond "dead" storage wherever possible and appropriate to allow for the infiltration of storm water runoff and promote groundwater recharge. 2. Wellhead protection areas should be reviewed when infiltration and/or groundwater recharge is considered. Refer to the City Engineering Department for a copy of the Wellhead Protection Plan. 3. Maintain an updated record of all known on-site septic systems, and prohibit installation of new individual sewer systems or alteration, repair, or extension of existing systems when connection can be made to the City's sanitary sewer. The City will notify property owners with on-site septic systems that they are required to connect to the City's sanitary sewer. 4. The City will work with the Department of Health to insure that all unsealed or improperly abandoned wells within the City are properly sealed. 5. Provide groundwater protection as laid out in the County's Local Water Plan. 5.8. Recreation, Habitat, and Shoreland Management 5.8.1. Goal Protect and enhance fish and wildlife habitat and recreation opportunities. 5.8.2. Policies Cooperate with McLeod County and the CROW to protect existing habitat and recreation corridors. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-7 SECTION 5 2. Maintain, enhance, or provide new habitat as part of wetland modification, storm water facility construction, or other appropriate projects. 3. Encourage alternative landscape designs that a) increase beneficial habitat, wildlife and recreational uses; promote infiltration and vegetative water use; and that b) decrease detrimental wildlife uses (such as beaver dams, goose overabundance), which damage water control facilities, shoreline vegetation, water quality, or recreational facilities. 4. Shore and bluff impact zone deficiencies must be evaluated and reasonable improvements made as part of the conversion. These improvements must include, where applicable, the following: i. Removal of extraneous buildings, docks or other facilities that no longer need to be located in shore or bluff impact zones; ii. Remedial measures to correct erosion sites and improve vegetative cover, and screening of buildings and other facilities as viewed from the water. (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances § 152.091(C)) Placement of natural rock riprap, including associated grading of the shoreline and placement of a filter blanket, is permitted if the finished slope does not exceed three feet horizontal to one foot vertical, the landward extent of the riprap is within ten feet of the ordinary high water level and the height of the riprap above the ordinary high water level does not exceed three feet (Hutchinson, AM Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (C) (4) (a)). 6. Alterations of vegetation and topography will be regulated to prevent erosion into public waters, fix nutrients, preserve shoreland aesthetics, preserve historic values, prevent bank slumping, and protect fish and wildlife habitat (Hutchinson, AN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (A)). 7. Intensive vegetation clearing within the shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes is not allowed. Intensive vegetation clearing for forest land conversion to another use outside of these areas is allowable as a conditional use if an erosion control and sedimentation plan is developed and approved by the soil and water conservation district in which the property is located (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (B) (2) (a)). In shore and bluff impact zones and on steep slopes, limited clearing of trees and shrubs and cutting, pruning, and trimming of trees is allowed to provide a view to the water from the principal dwelling site and to accommodate the placement of stairways and landings, picnic areas, access paths, livestock watering areas, beach, and watercraft access areas and permitted water -oriented accessory structures or facilities, provided that: Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-8 SECTION 5 The screening of structures, vehicles, or other facilities as viewed from the water, assuming summer, leaf -on conditions, is not substantially reduced; ii. Along rivers, existing shading of water surfaces is preserved; and iii. The above provisions are not applicable to the removal of trees, limbs or branches that are dead, are diseased or pose safety hazards (Hutchinson, MN Code of Ordinances § 152.039 (B) (2) (b)). 9. Shore recreation facilities, including but not limited to swimming areas, docks and watercraft mooring areas, and launching ramps must be centralized and located in areas suitable for them. Evaluation of suitability must include consideration of land slope, water depth, vegetation, soils, depth to ground water, and bedrock or other relevant factors. The number of spaces provided for continuous beaching, mooring, or docking of watercraft must not exceed one for each allowable dwelling unit or site in the first tier (notwithstanding existing mooring sites in an existing commercially used harbor). Launching ramp facilities, including a small dock for loading and unloading equipment, may be provided for use by occupants of dwelling units or sites located in other tiers (Hutchinson, AN Code of Ordinances § 152.029 (D)(3)). 5.9. Education and Public Involvement 5.9.1. Goal Increase public awareness, understanding, and involvement in water and natural resource management issues. 5.9.2. Policies Develop and distribute educational materials to the general public and targeted groups in accordance with the City SWPPP. Specific topics could include water resources, groundwater, wetlands, native vegetation, buffers, wildlife habitat, litter control, pet wastes, recycling, trash disposal, leaf collection, grass clippings, lawn chemicals, and hazardous materials. Information may be distributed via the City's newsletter, City website, local newspapers, cable television or other appropriate methods. 2. Coordinate education efforts with McLeod County and the CROW where appropriate. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-9 SECTION 5 5.10. Financing 5.10.1. Goal Minimize and fairly distribute public expenditures for plan implementation, with emphasis on using the City's storm water utility to finance projects and collaborating/partnering with other entities. 5.10.2. Policies Use the City's Storm Water Utility Fund to pay for as many storm water management projects and implementation activities as possible. 2. Use other funding sources to pay for the implementation activities, studies/analysis, grants, land sale proceeds, State Aid funds, etc., when available and appropriate. 3. The City will use either its general tax fund or the Storm Water Utility Fund to pay for the public education and information programs. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page 5-10 SECTION 6 6. IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM 6.1. Implementation Program Components Table 6.1 contains a comprehensive list of the MS4 activities and projects, programs, and studies that make up the City's implementation program for the next ten years (2015 through 2024). The City developed this program by evaluating the requirements in the MS4 permit (see MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization in Appendix B), reviewing existing information (Section 2), identifying potential and existing problems (Section 4), developing goals and policies (Section 5), and then assessing the need for programs, studies, or projects. The City estimated total costs, identified possible funding sources, and developed an approximate schedule to complete the implementation activities. It is anticipated these tables will be updated/revised on a yearly basis. 6.2. Implementation Priorities The implementation components listed in Table 6.1 were prioritized to make the best use of available local funding, meet MS4 Permit requirements, address existing water management problems, and prevent future water management problems from occurring. Table 6.1 identifies which activities are MS4 Permit Requirements, MS4 Permit Requirements — within twelve months, Annual Requirements, or Capital Projects/Programs/Studies. The City's implementation plan reflects its responsibility to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens by addressing problems and issues that are specific to the City. 6.3. Financial Considerations The City will use funds generated from its storm water utility fee as the primary funding mechanism for its implementation program including; maintenance, repairs, capital projects, studies, etc. If funds from this utility fee do not cover necessary costs, the City will consider adjusting the storm water utility fee as well as using general funds to cover the costs associated with the implementation program. The City will continue to review the storm water utility fee annually and adjust based on the storm water related needs of the City and other available funding mechanisms. Although not proposed at this time, the City may consider using plan implementation taxes (MN Statutes 10313.241) or 429 Special Improvement Assessments in the future if general funds or storm water utility funds are not sufficient to fund the projects. The City will also take advantage of grant or loan programs to offset project costs where appropriate and cost-effective. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -6-1 SECTION 6 6.4. Plan Revision and Amendments The City may need to revise this Plan to keep it current. The City may amend this Plan at any time in response to a petition by a resident or business. Written petitions for Plan amendments must be submitted to the City Administrator. The petition must state the reason for the requested amendment and provide supporting information for the City to consider the request. The City may reject the petition, delay action on the petition until the next full Plan revision, or accept the petition as an urgent issue that requires immediate amendment of the Plan. The City may also revise/amend the Plan in response to City -identified needs. This Plan is intended to be in effect for ten years. The Plan will be revised or updated at that time, to the extent necessary. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 Page -6-2 SECTION VI TABLE 6.1 LOCAL WATER MANAGEMENT IMPLEMENTATION PLAN a3 Proposed Cost By Year' 2 `w v a — A uw E v o 10 Year Possible w w 'o o c O v Cost Funding No. Project Description X ¢ m o- o- u) O Mw Estimate' Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Comments ADMINISTRATIVE Education Activity Implementation Plan - Complete See SWPPP Application for outline of education activity implementation program and Reauthorization (Appendix B) implementation schedule for the upcoming permit year by June 30th. Include procedures to meet requirements for the following stormwater educational programs: -Printed Brochures at City Hall -Coordination of City Education Program -IDDE Education postings on City website and PRCE 1 brochures �/ �/ 1 $7,500 Storm Water $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 -Post Construction SW Management Education Utility guidance documents provided to developers -Targeted distribution of education materials for grease dumpsters and lawn clippings -Other as noted in the Citys SWPPP -Others as noted in the City's SWPPP Application. Annual SWPPP Assessment & Annual Reporting City See SWPPP Application for staff will conduct an annual SWPPP assessment in Reauthorization (Appendix B) preparation of each annual report. Proposed SWPPP modifications are subject to Part II.G of the MS4 permit. ✓ ✓ Storm Water 2 The final annual report will be posted on the City's 1 $10,000 Utility $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 webpage. City staff will submit the annual report to the MPCA prior to June 30th for the previous calendar year. Annual Review of Stormwater Utility Fund - The City will Storm Water See SWPPP Application for 3 assess annually the rate to determine if there is a need ✓ 1 $5,000 Utility, Staff $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Reauthorization (Appendix B) for rate adjustments. Time Annual Public Meeting/Event Present the draft MS4 See SWPPP Application for annual report to one public event per year to solicit Reauthorization (Appendix B) public input regarding the adequacy of the City's SWPPP. Public input received (oral and written) will be Storm Water 4 recorded in a record of decision and evaluated by the 2 $10,000 Utility, Staff $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 $1,000 City's MS4 General Contact. City responses (if relevant) Time will be made in writing to each commenter. Hold one event per calendar year of the MS4 permit cycle. Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 SECTION VI a3 Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 Proposed Cost By Year''2 `w v a — A u w E v o 10 Year Possible M `E 0 0 c c A Cost Funding No. Project Description fn w X c w ¢ m ! o- o- u) o w U Mw Estimate' Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Comments Online Availability of the Stormwater Pollution Prevent See SWPPP Application for Plan (SWPPP) Program Document- The City will make Reauthorization (Appendix B) the SWPPP and annual reports on the City's webpage within Storm Water 5 12 months from the date the MS4 permit coverage is extended 2 $5,000 Utility, Staff $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 to the City. Time Employee Training - Continue to host a minimum of one See SWPPP Application for staff training event per year to discuss illicit discharge Reauthorization (Appendix B) recognition and reporting. City staff will develop an Storm Water 6 annual training schedule, record the employee names, �/ �/ 3 $5,000 Utility, Staff $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 topics covered, and date of each event, annually through Time the end of the MS4 permit cycle. City Webpage updates- The City will update the See SWPPP Application for webpage to include city contact information for Reauthorization (Appendix B) construction site non-compliance. The update will also Storm Water 7 include constriction site erosion and sediment control ✓ 1 $2,500 Utility, Staff $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 related public education information. This update will Time occur within 12 months from the date MS4 permit coverage is extended. Employee Training - Building or Engineering Department See SWPPP Application for staff (a minimum of one staff member) will maintain valid Storm Water Reauthorization (Appendix B) 8 certification in NPDES Construction Stormwater Permit ✓ ✓ 4 $2,000 Utility, Staff $400 $400 $400 $400 $400 related training per NPDES-CSW training requirements. Time Develop Priority Site Inspection Procedures - Develop See SWPPP Application for prioritized inspection frequencies for areas of high Storm Water Reauthorization (Appendix B) g concern. Post information associated with P2 and GH at ✓ ✓ 4 $7,000 Utility, Staff $2,500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 City facilities that cause potential pollution causing Time activities. Updated City Ordinance Chapter 54 Stormwater See SWPPP Application for Management - City code Chapter 54 will be revised to Reauthorization (Appendix B) comply with changing permit requirements related to illicit discharges, and construction activity stormwater Storm Water 10 discharges. The final ordinance language will be formally ✓ ✓ 3,4,5 $3,000 Utility, Staff $1,500 $1,500 adopted and implemented within 12 months from the Time date MS4 permit coverage is extended to the City. Update MS4 Program - incorporate inspections from Storm Water See SWPPP Application for 11 Industrial Stormwater permitted sites into MS4 program �/ ✓ 6 $5,000 Utility, Staff $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Reauthorization (Appendix B) records. Time Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 SECTION VI a3 Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 Proposed Cost By Year' 2 `L v CL - A u w E v o 10 Year Possible M `E 0 0 c c A Cost Funding No. Project Description fn w X c w ¢ m ! o- o- u) o w O Mw Estimate' Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Comments Post Construction Requirements - The City may See SWPPP Application for incorporate sensitivity to wellhead protection activities Reauthorization (Appendix B) into ordinance, accept MIDS calculator outputs during post construction reviews, and will amend it's ✓ Storm Water 12 Stormwater Management Plan within 12 months from 5 $5,000 Utility $5,000 the date permit coverage is extend to more clearly identify system maintenance needs and regional implementation strategies. Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs) - the City See SWPPP Application for will develop an ERP within 12 months from the date Reauthorization (Appendix B) permit coverage is extended. ERP will include the ✓ Storm Water 13 process to enforce code violations associated with General $2,000 Utility $1,000 $1,000 IDDEs, construction site runoff, and post construction stormwater management. Pond, Wetland, and Lake Inventory - The City will submit See SWPPP Application for its inventory form to the MPCA MS4 Permit Program ✓ Storm Water Reauthorization (Appendix B) 14 within 12 months from the date permit coverage is General $4,000 Utility $2,000 $2,000 extended. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Program - Storm Water See SWPPP Application for Includes erosion control permit, City Code Chapter 54, Utility, Reauthorization (Appendix B) 15 staff training, distribution of educational materials, and ✓ 4 $60,000 Developer's $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 $6,000 review of City permitted activities Agreements Annual Storm Sewer GIS Mapping Updates to include Storm Water Section 4.9.13 new storm sewer and 3MPs Utility, Staff 16 ✓ General $5,000 Time, $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 Subdivision A reements ADMINISTRATIVE TOTAL $138,000 $23,900 $12,000 $12,400 $12,000 $16,900 $12,000 $12,400 $12,000 $12,400 $12,000 OPERATIONAL Street Sweeping - The City will continue to conduct See SWPPP Application for annual street sweeping operations of all public streets Reauthorization (Appendix B) (record the sweeping roue and date per occurrence). Review and revise (as needed) street sweeping ✓ ✓ Storm Water 17 operations (including schedule, equipment's, and 6 $2,205,000 Utility $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 $220,500 disposal), stormwater quality priority areas, and routes annually through the end of the MS4 permit cycle. Structural Stormwater BMP Inspections - Continue Storm Water See SWPPP Application for 18 annual inspection of each structural BMP each year of �/ �/ 6 $48,000 Utility, Staff $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 $4,800 Reauthorization (Appendix B) the MS4 permit cycle. Time IDDE Inspections - The City will continue to annually See SWPPP Application for conduct IDDE inspections concurrently with stormsewer Storm Water Reauthorization (Appendix B) 19 outfall, and ponds inspections per the IDDE inspection ✓ ✓ 3 $7,500 Utility, Staff $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 $750 requirement. Time Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 SECTION VI a3 Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 Proposed Cost By Year' 2 `L v CL - A u w E v o 10 Year Possible M `E 0 c A Cost Funding No. L ion X ¢ m 0c i! o- o- u) U Mw Estimate' Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Comments Inspect MS4 Outfalls and Ponds - Continue to inspect See SWPPP Application for all MS4 Outfalls, and Ponds through the end of the MS4 Reauthorization (Appendix B) permit cycle and annually, review all pond, outfall, and SPCD inspection records to determine if maintenance, Storm Water 20 repair, or replacement is needed. Evaluate each SPCD's 6 $50,000 Utility, Staff $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 inspection frequency and adjust as needed per MS4 Time Permit. Evaluate and update inspection records annually through the end of the MS4 permit cycle. Stockpiles. Storage and Material Handling Area See SWPPP Application for Inspections - Creation of inspection and reporting Reauthorization (Appendix B) standard operating procedures to be developed to Storm Water 21 conduct annual written inspections of all stockpile, V/ V/ 6 $2,500 Utility, Staff $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 $250 storage and material handling areas (per the facility Time inventory), through the end of the MS4 permit cycle. Pond. BMP. & Outfall Management Program to prioritize Storm Water Section 4.8.13 22 inspection and maintenance activities V/6 $25,000 Utility $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 $2,500 OPERATIONAL TOTAL $2,338,000 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 $233,800 CAPITAL PROJECTS Downtown Stormwater Improvements in conjunction with Section 4.1.13 Trunk Highway 15 improvements ✓ Storm Water 23 - $350,000 Utility, MNDOT $350,000 South Central Drainage Area Improvements: newstorm Section 4.2.A sewer into neighborhoods west/east of RC, detention ✓ Storm Water 24 basin in the existing ball field area, new storm sewer into - $1,700,000 Utility $970,000 $730,000 RC parking lot. Clifton Heights Flood Improvement Project: stormwater Section 4.2.13 basin near Arch Street and Michigan Street NE Storm Water 25 V/- $800,000 $800,000 Utility Market Street Ditch Improvements: ditch east of Section 4.2.0 Fairgrounds and possible options to improve ✓ Storm Water 26 drainage/maintenance - $30,000 Utility $30,000 Bradford Street Flood Improvement Project construction Section 4.2.D 27 of improvements. V/ _ $100,000 Storm Water $100,000 Utility Flood Study Near Ridgewater College to investigate Section 4.2.E 28 constructing a regional pond and adding an outlet to the V/_ $12,000 Storm Water $12,000 landlocked area Utility Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 SECTION VI a3 Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 Proposed Cost By Year' 2 `L v CL — A u w E v o 10 Year Possible M `E 0 0 c c A Cost Funding No. ProjectDescri tion fn w M c w ¢ M ! a` a` U)O o w Mw Estimate' Sources 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Comments 8th Avenue Flood Improvements to reduce flood Section 4.2.F 29 potential and surcharging impacts from School Road ✓ - $75,000 Storm Water $75,000 Utility Alan Street Outfall Management to remove accumulated Section 4.5.A 30 material near the outfall into Otter Lake ✓ 6 $40,000 Storm Water $40,000 Utility Sediment Accumulation, Waterbody Functionality, Section 4.5.13, Future/potential Spillway Operations. Maintenance, and Depth ✓ Storm Water project costs and schedule to be Management Analysis within Otter Lake, Campbell Lake, 31 6 $25,000 Utility $25,000 determined and the Crow River Vegetation/Sediment Management on Montana Street Storm Water Section 4.8.0 pond to allow for appropriate stormwater storage 32 ✓ 6 $20,000 Utility $20,000 Bridgewater Pond Improvements to address erosion, Section 4.8.E 33 sedimentation, and necessary infrastructure✓ 6 $30,000 Storm Water $30,000 improvements. Utility CAPTIAL PROJECTS TOTAL $3,182,000 $0 $75,000 $970,000 $782,000 $175,000 $350,000 $30,000 $0$0 $800,000 GRAND TOTAL $5,658,000 $257,700 $320,800 $1,216,200 $1,027,800 $425,700 $595,800 $276,200 $245,800 $246,200 $1,045,800 ' Cost estimates are preliminary and subject to review and revision as engineer's reports are completed and more information becomes available. Table reflects 2015 costs and do not account for inflation. Costs generally include labor, equipment, materials, and all other costs necessary to complete each activity. For City completed activities, staff time is included in the cost. Some of the costs outlined above may be included in other operational costs budgeted by the City. 10 Year cost projections are based upon 2 MS4 Permit Cycles with year 1 program updates occurring again in 2019 a Funding for stormwater program activities projected to come from following sources - Surface Water Utility, Developers Agreements, Grant Funds, General Operating Fund, or Special Assessments Local Surface Water Management Plan City of Hutchinson TABLE 6.1 WSB Project No. 2702-00 APPENDIX A Figures Local SurfaceWater Management Plan Appendix A City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 ? Zion M Wakefield ockvilleT,1 on��,demS `rne0f4w { t, !J �ea�Clearwater o,, O •- Eden®sin '• �Stearns siscbueatrt avers ►. ' r ! ► tree �� � � o d • r Mbnti..11o Union Msnannsh Foes _ r� i O nna sobmsid. � �dl ` MaPIT Kin ston�- OF g L / ( Fre•r }x t aPe ! Buffalo.-- sNede Hary y nck .. Grove {rte• 0 Lkeh ^ Albion Is—--` BUR - Forest ry >1 P City; ChatKandiyohi -1 f �. %Art0 Wrighh +P — ■l ' Daw=A 0' okaro Da�G.nn.ssa. y . Nrddlevilr saR~n -4, tiw• d Maker � T � •� 12 . + I .41 w r `t w ' ! Danlel>Vn riz ��� S: �A %! • Greenlea Collinwood &oo� lnn veto, .beth —lie E ohhif 1 4 t •� +.J d& I • Y 3 East Lake I_-11 sn 1,om , Hu[chin i i/ Cedar Casmas Mills _--_ ----- --------------- I Camden ss Kaan �ll.v Boon Waoonia ak . Carver •y City of Hutchinson McLeod ® vo'"s Amen a P,.non ins sent.' Glencoe _ Kelen Lke I - I Renville I — _—_-- Sibley I � wasmogmn IsisL '------.---Bismarck ;4*1L Transit Arlington J.ssenlandSCO[[Ba ® +� Kelso IL-----•-------------- r-------� — _�_�--- — I I Jr Brown �_ f� Nicollet Sweden - Le c., s g.� fL `'' 1 inch equals 5 miles FIGURE 1: Location Map April 2015 ^ � City of Hutchinson Zoning Map August, 2012 Zoning 0 1 I . . . . E . . . . I 0 IT �arEwa. l= �Eaw,�o�sra. 0 ,-oUsra,—....E-..I 0 n, Pn Pa��Eo oE��oPME� ` 0 n= oazFaMo�P E; 0 n=Pn Pa��EooE� oPME� ,� 0 Rte ,�zanEoa�Ea;aa � ne Pn ���Eo oE�E�oPME�r � n s ���Fa�NaEo �oME Pa� M�n M,xE-�sEo,— Disclaimer The end user of Nis infonnffiion agrees Nat these dad and Tdp sets have been reated from infonndtion prwided by various g ---and pnodte sourcas dt different moments in t— anddt variousI wels of a......Y They are onlya graphic representation and should not be considered as positionally dc...do. The data is p—id.d dI iIwith no ddiT made as to its dccurdsy orifi dppropnatenass to its intended use of Ne dad. It is Ne responsibility of Ne end ser to be aware of Ne data's linint— and to utilize Ne data in do dppropriate Td.and Ne end user 19,ees to hold The City of Hutrnlnson harmless for smg opt of mis e;:rndnge orTfo,Ta<ion. me,ero,e �,do, no umsbnms shall Ne Cry of Hutchlnson be held responsibler an foy —, il xpenses,, I Tdg—'l.unes.Wdmg speodl ono, con segu..tial amages to any pe,son(s) o' p'opehy Nffi doses "OT the use, o, Tlsuse of Ne lfoflnat oil prwided. Figure 4.5 Future Land Use Map 07 City of Hutchinson Future Land Use January 2013 Future Landuse oAg,-It— tPIa ,,g-t,U o - D-,ty R -d- l Neigh -hod o M d- D-,= R -deo l-gn-h- H�9noeI=�R-d-� lNe�gh-h od M.' �" EA M blleHl-P- � Plb 11lttlo1111 P_._ save Wm, 1, }• 1 03-20-13 Tiller Dr Fernold 21om st 8 � 29 'St 1 H [c 205th Dr r A��Y 20sN St 2060h St ,Ll y� �e Aye NW b —' I _1 I 1 -�} Yr 200th St J"y 12[h•Ave �•---'--North High Dr _ 1 1—.---i � - t' 11iM1 Ave NE 9iM1 Ave I NE - . •.��� I BIM1 �oUrs.r. � Y _ � N �l � eRa I Ave m o t � _ _ + - m ]th Ave � ■ F - _ Ave NW I • Of[er (North 3rd ParkAve NE _.� � 1 Ann/Campbells) oaks - � -- La.. � 1 r pcoma Pa A Y, Lin'dt7 La � �� 1 - - isl Ave NW 1st Ave Hilltop Dr �-1 I - VpOp\n Washington AveW �- r_._—_._—_. �r I SNJ 1s1 Ave 1st Ave SE 06 2n Ave SW SW N _>Y Otter 3b Ave5W _ _ G _ _ Lewis Ave (Main m � m o - i w Basin) Aan 4th P eSw = E � i I _ - th Ave SE W Arch:St=,='==,t JuulRd I`.� Roberts Rtl � Q � Ave N f Railroa'--_._—._ _. -I Madsen Ave SW � _ m ' 1, d St Q S161ey MC Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW m ]ih � Fair . � ill ry A `�- a ti �a 3 Ave N � _■ x 3 a 8N S N �i� 5'W Oakland � Sti �y�I m Noble Rd �,� I` _.I 1 O N - •-- •Freemont Ave S��f 1 ^ 4 ► 1 � '�' _ l- CenturyAvea 1 7. I I ..-- CenturY:Ave SW r _ A: Elk �e �9. i ` i _"•. \ L--- —_._- � •, `SSW l _ ,•�--' - I- Edmonton' 1SW \ 1 —Rtl I,_— C Airport Rd 170th St I r i I 100th St 3 N Legend - Storm Sewer ,0 Wetland Inventory VZ, Lakes 150, 1 inch equals 2,500 feet FIGURE 4: Storm Sewer Map sanre.cltyatxncnmsa. (zois) April 2015 N Tiler Dr 215; Otter Lake's OHW = 1039.2* a *DNR's LakeFinder Fernold 21 Dth St 8 209th S( Aco 3 205th 203N St 206th St q�e NW ¢' £ 12th Ave �� NortM1 HigM1 Dr --- 266th St 9N Ave 1 BIM1 Ce4rse - � c uF � I + � � ]th Ave 5th Ave NW E �oJ NW o ti Ti NW m 3rd Ave NW Hwy,] Otter (North Rolling qih qve park Ave NE Ann/Campbells) NW 1sN � 1st Ave Eve Hilltop Dr �` S Upcon ashin9ton AveW �_ - - -'- ; °o� SNJ 1st Ave 1st Ave SE r � o SW N I 2nd Ave SE 2nd Ave S - _ Otter Lewis Ave 3rtlA eGW. (Maii Havaen esw m " °' _16 I 1 � Roberts Rtl � A a J I Rd _ adsen Ave S Slhle Mc onal Dr � Mil a kee Ave SW m � n _ O � y Goebel SY m ]the � Fair m = 8th S A a rn a sti 1 � � � ti SN Oakland P iI _ r -� T---�-- —I R 3 t] o Noble Rd _.. I Gratle tl 5 m I I.. Freemont I I Ave I I a I I CenturyAve y I Century Ave SW - �_ _ I Elka � 922 _ 1 I , I prchard Ave 9 Denver Ave ••Y . SW - Edmonton SW York Rd Airyort Rd, --- _--- _.__\ _. 170th St I -� Hasa o 6 \\ I 160th 51 3 EE 155ths Legend EDXft Nftg@ ® National Wetland Inventory - % 150th s �i i 1 inch equals 2,500 feet FIGURE 5: NWI and DNR Waters Map Source. U.S.Fish&Wildlife Service (2013), MN DNR (2008) ilpT'lt 2015 ^I Tller Dr Hydrologic Soil Group 215th &a A B C 3 210th St _ D; A/D; B/D; C/D Water 205th U, 203N St 2050 St )Ll y� OWN Now, t I 1 a l"e Q l � - - 12th Ave �� _ NoriM1IHiOM1 Dr 1�, � 1--�--� 200th St � �11iM1SAve!NE yy� � i � I 9th Ave NE � Ave eRa m o t NW N%L Q r-_ E- I NW MN7 3rd Ave NW Rdling qth Ave Park Ave NE 1 ') U OLas oma Pew �� Lindy La Ave isl Ave NW 1st _ NE Hilltopbr _I I � I 9W 1s1 _Ave 1st Ave SE I 06 2n Ave SW SW N 2n Ave SE - _—'- .. I � Lewis Ave 3b AveGW eSW m ihwnas Robarts Rtl w Ava Juul Rd - � Madsen Ave SW _ Ra'troatl St m � , Milwaukee A e SW - /�� � � S161e Mc Donal Dr � m � � Ave Sti Oakland � �i� 5 �^� �✓ NeaSl Ave ■' � �'�---'I SGratle Rtl - '� - I Noble Rd I ' I Freemont Ave I CenturyAve � � I Century Ave SW _ 1 �e I r F �+ Elka II yWi I .Ih _ Ordlard Ave �ri 922q L I) Denver-A� SW Edmonton--- 47 _ \ I York Rtl C A,M Rtl --�_.___.__\ ` 170th St I �� !r lleyn �• Z - 06 F y 1s°tM1 St E Allen _ 155th St a ¢sl _ lsom 57 1 inch = 2,500 feet / FIGURE 6: Hydrologic Soils and Infiltration /NJ\ S.— N-1 R--, co.s—lo. servle .zoos April 2015 fernold 3 I —I 3 Otter (North = •I Ann/Campbells) 4.2B ' 4._ - - �•AviT �� 4.1 Otter F - - - (Main 4.5A `•y' Basin) e!- _.. ,� _--.- r I 4.2A '. 14.2E I. i i i I I i I t Problem Areas: 4 South Central Drainage Area 0 Otter Lake Outfall Sediment Removal (Alan Street Outfall) OClifton Heights Flooding Legend o Bradford Street Flooding Area Low Area at Ridgewater College -Future Pond/Outlet 0 Sediment Accumulation within Otter Lake and Crow River Impaired Water 0 Market Street Ditch Improvements Pond Maintenance Nutrient TMDL - Otter Lake OTurbidity TMDL - Crow River Impairments: 0 Downtown Stormwater Water Quality Improvements Otter Lake (Mercury, Nutrients) �; Localized flooding on 8th Avenue (surcharging from School Rd) Crow River (Mercury, Impaired Biology, Turbidity) 0 Bridgewater Pond Improvements Aa 1 inch equals 2,500 feet FIGURE 7: Water Resource Problem Areas so.r.ecay,Me hmsoo(20is),MecA(2012) April 2015 N Tller Dr w 1 215th & , 21 Dr, St $ 3 209th St 205th Dr iF _` �� 203rd St 2050h St _1 Ia'e 1 -- 12th A-10 ` --- --Nodh High Dr J• I, . �,.1 - ; 1-- i 200th St I I 9iM1 Ave .'� � y � ;ve PRa m o t gam* • � ]tN Wve � j, �=F,%� ; a- A Otter (N rt y Rdling y 4th gveNW �s 3idA NW _ Palk -Ave NE-:"„''-ff, ^l i�� 1 I Ann/Campbells) oaks - nma�.- La L� ■ 9 DndLa isl AYvwe 1st Ave ~ �� fNW ijpP en Wa ngt-Ave N/NE Hilltop Dr I 1sl Ave SE SNJ Aver tylSt 7 I 06 2n Ave SW Sti !N'� I Otter - (Main Resin) � -- eRdbert 01 '��° Ava Juul Rd -- s Rtl ¢' Rartroatl Madsen Ave SW `m St Q S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW in ]ih � Fair ry 3 a 8th - , S Neal Ave --- —_. S Gratle Rd- -� oe - _ - w:,, o � Noble Rd i I` J s Freemont I I Gemnry.Ave ` i I r Genwn Ave sw �, s - eika rIh •• �t�ard Ave _922q' L --- __._—:) Denver Ave 1 `\ Edmonton % I-'---” `^\ � I —Rd I,_-- - t Airport Rd `� 170th St - I j 1n0d, St n Legend Lakes 155th St ,_.._.. 100 -Year Floodplain y F F 500 -Year Floodplain _ 9 lsom s7 1 inch = 2,500 feet FIGURE d FEMA Floodplain Map Sur.c oe. McLeod County-FEMA(2014) iipT'1t 2015 w' rf-,f Tller Dr w 1 215th & , 210th St $ - 209th S( - _ Hu[chlIs" J 3 205th Dr Il- Z03 51 2050 St y`�y `•R\ '- 12th Ave �� �'--- —Nod High Dr J� ' � r:- � 1 - 1-- 200th St NE.^ - 1 � 9iM1 Aver NE - v .� - � Ave PRa N o W t � - Ali U1;" paNW _91d Ave Nw 65 Otter INorthrn Rdiing . 4th_ �J. PaikAve NE - : y. 1 Ann/Campbells) DLks Aa�-r `- � cind�,7 ca p�ome � r -- �� _ isl AveNW.'1'st Ave NE `Hilltop Dr I _• _._—_. ' f_._—_•___.___.+ - VpSA\n Washin9t;ASW z � S��LL SNJ 1s1 C, =—_171 Ave SE ,_ •__ I Sti !N' Ave SE 2n - 2n Ave SW � _ MAU% Ottef Feyyis Ave 9N AveGW c,� _ (Maid - qan eSW E t 4th P 1_ .-in _ Jlw- . l, Roberts Rtl ' Ava Juul Rd _ � Madsen Ave SW RartroaU St Milwaukee A e SW I �'Q ry in ]ih � ,Fair S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy ''Ave i �i� SWC Oaklane � { Neal Ave o - m S Gratle Rtl-- w;,, o �.t Irl Noble Rd i_.___., J_._—_._—_. � o s� f I I - Freemont AveI i Century Ave SW CenturyAve y�e I r F I J s22 •• .!h i aarIMA Y al, l I L --- —--- —: Denver Ave SW ^\ I- Edmonton I -'---"SW I • l I ... I York Rtl Airport Ra' 1: 170th St F,II I I- I V'a Ia I I Legend 150th St 3 Owner, Monitoring Type O MPCA, LAKE MPCA, STREAM Allen F.tote: Monitoring sites shown have been used to collect data some point. Not all sites shown are active monitoring sites. lsom s7 1 inch = 2,500 feet FIGURE 9: Water Quality Monitoring Stations rf-,f S ... de MPCA,2014 April 2015 N Tller Dr w 1 215th & , 210th St $ chinson J 209th, HutdD 3 ❑ 205th Dr I �- �� 20s,d 51 2050h St y`�y `•R\ '- 12th Ave��-----Nortli 1-_ 200th St ( .; 11iM1AveTNE .y I _ 9iM1 Ave 1 v _ _- •� .•'.. ' p"Cp ❑ 'I'h = NW (z7 V ac• gam+ m nNWve E Cy v�y _ U� 24 y • N7 0 0' �y•� i �ate.Hwv.7.—: ---—I M�._i-(sr�eNw � _ O[[er (North Bolting "ash AvaNW� -dM'�Y•7o -• Ann/Campbells) Oaks - Prk-Ave NE y 1 1st Ave ist Ave,NW ', HiIItoP Vpap\n Washington AveW - S. 9� 1s1 Ave �.1 FtHve SE r ° SW = `r 2n Ave SW N 2nd Ave SE- _ ] iyJ Lewis Ave 3b AveGW c ►- y d V — I `-' qan 4th P eSW m E o W -=1. •`�— Arch St - -- m .ihwnas _ - th Ave SE.; _ Robert "'�° Ava Juul Rd - _ s Rtl a � Madsen Ave SW _ `m �_ Ra�troatl Sf �'Q S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW in ]ih � Fair _�' � �a v�i� SW m Oakland PS Sti N � ro -'---' ' SGiatle Rtl - o yr Noble Rd I I - - N a V "•• ® .I� rCentuiY Ave SW Q Century Ave y •• .!h VrtJ' ) L --- __.__: Denver Avev SW Q/� — C' ❑ 0'� / .F SW I I z York Rtl I,__ _. _\ I2.__._I Airport Rtl,_._ O.___.__\ I`.r. 170th St I _ \ O -51 I I _ Legend r _ I Air Permit `\ I ❑ CSW Site Subdivision ❑ Contaminated Soil Treatment Facility ❑ Feedlot 160th St ❑ Hazardous Waste ❑ Industrial Stormwater Permit " ❑ Landfill, Open 9 Leak Site ❑ Multiple Activities Allen O Petroleum Brownfield ❑ Solid Waste, Permit By Rule ❑ Tank Site ❑ Voluntary Investigation & Cleanup (VIC) ❑ Wastewater Discharger 'm 0.1 FIGURE 1A Pollutant Sources Map 1 inch = 2,500 feet Source. MPCA-"What's in My Neighborhood?"(2014) itprlt 2015 ^I Tiller Dr Fernold 3 om st 8 C6 ' h 29 'St _ St o_ dD NJ 205th Dr r A��Y ld3, St 2050h St Jlxx - eAve MNT♦\ b —_ 1 I I Q a� Pte' ♦� 1 -.. .711 �'---'--Nortli J 200th St £ '12th Ave�� R15 Dr 11thAv NE r� � 9iM1rAve _� ur :, • BIM1 �C° rs - Y ? Jam. - ' � Ave PRa m o t � ro ���• -_ ti n aNW MN% �srd Ave Nw _ 1 sta[e.Hwy.].__._—_. _I • _Offer . North xdllne 4thp Palk -Ave NE 1 Ann/Campbells) D�aa ma Pa •I �� rb eindy, �a h I 1 - isl Ave NW` 1,d AEve, _ '•HIII Dr �_,___I 1 9� eSE 1R_Ave istA _ 1 06 2n Ave SW SW N 2n Ave SE _ � I �� OIIer �evyis Ave 9N AveSW � � � ' w Basin) Aan 4th P eSW _ E o I _ th Ave SE A,h;St=.=-==,1 m ihwnas � R v h Ave Juul Rd � - - _-__ l♦'� _I i °harts Rtl � ¢' � \ Ra'troaU Madsen Ave SW _ St Q S161ey Mc Donal Dr Goebel yy Milwaukee A e SW in ]ih � ,Fair 1 ry ti � 3 Ave N_ ''Ave i i m SN! - - - 1 - •_ - '$ r: Uaklane � Sti \ Y.4 ro •SG- Rtl-� lug• o Noble Rd I I Freemont Ave f 1\ I oa --Century 1 Century Ave SW � r � ♦•'SNe ' i Uldlard Ave^ �,..L3 9 L --- __.__: Denver Ave ^#�T�.-•� �,•— \ SW Edmonton _ ^\ Ave I —Rd I,_-- Airy°d Rd 170tM1 St Li lMh St 3 N Legend L" Ponds Allen National Wetland Inventory Lakes - 'p, lsom s7 1 inch equals 2,500 feet �\ FIGURE 11: Stormwater BMP Map s°nr.aCity °exmmhms°o(zois) April 2015 N APPENDIX B MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization Local SurfaceWater Management Plan Appendix B City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 V00. Minnesota Pollution MS4 SWPPP Application Control Agency 520LafayetteRoadNorth for Reauthorization St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 for the NPDES/SDS General Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit MNR040000 reissued with an effective date of August 1, 2013 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Document Doc Type: Permit Application Instructions: This application is for authorization to discharge stormwater associated with Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems (MS4s) under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Permit Program. No fee is required with the submittal of this application. Please refer to "Example" for detailed instructions found on the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) MS4 website at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4. Submittal: This MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form must be submitted electronically via e-mail to the MPCA at ms4permitprogram.pca(cstate.mn.us from the person that is duly authorized to certify this form. All questions with an asterisk (*) are required fields. All applications will be returned if required fields are not completed. Questions: Contact Claudia Hochstein at 651-757-2881 or claudia.hochstein(cstate.mn.us, Dan Miller at 651-757-2246 or daniel.miller(�state.mn.us, or call toll-free at 800-657-3864. General Contact Information (*Required fields) MS4 Owner (with ownership or operational responsibility, or control of the MS4) *MS4 permittee name: City of Hutchinson *County: McLeod (city, county, municipality, government agency or other entity) *Mailing address: 111 Hassan St SE *City: Hutchinson *State: MN *Zip code: 55350 *Phone (including area code): 320.234.4212 *E-mail: kexner@ci.hutchinson.mn.us MS4 General contact (with Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program [SWPPP] implementation responsibility) *Last name: Paulson *First name: John (department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.) *Title: Environmental Specialist *Mailing address: 111 Hassan St SE *City: Hutchinson *State: MN *Zip code: 55350 *Phone (including area code): 320.234.5682 *E-mail: jpaulson@ci.hutchinson.mn.us Preparer information (complete if SWPPP application is prepared by a party other than MS4 General contact) Last name: First name: (department head, MS4 coordinator, consultant, etc.) Title: Mailing address: City: State: Zip code: Phone (including area code): E-mail: Verification 1. I seek to continue discharging stormwater associated with a small MS4 after the effective date of this Permit, and shall submit this MS4 SWPPP Application for Reauthorization form, in accordance with the schedule in Appendix A, Table 1, with the SWPPP document completed in accordance with the Permit (Part II.D.). ® Yes 2. I have read and understand the NPDES/SDS MS4 General Permit and certify that we intend to comply with all requirements of the Permit. ® Yes www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 1 of 14 Certification (All fields are required) ® Yes - l certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gathered and evaluated the information submitted. l certify that based on my inquiry of the person, or persons, who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. l am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of civil and criminal penalties. This certification is required by Minn. Stat. §§ 7001.0070 and 7001.0540. The authorized person with overall, MS4 legal responsibility must certify the application (principal executive officer or a ranking elected official). By typing my name in the following box, I certify the above statements to be true and correct, to the best of my knowledge, and that this information can be used for the purpose of processing my application. Name: Kent Exner (This document has been electronically signed) Title: Director of Public Works Mailing address: 111 Hassan St SE City: Hutchinson Phone (including area code) Date (mm/dd/yyyy): 11/26/13 State: MN 320.234.4212 E-mail: kexner Note: The application will not be processed without certification. Zip code: hutchinson.mn.uE 55350 www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 2 of 14 Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program Document I. Partnerships: (Part II.D.1) A. List the regulated small MS4(s) with which you have established a partnership in order to satisfy one or more requirements of this Permit. Indicate which Minimum Control Measure (MCM) requirements or other program components that each partnership helps to accomplish (List all that apply). Check the box below if you currently have no established partnerships with other regulated MS4s. If you have more than five partnerships, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. ® No partnerships with regulated small MS4s Name and description of partnershi NA MCM/Other permit requirements involved NA B. If you have additional information that you would like to communicate about your partnerships with other regulated small MS4(s), provide it in the space below, or include an attachment to the SWPPP Document, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere Partnerships. The City does not rely on other entities or MS4s to meet our permit requirements. The City does work in partnership with local watershed organizations, the Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition, and citizen groups to amplify the quality of the message that is being conveyed. II. Description of Regulatory Mechanisms: (Part II.D.2) Illicit discharges A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that effectively prohibits non-stormwater discharges into your small MS4, except those non-stormwater discharges authorized under the Permit (Part III.D.3.b.)? ® Yes ❑ No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): ® Ordinance ❑ Contract language ❑ Policy/Standards ❑ Permits ❑ Rules ❑ Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Hutchinson Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 Stormwater Management Direct link: http://www.amlegal.com/hutchinson mn/ ❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere IDDEreg. 2. If no: Describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: Updates will be made to the Ordinance within the next 12 months to comply with the changing permit requirements. Construction site stormwater runoff control A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) that establishes requirements for erosion and sediment controls and waste controls? ® Yes ❑ No 1. If yes: www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 3 of 14 a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): ® Ordinance ❑ Contract language ❑ Policy/Standards ❑ Permits ❑ Rules ❑ Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Hutchinson Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 Stormwater Management Direct link: http://www.amlegal.com/hutchinson mn/ ❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere CSWreg. B. Is your regulatory mechanism at least as stringent as the MPCA general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity (as of the effective date of the MS4 Permit)? ❑Yes ® No If you answered yes to the above question, proceed to C. If you answered no to either of the above permit requirements listed in A. or B., describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: City staff will review and amend, as necessary, our current ordinance to comply with the most current MPCA stormwater requirements within 12 months of permit issuance. C. Answer yes or no to indicate whether your regulatory mechanism(s) requires owners and operators of construction activity to develop site plans that incorporate the following erosion and sediment controls and waste controls as described in the Permit (Part III.D.4.a.(1)-(8)), and as listed below: 1. Best Management Practices (BMPs) to minimize erosion. ® Yes ❑ No 2. BMPs to minimize the discharge of sediment and other pollutants. ® Yes ❑ No 3. BMPs for dewatering activities. ® Yes ❑ No 4. Site inspections and records of rainfall events ® Yes ❑ No 5. BMP maintenance ® Yes ❑ No 6. Management of solid and hazardous wastes on each project site. ® Yes ❑ No 7. Final stabilization upon the completion of construction activity, including the use of perennial ® Yes ❑ No vegetative cover on all exposed soils or other equivalent means. 8. Criteria for the use of temporary sediment basins. ® Yes ❑ No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: Post -construction stormwater management A. Do you have a regulatory mechanism(s) to address post -construction stormwater management activities? ® Yes ❑ No 1. If yes: a. Check which type of regulatory mechanism(s) your organization has (check all that apply): ® Ordinance ❑ Contract language ® Policy/Standards ❑ Permits ❑ Rules ❑ Other, explain: b. Provide either a direct link to the mechanism selected above or attach it as an electronic document to this form; or if your regulatory mechanism is either an Ordinance or a Rule, you may provide a citation: Citation: Hutchinson Municipal Code of Ordinances Chapter 54 Stormwater Management www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 4 of 14 Direct link: http://www.amlegal.com/hutchinson mn/ ❑ Check here if attaching an electronic copy of your regulatory mechanism, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere PostCSWreg. B. Answer yes or no below to indicate whether you have a regulatory mechanism(s) in place that meets the following requirements as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.): 1. Site plan review: Requirements that owners and/or operators of construction activity submit ® Yes ❑ No site plans with post -construction stormwater management BMPs to the permittee for review and approval, prior to start of construction activity. 2. Conditions for post construction stormwater management: Requires the use of any combination of BMPs, with highest preference given to Green Infrastructure techniques and practices (e.g., infiltration, evapotranspiration, reuse/harvesting, conservation design, urban forestry, green roofs, etc.), necessary to meet the following conditions on the site of a construction activity to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP): a. For new development projects — no net increase from pre -project conditions (on an annual ® Yes ❑ No average basis) of: 1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)). 2) Stormwater discharges of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). 3) Stormwater discharges of Total Phosphorus (TP). b. For redevelopment projects — a net reduction from pre -project conditions (on an annual ❑ Yes ® No average basis) of: 1) Stormwater discharge volume, unless precluded by the stormwater management limitations in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(a)). 2) Stormwater discharges of TSS. 3) Stormwater discharges of TP. 3. Stormwater management limitations and exceptions: a. Limitations 1) Prohibit the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post -construction ❑ Yes ® No stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) when the infiltration structural stormwater BMP will receive discharges from, or be constructed in areas: a) Where industrial facilities are not authorized to infiltrate industrial stormwater under an NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit issued by the MPCA. b) Where vehicle fueling and maintenance occur. c) With less than three (3) feet of separation distance from the bottom of the infiltration system to the elevation of the seasonally saturated soils or the top of bedrock. d) Where high levels of contaminants in soil or groundwater will be mobilized by the infiltrating stormwater. 2) Restrict the use of infiltration techniques to achieve the conditions for post -construction ❑ Yes ® No stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), without higher engineering review, sufficient to provide a functioning treatment system and prevent adverse impacts to groundwater, when the infiltration device will be constructed in areas: a) With predominately Hydrologic Soil Group D (clay) soils. b) Within 1,000 feet up -gradient, or 100 feet down -gradient of active karst features. c) Within a Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA) as defined in Minn. R. 4720.5100, subp. 13. d) Where soil infiltration rates are more than 8.3 inches per hour. 3) For linear projects where the lack of right-of-way precludes the installation of volume ❑ Yes ® No control practices that meet the conditions for post -construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)), the permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) may allow exceptions as described in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(3)(b)). The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that a reasonable attempt be made to obtain right-of-way during the project planning process. 4. Mitigation provisions: The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall ensure that any stormwater discharges of TSS and/or TP not addressed on the site of the original construction activity are addressed through mitigation and, at a minimum, shall ensure the following requirements are met: a. Mitigation project areas are selected in the following order of preference: ❑ Yes ® No www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 5 of 14 1) Locations that yield benefits to the same receiving water that receives runoff from the original construction activity. 2) Locations within the same Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR) catchment area as the original construction activity. 3) Locations in the next adjacent DNR catchment area up -stream 4) Locations anywhere within the permittee's jurisdiction. b. Mitigation projects must involve the creation of new structural stormwater BMPs or the ❑ Yes ® No retrofit of existing structural stormwater BMPs, or the use of a properly designed regional structural stormwater BMP. c. Routine maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs already required by this permit cannot ❑ Yes ® No be used to meet mitigation requirements of this part. d. Mitigation projects shall be completed within 24 months after the start of the original ❑ Yes ® No construction activity. e. The permittee shall determine, and document, who will be responsible for long-term ❑ Yes ® No maintenance on all mitigation projects of this part. f. If the permittee receives payment from the owner and/or operator of a construction activity ❑ Yes ® No for mitigation purposes in lieu of the owner or operator of that construction activity meeting the conditions for post -construction stormwater management in Part III.D.5.a(2), the permittee shall apply any such payment received to a public stormwater project, and all projects must be in compliance with Part III.D.5.a(4)(a)-(e). 5. Long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs: The permittee's regulatory mechanism(s) shall provide for the establishment of legal mechanisms between the permittee and owners or operators responsible for the long-term maintenance of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, that have been implemented to meet the conditions for post -construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). This only includes structural stormwater BMPs constructed after the effective date of this permit and that are directly connected to the permittee's MS4, and that are in the permittee's jurisdiction. The legal mechanism shall include provisions that, at a minimum: a. Allow the permittee to conduct inspections of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or ® Yes ❑ No operated by the permittee, perform necessary maintenance, and assess costs for those structural stormwater BMPs when the permittee determines that the owner and/or operator of that structural stormwater BMP has not conducted maintenance. b. Include conditions that are designed to preserve the permittee's right to ensure maintenance ® Yes ❑ No responsibility, for structural stormwater BMPs not owned or operated by the permittee, when those responsibilities are legally transferred to another party. c. Include conditions that are designed to protect/preserve structural stormwater BMPs and ® Yes ❑ No site features that are implemented to comply with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)). If site configurations or structural stormwater BMPs change, causing decreased structural stormwater BMP effectiveness, new or improved structural stormwater BMPs must be implemented to ensure the conditions for post -construction stormwater management in the Permit (Part III.D.5.a(2)) continue to be met. If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: Post construction requirements are enforced by reference to the most restictive of all applicable state and local regulations. The City will also be amending it's Stormwater Management Plan within the next 12 months to more clearly identify system maintenance needs and regional implementation strategies. Ordinance updates will also be made within the next 12 months to directly reference the requirements of both the CSW and MS4 permit requirements for Post Construction. III. Enforcement Response Procedures (ERPs): (Part II.D.3) A. Do you have existing ERPs that satisfy the requirements of the Permit (Part III.B.)? ❑ Yes ® No 1. If yes, attach them to this form as an electronic document, with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere ERPs. 2. If no, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, with twelve (12) months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: The City of Hutchinson will develop a ERP within 12 months of permit issuance. The ERP to be developed will include the process to enforce code violations associated with IDDEs, construction site runoff, and post construction stormwater management. www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 6 of 14 B. Describe your ERPs: The ERPs will include current process and actions for any non-compliance issues. It will include the steps to be taken, who will be responsible for that enforcement action, and associated mitigative measures such as stop work orders and criminal penalties. IV. Storm Sewer System Map and Inventory: (Part II.D.4.) A. Describe how you manage your storm sewer system map and inventory: An annual review of the system map is completed so new BMPs can be added and modifications to existing BMPs can be updated in the map and inventory. Map updates are managed with a GIS system and include all known aspects of the City stormwater system and as modifications/additions to the system are made the map system is updated. B. Answer yes or no to indicate whether your storm sewer system map addresses the following requirements from the Permit (Part III.C.1.a-d), as listed below: 1. The permittee's entire small MS4 as a goal, but at a minimum, all pipes 12 inches or greater in ® Yes ❑ No diameter, including stormwater flow direction in those pipes. 2. Outfalls, including a unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee, and an ® Yes ❑ No associated geographic coordinate. 3. Structural stormwater BMPs that are part of the permittee's small MS4. ® Yes ❑ No 4. All receiving waters. ® Yes ❑ No If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: C. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the requirements of 2009 Minnesota Session Law, Ch. 172. Sec. 28: with the following inventories, according to the specifications of the Permit (Part III.C.2.a.-b.), including: 1. All ponds within the permittee's jurisdiction that are constructed and operated for purposes of ® Yes ❑ No water quality treatment, stormwater detention, and flood control, and that are used for the collection of stormwater via constructed conveyances. 2. All wetlands and lakes, within the permittee's jurisdiction, that collect stormwater via constructed ® Yes ❑ No conveyances. D. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have completed the following information for each feature inventoried. 1. A unique identification (ID) number assigned by the permittee. ® Yes ❑ No 2. A geographic coordinate. ® Yes ❑ No 3. Type of feature (e.g., pond, wetland, or lake). This may be determined by using best professional ® Yes ❑ No judgment. If you have answered yes to all above requirements, and you have already submitted the Pond Inventory Form to the MPCA, then you do not need to resubmit the inventory form below. If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: E. Answer yes or no to indicate if you are attaching your pond, wetland and lake inventory to the MPCA ❑ Yes ® No on the form provided on the MPCA website at: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4 , according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.C.2.b.(1)-(3)). Attach with the following file naming convention: MS4NameHere inventory. If you answered no, the inventory form must be submitted to the MPCA MS4 Permit Program within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended. V. Minimum Control Measures (MCMs) (Part II.D.S) A. MCM1: Public education and outreach 1. The Permit requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their education and outreach program that focuses on illicit discharge recognition and reporting, as well as other specifically selected stormwater-related issue(s) of high priority to the permittee during this permit term. Describe your current www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 7 of 14 educational program, including any high-priority topics included: The City of Hutchinson educates on a wide variety of stormwater pollution topics and the information is distributed via our monthly utility billings to each home and business throughout town. The City also utilizes our local newspaper to highlight topics of concern or interest. The Hutchinson Leader is very helpful in highlighting points of concern and conveys an appropriate message that the general public can relate to. The City utilizes its Park and Rec Brochure every year to distibute information on local stormwater concerns and to also highlight our annual rain barrel sale. Other outlets used to distribute educational information is our Stormwater Website as well as Hutchinson's Local Public Access Channels 7&10 are used to for distributing PSAs every year. 2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public education and outreach program, including the distribution of educational materials and a program implementation plan. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase Il Small MS4s (hftp://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Distribute Educational Materials Number of people reached and hits to website/Annual Implement and Education Program Number of brochures distributed to various entities/Annual) Public Education and Outreach Number of brochures distributed at City facilities/Annual) Public Participation -storm drain marking/annual meeting Number of public meetings and events/Annual) IDDE Education Posting information on web and PRCE brochure/Annual) Construction Site Run-off Control Education Number of handouts to builders/excavators / Annual) Post Construction SW Management Education Number of guidance documents to developers/Annually PP/Good Housekeeping Education Number of staff trained/Annual) Coordination of Education Program Check and update City website links to information/Annual) Annual Public Meeting Information distributed and number of attendees/Annual) Stormwater Utility Fund Assess annually to determine need for rate increases BMP cateaories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Targeted distribution of education materials for issues of concern such as grease dumpsters and mowing Number of businesses reached/New topic annually to focus clippings into streets efforts on new issues of concern as they arise. Host rain barrel sale or workshop I Number of barrels sold or constructed at a workshop/annuallv 3. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Environmental Specialist B. MCM2: Public participation and involvement 1. The Permit (Part III.D.2.a.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement a public participation/involvement program to solicit public input on the SWPPP. Describe your current program: The City host an annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention plan meeting at a City Council meeting each spring. It is an opportunity for both the Council and interested citizens to learn about the program, implementation activities, and is used to respond to questions. This meeting is meant to engage the public and bring awareness to stormwater issues both in our City and abroad. It is the primary, but not the only, opportunity for receiving public input/feedback. In addition to the annual meeting (which is televised on the local television station) City staff is actively engaged with the public for a wide variety of issues surrounding stormwater. 2. List the categories of BMPs that address your public participation/involvement program, including solicitation and documentation of public input on the SWPPP. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 8 of 14 addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase II Small MS4s (http://www.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/measurablegoals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Public Notice annual meeting Prepare and publish public meeting notice/annual) Solicit Public Opinion on adequacy of SWPPP Receive written or oral comments/annually Consider Public In BMP cateaories to be implemented Host a stormwater education booth at local fair or event Analyze comments and incorporate necessary changes/ongoin Measurable goals and timeframes Number of people reached/ann 3. Do you have a process for receiving and documenting citizen input? ® Yes ❑ No If you answered no to the above permit requirement, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: 4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Environmental Specialist C. MCM 3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination 1. The Permit (Part III.D.3.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees revise their current program as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into the small MS4. Describe your current program: The City implements IDDE program elements by utilizing a variety of tools. A call line is posted on the website and is available in all public education brochures is continously monitored. Incident tracking and response to issues is ongoing as problems are identified. An education program is used for both City staff and the general public to emphasize what illicit discharges are and how to report them. This is done through the use of brochures, posters, in person trainings, and site visits that are done when an illicit discharge is identified. A robust GIS map is also used to identify areas of concern, track routes of flow through the pipes, and to keep City staff on the frontline of identifying and preventing illicit discharges. This system is used for inspection location and identification of sources when an issue is identified. 2. Does your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Program meet the following requirements, as found in the Permit (Part III.D.3.c.-g.)? a. Incorporation of illicit discharge detection into all inspection and maintenance activities conducted ® Yes ❑ No under the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.-f.)Where feasible, illicit discharge inspections shall be conducted during dry -weather conditions (e.g., periods of 72 or more hours of no precipitation). b. Detecting and tracking the source of illicit discharges using visual inspections. The permittee may ® Yes ❑ No also include use of mobile cameras, collecting and analyzing water samples, and/or other detailed procedures that may be effective investigative tools. c. Training of all field staff, in accordance with the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.g.(2)), in ® Yes ❑ No illicit discharge recognition (including conditions which could cause illicit discharges), and reporting illicit discharges for further investigation. d. Identification of priority areas likely to have illicit discharges, including at a minimum, evaluating ® Yes ❑ No land use associated with business/industrial activities, areas where illicit discharges have been identified in the past, and areas with storage of large quantities of significant materials that could result in an illicit discharge. e. Procedures for the timely response to known, suspected, and reported illicit discharges. ® Yes ❑ No f. Procedures for investigating, locating, and eliminating the source of illicit discharges. ® Yes ❑ No g. Procedures for responding to spills, including emergency response procedures to prevent spills from ® Yes ❑ No entering the small MS4. The procedures shall also include the immediate notification of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Duty Officer, if the source of the illicit discharge is a spill or leak as defined in Minn. Stat. § 115.061. h. When the source of the illicit discharge is found, the permittee shall use the ERPs required by the ® Yes ❑ No Permit (Part III.B.) to eliminate the illicit discharge and require any needed corrective action(s). www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 9 of 14 If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: 3. List the categories of BMPs that address your illicit discharge, detection and elimination program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase Il Small MS4s (hftp://www.epa.ciov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals. pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Review and update sstem map Updates made to ma /annual) Review and update ordinance U dates made to ordinance/annual) IDDE plan implementation Complaints taken, responses to complaints, # of outfalls inspected/an uall Public and Employee IDDE education Number of brochures, posters, and training content/annual) Non-stormwater flows evaluation Assess list annual) BMP cateaories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Implement higher level of detail into system map to comply with inventory requirements Information updated/annually 4. Do you have procedures for record-keeping within your Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination (IDDE) program as specified within the Permit (Part III.D.3.h.)? ❑ Yes ® No If you answered no, indicate how you will develop procedures for record-keeping of your Illicit Discharge, Detection and Elimination Program, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended: Record keeping and tracking procedures of the IDDE program will be formalized to align with the current process that is being implemented in Hutchinson. This will be done through the formal development of a standard operating procedure. 5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Environmental Specialist D. MCM 4: Construction site stormwater runoff control 1. The Permit (Part III.D.4) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a construction site stormwater runoff control program. Describe your current program: The City implements it's CSW permit program parallel to the MPCA CSW program. Plan reviews, post construction treatment reviews, contractor education, ordinance enforcement, site inspections, and on site education are all part of program activities implemented to reduce%liminate risks associated with contaminated stormwater runoff from construction sites. Common issues receive additional focus with educational outreach. New industry products are also highlighted to contractors when they appear to be a good substitute to a traditional BMP. 2. Does your program address the following BMPs for construction stormwater erosion and sediment control as required in the Permit (Part III.D.4.b.): a. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you conduct prior to the start of ® Yes ❑ No construction activity? b. Does the site plan review procedure include notification to owners and operators proposing ® Yes ❑ No construction activity that they need to apply for and obtain coverage under the MPCA's general permit to Discharge Stormwater Associated with Construction Activity No. MN R100001? c. Does your program include written procedures for receipt and consideration of reports of ® Yes ❑ No noncompliance or other stormwater related information on construction activity submitted by the public to the permittee? d. Have you included written procedures for the following aspects of site inspections to determine compliance with your regulatory mechanism(s): 1) Does your program include procedures for identifying priority sites for inspection? ® Yes ❑ No www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 10 of 14 2) Does your program identify a frequency at which you will conduct construction site inspections? 3) Does your program identify the names of individual(s) or position titles of those responsible for conducting construction site inspections? 4) Does your program include a checklist or other written means to document construction site inspections when determining compliance? e. Does your program document and retain construction project name, location, total acreage to be disturbed, and owner/operator information? f. Does your program document stormwater-related comments and/or supporting information used to determine project approval or denial? ® Yes ❑ No ® Yes ❑ No ® Yes ❑ No ® Yes ❑ No ® Yes ❑ No g. Does your program retain construction site inspection checklists or other written materials used to ® Yes ❑ No document site inspections? If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met. 3. List the categories of BMPs that address your construction site stormwater runoff control program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase 11 Small MS4s (http://www.epa.aov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals.Of). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Ordinance Development Ordinance developed/permit cycle Construction site implementation of BMPs Sites inspected/annually Construction site waste control Sites ins ected/annual) Site plan review Plans reviewed/annual) Procedures for receiving complaints Complaints received and responses to them/annual) BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Revise ordinance to comply with new standards Updates made/annual) Conduct training for interested entities Trainin s conducted and content/annual) Distribute education materials to contractors at time of permit application Number ofpermits/annually Review active MPCA CSW permit list for discrepancies with City permitted activities #Sites that obtained appropriate coverage/annually 4. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Environmental Specialist E. MCM 5: Post -construction stormwater management 1. The Permit (Part III.D.5.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement and enforce a post -construction stormwater management program. Describe your current program: The City includes post -construction requirements into it's plan review procedures. BMPs are implemented in accordance with CSW and MS4 requirements to meet both treatment requirements and to address local and regional flooding issues as opportunities present themselves. A wide range of BMPs are considered and in place throughout Hutchinson and a stormwater maintenance agreement is required for detention that is required as part of a regulatory requirement. 2. Have you established written procedures for site plan reviews that you will conduct prior to the start of ® Yes ❑ No construction activity? 3. Answer yes or no to indicate whether you have the following listed procedures for documentation of post -construction stormwater management according to the specifications of Permit (Part III.D.5.c.): a. Any supporting documentation that you use to determine compliance with the Permit (Part ® Yes ❑ No III.D.5.a), including the project name, location, owner and operator of the construction activity, any www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 11 of 14 checklists used for conducting site plan reviews, and any calculations used to determine compliance? b. All supporting documentation associated with mitigation projects that you authorize? ® Yes ❑ No c. Payments received and used in accordance with Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(4)(f))? ® Yes ❑ No d. All legal mechanisms drafted in accordance with the Permit (Part III.D.5.a.(5)), including date(s) of ® Yes ❑ No the agreement(s) and names of all responsible parties involved? If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements, describe the steps that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met. 4. List the categories of BMPs that address your post -construction stormwater management program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. Refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase Il Small MS4s (http://www.epa.aov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Develop and implement structural and non-structural BMPs Number of BMPs installed/annually Ordinance to address post construction runoff I Review and updates of ordinance/annually Long term O&M of BMPs I Number of agreements implemented/annually BMP cateaories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Incorporate sensitivity to Wellhead Protection activities into ordinance Updated ordinance/12 months Update City stormwater management plan and incorporate references to requirements of CSW and MS4 Updated SWMP/12 months Accept MIDS calculator outputs during post construction reviews Number of plan reviews that used MIDS calculator/annually 5. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Environmental Specialist, City Engineer F. MCM 6: Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations 1. The Permit (Part III.D.6.) requires that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, existing permittees shall revise their current program, as necessary, and continue to implement an operations and maintenance program that prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from the permittee owned/operated facilities and operations to the small MS4. Describe your current program: The City implements its pollution prevention/good housekeeping program through staff training, inspections of stormwater system components, and evaluations to determine the need for increased activities in any area that is in need. Inspections of ponds, system outfalls, biofiltration practices, structural system components, and general facility operations are conducted by trained and knowledgeable staff. Street sweeping is a front line of defense that is used to remove volumes of potential pollutants from the streets. 2. Do you have a facilities inventory as outlined in the Permit (Part III.D.6.a.)? ® Yes ❑ No 3. If you answered no to the above permit requirement in question 2, describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, this permit requirement is met: 4. List the categories of BMPs that address your pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations program. Use the first table for categories of BMPs that you have established and the second table for categories of BMPs that you plan to implement over the course of the permit term. Include the measurable goals with appropriate timeframes that each BMP category will be implemented and completed. In www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 12 of 14 addition, provide interim milestones and the frequency of action in which the permittee will implement and/or maintain the BMPs. For an explanation of measurable goals, refer to the EPA's Measurable Goals Guidance for Phase 11 Small MS4s (http://www.epa.aov/npdes/pubs/measurablecioals.pdf). If you have more than five categories, hit the tab key after the last line to generate a new row. Established BMP categories Measurable goals and timeframes Municipal operations and maintenance Annual staff trainin /#attendees Street sweeping Routes and frequencies/annually Annual inspection of structural devices Number ins ected/annual) Pond, outfall inspections Number inspected/ annual) Inspection of exposed stockpiles Number inspected/annually Repair and Maintenance follow up of inspections Maintenance activities conducted/annual) Record retention of inspections U dates made to tracking system/annually BMP categories to be implemented Measurable goals and timeframes Incorporate inspections from Industrial Stormwater permitted sites into MS4 program records Inspections conducted/Annually Post information associated with P2 and GH at City facilities that conduct potential pollution causing activities Number ofposters/annually Prioritize inspection frequencies for areas of high concern Priority listing and number of inspections/annually 5. Does discharge from your MS4 affect a Source Water Protection Area (Permit Part III.D.6.c.)? ® Yes ❑ No a. If no, continue to 6. b. If yes, the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) is in the process of mapping the following items. Maps are available at http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/water/swp/maps/index.htm. Is a map including the following items available for your MS4: 1) Wells and source waters for drinking water supply management areas identified as ® Yes ❑ No vulnerable under Minn. R. 4720.5205, 4720.5210, and 4720.5330? 2) Source water protection areas for surface intakes identified in the source water ® Yes ❑ No assessments conducted by or for the Minnesota Department of Health under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, U.S.C. §§ 300j — 13? c. Have you developed and implemented BMPs to protect any of the above drinking water ® Yes ❑ No sources? 6. Have you developed procedures and a schedule for the purpose of determining the TSS and ® Yes ❑ No TP treatment effectiveness of all permittee owned/operated ponds constructed and used for the collection and treatment of stormwater, according to the Permit (Part III.D.6.d.)? 7. Do you have inspection procedures that meet the requirements of the Permit (Part III.D.6.e.(1)- ❑ Yes ® No (3)) for structural stormwater BMPs, ponds and outfalls, and stockpile, storage and material handling areas? 8. Have you developed and implemented a stormwater management training program commensurate with each employee's job duties that: a. Addresses the importance of protecting water quality? ® Yes ❑ No b. Covers the requirements of the permit relevant to the duties of the employee? ® Yes ❑ No c. Includes a schedule that establishes initial training for new and/or seasonal employees and ® Yes ❑ No recurring training intervals for existing employees to address changes in procedures, practices, techniques, or requirements? 9. Do you keep documentation of inspections, maintenance, and training as required by the Permit ® Yes ❑ No (Part III.D.6.h.(1)-(5))? If you answered no to any of the above permit requirements listed in Questions 5 — 9, then describe the tasks and corresponding schedules that will be taken to assure that, within 12 months of the date permit coverage is extended, these permit requirements are met: www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 13 of 14 An inspection and reporting standard operating procedure will be developed within 12 months to comply with new permit requirements. 10. Provide the name or the position title of the individual(s) who is responsible for implementing and/or coordinating this MCM: Environmental Specialist, Public Works Manager VI. Compliance Schedule for an Approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) with an Applicable Waste Load Allocation (WLA) (Part II.D.6.) A. Do you have an approved TMDL with a Waste Load Allocation (WLA) prior to the effective date of the Permit? 1. If no, continue to section VII. 2. If yes, fill out and attach the MS4 Permit TMDL Attachment Spreadsheet with the following naming convention: MS4NameHere TMDL. This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4. VII. Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems (Part II.D.7.) A. Do you own and/or operate any Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems which are regulated by this Permit (Part III.F.)? 1. If no, this section requires no further information. 2. If yes, you own and/or operate an Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment System within your small MS4, then you must submit the Alum or Ferric Chloride Phosphorus Treatment Systems Form supplement to this document, with the following naming convention: MS4NameHere TreatmentSystem. This form is found on the MPCA MS4 website: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ms4. VIII. Add any Additional Comments to Describe Your Program ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes ® No www.pca.state.mn.us 651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 • Available in alternative formats wq-strm4-49a • 5131113 Page 14 of 14 APPENDIX C Storm Water Management Design Standards Local SurfaceWater Management Plan Appendix C City of Hutchinson WSB Project No. 2702-00 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DESIGN STANDARDS CITY OF HUTCHINSON Purpose The primary purpose of this design guide is to set forth regulatory requirements for construction activities to help protectthe property and citizens in the City of Hutchinson. The goals are presented in Section 5 of the Local Plan. Definitions can be found in Appendix C. Other Agency Regulations Agency regulations as outlined in Local Plan Sectio n 3 m u st be m et in addition to the requirements of any other relevant regulations. Pertinent regulations that provide the greatest protection for human welfare and/or the environment shall be given highest emphasis. Receiving Waters Pertinent receiving waters relevant to the Local Plan are discussed in the Local Plan Section 2. Related Review and Regulations Hutchinson Ordinance Requirements Local Plan Section 2 and Appendix C MPCA NPDES Construction Permit http://www.pca.state.mn.us/index.PhP/water/water-types-and-programs/stormwater/construction- stormwater/index.html Crow River Organization of Water http://www.crowriver.org/ Environmental review (e.g. EAW, EIS) should be completed for projects that trigger the requirements, consistent with MN Rules. Design Requirements Developers are required to provide three submittals to the City, which are elaborated in greater detail in the City ordinances and Appendix C: • Drainage/Erosion Control Permit, • Stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and • NPDES Construction Permit. A SWPPP shall besubmitted withthe Drainage/Erosion Control Permit application. The SWPPP shall be consistent with the requirements outlined in this document, City ordinances, and State and Federal regulations. The SWPPP shall be completed priorto submitting a Drainage/Erosion Control Permit application and priorto conducting any land disturbing activities. SWPPP plan content must include at a minimum the items required and identified in the NPDES Construction Permit Part III. This includes information to meet the requirements of the Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control and Post - Construction Stormwater Management sections of this document, where applicable. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control Requirements Site plans and project documentation must incorporate erosion and sediment controls and waste controls as required and identified inthe NPDES Construction Permit Part IV, includingthose identified inthe NPDES Construction Permitfor dischargesto special and impaired waters, when applicable. These requirements may include: • Erosion prevention practices, • Sediment control practices, • Dewatering and basin draining activities, • Inspections and maintenance, • Pollution prevention management measures, and • Final stabilization. Post -Construction Stormwater Management Requirements Site plans and project documentation must incorporate post -construction (permanent) stormwater management BMPs/systems to manage stormwater longterm once construction activity is complete. Permanent stormwater systems shall be designed consistent with the Minnesota Stormwater Manual and address the following requirements as detailed in Local Plan Section 5 and Appendix C: • Water Quality (see Local Plan Section 5.3), • Runoff Management and Flood Control (see Local Plan Section 5.4), • Wetlands (see Local Plan Section 5.5), • Erosion and Sediment Control (see Local Plan Section 5.6), • Groundwater (see Local Plan Section 5.7), and • Recreation, Habitat, and Shoreland Management (see Local Plan Section 5.8). HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: MnDOT Aeronautics Maintenance & Operations Agreement Department: PW/Engineering LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: John Olson Agenda Item Type: Presenter: John Olson Reviewed by Staff ❑ Consent Agenda Time Requested (Minutes): 0 License Contingency N/A Attachments: Yes BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: Every biennium, MnDOT Aeronautics issues Maintenance and Operations (M&O) Agreements for airports throughout Minnesota. The agreement is standard and has not substantively changed over the last several years. As part of the agreement, MnDOT offers reimbursements for qualifying expenses of maintaining and operating the airport up to an amount set by them. For this biennium, the maximum M&O reimbursement is $26.727 per year, for a total of $53,454. In the past, the City has been reimbursed the entire amount included in the M&O agreements, and there is no indication that the City wouldn't incur qualifying expenses at least to that level for the upcoming biennium covered by this agreement. Over the course of the last 4 years, reimbursements made under the M&O agreement have accounted for an average of 22% of the airport's total revenue. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Consideration of adoption of resolution authorizing entering into the MnDOT Aeronautics Maintenance & Operations Agreement and executing the Agreement. Fiscal Impact: -$ 26,727.00 Funding Source: Airport Revenue FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: Yes PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: MnDOT Contract No. 1000999 STATE OF MINNESOTA AIRPORT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION GRANT CONTRACT State Project Number (S.P.): A4304-MO16 State Project Number (S.P.): A4304-MO17 This contract is between the State of Minnesota, acting through its Commissioner of Transportation ("State") and City of Hutchinson acting through its City Council ("Recipient"). RECITALS 1. Minnesota Statutes §§360.015 and 360.305 authorize State to provide financial assistance to airports for maintenance and operation activities. 2. Recipient owns, operates, or controls an airport ("Airport") in the state system, and Recipient desires financial assistance from the State for maintenance and operation activities for State Fiscal Year 2016 and State Fiscal Year 2017. 3. Recipient assures the State that Recipient will operate and maintain the airport according to the duties and obligations set forth in this Contract. CONTRACT TERMS 1. Term of Contract and Survival of Terms 1.1 Effective Date: This contract will be effective on the date State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 2. 1.2 Expiration Date: This contract will expire on June 30, 2017 or when all obligations have been satisfactorily fulfilled, whichever occurs first. 1.3 Survival of Terms: All clauses which impose obligations continuing in their nature and which must survive in order to give effect to their meaning will survive the expiration or termination of this contract, including, without limitation, the following clauses: 9. Indemnification; 10. State Audits; 11. Government Data Practices; 13. Governing Law, Jurisdiction and Venue; and 14. Data Disclosure. 2. Recipient's Duties 2.1 Recipient will operate and maintain the Airport in a safe, serviceable manner for aeronautical purposes only for the use and benefit of the public. 2.2 The Recipient will keep the runway and the area around the lights mowed at the Airport. The grass must be mowed at least 7 feet beyond the lights, and the grass must not exceed 6 inches in height on the landing area. 2.3 If the Airport remains operational during the winter months, the Recipient will keep at least one runway, associated taxiway, and apron area cleared of snow and ice to the same priority as arterial roads. Snow banks must be limited in height so that aircraft wings, engines, and propellers will clear them. Landing strip markers and/or lights must remain visible. 2.4 If the State contracts for the periodic paint striping of the Airport's runways and taxiways during the term of this Contract, the Recipient will cooperate with the marking operation. The Recipient must coordinate seal coat pavement maintenance projects with the State to maximize the pavement marking life. 2.5 The Recipient will allow a representative of the State's Office of Aeronautics access to any area of the Airport necessary for the purpose of periodic inspections. Page 1 of 5 MnDOT Contract No. 1000999 3. Recipient's Assurances 3.1 In accordance with Minnesota Statutes § 360.305, subdivision 4, Recipient assures the State that Recipient will operate and maintain the Airport in a safe, serviceable manner for aeronautical purposes only for the use and benefit of the public. 3.2 Recipient represents and warrants that Recipient has established a zoning authority for the Airport, and such authority has completed, or is in the process of and will complete, with due diligence, an airport zoning ordinance in accordance with Minnesota Statutes §§ 360.061 to 360.074. 4. Third -Party Contracting 4.1 Recipient will comply with all applicable local, state, or federal laws, regulations, policies and procedures in the procurement of goods and services funded in whole or in part under this Contract. 5. Consideration and Payment 5.1 Consideration. State will pay for all eligible maintenance and operation costs incurred by Recipient under this Contract as follows: 5. 1.1 Basis. Recipient will be paid for 75% of the eligible maintenance and operation costs not reimbursed by any other source, not to exceed $26,727.00 ("Base Amount") of state aid for each state fiscal year. 5.1.2 Total Obligation. The total obligation of State for all compensation and reimbursements to Recipient under this contract will not exceed $53,454.00 [Total for both fiscal years] ($26,727.00 for FY2016 and $26,727.00 for FY2017). 5.2 Payment 5.2.1 The Recipient must submit a reimbursement request of its eligible costs to the Director of the Office of Aeronautics on a quarterly basis. The State's Office of Aeronautics will supply the reimbursement request forms which Recipient must submit. Reimbursement requests must be submitted according to the following schedule: • In October, No later than November 15, for the period July 1 through September 30. • In January, No later than February 15, for the period October 1 through December 31. • In April, No later than May 15, for the period January 1 through March 31. • In July, No later than August 15, for the period April 1 through June 30. The State reserves the right to reject items that may not be eligible for reimbursement. 6. Conditions of Payment 6.1 All services provided by Recipient under this contract must be performed to State's satisfaction, as determined at the sole discretion of State's Authorized Representative and in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, including business registration requirements of the Office of the Secretary of State. Recipient will not receive payment for work found by State to be unsatisfactory or performed in violation of federal, state or local law. In addition to the foregoing, Recipient will not receive payment for Airport's failure to pass periodic inspections by a representative of the State's Office of Aeronautics. Authorized Representatives 7.1 State's Authorized Representative. State's Authorized Representative will be: Jenny Bahneman, Grants Specialist 222 East Plato Boulevard Saint Paul, Minnesota 55107-1618 651-234-7240 State's Authorized Representative or his /her successor, will monitor Recipient's performance and has the authority to accept or reject the services provided under this contract. If the Recipient's duties are performed in a satisfactory manner, the State's Authorized Representative will certify acceptance on each reimbursement request submitted for payment. Page 2 of 5 MnDOT Contract No. 1000999 7.2 Recipient's Authorized Representative. Recipient's Authorized Representative will be: John Olson, Public Works Manager City of Hutchinson,111 Hassan Street SE, Hutchinson, MN 55350 (320) 234-4473 jolson@ci.hutchinson.mn.us If Recipient's Authorized Representative changes at any time during this contract, Recipient must immediately notify State. 8. Assignment, Amendments, Waiver and Contract Complete 8.1 Assignment. Recipient may neither assign nor transfer any rights or obligations under this contract without the prior consent of State and a fully executed Assignment Contract, executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved this contract, or their successors in office. 8.2 Amendments. Any amendment to this contract must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original contract, or their successors in office. 8.3 Waiver. If State fails to enforce any provision of this contract that failure does not waive the provision or State's right to subsequently enforce it. 8.4 Contract Complete. This contract contains all prior negotiations and agreements between State and Recipient. No other understanding regarding this contract, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party. 9. Indemnification 9.1 In the performance of this contract by Recipient, or Recipient's agents or employees, Recipient must indemnify, save and hold State, its agents, and employees harmless from any and all claims or causes of action, including reasonable attorney's fees incurred by State, to the extent caused by Recipient's: 1) intentional, willful or negligent acts or omissions; 2) breach of contract or warranty; or 3) breach of the applicable standard of care. The indemnification obligations of this section do not apply if the claim or cause of action is the result of State's sole negligence. This clause will not be construed to bar any legal remedies Recipient may have for State's failure to fulfill its obligation pursuant to this contract. 10. State Audits 10.1 Under Minnesota Statutes § 16C.05, subdivision 5, Recipient's books, records, documents and accounting procedures and practices relevant to this contract are subject to examination by State, State's Auditor or the Legislative Auditor, as appropriate, for a minimum of six years from the expiration date of this contract. 11. Government Data Practices 11.1 Government Data Practices. Recipient and State must comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13, as it applies to all data provided by State under this contract, and as it applies to all data created, collected, received, stored, used, maintained or disseminated by Recipient under this contract. The civil remedies of Minnesota Statutes § 13.08 apply to the release of the data referred to in this clause by either Recipient or State. If Recipient receives a request to release the data referred to in this Clause, Recipient must immediately notify State and consult with State as to how Recipient should respond to the request. Recipient's response to the request must comply with applicable law. 12. Workers' Compensation 12.1 Recipient certifies that it is in compliance with Minnesota Statutes § 176.181, subdivision 2, pertaining to workers' compensation insurance coverage. Recipient's employees and agents will not be considered State employees. Any claims that may arise under the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act on behalf of these employees and any claims made by any third party as a consequence of any act or omission on the part of these employees are in no way the State's obligation or responsibility. Page 3 of 5 MnDOT Contract No. 1000999 13. Governing Law, Jurisdiction and Venue 13.1 Minnesota law, without regard to its choice -of -law provisions, governs this contract. Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this contract, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 14. Data Disclosure 14.1 Under Minnesota Statutes §270C.65, and other applicable law, Recipient consents to disclosure of its social security number, federal employer tax identification number and Minnesota tax identification number, already provided to State, to federal and state agencies and state personnel involved in the payment of state obligations. These identification numbers may be used in the enforcement of federal and state laws which could result in action requiring Recipient to file state tax returns and pay delinquent state tax liabilities, if any, or pay other state liabilities. 15. Termination and Suspension 15.1 Termination by State. State may cancel this contract at any time, with or without cause, upon 30 days' written notice to Recipient. Upon termination, Recipient will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed. 15.2 Termination for Insufficient Funding. State may immediately terminate this contract if it does not obtain funding from the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source; or if funding cannot be continued at a level sufficient to allow for the payment of the services covered here. Termination must be by written notice to Recipient. Written notice may be transmitted by electronic means. State is not obligated to pay for any services that are provided after notice and effective date of termination. However, Recipient will be entitled to payment, determined on a pro rata basis, for services satisfactorily performed to the extent that funds are available. State will not be assessed any penalty if the contract is terminated because of the decision of the Minnesota Legislature, or other funding source, not to appropriate funds. State must provide Recipient notice of the lack of funding within a reasonable time of State's receiving that notice. 16. Discrimination Prohibited by Minnesota Statutes §181.59 16.1 Recipient will comply with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes § 181.59 which requires that every contract for or on behalf of the State of Minnesota, or any county, city, town, township, school, school district or any other district in the state, for materials, supplies or construction will contain provisions by which Contractor agrees: 1) That, in the hiring of common or skilled labor for the performance of any work under any contract, or any subcontract, no Contractor, material supplier or vendor, will, by reason of race, creed or color, discriminate against the person or persons who are citizens of the United States or resident aliens who are qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates; 2) That no Contractor, material supplier, or vendor, will, in any manner, discriminate against, or intimidate, or prevent the employment of any person or persons identified in clause 1 of this section, or on being hired, prevent or conspire to prevent, the person or persons from the performance of work under any contract on account of race, creed or color; 3) That a violation of this section is a misdemeanor; and 4) That this contract may be canceled or terminated by the state of Minnesota, or any county, city, town, township, school, school district or any other person authorized to grant contracts for employment, and all money due, or to become due under the contract, may be forfeited for a second or any subsequent violation of the terms or conditions of this contract. THE BALANCE OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Page 4 of 5 STATE ENCUMBRANCE VERIFICATION Individual certifies that funds have been encumbered as required by Minnesota Statutes § 16A.15 and § 16C.05. Signed: Date: SWIFT Contract (SC) ID No. Purchase Order (PO) ID No. RECIPIENT Recipient certifies that the appropriate person(s) have executed Contracts on behalf of Recipient as required by applicable articles, bylaws or resolutions. By: Title: Date: By: Title: Date: MnDOT Contract No. 1000999 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 0 (with delegated authority) Title: Date: MuDOT CONTRACT MANAGEMENT By: Date: Page 5 of 5 RESOLUTION NO. 14529 AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AIRPORT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION GRANT CONTRACT It is resolved by the City of Hutchinson as follows: That the state of Minnesota Contract Number 10000999, "Airport Maintenance and Operation Grant Contract", at the Hutchinson Municipal Airport is accepted. That the Mayor and City Administrator are authorized to execute this Contract and any amendments on behalf of the City of Hutchinson. Adopted by the Hutchinson City Council on this 23rd day of February, 2016. Mayor, Gary Forcier City Administrator, Matt Jaunich CERTIFICATION STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF MCLEOD I certify that the above Resolution is a true and correct copy of the Resolution adopted by the City of Hutchinson at an authorized meeting held on the 23rd day of February, 2016, as shown by the minutes of the meeting in my possession. CORPORATE SEAL City Administrator HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M -W Agenda Item: Special Event Request Department: Police LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Daniel T. Hatten Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Daniel T. Hatten Reviewed by Staff ✓❑ Consent Agenda Time Requested (Minutes): 2 License Contingency N/A Attachments: No BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: The 42th Annual Arts & Crafts Festival and Taste of Hutchinson will be held Friday, September 16th, 10 am - 6 pm and Saturday, September 17th, 9 am - 4 pm in Library Square and 1 S\ Ave SE. Setup for the festival will begin on Thursday, September 15th at 8 am. The event will end on Saturday the 17th at 4 pm. Cleanup is usually completed by 8 pm on the 17th. A rain location will not be provided. A severe weather emergency plan is currently in place. The Arts & Crafts Festival committee would like to request the support and assistance of the City of Hutchinson in regards to the areas outlined. We understand that our request for support of the festival will affect multiple City of Hutchinson departments. Request of Support from the City of Hutchinson - Administration • The Hutchinson Ambassadors wish to reserve all concession rights on 1 st Ave SE between Main Street and Hassan Street as well as the control of any and all food exhibitors for the Taste of Hutchinson. The Ambassadors have an agreement with the Downtown Association regarding the operation of the Popcorn Wagon during the event. • Use of electricity in band shell and along 151 Ave SE during the festival weekend. Police Department • Overnight security on Thursday, September 161 h and Friday, September 17th. • Assistance with pedestrian traffic crossing on the comer of Main Street and 1 st Ave. • Assistance in directing vendor traffic during the event • Assistance with vendor check in traffic control and allow use of Hassan Street from Washington to 5th Ave SE to aid in this process • Emergency services support during the event Parks & Recreation • Exclusive use of Library Square for art & craft exhibitors for September 15-17 2016 BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: I Recommend approval Fiscal Impact: $ 4,000.00 Funding Source: Department Buget FTE Impact: 20.00 Budget Change: No Included in current budget: Yes PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Special Event Department: Police LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Daniel T. Hatten Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Daniel T. Hatten Reviewed by Staff ✓❑ Consent Agenda Time Requested (Minutes): 2 License Contingency N/A Attachments: No BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: On behalf of the Hutchinson Chamber & Tourism's Agri-Business Committee I would like to make a request to close First Ave SE between Main Street and Hassan Street. This request is for our annual Dairy Day Celebration on Friday, June 3, 2016 in library Square. We would like to use First Ave SE for the tractor club and equipment displays. We currently have library Square reserved from 9:00 am until 3:00 pm. The tractors would be brought in Friday morning after 9:00 am. The event is scheduled to run until 1:30 pm, but we are requesting 3:00 pm to allow for clean-up. If you have any questions, or if the committee can be of any assistance, please give me a call at 320-234- 0785 or email meatmary@explorehutchinson.com. Thank you for your help. The Hutchinson Police Department has reviewed the request and plans for the 2016 Dairy Day Celebration and we look forward to assisting the Chamber with another successful event. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Recommend Approval Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source: FTE Impact: 0.00 Budget Change: No Included in current budget: No PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Luce Line/River Corridor Parks Reforestation Community Tree Project Department: Parks LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Sara Witte Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Reviewed by Staff ❑ Consent Agenda Time Requested (Minutes): 0 License Contingency N/A Attachments: No BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: Funding is being made available from Legislative-Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources money and administered through the DNR and other partnerships to improve community forests through citizen engagement. This project will help to move Hutchinson forward in it's pro-active approach to community forestry. The main focus will be to involve citizens of all ages and abilities in all aspects of community forestry. This includes education on: tree identification, inventorying, planting processes, maintenance, etc. The planting area of interest is the Luce Line trail/Crow River corridor, due to the number of park acres that fall into this zone. The total number of trees on the grant is 206, all of which are considered trees native to Minnesota and the upper Midwest, and are all approved species by the DNR. If awarded this grant, DNR and it's project partners will help with all the necessary citizen education and planting activities. Parks and Public Works recommends that the City Council approve the grant submission to the DNR and if so awarded, are approving Parks funds of which half is considered in-kind labor ($3,750.00) and other operating budget ($3,803.99) all in total of $7,553.99 for materials/equipment needed during the volunteer education, planting and maintenance activities. The upfront cost of trees, materials and tools ($30,103.27) will come out of the Parkland Dedication Account. When we receive reimbursement from the LCCMR grant, the money will go back into Parkland Account. City staff is available to answer any questions that you may have. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Approval to apply for the 2015 to 2018 LCCMR Grant for Improving Community Forests Through Citizen Engagement Fiscal Impact: $ 7,553.99 Funding Source: FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: Yes PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: $ 37,657.26 Total City Cost: $ 7,553.99 Funding Source: Parks General Operating budget Remaining Cost: $ 30,103.27 Funding Source: MN DNR LCCMR Grant CHECK REGISTER -A FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON CHECK DATE FROM 02/09/2016 - 02/23/2016 Check Date ------------------- 02/09/2016 Check -------------- 189803 Vendor Name -------------------------------------------------------------- LEAGUE OF MN CITIES -INS TRUST Description -----------INS P--EMIU---------/16-3/31--------------------- 3RD QTR INS PREMIUMS 1/1/16-3/31/16 Amount -------------- 5.75- 58,945.75 02/23/2016 189807 AARP FEBRUARY INSTRUCTION 280.00 02/23/2016 189808 ABSOLUTE LOGISTICS LLC LOAD 01/28 & 1/29 FOSTER'S 650.00 02/23/2016 189809 ACE HARDWARE TOILET TANK RENEWAL KIT, CABLE TIE 537.82 02/23/2016 189810 AEM MECHANICAL SERVICES INC TRUCK SURCHARGE AIRPORT FBO HANGAR- HVAC 511.10 02/23/2016 189811 ALL SPORTS AMERICA TACKLE TWILL, JERSEY 1,364.10 02/23/2016 189812 ALLINA MEDICAL AED W/CABINET 3,750.00 02/23/2016 189813 ALPHA WIRELESS MAI NT ON CONSOLE & FIXED TRANSMITTERS FE 848.19 02/23/2016 189814 AMERICAN BOTTLING CO MISC BEVERAGES 106.16 02/23/2016 189815 AMERIPRIDE SERVICES TOWELS, MOP 89.53 02/23/2016 189816 ANIMAL MEDICAL CENTER ON CROW RIVER CAT & DOG BOARDING 748.00 02/23/2016 189817 ARCTIC GLACIER USA INC. ICE 78.85 02/23/2016 189818 ARNESON DISTRIBUTING CO FEB PURCH 450.00 02/23/2016 189819 ARROW TERMINAL LLC ATBUALARM- SHOP SUPPLIES 231.48 02/23/2016 189820 ARTISAN BEER COMPANY FEB PURCH 323.68 02/23/2016 189821 ASSESSCO ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 430 WATER ST ASBESTOS 749.00 02/23/2016 189822 AUTO VALUE - GLENCOE SOCKET SET 13PC 94.44 02/23/2016 189823 B & C PLUMBING & HEATING INC FURNACE NOT WORKING- EVENT CENTER 490.50 02/23/2016 189824 BELLBOY CORP FEB PURCH 2,146.11 02/23/2016 189825 BENNY'S MEAT MARKET ANNUAL TOWN BOARD MTG-SHREDDED PORK, BU 59.82 02/23/2016 189826 BERGER PLUMBING HEATING AC HUD COUPLING, PATCH SPRINKLER SYSTEM 90.98 02/23/2016 189827 BERNICK'S MISC BEVERAGES 213.40 02/23/2016 189828 BLUE EARTH COUNTY RADIO BD DUES 631.89 02/23/2016 189829 BREAKTHRU BEVERAGE FEB PURCH 25,012.40 02/23/2016 189830 BUSINESSWARE SOLUTIONS HP DESIGNJET SD PRO MFP & CARE PACK 17,465.82 02/23/2016 189831 C & L DISTRIBUTING FEB PURCH 14,179.37 02/23/2016 189832 CENTRAL HYDRAULICS WATER HOSE 175.60 02/23/2016 189833 CENTRAL MCGOWAN HIGH PRESSURE CYL 138.88 02/23/2016 189834 COALITION OF GREATER MN CITIES 2016 PLEDGE WW LEGAL & REGULATORY PROGR 4,740.00 02/23/2016 189835 CROW RIVER AUTO & TRUCK REPAIR OIL CHANGE -2006 DODGE DAKOTA 1,032.43 02/23/2016 189837 CROW RIVER PRESS INC SENIOR NEWSLETTERS 87.60 02/23/2016 189838 CROW RIVER TITLE GUARANTY INC BUILDING PURCHASE- OLD MEDICAL BUILDING- 218,260.93 02/23/2016 189839 CROW RIVER WINERY FEB PURCH 1,267.48 02/23/2016 189840 DALE A. ZORMAN TRUCKING SERVICE INC STARKMAN LANDSCAPE ELY MN 1,400.00 02/23/2016 189841 DROP -N -GO SHIPPING INC SOIL CONTROL LABS, WATSONVILLE CA 2,029.41 02/23/2016 189842 DVS RENEWAL 2004 MACK STRT-522-HTK 822.00 02/23/2016 189843 VOID 0.00 02/23/2016 189844 VOID 0.00 02/23/2016 189845 VOID 0.00 02/23/2016 189846 DYNA SYSTEMS SLASHER, WASHER 1,939.80 02/23/2016 189847 E2 ELECTRICAL SERVICES INC BIPIN, LAMPS 652.63 02/23/2016 189848 ECOLAB PEST ELIMINATION COCKROACH/RODENT PROGRAM- FEB 212.07 02/23/2016 189849 ECONOMIST, THE 1 YEAR SUBSCRIPTION 155.00 02/23/2016 189850 EDINA REALTY RELOCATION UB refund for account: 2-640-5300-1-02 39.40 02/23/2016 189851 ELECTRIC MOTOR CO NEW MOTOR 119.00 02/23/2016 189852 ELECTRONIC SERVICING LUXUL ROUTER 419.95 02/23/2016 189853 EMERGENCY RESPONSE SOLUTIONS FIRE DEX FX -R TURN OUT COAT & PANT PER G 6,850.91 02/23/2016 189854 FARM -RITE EQUIPMENT BOB TACH REPLACEMENT PART 3,401.22 02/23/2016 189855 FASTENAL COMPANY LYNCHPIN, SCRWDRBITST 521.18 02/23/2016 189856 FINANCE & COMMERCE BID LOCATION HENNEPIN COUNTY 204.88 02/23/2016 189857 FIRST CHOICE FOOD & BEVERAGE SOLUTI COFFEE 228.00 02/23/2016 189859 FOSTER'S INC. FOS CATALOG 154.43 02/23/2016 189860 G & K SERVICES COVERALLS 216.18 02/23/2016 189861 GALLS LLC 1ST RESPONDER XTRA KIT 446.40 02/23/2016 189862 GAVIN WINTERS TWISS THIEMANN & LONG FLAT FEE -JAN 3,200.00 02/23/2016 189863 GOPHER STATE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO. ENGINE #7, 10# ANSUL ABC RECHARGE 70.50 02/23/2016 189864 GRAINGER HIGH CAP PLEATED FILTER 929.58 02/23/2016 189865 GRAPE BEGINNINGS, INC FEB PURCH 1,129.50 02/23/2016 189866 GREATER MINNESOTA PARKS & TRAILS 2016 MEMBERSHIP- D. MOON 225.00 02/23/2016 189867 GREEN EARTH LAWN CARE INC REPLACE WOODEN POST ON 12/23/15 385.32 02/23/2016 189868 GTS REG#89347215- MELISSA STARKE- 2016 MCFOA 265.00 02/23/2016 189869 HANSEN GRAVEL D6 DOZER PUSHING @ BASS POND 1,554.50 02/23/2016 189870 HANSON & VASEK CONSTRUCTION 4.5HRS SNOW HAULING 2/4/16 351.00 02/23/2016 1189871 1 HAWKINS INC IAZONE 15 1 1,359.47 CHECK REGISTER -A FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON CHECK DATE FROM 02/09/2016 - 02/23/2016 Check Date ------------------- 02/23/2016 Check --8--8-------- 189872 Vendor Name -------------------------------------------------------------- HD SUPPLY WATERWORKS LTD Description 3/4" SHORT IPERL WATER METERS -/4" S--ORTIPERL-------------ETER-------------------------------------,053.20 Amount 5,053.20 02/23/2016 189873 HILLYARD / HUTCHINSON TISSUE, LINER, ICE MELT 5,217.19 02/23/2016 189874 HJERPE CONTRACTING HAULING SNOW 4.5HRS 936.00 02/23/2016 189875 HOLT MOTORS INC SWITCH, AARESISTOR-ST658 29.81 02/23/2016 189876 HP INC PROMO- HP 4GB DIMM MEMORY 39.60 02/23/2016 189877 HRA BETH & STEVE GASSER - SCDP PROJECT 3,618.00 02/23/2016 189878 HUTCHFIELD SERVICES INC JANITORIAL- FEB 2016 1,512.28 02/23/2016 189879 HUTCHINSON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BRING IT HOME EXPO 2016 100.00 02/23/2016 189880 HUTCHINSON CO-OP FORKLIFT TANK 9,514.45 02/23/2016 189881 HUTCHINSON HEALTH EMPLOYEE SCREENING M. DEMARS 387.00 02/23/2016 189882 HUTCHINSON LEADER ADVERTISING 1,378.58 02/23/2016 189883 HUTCHINSON SENIOR ADVISORY BOARD TOUR REIMBURSEMENT 750.00 02/23/2016 189884 HUTCHINSON UTILITIES JAN UTILITIES 12/31- 1/29/16 135,291.83 02/23/2016 189885 HUTCHINSON WHOLESALE TAIL LAMP, HATCH 848.71 02/23/2016 189886 HUTCHINSON, CITY OF SERVICE 1/1/16-1/31/15 170.43 02/23/2016 189887 HUTCHINSON, CITY OF REPLENISH ATM 5,000.00 02/23/2016 189888 IFCO SYSTEMS NA INC. 08-B GRADE 48 X40 6,000.00 02/23/2016 189889 INDIAN ISLAND WINERY FEB PURCH 129.12 02/23/2016 189890 INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY OF ARBORICULT ISA MEMBERSHIP D. SCHUETTE 255.00 02/23/2016 189891 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEM MINNEAPOL 31-MHD, MT -78 131.95 02/23/2016 189892 J & B PALLET 48X40 #2 GMA PALLETS 6,960.00 02/23/2016 189893 JAY MALONE MOTORS OIL CHANGE- 2014 FORD FUSION 57.57 02/23/2016 189894 JEFF MEEHAN SALES INC. JANUARY COMMISSIONS 4,057.16 02/23/2016 189895 JEFFERSON FIRE & SAFETY INC HOLMATRO CORE PUMP, SPREADER, CUTTER 17,639.10 02/23/2016 189896 JJ TAYLOR DIST OF MN FEB PURCH 5,231.05 02/23/2016 189897 JLR GARAGE DOOR SERVICE ADJUSTED AIR SWITCH 150.00 02/23/2016 189898 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO. FEB PURCH 32,852.59 02/23/2016 189899 JUUL CONTRACTING CO FORCEMAIN TEST AT ROBERTS PARK 651.00 02/23/2016 189900 KDUZ KARP RADIO ADVERTISING -:30 SPOT 72.00 02/23/2016 189901 KOSEK, JEFF SNOW REMOVAL TRUCKING 4.5 HRS 351.00 02/23/2016 189902 L & P SUPPLY CO SLIDER MOWERS -BELT, PULLEY 1,313.64 02/23/2016 189903 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES 2016 SAFETY & LOSS CONTROL WORKSHOP J.PA 780.00 02/23/2016 189904 LEXISNEXIS JANUARY 2016 USER 151.41 02/23/2016 189905 LIEN, MIKE BRAINERD CONFERENCE 466.46 02/23/2016 189906 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC 4.68 HRS OF REPAIR LABOR ON WING 468.00 02/23/2016 189907 LOCATORS & SUPPLIES SUBSURFACE METERED MAGNETIC LOCATOR 4,795.60 02/23/2016 189908 LOCHER BROTHERS INC FEB PURCH 24,151.85 02/23/2016 189909 M -R SIGN SIGNS 242.17 02/23/2016 189910 MACTEK SYSTEMS INC ANNUAL MAINT AGREEMENT FOR HIGHERGROUND 3,547.00 02/23/2016 189911 MADDEN GALANTER HANSEN LLP SERVICES RENDERED THROUGH 1/31/16 2,862.69 02/23/2016 189912 MARIPOSA PUBLISHING 2016 MINN ATTY SEC UPDATE 135.26 02/23/2016 189913 MATHESON TRI -GAS INC ACETYLENE, HIGH PRESSURE 15.04 02/23/2016 189914 MAYTAG LAUNDRY & CAR WASH CLEANING OF LINENS 142.31 02/23/2016 189915 MCKAY, JEFF FIRE OFFICER SCHOOL- ALEXANDRIA 351.05 02/23/2016 189916 MCLEOD COUNTY BAR ASSN 2016 BAR ASSN DUES 40.00 02/23/2016 189917 MCLEOD COUNTY COURT ADMINISTRATOR BAIL- D.AIME 300.00 02/23/2016 189918 MCLEOD COUNTY RECORDER DOC#A423967 & A423968, B. SCHEURER 92.00 02/23/2016 189919 MCLEOD PUBLISHING INC BRIDE & GROOM SUPPLEMENT 118.45 02/23/2016 189920 MENARDS HUTCHINSON ROYAL OAK CHARCOAL, LIGHTER FLUID 1,056.13 02/23/2016 189921 MESSAGE MEDIA MONTHLY ACCESS FEE - FEB 30.00 02/23/2016 189922 MID AMERICA BUSINESS SYSTEMS NETLABELS 1 YEAR MAINT 116.75 02/23/2016 189923 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH ARENA DUES - CONCESSIONS 120.00 02/23/2016 189924 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH WEST RIVER PARK 126.00 02/23/2016 189925 MINNESOTA DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION REPLACE "ODDFELLOWS PARK" SIGNS ON HWY 7 1,020.00 02/23/2016 189926 MINNESOTA GREEN EXPO PREMIUM BOOTH FOR MNLA GREEN EXPO 2017 489.60 02/23/2016 189927 MINNESOTA SPORTS FEDERATION LEAGUE SANCTIONING- VB & BASKETBALL 272.00 02/23/2016 189928 MINNESOTA VALLEY TESTING LAB BOD 684.50 02/23/2016 189929 MN STATE PATROL MANDATORY INSPECTION DECALS 36.00 02/23/2016 189930 MNDRIVERSMANUALS.COM COMMERCIAL MANUALS 544.23 02/23/2016 189931 MOTION INDUSTRIES INC SA37/A REDUCER 517.45 02/23/2016 189932 MRPA LEAGUE SANCTIONING -VB 216.00 02/23/2016 189933 NERO ENGINEERING WELL #4, WWTF FORCEMAIN BYPASS, WTP AIR 1,883.96 02/23/2016 189934 NEW FRANCE WINE FEB PURCH 1,641.00 02/23/2016 1189935 1 NORTH AMERICAN RESCUE TOURNIQUET, COMBAT APP, CASE, DRESSING 1,844.75 CHECK REGISTER-A FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON CHECK DATE FROM 02/09/2016 - 02/23/2016 Check Date ------------------- 02/23/2016 Check -------------- 189936 Vendor Name -------------------------------------------------------------- NORTH CENTRAL LABORATORIES Description ------------------------------------------------------------------ NALGENE Amount -----------------88 312.88 02/23/2016 189937 NORTHERN BUSINESS PRODUCTS LINER, INK CRG 883.56 02/23/2016 189938 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC PLOWBOLT #8 PKG 418.27 02/23/2016 189939 NU-TELECOM FEB SERVICE 76.45 02/23/2016 189940 NYBAKKE, LYLE FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 11.44 02/23/2016 189941 O'REILLY AUTO PARTS MINI BULB, WIPER BLADES 220.46 02/23/2016 189942 OFFICE DEPOT PAPER, TOWELS 523.59 02/23/2016 189943 PAUSTIS WINE COMPANY FEB PURCH 1,104.27 02/23/2016 189944 PETERSON, TIM FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 12.06 02/23/2016 189945 PHILLIPS WINE & SPIRITS FEB PURCH 13,284.50 02/23/2016 189946 POSTMASTER SR NEWSLETTER- MARCH 147.00 02/23/2016 189947 POWDER RIDGE WINTER REC AREA 2015-2016 SEASON 6-TIME SKI/BOARD CLUB 4,089.00 02/23/2016 189948 PRINTERS SERVICE INC 77" ICE KNIFE SHARP 120.00 02/23/2016 189949 QUILL CORP MOP 26.94 02/23/2016 189950 RATH PRECISION TANKER 6 DROP TANK LATCH REPAIR 145.00 02/23/2016 189951 RATH RACING POLARIS RANGER-REMOVED OLD LIGHTING 3,142.65 02/23/2016 189952 RATH, DARYL FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 14.77 02/23/2016 189953 REINER ENTERPRISES INC GERTEN'S ROUND TRIP 780.00 02/23/2016 189954 RIPPE PRINT COMMUNICATIONS WONDERBLEND REBATE MIX 1,496.21 02/23/2016 189955 RJO CORPORATE SCREEN PRINTED T SHIRTS 1,889.25 02/23/2016 189956 ROSENBAUER MN LLC ROSENBAUER MOTORS CHASSIS - FIRE TRUCK 226,600.00 02/23/2016 189957 RUNNING'S SUPPLY HOSE CLAMP, BATTERY, NOZZLE, BINS 343.66 02/23/2016 189958 SAM'S CLUB MISC PURCH 1,710.90 02/23/2016 189959 SARGENT, DAN FIRE DEPT TRAINING ST LOUIS PARK 47.30 02/23/2016 189960 SCARCELY LTD GASSER- 815-817 MAIN ST S (HRA LOAN) 325.00 02/23/2016 189961 SCHIMMEL CONSTRUCTION LLC GASSER- 815-817 MAIN ST S (HRA LOAN) 2,200.00 02/23/2016 189962 SEBORA, MARC COURT EXPENSES 76.86 02/23/2016 189963 SHAW, KAREN YOGA & PILATES 210.00 02/23/2016 189964 SHRED-IT USA INC ON SITE SHRED 5 CONTAINERS 48.99 02/23/2016 189965 SIMPLEXGRINNELL LP QUARTERLY CONTRACT 6/1/15-5/31/16 180.80 02/23/2016 189966 SOIL CONTROL LAB FINISHED COMPOST CELL 1 698.00 02/23/2016 189967 SOUTHERN WINE & SPIRITS OF MN FEB PURCH 13,979.44 02/23/2016 189968 SPS COMMERCE INC WEBFORMS MONTHLY SUB & PROCESSING FEE 357.65 02/23/2016 189969 STAPLES ADVANTAGE ROLL- DMV 680.32 02/23/2016 189970 STATE OF MINNESOTA DEPT OF PUBLIC S HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL INVENTORY FEE 25.00 02/23/2016 189971 STEARNS COUNTY COURT ADMINISTRATOR BAIL- N. SELLE 200.00 02/23/2016 189972 STREICH TRUCKING ON SITE HAULING- FINES 2/4/16-2/5/16 947.50 02/23/2016 189973 STURGES, JASON FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 15.49 02/23/2016 189974 STURGES, MATT FIRE TRAINING- INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 24.24 02/23/2016 189975 SUBWAY WEST EDA MEETING 58.46 02/23/2016 189976 THOMPSON, DENEIL SAFETY GLASSES 100.00 02/23/2016 189977 THOMSON REUTERS-WEST DISCOUNT PLAN CHARGES JAN - LEGAL 1,412.85 02/23/2016 189978 TITAN MACHINERY SENDER ENGINE OIL PRESSURE 64.31 02/23/2016 189979 TKO WINES FEB PURCH 839.40 02/23/2016 189980 TOWMASTER INC. HYDRAULICS ARE SLOW- EMERGENCY REPAIR 4,159.00 02/23/2016 189981 TRI COUNTY WATER BOTTLE WATER DEL 560.66 02/23/2016 189982 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED UNIFORMS 39.45 02/23/2016 189983 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA J. SCHELITZCHE- SHADE TREE SHORT COURSE 195.00 02/23/2016 189984 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE CO OF AMERICA LIFE & LTD INSURANCE FOR MARCH 2,019.06 02/23/2016 189985 VESSCO INC TUBING, MARPRENE 373.96 02/23/2016 189986 VIK, BRANDON FD LEADERSHIP CLASS- ST LOUIS PARK 85.77 02/23/2016 189987 VIKING BEER FEB PURCH 19,689.77 02/23/2016 189988 VIKING COCA COLA MISC BEVERAGES 315.60 02/23/2016 189989 VINOCOPIA INC FEB PURCH 1,603.43 02/23/2016 189990 WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN 1/16-1/31/16 DISPOSAL FEES 4,081.26 02/23/2016 189991 WELCOME NEIGHBOR HUTCHINSON NEW RESIDENTVISITS 60.00 02/23/2016 189992 WELLS FARGO MISC PURCH 4,653.80 02/23/2016 189993 WEST CENTRAL SHREDDING FEB 2016 DOCUMENT PURGE- 2005 LBS 401.00 02/23/2016 189994 WINE MERCHANTS INC FEB PURCH 1,489.00 02/23/2016 189995 ZIEGLER INC PUMP PARTS- GRINDER 118.46 02/23/2016 189996 ZWILLING, TROY INNOVATIVE CONFERENCE 108.20 GRAND TOTAL I 1 999,787.45 CHECK REGISTER -B FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON CHECK DATE FROM 02/23/2016 - 02/23/2016 Check Date ------------------- 02/23/2016 Check -------------- 189836 Vendor Name -------------------------------------------------------------- CROW RIVER GLASS Description Amount -------------------------------------------------------------------------------65.0 -- FIX DOOR 65.00 02/23/2016 189858 FORCIER - MARTY'S ROOFING INC INSTALL METAL COUNTER- EVERGREEN APTS 525.00 GRAND TOTAL 590.00 HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Consideration of adoption of a modification to the Development Program for Devfi Department: EDA LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Miles R. Seppelt Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Miles R. Seppelt Reviewed by Staff r-1 Public Hearing Time Requested (Minutes): 10 License Contingency N/A Attachments: No BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: In order to promote the redevelopment of downtown and remove blight the Hutchinson Economic Development Authority would like to acquire and demolish the "Old Medical Clinic" building located at 126 Franklin Street NW. In order to pay for the project an economic development tool known as Tax Increment Financing would be used. This will allow the City of Hutchinson to capture a portion of the future property taxes generated by the property once its redeveloped with a new building. The EDA plans to acquire the property, demolish the existing structure, make needed soil corrections on the site, and market the site to potential developers. Once a developer has been identified the lot would be sold to them for $1. To establish the TIF District a public hearing is required, after which the City Council will be asked to consider the adoption of two resolutions: the first to establish the TIF District and the 2nd to authorize an inter-fund loan to cover project costs until such time as tax increment from a new development can provide reimbursement. Initial project costs will be advanced from existing tax increment within Development District # 4 and reimbursed via future tax increment generated by the new development. If you have any questions or need additional information, please give me a call anytime at 234-4223. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Adoption of resolution establishing TIF District 4-16; 2. Adoption of a resolution authorizing an inter-fund loan for advance of certain costs in connection with TIF District 4-16 Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source: N/A FTE Impact: 0.00 Budget Change: No Included in current budget: No PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: Tax Increment Financing District Overview City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16. More detailed information on each of these topics can be found in the complete Tax Increment Financing Plan. Proposed action: ➢ Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (District) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan). Modification of the Development Program for Development District No. 4 which includes the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 and represents a continuation of the goals and objectives set forth in the Development Program for Development District No. 4. Passing an interfund loan in conjunction with the District. Type of TIF District: A redevelopment district Parcel Numbers: 23.056.2880 Proposed The District is being created to enable the EDA and City to acquire property Development: and prepare the site for future development in the City. Please see Appendix A of the TIF Plan for a more detailed project description. Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the first increment (26 years of increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2019. It is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after December 31, 2044, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. Estimated annual tax Up to $81,219 increment: EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE Authorized uses: The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount that may be expended: Land/Building Acquisition .....................................................$225,000 Site Improvements.................................................................$284,000 Other Qualifying Improvements ............................................$335,326 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) ..........................................$140,000 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ...................................................$984,326 Interest...................................................................................$555,674 PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ............................................. 1 540 000 See Subsection 2-10, on page 2-6 of the TIF Plan for the full budget authorization. Form of financing: The project is proposed to be financed by a pay-as-you-go note, interfund loan, or a combination of both. Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified. Interfund Loan If the City wants to pay for administrative expenditures from a tax increment Requirement: fund, it is recommended that a resolution authorizing a loan from another fund be bassed PRIOR to the issuance of the check. 4 Year Activity Rule After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the (§ 469.176 Subd. 6) following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District: • Demolition • Rehabilitation • Renovation • Other site preparation (not including utility services such as sewer and water) If the activity has not been started by approximately February 2020, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel until the commencement of a qualifying activity. 5 Year Rule Within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax increments must be (§ 469.1763 Subd. 3) expended or obligated to be expended. Any obligations in the District made after approximately February 2021, will not be eligible for repayment from tax increments. The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City resolution. Page 2 isEHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE ,i�i�lll nen SII As of February 9, 2016 Draft for Public Hearing Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 and the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (a redevelopment district) within Development District No. 4 City of Hutchinson McLeod County State of Minnesota Public Hearing: February 23, 2016 Adopted: 40 FREERS Prepared by: EHLERS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113-1105 651-697-8500 fax: 651-697-8555 www.ehlers-inc.com Table of Contents (for reference purposes only) Section 1 - Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 ............................................. 1-1 Foreword............................................................. 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 ................................. 2-1 Subsection 2-1. Foreword ............................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority ........................................ 2-1 Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives ................................... 2-1 Subsection 2-4. Development Program Overview ............................ 2-1 Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired . 2-2 Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District ................................. 2-2 Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District ........... 2-4 Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements ................ 2-4 Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued ...................... 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds ........................................... 2-6 Subsection 2-11. Business Subsidies ....................................... 2-6 Subsection 2-12. County Road Costs ....................................... 2-7 Subsection 2-13. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions ................. 2-7 Subsection 2-14. Supporting Documentation ................................. 2-9 Subsection 2-15. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues ........................ 2-9 Subsection 2-16. Modifications to the District ................................ 2-10 Subsection 2-17. Administrative Expenses .................................. 2-10 Subsection 2-18. Limitation of Increment ................................... 2-11 Subsection 2-19. Use of Tax Increment .................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-20. Excess Increments ...................................... 2-12 Subsection 2-21. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer .............. 2-13 Subsection 2-22. Assessment Agreements ................................. 2-13 Subsection 2-23. Administration of the District ............................... 2-13 Subsection 2-24. Annual Disclosure Requirements ........................... 2-13 Subsection 2-25. Reasonable Expectations ................................. 2-13 Subsection 2-26. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment ................. 2-14 Subsection 2-27. Summary .............................................. 2-14 Appendix A Project Description...................................................... A-1 Appendix B Map of Development District No. 4 and the District ............................. B-1 Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District ............................ C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District ........................................ D-1 Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form ....................................... E-1 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District .................................. F-1 Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications ..................................... G-1 Section 1 - Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 Foreword The following text represents a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4. This modification represents a continuation ofthe goals and objectives set forth in the Development Program for Development District No. 4. Generally, the substantive changes include the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16. For further information, please review the Development Program for Development District No. 4, adopted May 1980 and modified on April 24, 1990; December 30, 1991; May 13, 1997; June 8, 2003; June 29, 2004; August 23, 2005; and June 12, 2007. It is available from the City Administrator or Economic Development Director at the City of Hutchinson. Other relevant information is contained in the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the Tax Increment Financing Districts located within Development District No. 4. City of Hutchinson Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 1-1 Section 2 - Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 Subsection 2-1. Foreword The City of Hutchinson (the "City"), staff and consultants have prepared the following information to expedite the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (the "District"), a redevelopment tax increment financing district, located in Development District No. 4. Subsection 2-2. Statutory Authority Within the City, there exist areas where public involvement is necessary to cause development or redevelopment to occur. To this end, the City has certain statutory powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.124 to 469.133, inclusive, as amended, and M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Tax Increment Financing Act" or "TIF Act"), to assist in financing public costs related to this project. This section contains the Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the District. Other relevant information is contained in the Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4. Subsection 2-3. Statement of Objectives The District currently consists of one parcel of land and adjacent and internal rights-of-way. The District is being created to enable the Hutchinson Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and City to acquire property and prepare the site for future development in the City. Please see Appendix A for further District information. The City has not entered into an agreement or designated a developer at the time of preparation of this TIF Plan. This TIF Plan is expected to achieve many of the objectives outlined in the Development Program for Development District No. 4. The activities contemplated in the Modification to the Development Program and the TIF Plan do not preclude the undertaking of other qualified development or redevelopment activities. These activities are anticipated to occur over the life of Development District No. 4 and the District. Subsection 2-4. Development Program Overview 1. Property to be Acquired - Selected property located within the District may be acquired by the City and is further described in this TIF Plan. 2. Relocation - Relocation services, to the extent required by law, are available pursuant to M.S., Chapter 117 and other relevant state and federal laws. 3. Upon approval of a developer's plan relating to the project and completion of the necessary legal requirements, the City may sell to a developer selected properties that it may acquire within the District or may lease land or facilities to a developer. 4. The City may perform or provide for some or all necessary acquisition, construction, relocation, demolition, and required utilities and public street work within the District. City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-1 Subsection 2-5. Description of Property in the District and Property To Be Acquired The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcels listed in Appendix C of this TIF Plan. Please also see the map in Appendix B for further information on the location of the District. The City may acquire any parcel within the District including interior and adjacent street rights of way. Any properties identified for acquisition will be acquired by the City only in order to accomplish one or more of the following: storm sewer improvements; provide land for needed public streets, utilities and facilities; carry out land acquisition, site improvements, clearance and/or development to accomplish the uses and objectives set forth in this plan. The City may acquire property by gift, dedication, condemnation or direct purchase from willing sellers in order to achieve the objectives of this TIF Plan. Such acquisitions will be undertaken only when there is assurance of funding to finance the acquisition and related costs. Subsection 2-6. Classification of the District The City, in determining the need to create a tax increment financing district in accordance with M.S., Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended, inclusive, finds that the District, to be established, is a redevelopment district pursuant toMS, Section 469.174, Subd. 10(a)(1) as defined below: (a) 'Redevelopment district" means a type oftax incrementfinancing district consisting ofaproject, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: (1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area in the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; (2) The property consists of vacant, unused, underused, inappropriately used, or infrequently used rail yards, rail storage facilities or excessive or vacated railroad rights-of-way; (3) tank -facilities, orproperty whose immediately previous use was for tank -facilities, as defined in Section 115C, Subd. 15, if the tank facility: (i) have or had a capacity of more than one million gallons; (ii) are located adjacent to rail facilities; or (iii) have been removed, or are unused, underused, inappropriately used or infrequently used; or (4) a qualifying disaster area, as defined in Subd. IOb. (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination ofdeficiencies in essential utilities andfacilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition ofinteriorpartitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. (c) A building is not structurally substandard ifitis in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-2 site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. (d) A parcel is deemed to be occupied by a structurally substandard building for purposes of the finding under paragraph (a) or by the improvement described in paragraph (e) if all of the following conditions are met: (1) the parcel was occupied by a substandard building or met the requirements ofparagraph (e), as the case may be, within three years of the filing of the request for certification of the parcel as part of the district with the county auditor; (2) the substandard building or the improvements described in paragraph (e) were demolished or removed by the authority or the demolition or removal was financed by the authority or was done by a developer under a development agreement with the authority; (3) the authority found by resolution before the demolition or removal that the parcel was occupied by a structurally substandard building or met the requirement ofparagraph (e) and that after demolition and clearance the authority intended to include the parcel within a district; and (4) upon filing the requestfor certification of the tax capacity of the parcel as part ofa district, the authority notifies the county auditor that the original tax capacity of the parcel must be adjusted as provided by § 469.177, subdivision 1, paragraph 0. (e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. (f) For districts consisting of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must qualify as a redevelopment district under paragraph (a) to be included in the district, and the entire area of the district must satisfy paragraph (a). In meeting the statutory criteria the City relies on the following facts and findings: • The District is a redevelopment district consisting of one parcel. • An inventory shows that more than 15 percent of the parcel is occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures. • An inspection of the sole building located within the District finds that the building is structurally substandard as defined in the TIF Act. (See Appendix F). Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 7, the District does not contain any parcel or part of a parcel that qualified under the provisions of MS, Sections 273.111, 273.112, or 273.114 or Chapter 473H for taxes payable in any of the five calendar years before the filing of the request for certification of the District. City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-3 Subsection 2-7. Duration and First Year of Tax Increment of the District Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. 1, and Section 469.176, Subd. 1, the duration and first year of tax increment of the District must be indicated within the TIF Plan. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. l b., the duration of the District will be 25 years after receipt of the first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The City elects to receive the first tax increment in 2019, which is no later than four years following the year of approval of the District. Thus, it is estimated that the District, including any modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would terminate after 2044, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied. The City reserves the right to decertify the District priorto the legally required date. Subsection 2-8. Original Tax Capacity, Tax Rate and Estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity Value/Increment and Notification of Prior Planned Improvements PursuanttoM. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 7 andM. S., Section 469.177, Subd. l , the Original Net Tax Capacity (ONTC) as certified for the District will be based on the market values placed on the property by the assessor in 2015 for taxes payable 2016. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.177, Subds. I and 2, the County Auditor shall certify in each year (beginning in the payment year 2019) the amount by which the original value has increased or decreased as a result of Change in tax exempt status of property; Reduction or enlargement of the geographic boundaries of the district; Change due to adjustments, negotiated or court-ordered abatements; Change in the use of the property and classification; Change in state law governing class rates; or Change in previously issued building permits. In any year in which the current Net Tax Capacity (NTC) value of the District declines below the ONTO, no value will be captured and no tax increment will be payable to the City. The original local tax rate for the District will be the local tax rate for taxes payable 2016, assuming the request for certification is made before June 30, 2016. The ONTC and the Original Local Tax Rate for the District appear in the table below. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.174 Subd. 4 and M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, 2, and 4, the estimated Captured Net Tax Capacity (CTC) of the District, within Development District No. 4, upon completion of the projects within the District, will annually approximate tax increment revenues as shown in the table on the following page. The City requests 100 percent of the available increase in tax capacity for repayment of its obligations and current expenditures, beginning in the tax year payable 2019. The Project Tax Capacity (PTC) listed is an estimate of values when the projects within the District are completed. City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-4 Project Estimated Tax Capacity upon Completion (PTC) $63,965 Original Estimated Net Tax Capacity (ONTO) $8,372 Estimated Captured Tax Capacity (CTC) $55,593 Original Local Tax Rate 146.095% Estimated Pay 2016 Estimated Annual Tax Increment (CTC x Local Tax Rate) $81,219 Percent Retained by the City 100% Tax capacity includes a 3% inflation factor for the duration of the District. The tax capacity included in this chart is the estimated tax capacity of the District in year 25. The tax capacity of the District in year one is estimated to be $30,550. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 4, the City shall, after a due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the County Auditor or its notice of the District enlargement pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 4, with a listing of all properties within the District or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the eighteen (18) months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the municipality pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3. The County Auditor shall increase the original net tax capacity of the District by the net tax capacity of improvements for which a building permit was issued. The City has reviewed the area to be included in the District and found no parcels for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the TIF Plan by the City. Subsection 2-9. Sources of Revenue/Bonds to be Issued The costs outlined in the Uses of Funds will be financed primarily through the annual collection of tax increments. The City reserves the right to incur bonds or other indebtedness as a result of the TIF Plan. As presently proposed, the projects within the District will be financed by a and interfund loan, pay -as -you go ora combination of both. Any refunding amounts will be deemed a budgeted cost without a formal TIF Plan Modification. This provision does not obligate the City to incur debt. The City will issue bonds or incur other debt only upon the determination that such action is in the best interest of the City. The total estimated tax increment revenues for the District are shown in the table below: SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL Tax Increment $1,400,000 Land Sale Proceeds $1 Interest $139,999 TOTAL $1,540,000 The City may issue bonds (as defined in the TIF Act) secured in whole or in part with tax increments from the District in a maximum principal amount of $984,326. Such bonds may be in the form of pay-as-you-go notes, revenue bonds or notes, general obligation bonds, or interfund loans. This estimate of total bonded indebtedness is a cumulative statement of authority under this TIF Plan as of the date of approval. City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-5 Subsection 2-10. Uses of Funds Currently under consideration for the District is a proposal to enable the EDA and City to acquire property and prepare the site for future development. The City has determined that it will be necessary to provide assistance to the project(s) for certain District costs, as described. The City has studied the feasibility of the development or redevelopment of property in and around the District. To facilitate the establishment and development or redevelopment of the District, this TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment financing to pay for the cost of certain eligible expenses. The estimate of public costs and uses of funds associated with the District is outlined in the following table. USES OF TAX INCREMENT FUNDS TOTAL Land/Building Acquisition $225,000 Site Improvements/Preparation $284,000 Other Qualifying Improvements $335,326 Administrative Costs (up to 10%) $140,000 PROJECT COST TOTAL $984,326 Interest $555,674 PROJECT AND INTEREST COSTS TOTAL $1,540,000 The total project cost, including financing costs (interest) listed in the table above does not exceed the total projected tax increments for the District as shown in Subsection 2-9. Estimated costs associated with the District are subject to change among categories without a modification to this TIF Plan. The cost of all activities to be considered for tax increment financing will not exceed, without formal modification, the budget above pursuant to the applicable statutory requirements. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 2, no more than 25 percent of the tax increment paid by property within the District will be spent on activities related to development or redevelopment outside of the District but within the boundaries of Development District No. 4, (including administrative costs, which are considered to be spent outside of the District) subject to the limitations as described in this TIF Plan. Subsection 2-11. Business Subsidies Pursuant to M.S., Section 116J.993, Subd. 3, the following forms of financial assistance are not considered a business subsidy: (1) A business subsidy of less than $150,000; (2) Assistance that is generally available to all businesses or to a general class of similar businesses, such as a line of business, size, location, or similar general criteria; (3) Public improvements to buildings or lands owned by the state or local government that serve a public purpose and do not principally benefit a single business or defined group of businesses at the time the improvements are made; (4) Redevelopment property polluted by contaminants as defined MM S., Section 116J. 552, Subd. 3; (5) Assistance provided for the sole purpose of renovating old or decaying building stock or bringing it up to code and assistance provided for designated historic preservation districts, provided that the assistance is equal to or less than 50% of the total cost; City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-6 (6) Assistance to provide job readiness and training services if the sole purpose of the assistance is to provide those services; (7) Assistance for housing; (8) Assistance for pollution control or abatement, including assistance for a tax increment financing hazardous substance subdistrict as defined under M. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 23; (9) Assistance for energy conservation; (10) Tax reductions resulting from conformity with federal tax law; (11) Workers' compensation and unemployment compensation; (12) Benefits derived from regulation; (13) Indirect benefits derived from assistance to educational institutions; (14) Funds from bonds allocated under chapter 474A, bonds issued to refund outstanding bonds, and bonds issued for the benefit of an organization described in section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended through December 31, 1999; (15) Assistance for a collaboration between a Minnesota higher education institution and a business; (16) Assistance for a tax increment financing soils condition district as defined under M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 19; (17) Redevelopment when the recipient's investment in the purchase of the site and in site preparation is 70 percent or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value; (18) General changes in tax increment financing law and other general tax law changes of a principally technical nature; (19) Federal assistance until the assistance has been repaid to, and reinvested by, the state or local government agency; (20) Funds from dock and wharf bonds issued by a seaway port authority; (21) Business loans and loan guarantees of $150,000 or less; (22) Federal loan funds provided through the United States Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration; and (23) Property tax abatements granted under M.S., Section 469.1813 to property that is subject to valuation under Minnesota Rules, chapter 8100. The City will comply with M.S., Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995 to the extent the tax increment assistance under this TIF Plan does not fall under any of the above exemptions. Subsection 2-12. County Road Costs Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. ]a, the county board may require the City to pay for all or part of the cost of county road improvements if the proposed development to be assisted by tax increment will, in the judgment of the county, substantially increase the use of county roads requiring construction of road improvements or other road costs and if the road improvements are not scheduled within the next five years under a capital improvement plan or within five years under another county plan. If the county elects to use increments to improve county roads, it must notify the City within forty-five days of receipt of this TIF Plan. In the opinion of the City and consultants, the proposed development outlined in this TIF Plan will have little or no impact upon county roads, therefore the TIF Plan was not forwarded to the county 45 days prior to the public hearing. The City is aware that the county could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. Subsection 2-13. Estimated Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions The estimated impact on other taxing jurisdictions assumes that the redevelopment contemplated by the TIF Plan would occur without the creation of the District. However, the City has determined that such development or redevelopment would not occur "but for" tax increment financing and that, therefore, the City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-7 fiscal impact on other taxing jurisdictions is $0. The estimated fiscal impact of the District would be as follows if the "but for" test was not met: The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2016 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on actual Pay 2015 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2016 rates and figures, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. Pursuant to M. S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) : (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $1,400,000; (2) Probable impact of the District on cL provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the District on police protection is not expected. The City Police Department does track all calls for service including property -type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The probable impact ofthe District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing building, which will be eliminated by the new development, is blighted and not maintained. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-8 IMPACT ON TAX BASE Estimated Estimated Captured 2015/Pay 2016 Tax Capacity (CTC) Percent of CTC Total Net Upon Completion to Entity Total Tax Capacity McLeod County 35,498,296 55,593 0.1566% City of Hutchinson 8,908,926 55,593 0.6240% Hutchinson ISD No. 423 14,965,582 55,593 0.3715% IMPACT ON TAX RATES Estimated Percent Potential Pay 2016 of Total CTC Taxes Extension Rates McLeod County 0.509340 34.86% 55,593 28,316 City of Hutchinson 0.744170 50.94% 55,593 41,371 Hutchinson ISD No. 423 0.173390 11.87% 55,593 9,639 Other 0.034050 2.33% 55,593 1,893 Total 1.460950 100.00% 81,219 The estimates listed above display the captured tax capacity when all construction is completed. The tax rate used for calculations is the estimated Pay 2016 rate. The total net capacity for the entities listed above are based on actual Pay 2015 figures. The District will be certified under the actual Pay 2016 rates and figures, which were unavailable at the time this TIF Plan was prepared. Pursuant to M. S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) : (1) Estimate of total tax increment. It is estimated that the total amount of tax increment that will be generated over the life of the District is $1,400,000; (2) Probable impact of the District on cL provided services and ability to issue debt. An impact of the District on police protection is not expected. The City Police Department does track all calls for service including property -type calls and crimes. With any addition of new residents or businesses, police calls for service will be increased. New developments add an increase in traffic, and additional overall demands to the call load. The City does not expect that the proposed development, in and of itself, will necessitate new capital investment. The probable impact ofthe District on fire protection is not expected to be significant. Typically new buildings generate few calls, if any, and are of superior construction. The existing building, which will be eliminated by the new development, is blighted and not maintained. The impact of the District on public infrastructure is expected to be minimal. The development is not expected to significantly impact any traffic movements in the area. The current infrastructure for City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-8 sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water will be able to handle the additional volume generated from the proposed development. Based on the development plans, there are no additional costs associated with street maintenance, sweeping, plowing, lighting and sidewalks. The development in the District is expected to contribute to sanitary sewer (SAC) and water (WAC) connection fees, however the exact amount is unknown at this time. It is not anticipated that there will be any general obligation debt issued in relation to this project, therefore there will be no impact on the City's ability to issue future debt or on the City's debt limit. (3) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to school district levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to school district levies, assuming the school district's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $166,180; (4) Estimated amount of tax increment attributable to county levies. It is estimated that the amount of tax increments over the life of the District that would be attributable to county levies, assuming the county's share of the total local tax rate for all taxing jurisdictions remained the same, is $488,040; (5) Additional information requested by the county or school district. The City is not aware of any standard questions in a county or school district written policy regarding tax increment districts and impact on county or school district services. The county or school district must request additional information pursuant to M.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 2(b) within 15 days after receipt of the tax increment financing plan. No requests for additional information from the county or school district regarding the proposed development for the District have been received. Subsection 2-14. Supporting Documentation Pursuant to MS Section 469.175, Subd. I (a), clause 7 the TIF Plan must contain identification and description of studies and analyses used to make the determination set forth MMS Section 469.175, Subd. 3, clause (b)(2) and the findings are required in the resolution approving the District. Following is a list of reports and studies on file at the City that support the City's findings: • Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District Eligibility Study: "Old Medical Clinic". • Imagine Hutchinson Downtown Vision and Action Plan. • Levee Area Walkway Alternatives. Subsection 2-15. Definition of Tax Increment Revenues Pursuant to M. S, Section 469.174, Subd. 25, tax increment revenues derived from a tax increment financing district include all of the following potential revenue sources: Taxes paid by the captured net tax capacity, but excluding any excess taxes, as computed underM. S, Section 469.177; The proceeds from the sale or lease of property, tangible or intangible, to the extent the property was purchased by the authority with tax increments; Principal and interest received on loans or other advances made by the authority with tax increments; Interest or other investment earnings on or from tax increments; Repayments or return of tax increments made to the Authority under agreements for districts for which the request for certification was made after August 1, 1993; and City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-9 6. The market value homestead credit paid to the Authority under M.S., Section 273.1384. Subsection 2-16. Modifications to the District In accordance with MS, Section 469.175, Subd. 4, any: Reduction or enlargement of the geographic area of the District, if the reduction does not meet the requirements of MS, Section 469.175, Subd. 4(e); Increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred; A determination to capitalize interest on debt if that determination was not a part of the original TIF Plan; Increase in the portion of the captured net tax capacity to be retained by the City; Increase in the estimate of the cost ofthe District, including administrative expenses, that will be paid or financed with tax increment from the District; or Designation of additional property to be acquired by the City, shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original TIF Plan. PursuanttoM.S. Section 469.175 Subd. 40, the geographic area of the District may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original net tax capacity by the county auditor. If a redevelopment district is enlarged, the reasons and supporting facts for the determination that the addition to the district meets the criteria of M. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10, must be documented in writing and retained. The requirements of this paragraph do not apply if (1) the only modification is elimination of parcel(s) from the District and (2)(A) the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District equals or exceeds the net tax capacity of those parcel(s) in the District's original net tax capacity or (B) the City agrees that, notwithstanding M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 1, the original net tax capacity will be reduced by no more than the current net tax capacity of the parcel(s) eliminated from the District. The City must notify the County Auditor of any modification to the District. Modifications to the District in the form of a budget modification or an expansion of the boundaries will be recorded in the TIF Plan. Subsection 2-17. Administrative Expenses In accordance with M. S., Section 469.174, Subd. 14, administrative expenses means all expenditures of the City, other than: Amounts paid for the purchase of land; Amounts paid to contractors or others providing materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the District; Relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the District; Amounts used to pay principal or interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to M. S., Section 469.178; or Amounts used to pay other financial obligations to the extent those obligations were used to finance costs described in clauses (1) to (3). For districts for which the request for certification were made before August 1, 1979, or after June 30, 1982, and before August 1, 2001, administrative expenses also include amounts paid for services provided by bond City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-10 counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3, tax increment may be used to pay any authorized and documented administrative expenses for the District up to but not to exceed 10 percent of the total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined byM.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. For districts for which certification was requested after July 31, 2001, no tax increment may be used to pay any administrative expenses for District costs which exceed ten percent of total estimated tax increment expenditures authorized by the TIF Plan or the total tax increments, as defined MMS, Section 469.174, Subd. 25, clause (1), from the District, whichever is less. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4h, tax increments may be used to pay for the County's actual administrative expenses incurred in connection with the District and are not subject to the percentage limits ofM..S., Section 469.176, Subd. 3. The county may require payment of those expenses by February 15 of the year following the year the expenses were incurred. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469. 177, Subd. 11, the County Treasurer shall deduct an amount (currently .36 percent) of any increment distributed to the City and the County Treasurer shall pay the amount deducted to the State Commissioner of Management and Budget for deposit in the state general fund to be appropriated to the State Auditor for the cost of financial reporting of tax increment financing information and the cost of examining and auditing authorities' use of tax increment financing. This amount may be adjusted annually by the Commissioner of Revenue. Subsection 2-18. Limitation of Increment The tax increment pledged to the payment of bonds and interest thereon may be discharged and the District may be terminated if sufficient funds have been irrevocably deposited in the debt service fund or other escrow account held in trust for all outstanding bonds to provide for the payment of the bonds at maturity or redemption date. Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. 6: if, after four years from the date of certification of the original net tax capacity of the tax incrementfinancing districtpursuanttoM.S., Section 469.177, no demolition, rehabilitation or renovation of property or other site preparation, including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax incrementfinancing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax incrementfinancing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original net tax capacity of that parcel shall be excluded from the original net tax capacity of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on thatparcel including qualified improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax incrementfinancingplan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced and the county auditor shall certify the net tax capacity thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original net tax capacity ofthe tax incrementfinancing district. The county auditor must enforce the provisions ofthis subdivision. The authority must submit to the county auditor evidence that the required activity has taken place for each parcel in the district. The evidence for a parcel must be submitted by February I of the fifth year following the year in which the parcel was certified as included in the district. For purposes of this subdivision, qualified improvements of a City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-11 street are limited to (1) construction or opening of a new street, (2) relocation of a street, and (3) substantial reconstruction or rebuilding of an existing street. The City or a property owner must improve parcels within the District by approximately February 2020 and report such actions to the County Auditor. Subsection 2-19. Use of Tax Increment The City hereby determines that it will use 100 percent of the captured net tax capacity of taxable property located in the District for the following purposes: To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued to finance a project; To finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs of Development District No. 4 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.124 to 469.133; To pay for project costs as identified in the budget set forth in the TIF Plan; To finance, or otherwise pay for other purposes as provided in M. S., Section 469.176, Subd. 4; To pay principal and interest on any loans, advances or other payments made to or on behalf of the City or for the benefit of Development District No. 4 by a developer; To finance or otherwise pay premiums and other costs for insurance or other security guaranteeing the payment when due of principal of and interest on bonds pursuant to the TIF Plan or pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C. M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/orM.S., Sections 469.178; and To accumulate or maintain a reserve securing the payment when due of the principal and interest on the tax increment bonds or bonds issued pursuant to M.S., Chapter 462C, M.S., Sections 469.152 through 469.165, and/orMS, Sections 469.178. These revenues shall not be used to circumvent any levy limitations applicable to the City nor for other purposes prohibited by MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 4. Tax increments generated in the District will be paid by McLeod County to the City for the Tax Increment Fund of said District. The City will pay to the developer(s) annually an amount not to exceed an amount as specified in a developer's agreement to reimburse the costs of land acquisition, public improvements, demolition and relocation, site preparation, and administration. Remaining increment funds will be used for City administration (up to 10 percent) and for the costs of public improvement activities outside the District. Subsection 2-20. Excess Increments Excess increments, as defined inM.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 2, shallbe used only to do one or more ofthe following: 1. Prepay any outstanding bonds; 2. Discharge the pledge of tax increment for any outstanding bonds; 3. Pay into an escrow account dedicated to the payment of any outstanding bonds; or 4. Return the excess to the County Auditor for redistribution to the respective taxing jurisdictions in proportion to their local tax rates. The City must spend or return the excess increments under MS, Section 469.176, Subd. 2, paragraph (c) within nine months after the end of the year. In addition, the City may, subject to the limitations set forth herein, choose to modify the TIF Plan in order to finance additional public costs in Development District No. 4 or the District. City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-12 Subsection 2-21. Requirements for Agreements with the Developer The City will review any proposal for private development to determine its conformance with the Development Program and with applicable municipal ordinances and codes. To facilitate this effort, the following documents may be requested for review and approval: site plan, construction, mechanical, and electrical system drawings, landscaping plan, grading and storm drainage plan, signage system plan, and any other drawings or narrative deemed necessary by the City to demonstrate the conformance of the development with City plans and ordinances. The City may also use the Agreements to address other issues related to the development. Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.176, Subd. 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired in the District as set forth in the TIF Plan shall at any time be owned by the City as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to M. S., Section 469.178 to which tax increments from property acquired is pledged, unless prior to acquisition in excess of 25 percent of the acreage, the City concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the City should the development or redevelopment not be completed. Subsection 2-22. Assessment Agreements Pursuant to M.S., Section 469.177, Subd. 8, the City may enter into a written assessment agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the District which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the District. The assessment agreement shall be presented to the County Assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements to be constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and, so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears, in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the County Assessor shall also certify the minimum assessment agreement. Subsection 2-23. Administration of the District Administration of the District will be handled by the City Administrator. Subsection 2-24. Annual Disclosure Requirements Pursuant to M. S., Section 469.175, Subds. 5, 6, and 6b the City must undertake financial reporting for all tax increment financing districts to the Office of the State Auditor, County Board and County Auditor on or before August 1 of each year. M. S., Section 469.175, Subd. 5 also provides that an annual statement shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City on or before August 15. If the City fails to make a disclosure or submit a report containing the information required by M. S., Section 469.175 Subd. 5 and Subd. 6, the Office of the State Auditor will direct the County Auditor to withhold the distribution of tax increment from the District. Subsection 2-25. Reasonable Expectations As required by the TIF Act, in establishing the District, the determination has been made that the anticipated development would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value ofthe site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments forthe maximum duration ofthe District permitted by the TIF Plan. In making said determination, City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-13 reliance has been placed upon City staff awareness of the feasibility of developing the project site(s) within the District. A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and the use oftax increments has been performed as described above. Such analysis is included with the cashflow in Appendix D, and indicates that the increase in estimated market value of the proposed development (less the indicated subtractions) exceeds the estimated market value of the site absent the establishment of the District and the use of tax increments. Subsection 2-26. Other Limitations on the Use of Tax Increment General Limitations. All revenue derived from tax increment shall be used in accordance with the TIF Plan. The revenues shall be used to finance, or otherwise pay the capital and administration costs of Development District No. 4 pursuant to M.S., Sections 469.124 to 469.133. Tax increments may not be used to circumvent existing levy limit law. No tax increment may be used for the acquisition, construction, renovation, operation, or maintenance of a building to be used primarily and regularly for conducting the business of a municipality, county, school district, or any other local unit of government or the state or federal government. This provision does not prohibit the use of revenues derived from tax increments for the construction or renovation of a parking structure. 2. Pooling Limitations. At least 75 percent of tax increments from the District must be expended on activities in the District or to pay bonds, to the extent that the proceeds of the bonds were used to finance activities within said district or to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. Not more than 25 percent of said tax increments may be expended, through a development fund or otherwise, on activities outside of the District except to pay, or secure payment of, debt service on credit enhanced bonds. For purposes of applying this restriction, all administrative expenses must be treated as if they were solely for activities outside of the District. Five Year Limitation on Commitment of Tax Increments. Tax increments derived from the District shall be deemed to have satisfied the 75 percent test set forth in paragraph (2) above only if the five year rule set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 3, has been satisfied; and beginning with the sixth year following certification of the District, 75 percent of said tax increments that remain after expenditures permitted under said five year rule must be used only to pay previously committed expenditures or credit enhanced bonds as more fully set forth in M.S., Section 469.1763, Subd. 5. 4. Redevelopment District. At least 90 percent of the revenues derived from tax increment from a redevelopment district must be used to finance the cost of correcting conditions that allow designation of redevelopment and renewal and renovation districts underM. S., Section 469.176 Subd. 4j. These costs include, but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures, clearing of the land, the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary for development of the land, and installation of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site. The allocated administrative expenses of the City, including the cost of preparation ofthe development action response plan, may be included in the qualifying costs. Subsection 2-27. Summary The City of Hutchinson is establishing the District to preserve and enhance the tax base, redevelop substandard areas, and provide employment opportunities in the City. The TIF Plan for the District was prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc., 3060 Centre Pointe Drive, Roseville, Minnesota 55113, telephone (651) 697-8500. City of Hutchinson Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 2-14 Appendix A Project Description The proposed Tax Increment District project involves acquisition of the property located at 126 Franklin Street NW in Hutchinson, by the Economic Development Authority (the "EDA"). In order to prepare the site for new commercial or office development, the EDA will use tax increments generated to pay for costs incurred for demolition and removal of the existing building, site corrections, parking lot maintenance and repair, and the possible addition of a new sidewalk segment. The EDA will issue an interfund loan to Development District No 5, the 1990 Shopko redevelopment tax increment district. The increments received from the proposed District will repay the interfund loan. Appendix A-1 Appendix B Map of Development District No. 4 and the District Appendix B-1 7 'liilill� m Appendix C Description of Property to be Included in the District The District encompasses all property and adjacent rights-of-way and abutting roadways identified by the parcel listed below. Parcel Numbers Address Owner 23.056.2880 126 Franklin St. NW Applegate Properties LLC Appendix C-1 Appendix D Estimated Cash Flow for the District Appendix D-1 1/21/2016 DistrictType: District Name/Number: County District #: First Year Construction or Inflation on Value Existing District - Specify No. Years Remaining Inflation Rate - Every Year: Interest Rate: Present Value Date: First Period Ending Tax Year District was Certified: Cashflow Assumes First Tax Increment For Development: Years of Tax Increment Assumes Last Year of Tax Increment Fiscal Disparities Election [Outside (A), Inside (B), or NA] Incremental or Total Fiscal Disparities Fiscal Disparities Contribution Ratio Fiscal Disparities Metro -Wide Tax Rate Maximum/Frozen Local Tax Rate: Current Local Tax Rate: (Use lesser of Current or Max.) State-wide Tax Rate (Comm./Ind. only used for total taxes) Market Value Tax Rate (Used for total taxes) IS EHLERS LEADERS INPDDUG nNANGE TIF District No 4-16 City of Hutchinson Redevelopment Project Redevelopment TIF District No. 4-16 2017 3.00 4.00 1 -Aug -16 1 -Feb -17 Pay 2016 2019 26 2044 NA Incremental 0.0000% Pay 2016 TNT 0.0000% Pay 2016 TNT 146.095% Pay 2016 TNT 146.095% Pay 2016 TNT 49.0000% Pay 2016 TNT 0.19340% Pay 2016 TNT Base Value Assumptions - Page 1 Tax Rates Exempt Class Rate (Exempt) 0.00% Commercial Industrial Preferred Class Rate (C/I Pref.) First $150,000 1.50% Over $150,000 2.00% Commercial Industrial Class Rate (C/1) 2.00% Rental Housing Class Rate (Rental) 1.25% Affordable Rental Housing Class Rate (Aff. Rental) First $106,000 0.75% Over $106,000 0.25% Non -Homestead Residential (Non -H Res. 1 Unit) Market First $500,000 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Homestead Residental Class Rate (Hmstd. Res.) After First $500,000 1.00% Over $500,000 1.25% Agricultural Non -Homestead 1.00% Note: 1. Base values are based email from County auditor on 1/11/16. Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls BASE VALUE INFORMATION • .Capacity) I Building Total Percentage Tax Year Property Current Class After Land Market Market Of Value Used Original Original Tax Original After Conversion Area/ Map # PID Owner Address Market Value Value Value for District Market Value Market Value Class Tax Capacity Conversion Orig. Tax Cap. Phase 126 23-056-2880 Applegate Properties 126 Franklin St 364,100 92,000 456,100 100% 456,100 Pay 2016 C/I Pref. 8,372 C/I Pref. 8,372 364,100 92,000 456,100 8,372 8,372 Note: 1. Base values are based email from County auditor on 1/11/16. Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls 1/21/2016 EHLERS (FADE RSIN PORtif FINANCE TIF District No 4-16 City of Hutchinson Redevelopment Project Base Value Assumptions - Page 2 Note: 1. Market values are based upon estimates from City staff. PROJECT INFORMATION CALCULATIONSTAX (Project Tax Capacity) o aI OEM 1-0cai LOCaIve-witio Estimated Taxable Market Value Market Value Area/Phase New Use Per Sq. Ft./Unit Per Sq. Ft./Unit Total Sq. Ft./Units Total Taxable Market Value Property Tax Class Project Tax Capacity Project Tax Capacity/Unit Percentage Completed 2017 Percentage Completed 2018 Percentage Completed 2019 Percentage Completed 2020 First Year Full Taxes Payable Commerical 1,565,000 1,565,000 1 1,565,000 C/I Pref. 30,550 30,550 100% 100% 100% 100% 2019 14,970 3,027 62,628 62,628.23 Note: Subtotal Residential 0 0 0 Subtotal CommerciallInd. 1 1,565,000 30,550 Note: 1. Market values are based upon estimates from City staff. 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, and other factors which cannot be predicted. WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM FOR Total Property Taxes 62,628 Current Market Value -Est. 456,100 less State-wide Taxes (14,970) New Market Value - Est. 1,565,000 less Fiscal Disp. Adj. 0 Difference less Market Value Taxes (3,027) Present Value of Tax Increment less Base Value Taxes (12,231) Difference Annual Gross TIF 32,401 Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than: Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls CALCULATIONSTAX o aI OEM 1-0cai LOCaIve-witio ar e Tax Disparities Tax Property Disparities Property Value Total Taxes Per New Use Capacity Tax Capacity Capacity Taxes Taxes Taxes Taxes Taxes Sq. Ft./Unit Commerical 30,550 0 30,550 44,632 0 14,970 3,027 62,628 62,628.23 Note: 1. Taxes and tax increment will vary significantly from year to year depending upon values, rates, state law, and other factors which cannot be predicted. WHAT IS EXCLUDED FROM FOR Total Property Taxes 62,628 Current Market Value -Est. 456,100 less State-wide Taxes (14,970) New Market Value - Est. 1,565,000 less Fiscal Disp. Adj. 0 Difference less Market Value Taxes (3,027) Present Value of Tax Increment less Base Value Taxes (12,231) Difference Annual Gross TIF 32,401 Value likely to occur without Tax Increment is less than: Prepared by Ehlers & Associates, Inc. - Estimates Only N:\Minnsota\Hutchinson\Housing - Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls 1/21/2016 Tax Increment Cashflow - Page 3 IS EHLERS 4r F7rRS isi TIF District No 4-16 City of Hutchinson Redevelopment Project 08/01/17 02/01/18 08/01/18 02/01/19 100% 30,550 (8,372) - 22,178 INCREMENTTAX • Project Original Fiscal Captured Local Annual Semi -Annual State Admin. Semi -Annual Semi -Annual PERIOD of Tax Tax Disparities Tax Tax Gross Tax Gross Tax Auditor at Net Tax Present ENDING Tax Payment OTC Capacity Capacity Incremental Capacity Rate Increment Increment 0.36% 10% 1 Increment Value Yrs. Year Date 16,200 (58)(1,614) 14,528 - - - - 02/01/17 08/01/17 02/01/18 08/01/18 02/01/19 100% 30,550 (8,372) - 22,178 146.095% 32,401 16,200 (58) (1,614) 14,528 12,900 0.5 2019 08/01/19 16,200 (58)(1,614) 14,528 25,548 1 2019 02/01/20 100% 31,467 (8,372) - 23,095 146.095% 33,740 16,870 (61) (1,681) 15,128 38,460 1.5 2020 08/01/20 16,870 (61) (1,681) 15,128 51,118 2 2020 02/01/21 100% 32,410 (8,372) - 24,038 146.095% 35,119 17,560 (63) (1,750) 15,747 64,036 2.5 2021 08/01/21 17,560 (63) (1,750) 15,747 76,701 3 2021 02/01/22 100% 33,383 (8,372) - 25,011 146.095% 36,540 18,270 (66) (1,820) 16,384 89,619 3.5 2022 08/01/22 18,270 (66) (1,820) 16,384 102,284 4 2022 02/01/23 100% 34,384 (8,372) - 26,012 146.095% 38,003 19,001 (68) (1,893) 17,040 115,198 4.5 2023 08/01/23 19,001 (68) (1,893) 17,040 127,859 5 2023 02/01/24 100% 35,416 (8,372) - 27,044 146.095% 39,510 19,755 (71) (1,968) 17,715 140,763 5.5 2024 08/01/24 19,755 (71) (1,968) 17,715 153,415 6 2024 02/01/25 100% 36,478 (8,372) - 28,106 146.095% 41,062 20,531 (74) (2,046) 18,411 166,306 6.5 2025 08/01/25 20,531 (74) (2,046) 18,411 178,944 7 2025 02/01/26 100% 37,573 (8,372) - 29,201 146.095% 42,661 21,330 (77) (2,125) 19,128 191,817 7.5 2026 08/01/26 21,330 (77) (2,125) 19,128 204,437 8 2026 02/01/27 100% 38,700 (8,372) - 30,328 146.095% 44,307 22,154 (80) (2,207) 19,867 217,287 8.5 2027 08/01/27 22,154 (80) (2,207) 19,867 229,886 9 2027 02/01/28 100% 39,861 (8,372) - 31,489 146.095% 46,004 23,002 (83) (2,292) 20,627 242,710 9.5 2028 08/01/28 23,002 (83) (2,292) 20,627 255,283 10 2028 02/01/29 100% 41,057 (8,372) - 32,685 146.095% 47,751 23,875 (86) (2,379) 21,410 268,078 10.5 2029 08/01/29 23,875 (86) (2,379) 21,410 280,621 11 2029 02/01/30 100% 42,288 (8,372) - 33,916 146.095% 49,550 24,775 (89) (2,469) 22,217 293,382 11.5 2030 08/01/30 24,775 (89) (2,469) 22,217 305,893 12 2030 02/01/31 100% 43,557 (8,372) - 35,185 146.095% 51,404 25,702 (93) (2,561) 23,048 318,617 12.5 2031 08/01/31 25,702 (93) (2,561) 23,048 331,092 13 2031 02/01/32 100% 44,864 (8,372) - 36,492 146.095% 53,313 26,656 (96) (2,656) 23,904 343,776 13.5 2032 08/01/32 26,656 (96) (2,656) 23,904 356,212 14 2032 02/01/33 100% 46,210 (8,372) - 37,838 146.095% 55,279 27,639 (100) (2,754) 24,786 368,854 14.5 2033 08/01/33 27,639 (100) (2,754) 24,786 381,247 15 2033 02/01/34 100% 47,596 (8,372) - 39,224 146.095% 57,304 28,652 (103) (2,855) 25,694 393,843 15.5 2034 08/01/34 28,652 (103) (2,855) 25,694 406,192 16 2034 02/01/35 100% 49,024 (8,372) - 40,652 146.095% 59,390 29,695 (107) (2,959) 26,629 418,739 16.5 2035 08/01/35 29,695 (107) (2,959) 26,629 431,041 17 2035 02/01/36 100% 50,494 (8,372) - 42,122 146.095% 61,539 30,769 (111) (3,066) 27,593 443,537 17.5 2036 08/01/36 30,769 (111) (3,066) 27,593 455,789 18 2036 02/01/37 100% 52,009 (8,372) - 43,637 146.095% 63,752 31,876 (115) (3,176) 28,585 468,232 18.5 2037 08/01/37 31,876 (115) (3,176) 28,585 480,431 19 2037 02/01/38 100% 53,570 (8,372) - 45,198 146.095% 66,031 33,016 (119) (3,290) 29,607 492,819 19.5 2038 08/01/38 33,016 (119) (3,290) 29,607 504,964 20 2038 02/01/39 100% 55,177 (8,372) - 46,805 146.095% 68,379 34,190 (123) (3,407) 30,660 517,294 20.5 2039 08/01/39 34,190 (123) (3,407) 30,660 529,382 21 2039 02/01/40 100% 56,832 (8,372) - 48,460 146.095% 70,798 35,399 (127) (3,527) 31,744 541,652 21.5 2040 08/01/40 35,399 (127) (3,527) 31,744 553,682 22 2040 02/01/41 100% 58,537 (8,372) - 50,165 146.095% 73,288 36,644 (132) (3,651) 32,861 565,891 22.5 2041 08/01/41 36,644 (132) (3,651) 32,861 577,860 23 2041 02/01/42 100% 60,293 (8,372) - 51,921 146.095% 75,854 37,927 (137) (3,779) 34,011 590,006 23.5 2042 08/01/42 37,927 (137) (3,779) 34,011 601,913 24 2042 02/01/43 100% 62,102 (8,372) - 53,730 146.095% 78,497 39,248 (141) (3,911) 35,196 613,994 24.5 2043 08/01/43 39,248 (141) (3,911) 35,196 625,837 25 2043 02/01/44 100% 63,965 (8,372) - 55,593 146.095% 81,218 40,609 (146) (4,046) 36,417 637,852 25.5 2044 08/01/44 40,609 146 4,046 36,417 649,630 26 2044 02/01/45 Total 1,402,692 (5,050) (139,764) 1,257,878 Present Value From 08/01/2016 Present Value Rate / 724,419 2,608 72,181) 649,630 Prepared by Ehlers &Associates, Inc. -Estimates Only N:\Minn sota\Hutchinson\Housing- Economic - Redevelopment\TIF\TIF Districts\TIF 4-16\Fiscal Implications TIF Run 1.17.16.xls Appendix E Minnesota Business Assistance Form (Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development) A Minnesota Business Assistance Form (MBAF) should be used to report and/or update each calendar year's activity by April 1 of the following year. Please see the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) website at http://www.deed.state.mn.us/Community/subsidies/MBAFFonn.htm for information and forms. Appendix E-1 Appendix F Redevelopment Qualifications for the District Appendix F-1 Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District Eligibility study TIF District 4-16 "Old Medical Clinic" 126 Franklin Street NW Prepared By Miles R. Seppelt, EDA Director Kyle Dimler, Building Official January 12, 2016 !. Governing Statutory Language To be eligible for a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District, the area to be redeveloped must meet certain requirements as outlined in state statute. These are: Minnesota Statute 469.174 Subd. l O.Redeveiopment district. Subd. 10 (a) "Redevelopment district" means a type of tax increment financing district consisting of a project, or portions of a project, within which the authority finds by resolution that one or more of the following conditions, reasonably distributed throughout the district, exists: (1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; Subd. 10 (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are of sufficient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. Subd. 10 (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost ofplumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. Items of evidence that support such a conclusion include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence. Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3, clause (1). Failure of a building to be disqualified under the provisions of this paragraph is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition to determining that the building is substandard. Subd. 10(e) For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures. Study Area 1$7 AVE NW LN Sim ___ Figure Z — Aerial view of study area. 175 Redevelopment TIF District 4-16 will encompass 126 Franklin Street NW in downtown Hutchinson. The site is composed of five city lots that have been platted into one parcel and is occupied by a structure commonly referred to at the `old Medical Clinic.' Table 1— Identification of Study Area Common Name.. 71 'Old Medical Clinic' 126 Franklin Street NW Lots 1-2-3-4-5, Blk 41, North Half of Hutchinson, County of McLeod, MN Figure 2 — Map of Study Area IST AVE NW 126 Franklin Street NW III. Criterion 1 Minnesota Statute 469.174, Subd. 10 (1) states: "(1) parcels consisting of 70 percent of the area of the district are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures... " Findings There is one parcel in the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. This one lot is occupied by buildings and a paved parking lot. 1_parcel = 100% 1 occupied Since 100% of the parcels in the proposed Redevelopment TIF District are in fact occupied by buildings are parking lots as specified in statute, this criterion is satisfied. IV. Criterion 2 The second criterion that must be satisfied is that more than one-half of the buildings in the proposed redevelopment district must be found to be substandard based upon an internal inspection. The governing statutes state: Minnesota Statute 469.174, Subd 10. (1) "...and more than 50 percent of the buildings, not including outbuildings, are structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance; " Subd. 10 (b) For purposes of this subdivision, "structurally substandard" shall mean containing defects in structural elements or a combination of deficiencies in essential utilities and facilities, light and ventilation, fire protection including adequate egress, layout and condition of interior partitions, or similar factors, which defects or deficiencies are ofsuffrcient total significance to justify substantial renovation or clearance. Subd. 10 (c) A building is not structurally substandard if it is in compliance with the building code applicable to new buildings or could be modified to satisfy the building code at a cost of less than 15 percent of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. The municipality may find that a building is not disqualified as structurally substandard under the preceding sentence on the basis of reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost ofplumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence. The municipality may not make such a determination without an interior inspection of the property, but need not have an independent, expert appraisal prepared of the cost of repair and rehabilitation of the building. An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. Items of evidence that support such a conclusion include recent fire or police inspections, on-site property tax appraisals or housing inspections, exterior evidence of deterioration, or other similar reliable evidence. Written documentation of the findings and reasons why an interior inspection was not conducted must be made and retained under section 469.175, subdivision 3, clause (1). Failure ofa building to be disqualified under the provisions of this paragraph is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition to determining that the building is substandard. Findings An internal inspection of the `Old Medical Clinic' was completed on January 12, 2016. Building Code violations found include the following: 1. The west exterior door is decayed and no longer weather resistant. Multiple windows on the north side of the building have rotten brick -molding allowing moisture to enter the building envelope. Joints of exterior wall finish materials are not sealed from weather intrusion International Property Maintenance Code Section 304.2 2. There are numerous gaps in the parapet flashing allowing moisture intrusion into the building envelope. 3. There is evidence of bulk water intrusion through the apparently failed roof assembly as there is moisture staining in the ceiling and walls throughout the building as well as unidentified organic growth in multiple office areas on interior and exterior wall assemblies and on the office floor coverings. Multiple areas of the office area have experienced ceiling finish collapse due to bulk water intrusion. 4. In the basement, there is unpermitted plumbing piping installed within the mechanical plenum space, prohibited by Section 602.2.1 of the MN Mechanical Code. 5. Flexible exhaust ventilation ducting in the ceiling space does not comply with Section 603.6 of the MN Mechanical Code. 6. Drain and waste piping in basement is improperly pitched and is not installed in compliance with the MN Plumbing Code's Sections 4715.2400, 4715.1430, 4715.0310. (Incorrect slope of piping, incorrect support of piping, discharge of waste in sump basin). 7. The discharge pipe on the water heater's temperature and pressure relief valve is undersized per MN Mechanical Code 1006.6. 8. The structure's mechanical system is out of service and in apparent need of service or replacement due to the length of time is has not been operated or maintained. 9. On the exterior of the building there are multiple electrical receptacles that do not meet the requirements of the MN Electrical Code for exterior devices. Some portions of the electrical service appear outdated and non-compliant with the current MN Electrical Code (fuse panels, open boxes, etc.). 10. There are some open electrical junction boxes in the ceiling space of the structure. MN Electrical Code, 11. The restrooms do not comply with the requirements for clear spaces, grab bars, and accessories of Sections 603 and 604 of the MN Accessibility Code. 12. The concrete floor in the eastern half of the office space has heaved noticeably and results in an irregular walking surface. 13. The stairway leading to the mechanical room does not provide closed riser spaces, a code compliant handrail, nor a code compliant guardrail per Sections 1009.7.5, 1012, and 1013 of the MN Building Code. 14. The installation of the building's brick veneer does not appear to have provided flashing and weep holes as required by Section 1405.4 of the MN Building Code. Per a cost estimate provided by Hasslen Construction, the total cost to bring the existing building up to current building code standards would be between $500,125 and $728,920. Also per Hasslen Construction, a new building of this type, at the same type and size of 4,973 square feet would cost between $870,275 and $994,460. Repair Cost New Building Percentage Low Estimate $500,125 $870,275 57.5% High Estimate $728,920 $994,460 73.3% Since the total cost to renovate the existing building is far more than 15% of the cost to construct a new building, the 'Old Medical Clinic' does meet the statutory definition of substandard. Please refer to the Hasslen Construction attachment at the end of this report for details. V. Criterion 3 Minnesota State Statute 469.174 Subd. 10(e) states: For purposes of this subdivision, a parcel is not occupied by buildings, ,streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures unless 15 percent of the area of the parcel contains buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures. The parcel in question covers one acre of downtown Hutchinson, an area encompassing 43,560 square feet. The improved area of the parcel is as follows: Building 4,973 Paved Parking Lot 8,102 Sidewalk 330 TOTAL 13,405 The total improved area is 13,833 square feet. 13,405 / 42,560 = 31.5 % 31.5 % of the parcel is 'improved/ therefore this criterion is satisfied. VI. Conclusion All three statutory criteria are satisfied. Therefore the area of this study being considered for a Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District is in fact eligible. Any questions regarding this eligibility study can be directed to Miles R. Seppelt, Economic Development Director, City of Hutchinson at (320) 234-4223 or mse elt ci.hutchinson.mn.us FHASSLEN CONSTRUCTION 45 First St SE • PO Box 157 •Ortonville MN 56278 Phone 320-839-2529 • Fax 320-839-2339 www hasslenconstructio n. com 990 Fifth Avenue SE, Suite #1 Hutchinson, MN 55350 Phone 320-587-3970 Fax 320-587-7271 Building Deficiencies 'Old Medical Clinic' (Approx. 4,973 sf) 1. The west exterior door is decayed and no longer weather resistant. Multiple windows on the north side of the building have rotten brick -molding allowing moisture to enter the building envelope. Joints of exterior wall finish materials are not sealed from weather intrusion International Property Maintenance Code Section 304.2 Cost to Remedy $ 18,600.00424,995,00 2. There are numerous gaps in the parapet flashing allowing moisture intrusion into the building envelope, including replacement of roof Cost to Remedy $ 35,700.00-$55,175.00 3. There is evidence of bulk water intrusion through the apparently failed roof assembly as there is moisture staining in the ceiling and walls throughout the building as well as unidentified organic growth in multiple office areas on interior and exterior wall assemblies and on the office floor coverings. Multiple areas of the office area have experienced ceiling finish collapse due to bulk water intrusion. Cost to Remedy $372-975.00 _$497,300.00 4. In the basement, there is unpermitted plumbing piping installed within the mechanical plenum space, prohibited by Section 602.2.1 of the MN Mechanical Code. Cost to Remedy $ 1,500.00-$4,000.00 5. Flexible exhaust ventilation ducting in the ceiling space does not comply with Section 603.6 of the MN Mechanical Code. Cost to Remedy $ 5,000.00-$8,000.00 6. Drain and waste piping in basement is improperly pitched and is not installed in compliance with the MN Plumbing Code's Sections 4715.2400, 4715.1430, 4715.0310. (Incorrect slope of piping, incorrect support of piping, discharge of waste in sump basin). Cost to Remedy $ 2.500.00-$4,600.00 7. The discharge pipe on the water heater's temperature and pressure relief valve is undersized per MN Mechanical Code 1006.6. Cost to Remedy $ 1,850.00-$2,950.00 8. The structure's mechanical system is out of service and in apparent need of service or replacement due to the length of time is has not been operated or maintained. Cost to Remedy $4000.00-$45,000.00 9. On the exterior of the building there are multiple electrical receptacles that do not meet the requirements of the MN Electrical Code for exterior devices. Some portions of the electrical service appear outdated and non- compliant with the current MN Electrical Code {fuse panels, open boxes, etc.}. Cost to Remedy $ 11500.00 3,500.00 10. There are some open electrical junction boxes in the ceiling space of the structure. MN Electrical Code. Cost to Remedy $_1,500-00-$5,500.00 11. The restrooms do not comply with the requirements for clear spaces, grab bars, and accessories of Sections 603 and 604 of the MN Accessibility Code. Cost to Remedy $10,000.00 er bathroom 12. The concrete floor in the eastern half of the office space has heaved noticeably and results in an irregular walking surface. Cost to Remedy $ 15800.00-$25,000.00 13. The stairway leading to the mechanical room does not provide closed riser spaces, a code compliant handrail, nor a code compliant guardrail per Sections 1009.7.5, 1012, and 1013 of the MN Building Code. Cost to Remedy $_ _ 5,000.00-$8,000.00 14. The installation of the building's brick veneer does not appear to have provided flashing and weep holes as required by Section 1405.4 of the MN Building Code. Cost to Remedy $ 15,000.00-$25,000.00 Estimated cost for a building the same square footage and type: $ 870 275.00 - $994,460.00 (4,973 sf building) Respectively submitted, Hasslan Construction Company, Inc. f Scott W. Schochenmaler Date Estimator! Project Manager General Construction Design/Build Services Construction Management An Equal Opportunity Employer Appendix G Findings Including But/For Qualifications The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10. The District consists of one parcel, with plans to redevelop the area for commercial/industrial purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and that the sole building on the parcel, not including outbuildings, is structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeablefuture and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIFPIan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to the high cost of redevelopment on the parcel currently occupied by a single substandard building, the incompatible land uses at close proximity, and the cost of financing the proposed demolition and land purchase, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIFPIan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the cost of site and public improvements add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, site and public improvements costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. This site has been marketed for approximately ten years without success. The City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. Therefore, the City concludes as follows: a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0. b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $1,108,900. C. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $724,419. Appendix G-1 d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $384,481 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The City Council has reviewed the TIF Plan and finds that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City pending approval by the City Planning Commission. 4. Finding that the TIF PIan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Development District No. 4 by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. But -For Analysis Current Market Value 456,100 New Market Value - Estimate 1,565,000 Difference 1,108,900 Present Value of Tax Increment 724,419 Difference 384,481 Value Likely to Occur Without TIF is Less Than: 384,481 Appendix G-2 Council member CITY OF HUTCHINSON MCLEOD COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 14530 RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 4; AND ESTABLISHING TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4-16 THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Recitals 1.01. The City Council of the City of Hutchinson (the "City") has heretofore established Development District No. 4 and adopted the Development Program therefor. It has been proposed that the City adopt a Modification to the Development Program for Development District No. 4 (the "Development Program Modification") and establish Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (the "District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Development Program Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Program and Plan"); all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 to 469.133 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the Program and Plan, and presented for the Council's consideration. 1.02. The City has investigated the facts relating to the Program and Plan and has caused the Program and Plan to be prepared. 1.03. The City has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Program and Plan, including, but not limited to, notification of McLeod County and Independent School District No. 423 having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written comment on the Program and Plan by the City Planning Commission, recommendation of the Program and Plan by the City Economic Development Authority on January 27, 2016, and the holding of a public hearing. Notice of the public hearing was duly published as required by law in [Name of Publication], on [Date, 20]. 1.04. Certain written reports (the "Reports") relating to the Program and Plan and to the activities contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to the Council and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Program and Plan. The Reports, including the redevelopment qualifications, reports and planning documents, include data, information and/or substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made in this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein. 1.05 The City is not modifying the boundaries of Development District No. 4, but is however, modifying the Development Program therefor. Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and ADnroval of the DeVelonment Program Modification 2.01. The Council approves the Development Program Modification, and specifically finds that: (a) the land within the Project area would not be available for redevelopment without the financial aid to be sought under this Development Program; (b) the Development Program, as modified, will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the development of the Project by private enterprise; and (c) that the Development Program, as modified, conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole. Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 3.01. The Council hereby finds that the District is in the public interest and is a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, Subd. 10 of the Act. 3.02. The Council further finds that (1) the proposed redevelopment would not occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the Tax Increment Financing Plan; (2) that the Program and Plan conform to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and (3) that the Program and Plan will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise. 3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing, attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 4. Public Puraose 4.01. The adoption of the Program and Plan conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the City which is already built up, to provide employment opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of the State and thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in Exhibit A, the City believes these benefits directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided under the TIF Plan. A private developer will receive only the assistance needed to make this development financially feasible. As such, any private benefits received by a developer are incidental and do not outweigh the primary public benefits. Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Program and Plan 5.01. The Program and Plan, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established, and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Administrator. 5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Program and Plan and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. 5.03 The Auditor of McLeod County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the District, as described in the Program and Plan, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the City of Hutchinson is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form and content as the Auditor may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding the adoption of this resolution. 5.04. The City Administrator is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the Program and Plan with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 469.175, Subd. 4a. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member , and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Dated: February 23, 2016 Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: City Administrator EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. 14530 The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan) for Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (District), as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows: 1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10. The District consists of one parcel, with plans to redevelop the area for commercial/industrial purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcels in the District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and that the sole building on the parcel, not including outbuildings, is structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.) 2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIFPlan. The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to the high cost of redevelopment on the parcel currently occupied by a single substandard building, the incompatible land uses at close proximity, and the cost of financing the proposed demolition and land purchase, this project is feasible only through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This finding is justified on the grounds that the cost of site and public improvements add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, site and public improvements costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance. This site has been marketed for approximately ten years without success. The City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development. Therefore, the City concludes as follows: a. The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0. b. If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be $1,108,900 (see Appendix D and G of the TIF Plan). c. The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $724,419 (see Appendix D and G of the TIF Plan). d. Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value increase greater than $384,481 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause c) without tax increment assistance. 3. Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole. The Planning Commission has reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to the general development plan of the City. 4. Finding that the TIFPlan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of Development District No. 4 by private enterprise. The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality development to the City. Council member CITY OF HUTCHINSON MCLEOD COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 14531 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF CERTAIN COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 4-16. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Hutchinson, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Background. 1.01. The City has heretofore approved the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 4-16 (the "TIF District") within Development District No. 4 (the "Project"), and has adopted a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project. 1.02. The City has determined to pay for certain costs identified in the TIF Plan consisting of landibuilding acquisition, site improvements/preparation, other qualifying improvements, interest and administrative costs (collectively, the "Qualified Costs"), which costs may be financed on a temporary basis from City funds available for such purposes. 1.03. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the City is authorized to advance or loan money from the City's general fund or any other fund from which such advances may be legally authorized, in order to finance the Qualified Costs. 1.04. The City intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax increments derived from the TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to collectively as the "Interfund Loan"). Section 2. Terms of Interfund Loan. 2.01. The City hereby authorizes the advance of up to $900,000 from the Development District No. 5 (Shopko District) fund or so much thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs. The City shall reimburse itself for such advances together with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the principal amount from the date of each advance. The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged is limited to the greater of the rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 as of the date the loan or advance is authorized, unless the written agreement states that the maximum interest rate will fluctuate as the interest rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 are from time to time adjusted. The interest rate shall be 4% and will not fluctuate. 2.02. Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on each August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on which the Authority has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined by the City Administrator, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District. 2.03. Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment," which shall mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been paid, or as determined by the City Administrator, generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the property within the TIF District and remitted to the City by McLeod County, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended. Payments on this Interfund Loan may be subordinated to any outstanding or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment, and are on parity with any other outstanding or future interfund loans secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment. 2.04. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre- payable in whole or in part at any time by the City without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this Interfund Loan. 2.05. This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the City in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund Loan and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the City. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto. The City shall have no obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund Loan or accrued interest thereon, which may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date. 2.06. The City may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the City Council, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to the extent permissible under law. Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon the date of its approval. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member , and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Dated: February 23, 2016 Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: City Administrator Hutchinson HRA i7,� Downtown Rental Rehab HRA HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350 (320) 234-4251 Fax (320) 234-4240 NMISR# 396789 www.hutchinsonhra.com Foreclosure Remediation: School Construction Program 445 Adams Street SE r Np aN.ksoN Hk.9 o �•s 44 _ 1 f RA 2015 YEAR END REPORT Hutchinson Housing & Redevelopment Authority The Hutchinson HRA is a public body politic, formed by the Hutchinson City Council in 1969 according to MN State Statue. The HRA was created to address a shortage of housing needs for low income families and to address substandard areas in Hutchinson. Since then the HRA has been involved in building and operating Park Towers Apartments with HUD Federal funding and is a HUD High performer. In the 1990's, the Hutchinson HRA helped to redevelop the parcel that is now Prince of Peace Retirement Living. Since 1990, HRA has been involved with owner occupied rehab, rental rehab, the school construction program and affordability gap for new construction workforce housing. In 2015, the HRA was awarded $364,359 Small Cities Development Program funds for an approved $771,501 downtown area rental rehab project, and $234,000 in funds were awarded from Minnesota Housing Publicly Owned Housing Program as part of the Park Tower's $425,000 elevator project. The HRA also implemented a plan to use $300,000 of TIF available funds for owner occupied rehab projects in the City of Hutchinson. Over the past twenty-five years the HRA has obtained over $20M of federal, state or other outside funding for the housing needs in Hutchinson. Why does Housing matter? Housing matters because: • Decent, affordable housing is shown to stabilize families. For example, studies have shown that children who have stable housing do better in school • Housing Programs help improve neighborhoods and maintain property values • Housing Programs provide economic stimulus for the local economy by providing work for local contractors and businesses In 2015, the HRA worked on the following objectives: 1. Continued to maintain strong emphasis on property management, property improvements, energy conservation, and tenant services at Park Towers. 2. Supported the rehabilitation of housing stock to preserve housing stock and enhance neighborhoods. 3. Monitored foreclosures, median resales, and other housing data. 4. Completed a demolition/new construction home at 445 Adams Street by partnering with the school construction program. 5. Completed updating the HRA website. 6. Implemented Portfol, the Community Development Software Program for better housing loan tracking. Summary of 2015 Activities: Park Towers Apartments: Property improvements and energy conservation remains a priority 1. $97,525 in federal capital program funding and $167,152 in operating reserves were expended as part of the $425,000 elevator update project. Completion of both elevators is expected in February, 2016. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 1 of 10 Pages 2 Other Improvements/Repairs: $110,000 was spent from operating reserves for various improvements as follows: Replaced one apartment air conditioner, replaced 101 unit locks with proximity locks and front desk programmer as well as card readers at entrances, replaced security/surveillance cameras, replaced fire alarm panel, commons areas smoke detectors and pull stations. Replaced unit carpets in eight apartments when apartments were vacated, replaced the management office carpet, replaced commons areas plumbing circulating lines, zone valves, programmable thermostats and dielectric unions. Property Management 1. Updated/prepared the following: ACOP, 2015 Schedule of Charges and 2016 Park Towers Annual Plan. 2. Achieved a HUD PHAS High Performer Score of 99 out of 100 on Park Towers operation and management. 3. Achieved a 99% average occupancy for 2015 and leased sixteen apartments. 4. Inspected all units, community areas and systems and during the unit inspection changed the toilet flappers and completed any maintenance work necessary to save time in doing the work order at a later date. Tenant Services Continued focus on providing decent, affordable housing as well as facilitating services needed by the senior and disabled population at Park Towers. A management goal at Park Towers has been to support programs and partnerships that address the needs of residents. • Park Towers continued as a Senior Dining Program Site through a lease with Lutheran Social Services. Meals are prepared at the Evergreen Senior Dining kitchen, then delivered and served at Park Towers. 5573 meals were served at Park Towers in 2015 through the Senior Dining Program. The full cost of a meal is $7.00 and the suggested donation is $4.00. • The Park Tower's 2015 budget included funding for Tenant Services to create a monthly activities calendar and newsletter. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 2 of 10 Pages City Center Operations: Home Ownership MHFA has the MHFA START UP purchase loan for first time homebuyers and is featured on the HRA website. These loans have an option to obtain funding for down payment and closing costs along with a first mortgage. MHFA also offers funding through their STEP UP loans for current homeowners to purchase a new house or refinance their current house. Owner Occupied Rehabilitation In 2015, an available balance of $300,000 in city TIF housing funds was added as a flexible tool for single family owner occupied housing rehab to continue owner occupied rehab efforts throughout the city. The City Deferred Grant program and Minnesota Housing Rehab Loan Program, are "full service" programs that are HRA labor intensive, requiring home inspections, work write ups, procurement and bidding, loan closing with the owner(s), construction oversight, disbursal of loan proceeds to the contractor, and reports to the state. The Minnesota Housing Fix Up Loan Program, Community Fix Up Loan Program, City Accessibility Deferred Grant and the HRA Home Improvement Loan Program (3% interest with a monthly payment) requires that the owner submit contractor quotes and that the owner meets loan underwriting criteria to obtain home improvement loan proceeds. However, HRA inspection and construction management is not required. 1. City Deferred Grant Program Funding for this program is from SCDP Program Income (SCDP revolving/program income funds must be expended before any new allocation of funding can be requested) and from TIF funds. Homeowners receive a 0% deferred loan with no payments, forgiven after five years. The City Deferred Grant covers 50% of the repair costs. The HRA closed on four SCDP Program Income rehab loans in 2015. City Home Improvement Loans $49,648 Other leverage funds $24,585 Total $74,233 Before After 2. City Revolving Local Income Program (CRLI) Funding for this program is from SCDP Local Income. CRLI provides a 0-2% loan depending on the household income that has monthly payments. Maximum loan amount is $5,000 with a maximum term of 5 years. One project used this funding for an owner match to the City Deferred Grant. HRA Home Improvement Loan Program (HILP) — No loans were closed in 2015. HILP provides a 3% loan that has monthly payments. Maximum loan amount is $20,000 with a maximum term of 10 years. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 3 of 10 Pages 4. Minnesota Housing (MHFA) Rehabilitation (RLP) Program — One, $25,152 RLP loan was closed and completed in the year. The MHFA Rehabilitation Program is a 0% deferred loan forgiven after fifteen years that stresses safety, livability, and accessibility for families with very low incomes who own their homes. Before After 5. Minnesota Housing Finance (MHFA) Fix Up Loan and Community Fix Up Loan Home Improvement Programs — No loans were closed in 2015. Five total owner occupied properties were improved in 2015; however multiple loans may have been needed to fund the rehab project for each property. Rental Rehab Program DEED awarded the City of Hutchinson $364,359 for the City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Program in June 2015. Unit goals are: 3 single family units, 8 units of duplexes and 24 units of 3+ unit complexes. One duplex rehab project closed in 2015. City Rental Rehab Loan/Grant $27,832 Other leverage funds $14,328 Total $42,160 2015 Foreclosure Remediation Initiative: Demolition of an abandoned, foreclosed, blighted house at 445 Adams Street occurred during the summer of 2014. New construction began in the fall of 2014 and was completed the summer of 2015, partnering with the School Construction Program. There is a purchase offer on the house with closing scheduled for early March 2016. The HRA was awarded $47,500 in value gap funds from Minnesota Housing Impact Fund for the project. The Impact Fund requires rehab or new construction according to Green Criteria, providing an end product that is more energy efficient. For example, the HRA first new construction house built according to Green Criteria, 400 Lynn Road, had a HERS rating of 55 which should translate into 45% lower utility bills than standard construction practices. The 907 Lewis Ave house had a HERS rating of 58. 445 Adams Street has an excellent HERS rating of 47, translating into 53% lower utility bills than standard construction practices. This program requires a large commitment of staff time to acquire the properties, rehab or demolish according to EPA guidelines and adhere to the requirements of the Impact Program. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 4 of 10 Pages Trends: 1. Rental Housing Market Rate General Occupancy Rental The market rate general occupancy rate in the fall of 2015 was 1.85%. A 5.0% vacancy rate is considered a healthy vacancy rate to allow for turnover and consumer choice. A vacancy rate of greater than 5.0% indicates a soft demand or mismatch between supply and demand. Since 1999, the rental vacancy rate has fluctuated from 1.00% to a high of 14.9% in 2009 due to area layoffs. The Maxfield Housing Study recommends that no additional market rate general occupancy units be built until 2014 + or until the economy and unemployment rate in Hutchinson improves. Demand should increase to a level sufficient enough to support the development without adversely affecting the existing rental market (vacancy rate generally in the 2.0% range or less). Market Rate General Occupancy Vacancy Rate 14.90% 15.00% 11.50% 10.31% 10.00% 9. °° 9.00% 8.38% 7.00% 7.54% 4.60% 4.68% 5.30% 5.00% 4. % 4.08% 2.12% 1.89%1.85% 0.00% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Subsidized General Occupancy Rental The vacancy rate of subsidized general occupancy projects in the fall of 2015 was 3.65% Vacancies in subsidized developments should typically fall around 2.0% - 3.0%. Senior Housing The 2015 vacancy rate for market rate senior housing except for memory care was 1.64%. Prince of Peace Retirement Living is in the planning stages for development of market rate Congregate Housing at their downtown location. The 2015 vacancy rate for affordable/subsidized senior housing was 0%. Vacancies in subsidized developments should typically fall around 2.0 -3.0%. 3.65% 4.00% ■ Market Rate General Occupancy 3.00% °° 1.64/ ° ■ Subsidized General Occupancy 2.00% 1.00% ° ■ Senior Market Rate Rental Housing 0.00% ■ Senior Subsidized Rental 2015 Vacancy Rates Housing 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 5 of 10 Pages 2. Homeownership The median sales price rose slightly in 2015, reflecting that a stable housing market. Foreclosures declined slightly in 2015. Low interest rates and an affordable median sales price provides opportunities for buyers who have good credit and are mortgage ready. The current interest (February 2015) rate for a first time homebuyer MHFA Start Up loan for an RD or FHANA loan is 3.375%. According to information from McLeod County, in 2015 there were 356 sales in Hutchinson with a median sales price of $138,750. According to information from the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, looking at data for Hutchinson, the 2015 median sales price was $145,000 compared to $142,900 in 2014. There were 338 sales in 2015 compared to 310 sales in 2014. As of December 2015, there were 88 homes for sale, compared to 124 homes for sale in December 2014. The 2015 median family income for McLeod County is $73,900. Based on a household being able to afford a home priced at 2.5 times their income, not factoring in savings or debt that they may have, a household would need an income of $58,000 to afford a home priced at $145,000, the MLS 2015 median sales price of a house. 3. Housing Construction in Hutchinson According to the City of Hutchinson, PI anning/Zoning/Building Department, there were 20 single family homes built in 2015. There is an adequate supply of 279 residential lots available compared to 284 lots as of January 1, 2015. Residential Lots Available 500 400 HOME RESALES 3 8 92 292 317 314 309 284 300 200 224 262 202 314 299 9 100 180 0 199719981999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015 CITY OF HUTCHINS ON 2006 through 2015 Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 P rir e. Ranoe. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. N. Pet. Under $50 000 $ 15 4.2% 18 5.7 5.4 29 10.2 44 15.3 30 12.4 24 11.1 9 27 4.2 12.5 6 2.7 5 1.8 6 1.6 39 11.0% 12.7 62 23 10.2 17 6.1 22 5.8 $75,000 to $99,999 34 10.8 36 21.6 46 19.0 32 14.8 36 16.7 $100,000 to $124,999 58 16.3% "r-59 18.7 49 17.3 52 18.1 38 17.6 47 21.8 4�0 39 $125,000 to $149,999 68 19.1% 68 21.5 59 20.8 41 14.3 33 13.6 38 17.6 46 21.3 34 15.0 63 22.6 67 17.7 $150,000 to $174,999 6.9% 5 16.1 29 1 16 2 3 20 9.3 5 5 $175,000 to $199,999 27 7.6% 21 6.6 16 5.6 13 4.5 9 3.7 12 5.61 12 5.61 22 9.7 36 12.91 45 11.9 $1,00,000 + i 3561 100.0%1 100.01 242 100.0 216 100.01 216 100.01 226 100.0279 100.0 379 100.0 Total 3161 100.01 2841 100.01 2871 Median 1 $138,750 1 $133,500 $121,000 1 $101,400 $109,950 $121,600 $117,750 $146,750 $157,900 $158,000 Sources: Peterson -Paulsen Associates Inc. Realty Maxfield Research McLeod Coun Assessor's Office The 2015 median family income for McLeod County is $73,900. Based on a household being able to afford a home priced at 2.5 times their income, not factoring in savings or debt that they may have, a household would need an income of $58,000 to afford a home priced at $145,000, the MLS 2015 median sales price of a house. 3. Housing Construction in Hutchinson According to the City of Hutchinson, PI anning/Zoning/Building Department, there were 20 single family homes built in 2015. There is an adequate supply of 279 residential lots available compared to 284 lots as of January 1, 2015. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 6 of 10 Pages Residential Lots Available 500 400 337 3 8 92 292 317 314 309 284 300 200 224 262 202 314 299 9 100 180 0 199719981999 2000 20012002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 6 of 10 Pages Number of New Dwelling Units Construction 100 93 McLeod 81 2001 80 73 43 2003 48 58 60 48 14 2005 56 40 2006 72 32 142 40 2008 159 42 2009 19 23 20 20 2010 200 62 2011 176 12 2012 135 45 2013 93 39 2014 75 0 2015 53 25 2015 Sheriff Sales Cancelled In Hutchinson 7 2016 Sheriff Sales Scheduled to Date In Hutchinson 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 The above charts are based on information from the Department of Planning, Zoning and Building 4. Foreclosure Update McLeod County and Hutchinson Foreclosure Counts 200 200 14 159 135 76 3 100 2 77 5 53 0 7�7 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Number of Foreclosures in McLeod County and Hutchinson ■ McLeod County ■ Hutchinson Year McLeod Hutchinson 2001 37 2002 43 2003 48 2004 48 14 2005 56 2006 72 2007 142 40 2008 159 42 2009 135 50 2010 200 62 2011 176 77 2012 135 45 2013 93 39 2014 75 28 2015 53 25 2015 Sheriff Sales Cancelled In Hutchinson 7 2016 Sheriff Sales Scheduled to Date In Hutchinson 6 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 7 of 10 Pages 2016 Predictions from local realtors: • According to the Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors, the median sales price for Hutchinson in December 2015 based on 338 closed sales was $145,000, an increase of 1.5% from $142,900 in December 2014. Currently, the number of homes for sale inventory is low and if the inventory remains low, the resale price may continue to rise in 2016. Listings are down nationwide. • There were 20 newly constructed homes built in 2015. Many of the new construction homes in 2015 were patio or twin homes in the $225,000 - $250,000 with 2016 expecting similar numbers. • The impact of the buyout of HTI on housing remains unknown, because no one knows if there will be any changes. • With rental housing vacancy rates for general occupancy below 2% why are people renting instead of buying? The decrease in home values during the years 2008 - 2011 is still fresh in peoples' minds and this is also a national trend. People want the freedom to pick up and go whenever they want, without worrying about selling a home. However, if the shortage of rentals cause rents to increase, homeownership may look more attractive in 2016. Hutchinson HRA Priorities for 2016: HRA Park Towers: • Complete the modernization of elevators at Park Towers. • Develop plans and establish funding to convert a regular unit to a handicapped accessible unit at Park Towers. • A new HUD rule called the AFFH (Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing) Assessment Tool for Local Governments has been finalized. During 2016, the HRA will research implementation of the AFFH Assessment Tool. A new HUD rule for Section 3 will be finalized in 2016. Develop a Section 3 Policy reflecting the finalized rule. • A new HUD rule regarding Smoke Free Housing will be finalized in 2016. Determine whether the existing Smoke Free Policy at Park Towers will need to be updated. • HUD has published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on strengthening oversight of over income tenants in Public Housing. City Center Operations, Downtown Rental Rehab Pro, -ram: • The Rental Rehab SCDP for the downtown area of Hutchinson began accepting applications in August 2015. Since then a duplex project is complete and a mixed use project with 2 upper units has applied and is in the process of obtaining bids. An HRA staff person, who has years of experience working with SCDP programs, is assigned to work primarily with this program in 2016 and has been in contact with all the owners who submitted Intents to Participate. Even though numerous applications have been given out, there seem to be a few changes since the application to DEED was submitted. There are now numerous rental properties for sale in the project area; these owners are not interested in participating in the program if they are planning to sell their rental property. Another issue is that the Utility Allowances have increased substantially decreasing the amount of rent landlords can charge. The Hutchinson HRA cannot change the utility allowances or this requirement. Finally, some owners need help financing the 30% owner match for the project. Therefore, the HRA Board has authorized using $80,000 in SCDP Local and Program Income as an owner match source with loan terms of 0% principal payments over a five year term. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 8 of 10 Pages City Center Operations, Owner Occupied Rehab: • Administer the Minnesota Housing Fix- Up Loan Program. When RFP becomes available, determine whether to apply for Community Fix -Up Fund as leverage funds to the City deferred rehab program. Administer the Minnesota Housing Rehab Loan Program for owner occupied rehab. Administer the City Deferred Grant Program (TIF available funds) for owner occupied rehab. City Center Operations, Rental Development: • With a general occupancy vacancy rate of 1.85%, support the 2016 development of a general occupancy rental project, recommended by the Maxfield Research Inc. Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis for Hutchinson. • Monitor availability of potential funding sources for Housing Development and determine feasibility of projects if TIF is requested. City Center Operations: • Continue to request free radon test kits from the Minnesota Department of Health for distribution in Hutchinson. Free radon test kits are available at the Hutchinson Planning, Zoning, & Building front desk. Hutchinson is in a high radon area; radon mitigation is recommended at radon levels above 4.Opc/L. Program Changes for 2016: HRA City Center Operations, School Construction Program: • After a successful run since 2002, there will be no school construction project in 2016. The HRA was unable to secure a foreclosed or tax forfeited, blighted property and the High School will be re -vamping their training program in a new direction. Ten homes were constructed throughout Hutchinson and 4 homes were rehabbed during the tenure of the program. Thanks to all the High School construction class students, teachers and administration for in this very successful program. 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 9 of 10 Pages 2015 Hutchinson HRA Summary: Park Towers: Federal Operating Funds Federal Capital Funds Operating Reserves Operating Reserves Homeowner Rehab Loans closed DEED/SCDP TIF MHFA: CFUF FUF Unsecured FUL RLP SCDP Rental Rehab Foreclosure Remediation: Construction financing/Value gap 2015 Federal & State Funds Administered $123,302.00 $97,525.00 Elevator Project Elevator Project Park Towers Improvements $0.00 City Home Improvement Loans Other Leverage funds $0.0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $25,152.00 $27,832.00 Other leverage funds $100,000.00 445 Adams Street 2015 Local Funds Administered $167,652.00 $110,000.00 $49,648.00 $24,585.00 $14,328 $72,235 Total 2014 Federal & State Funds Total 2015 Local Funds Administered $373,811.00 Administered $438,448.00 Total all Funds Administered Funds Available: SCDP City Revolving Local Income SCDP City Revolving Program Income TIF Available Balance Housing Fund Loan Balances: HRA Notes Receivable HHPOP HRA Notes Receivable Rehab City SCDP New Construction City SCDP Rehab Total Balance of City SCDP Loans Receivable 2015 Budgets Park Towers City Center Total HRA Budget $812,259.00 $116,949.73F-- $24,266.48,($20,000 116,949.73$24,266.48($20,000 allocated to Rental Rehab) $300,000.00 $85,445.56 $5,586.00 $302,450.00 $511,951.71 $814,401.71 $552,013.00 $357,772.00 $909,785.00 G: HRA/Year End Report/2015 HRA Year End Report 2015 Hutchinson HRA Year End Report 2/12/2016 Page 10 of 10 Pages Appendix A. "TIF: A Flexible Tool for Single Family Rehab Housing" EHLERS Article B. City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Interest List C. City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Owner Match Scenarios D. 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales E. Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors Sales Information F. City of Hutchinson Vacant Lots — 2016 Map G. 2015 Hutchinson Foreclosures H. 2016 Hutchinson Foreclosures wavw.ehfers-hc.com EHLERS LEADERS IN PUBLIC HNRNCE TIF: A Flexible Tool for Single Family Rehab Housing By Shelly Elui �u u, Senior Municipal Advisor Each year, the Hutchinson HRA struggles to acquire funding for the housing needs in Hutchinson. Should it prioritize single family rehab or provide much needed assistance to improve its affordable rental housing? Fortunately, this year is different. The HRA can offer deferred loans for both owner occupied and rental housing due to a new funding source: tax increment from an existing housing district. The City of Hutchinson identified an existing district where the obligations have been paid in full, leaving a balance of approximately $300,000. State statute allows authorities to use increment from an existing housing district for affordable housing elsewhere in the City, without regard to the five year rule or whether the new expenditure is within the original project area. "The increment gives us the opportunity to keep re -investing in our community," said Jean Ward, Executive Director of the HRA. "Our Small Cities grant is dedicated to rental housing, so the TIF allows us to maintain and improve our single family neighborhoods." The HRA plans to use the increment, in part, to make 0% deferred loans, forgiven after five years, to fund up to 50% of projects that will address deferred maintenance or accessibility needs of homes owned by income eligible families. In addition, the HRA may use available increment to acquire and demolish blighted houses in targeted areas. Because the income limits for tax increment are higher than other loan and grant programs, the HRA is anticipating using increment to improve "workforce" housing in the City. The HRA expects to be able to assist in up to five housing projects a year. Ehlers assisted the City and HRA by monitoring the TIF Districts and identifying opportunities to accomplish the community's goals. To kick off the loan program, Ehlers also prepared a TIF plan modification to adjust the budget and identify the target area as potential sites for property acquisition. "The new TIF Loan program fails into a continuum of loan programs we have for different kinds of property and different income levels. It complements our overall efforts and is easy to administer because the loans are forgiven after five years," said Andy Reid, Finance Director. Contact your Ehlers Municipal Advisor to learn more about a debt study for your community. City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Interest List Property Address Owner Units Comments 1 815-817 Main Street S Steve & Beth Gasser Duplex 2 Under Construction 2 106 Second Avenue SW Rod Manderscheid AA 2 Out to bid 3 245 Monroe Street SE George Schaust SF 1 working on application 4 345 Jefferson Street SE Westwind Prop. Man. (Colonial) Bldg 8 working on application 5 18 Main Street South Julie Elder AA 1 working on application 6 6 Main Street N Mark Dawson AA 4 Needs a roof Maybe: Total Units 18 35 Goal * 628 Main Street South Gerald Heintz Duplex 2 working on application * 536 Main Street SW Robert Sandstede & Janet Valen SF-4plex 4 Withdrawn atter HQS insp. because of added costs, but maybe interested in OM Frog. * 105 2nd Avenue SW HH & L Properties - Manther AA 7 Currently for sae & don't want to put in any money. 405 Franklin Street SW? Stix & Brix - Scott Duplex 2 Looking for a property 3 Main Street N Stix & Brix - Scott AA 2 Determining if has a good 226 Franklin Street SW Stix & Brix - Scott Duplex — 2 property program. Questions Questions on City Rental 406 Hassan Street SE Stix & Brix - Scott Duplex 2 program. Meeting in Feb. 36 Jefferson Street SE Stix & Brix - Scott SF 1 2016 841 Main Street S Stix & Brix - Scott SF 1 655 Main Street S Stix & Brix - Scott SF 1 209 Hassan Street SE Robert Sandstede & Janet Valen Duplex 2 Don't need as much rehab Not eligible(NE) or not interested (NI): NE 116 Monroe Street SE Wildflower Properties LLC - Ian McDo SF 1 Rent over FMR NI 250 3rd Avenue SE Turner Properties - Daniel & Linda Bldg 6 Doesn't want federal money & not to raise rents for 5 years NE 565 Main Street S. Amy Forcier (owner occupied) Duplex 1 Over Income NE 705 Main Street S. Robert & Jennifer Grimsly SF 1 Rent over FMR NE 315 Adams Street SE Nathanial Baldry SF 1 Rent over FMR NE 145 First Ave/46 Jefferson SE Joshua Schimmel AA 1 Rent over FMR NI 415 Jefferson Street SE Michael & Connie Olson (Alexander) Bldg 11 B e t t e improvements were not worth the tax increase NE 146 Adams Street SE Kon & Diane Sorensen AA 1 Rent over FMR NE 140 Main Street N. Quade Investments LLC AA 2 In flood plain NE 146 2nd Avenue SE Roger Bluhm (owner occupied) Duplex 1 Over Income NI 126 Washington Ave. SE George Quast SF 1 Busy with other projects. NI 8 Main Street North Anthony & Katherine Prellwitz AA 2 Rents? NI 130 Main Street S. Brett Oman AA 6 Doesn't believe that the units currently need updates NE 557 Main Street S Justin Rooney SF 1 Notice of Foreclosure NI 28 Main Street N Tammy Lauer AA 4 Message left 1/29/16 NI* 14 & 16 Main Street S Jeff Haag (Kristen Haag) AA 3 working on application? Interested: To -be Purchased 3BR * 31 Main Street N (Janousek Ca Jason B AA 1 * 325 Jefferson Tom Anderson Bldg 12 Out -side Boundry: 135 Washington Avenue W. Linda Stacy (owner occupied) Duplex 2 11 Glen Street NW Coffee Tree Investments Bldg 17 * For Sale I I 1 1 26 Units for sale City of Hutchinson Downtown Rental Rehab Owner Match Scenarios Property Address Owner # of Units Owner Match 245 Monroe Street SE George Schaust SF 1 $10,714 345 Jefferson Street SE Westwind Prop. Man. (Colonial) Bldg 8 $42,857 18 Main Street South Julie Elder AA 1 $4,286 6 Main Street N Mark Dawson AA 1 4 $17,143 14 $75,000 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales PARCEL SELLER BUYER SALE PRICE DATE OF SALE 23.112.0090 US BANK DOSTAL $6,000 8/27/2015 23.143.0160 ZL ENTERPIRSES BARTCO RENTALS $9,020 5/14/2015 23.050.2080 HOLTBERG KUHLMEY $9,500 3/11/2015 23.050.5150 MEYERSON RONNGREN $25,000 5/04/2015 23.056.0240 SEC OF HOUSING KNUDSON $25,550 7/29/2015 23.050.4940 FANNIE MAE VOLKOV $26,000 6/23/2015 23.394.0010 BANK OF NEW YORK SKOOG $30,000 5/12/2015 23.050.3040 MN HOUSING SILBERNICK $32,000 5/01/2015 23.218.0130 STEELE KOTZER RENTALS $36,000 1/22/2015 23.143.0370 SEC OF HOUSING LABRAATEN $36,500 10/01/2015 23.050.0990 BANK OF NEW YORK IND SCHOOL DISTRICT $37,955 8/04/2015 23.050.0920 BAUER VMAX PROPERTIES $38,500 4/01/2015 23.050.4160 LAIDEMITT SCHERPING $40,000 7/21/2015 23.050.4200 PETERSON PETERSON $40,000 4/21/2015 23.162.0060 ROLF STARK $46,493 1/30/2015 15 4.2% 23.056.1920 BANK OF NEW YORK BURR $50,000 4/07/2015 23.130.0140 PETZEL WURZBERGER $50,000 12/04/2015 23.088.0610 SECRETARY OF HOUSI JARMAN $50,550 8/24/2015 23.050.3840 FANNIE MAE STIX & BRIX $51,115 9/02/2015 23.169.0190 MN HOUSING POLO $52,500 5/13/2015 23.312.0070 PREGLER TRYGG $53,000 9/03/2015 23.145.0350 BRADY STARR $53,505 12/10/2015 23.112.0860 WILSON FANNIE MAE $54,000 3/31/2015 23.088.0640 PAUL PAUL $55,000 9/02/2015 23.056.1670 JP MORGAN RECH $56,175 9/30/2015 23.061.0020 MIELKE TIFTT $56,650 7/17/2015 23.099.0060 MN HOUSING BESTUL $57,000 2/05/2015 23.084.0030 EKGERG HW HOLDING $58,400 1/23/2015 23.112.1160 HOFFMAN SPRENGER $58,900 4/14/2015 23.050.2920 WORNSON GROFF $60,000 3/31/2015 23.143.0050 TERRELL HORNICK-TERRELL $60,000 12/01/2015 23.112.0670 BOOCK JARMAN $61,000 5/01/2015 23.154.0290 BANK OF NEW YORK JACQUES $64,000 6/17/2015 23.106.0350 BREWSTER POSUSTA $65,000 2/17/2015 23.114.0080 RATH HOUK $65,000 2/20/2015 23.380.0090 BANK OF NEW YORK FIRST CLASS BUILDERS $65,399 11/02/2015 23.056.3830 ACKERMAN RUHLAND $72,500 8/19/2015 23.147.0090 ACTIVE ASESSTS HUSE & LIBOR $74,000 1/06/2015 23.102.0045 STEPHENS WARNER $74,400 12/08/2015 23.145.0690 BAH NEMITZ $74,900 7/29/2015 23.407.0010 STEVENS ELDER $74,900 2/27/2015 26 7.3% 23.218.0050 FISHER DORING $75,000 8/25/2015 23.050.1950 KOLBE RANNOW $75,500 4/28/2015 23.310.0070 WOLLER CONTRERAS $75,500 1/06/2015 23.231.0140 TOFTELY BUECHELE $77,000 6/18/2015 23.112.2010 KUECHLE BLEVINS $78,000 10/13/2015 23.112.1980 MAIERS HEIDECKER $80,000 9/15/2015 23.248.0070 MCLAIN NELSON $81,000 10/29/2015 23.001.0700 FEDERAL HOME MORTC. RUSSELL $81,500 8/25/2015 23.149.0270 SEC OF HOUSING BAYSINGER $82,100 12/17/2015 23.063.0110 SCHRAMM DEMENGE $82,500 12/15/2015 23.056.0360 ALINE KRIENKE $83,000 7/22/2015 23.192.0020 CHRISTENSEN CHRISTENSEN $83,000 7/31/2015 23.050.5280 GERTKEN BERRY $85,000 12/28/2015 23.056.1470 SCHAFFER SCHAFFER $85,000 2/04/2015 1 of 7 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales 23.231.0330 HOVERSTEN FRANSEN $85,600 5/07/2015 23.255.0260 HAMANN SPRIGLER $86,000 4/08/2015 23.360.0040 SEC OF HOUSING SCHILING $86,000 2/12/2015 23.167.0020 DUESTERHOEFT BETKER $87,900 5/12/2015 23.112.1060 LOFGREN HOPP $91,382 12/31/2015 23.086.0040 ROFFEY KAPING $92,000 5/27/2015 23.124.0140 PRIBYL MCGINNIS $92,500 7/06/2015 23.143.0460 ANDERSON CORDES $92,700 8/10/2015 23.056.1490 WELLS FARGO SMITH $92,900 1/28/2015 23.231.0010 DEMEYER SCHWARZ $93,500 2/12/2015 23.050.0050 SEC OF HOUSING DALBEC $94,800 9/22/2015 23.050.3890 BENSON ORTLOFF $95,000 4/01/2015 23.050.4400 OLSON SMALLWOOD $95,000 10/29/2015 23.145.0300 SCHARA MACKEDANZ $95,000 12/08/2015 23.118.0060 MCGINNIS PLAUNT $95,650 6/10/2015 23.120.0080 WRASPIR COUBROUGH $96,000 5/12/2015 23.255.0210 MASSMANN CRONEN $96,000 6/30/2015 23.255.0200 SCHUETZ BLACK $97,000 3/06/2015 23.167.0330 ASKEW VALLACHER $98,500 4/22/2015 23.086.0050 SCHOENFELD BENJAMIN $98,900 12/17/2015 23.231.0270 RADTKE ROEPKE $98,900 11/18/2015 23.050.5370 SCHMELING ELLMAN $99,500 4/29/2015 23.143.0360 DOSTAL LARSON $99,500 5/01/2015 23.088.0150 PLATH TRETTIN $99,750 10/29/2015 23.423.0650 WALKER ARNESON $99,900 2/11/2015 39 11.0% 23.228.0025 NELSON SUKO $100,000 3/27/2015 23.050.3040 SILBERNICK BIPES $102,000 11/13/2015 23.176.0080 FISCHER KALENBERG $102,500 7/06/2015 23.165.0200 KURTH MULYCK $105,000 1/13/2015 23.362.0080 PETTIS MCMANUS $105,000 3/05/2015 23.167.0340 NOEHRING BONNIWELL $106,000 3/03/2015 23.423.0650 ARNESON BERNARD $106,000 2/11/2015 23.070.0100 STEPHENS ARTIBEE $106,900 5/27/2015 23.389.0120 JOHNSON HOUK $106,900 8/11/2015 23.082.0060 BANK OF AMERICA EXSTED $107,811 3/30/2015 23.058.0020 THODE CUMMINGS $109,000 8/17/2015 23.070.0010 LARSON BUSCHE $109,900 7/22/2015 23.146.0030 KEEHR VANCE $109,900 9/03/2015 23.255.0160 WAREING JURVELIN $109,900 8/04/2015 23.112.1910 MAYNARD KUESTER $110,000 8/31/2015 23.423.0300 ADOLPHSEN BAKKE $112,000 2/12/2015 23.094.0060 WEIDE BROESDER $112,500 1/22/2015 23.269.0080 ANDERSON ANDERSON $112,500 4/17/2015 23.056.2850 RECH CHELIN $114,000 4/14/2015 23.058.0040 PICHOTTA UNTERBURGER $114,900 6/04/2015 23.118.0140 NEPHEW SMITH $114,900 9/08/2015 23.050.5380 US BANK DOLEZAL $115,000 7/02/2015 23.278.0040 ETTEL KALENBERG $115,000 1/30/2015 23.479.0160 HERITAGE INVESTMEN SCHMIDT $115,000 6/04/2015 23.176.0080 KALENBERG BRAND $115,400 11/23/2015 23.165.0140 MIKRUT KIRCHOFF $115,900 1/29/2015 23.255.0240 COOPER NORTROM $116,000 8/25/2015 23.336.0930 MATTSFIELD LARSEN $116,000 5/22/2015 23.112.1090 RYBERG JOHNSON $117,500 9/01/2015 23.154.0570 BROWN CARLSON $118,000 9/25/2015 23.167.0270 FRANCO FINK $118,000 6/15/2015 2 of 7 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales 23.145.0880 ROBBIN HAGEMAN $119,000 4/06/2015 23.145.0480 CLOUSE SCHORNACK $119,900 4/22/2015 23.154.0180 FISCHER HARBARTH $119,900 5/12/2015 23.154.0210 MACKEDANZ RASMUSSEN $119,900 9/30/2015 23.115.0010 YOUNG KOFORD $120,000 12/28/2015 23.145.0230 LUETH JUHL $120,000 1/20/2015 23.154.0500 WEBER HOECKE $120,000 7/22/2015 23.167.0300 VACEK HOPKINS $120,000 6/03/2015 23.255.0040 PICHA ANDERSON $121,000 8/24/2015 23.386.0120 LADE BEEM $122,000 7/30/2015 23.086.0030 LICKFELT NORTON $122,500 8/25/2015 23.154.0240 CZECH FOSTER $122,500 9/04/2015 23.050.3610 BRECHT PAQUET $122,750 9/30/2015 23.176.0020 POWELL SCHWARTZ $122,750 9/28/2015 23.218.0080 FELIX MULLERLEILE $122,900 11/20/2015 23.148.0080 CLARK ENSTAD $123,500 6/23/2015 23.063.0040 SMITH HEMINGSEN $123,850 5/20/2015 23.118.0040 LEONARD BLAIR $123,900 6/12/2015 23.050.2440 ROSTBERG LARSON $124,000 4/27/2015 23.150.0070 KOHLS STEVENS $124,000 3/13/2015 23.133.0180 SOUTHER O'NEAL $124,315 2/20/2015 23.112.1260 STEPHENS ELFERING $124,900 5/04/2015 23.112.1580 ROSKAMP DILLON $124,900 2/19/2015 23.126.0010 SMITH PETERMAN $124,900 8/04/2015 23.423.0550 KOEHLER NOWAK $124,900 6/29/2015 23.479.0200 HERITAGE INVESTMEN1 CARRIGAN $124,900 11/17/2015 23.479.0250 REINER DEAN $124,900 5/21/2015 58 16.3% 23.050.1430 WILDFLOWER STUBER $125,000 11/10/2015 23.101.0050 HLAVKA JOHNSON $125,000 3/27/2015 23.124.0150 PLOWMAN YERKS $125,000 10/14/2015 23.139.0240 KRUMRIE GROFF $125,000 3/09/2015 23.143.0180 HOUK SLATER $125,000 6/10/2015 23.145.0720 BENTON BERGUM $125,000 6/03/2015 23.160.0290 GOODWIN BROLL $125,000 12/17/2015 23.255.0140 BJUR GILLETT $125,000 8/25/2015 23.448.0050 MUELLERLEILE ANTONSON $125,000 9/18/2015 23.253.0090 CROW RIVER HABITAT RENVILLE $127,000 6/05/2015 23.238.0020 GARCIA CARNICOM $129,000 2/24/2015 23.167.0420 KROMMENHOEK RODEBERG $129,500 7/22/2015 23.218.0100 SCHREINER WICHMAN $129,650 1/22/2015 23.145.0440 SUESS ELLMAN $129,900 1/22/2015 23.154.0580 MCKITTRICK WENDLANDT $129,900 4/24/2015 23.386.0190 OTTERSTATTER KROMMENHOEK $129,900 7/06/2015 23.130.0210 JOHNSON FARIAS $130,000 8/21/2015 23.454.0050 NATIONSTAR MORTGAC. FITZGERALD $130,000 1/22/2015 23.160.0290 BROLL SHANDS $131,000 12/17/2015 23.423.0480 MARQUARDT MURPHY $131,000 12/08/2015 23.096.0050 RADEMACHER MOLITOR $131,500 5/22/2015 23.392.0070 PETERSON LICKFELT $131,500 6/10/2015 23.423.0520 MILLER MALONE $132,000 12/22/2015 23.124.0100 KUVAAS PARKER $133,900 11/10/2015 23.176.0430 REED BECKER $134,000 7/09/2015 23.193.0010 SCHMIDT MARKWARDT $134,000 10/23/2015 23.443.0020 RAMIREZ CZECH $134,000 7/29/2015 23.154.0160 WINES IDSO $134,900 12/15/2015 23.169.0330 WENDLAND TIMM $134,900 6/24/2015 3 of 7 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales 23.423.0230 YOB MARSHALL $134,900 11/03/2015 23.269.0120 FEDERAL HOME LOAN BESTUL & MCCORMICK $135,000 7/30/2015 23.296.0030 MERKINS LANDFAIR $135,000 9/30/2015 23.344.0050 KRAFT COX $135,000 2/26/2015 23.108.0100 THRALL KRUGERUD $135,500 1/22/2015 23.296.0030 TURMAN MERKINS $135,500 9/29/2015 23.056.1380 NEATON MCDONALD $136,000 10/13/2015 23.252.0040 ALBRECHT MILLER $137,000 12/03/2015 23.269.0070 KUTTNER KASTEL $137,900 5/01/2015 23.116.0030 TEUBERT RESENDEZ $138,400 11/02/2015 23.435.0180 SOUTHWEST SALES MILLIES $138,500 4/02/2015 23.453.0150 ZIMMER PLATH $139,000 9/17/2015 23.269.0060 PLOMBON PEITROBON $139,900 2/03/2015 23.423.0580 WILSON ZEULI $139,900 6/04/2015 23.088.0730 RONNEI MARCEAU $140,000 9/02/2015 23.102.0030 BERGER LINDELL $140,000 10/01/2015 23.154.0290 JACQUES CURWICK $140,000 11/02/2015 23.186.0090 NORTON BULTHUIS $140,000 8/28/2015 23.479.0140 HERITAGE INVESTMEN1 DWINNELL $140,500 7/06/2015 23.079.0020 RANNOW CGE PROPERTIES $141,000 3/05/2015 23.133.0310 LABAT OLINGER $141,000 11/24/2015 23.050.4020 TAYLOR OHARA $142,000 11/10/2015 23.112.0585 SCHAEFER DAWKINS $142,000 3/04/2015 23.162.0030 BEEM KOEHLER $142,000 6/29/2015 23.374.0030 HEPOLA LOFGREN $142,000 9/23/2015 23.118.0150 HAHN ORME $142,400 7/06/2015 23.330.0060 COTE OSTLUND $142,900 4/06/2015 23.310.0050 COLLINS PFANNSMITH $143,000 6/25/2015 23.196.0130 LUEDTKE SIFFERATH $145,000 3/20/2015 23.309.0320 RENVILLE TRACY $145,000 6/08/2015 23.154.0470 KASAL SMITH $145,900 9/08/2015 23.294.0040 JP MORGAN KRZMARZICK $145,950 6/24/2015 23.050.4420 WRIGHT HOLLATZ $147,000 5/22/2015 23.426.0040 PIKAL SCHUETZ $147,290 3/20/2015 23.174.0040 CHRISTENSON HALTER $148,000 1/22/2015 23.124.0060 JOHNSON AVERY $149,400 12/08/2015 23.169.0090 ELDER DRAPER $149,900 2/19/2015 23.396.0040 SIMMONS HILSGEN $149,900 2/24/2015 23.427.0170 MARTIN SCHREINER $149,900 1/22/2015 68 19.1% 23.063.0080 WALTRHOUSE PETERSEN $150,000 11/24/2015 23.079.0020 CGE PROPERTIES MASSMANN $150,000 6/30/2015 23.220.0030 SCHMIDT TOUTGES $150,000 7/06/2015 23.240.0070 WENDORFF BOLLIG $150,000 7/06/2015 23.244.0170 HEINTZ KRIPPNER $150,000 7/07/2015 23.468.0130 WILLERS CANO $150,000 4/01/2015 23.414.0220 FRANSEN STENDER $150,400 5/07/2015 23.056.1850 PETERSON BREITKREUTZ $152,000 7/20/2015 23.106.0320 JOHNSON SAXTON $152,000 4/06/2015 23.238.0025 MCRAITH DAVIS $153,000 4/22/2015 23.268.0020 EVENSON NORNES $153,000 10/13/2015 23.453.0460 MCMANUS WITTE $153,000 3/05/2015 23.440.0040 KIECKER BRIGGS $153,500 4/06/2015 23.306.0070 LUTHENS BOCK $153,900 8/20/2015 23.056.0970 JOECKS LLAMAS $154,000 5/08/2015 23.396.0070 VOELKER KRUMIE $154,500 9/30/2015 23.435.0150 SOUTHWEST SALES & FIELD $154,500 3/02/2015 4 of 7 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales 23.435.0150 SOUTHWEST SALES & VARELAS $154,500 4/29/2015 23.001.0300 STRATMAN MALONE $154,900 7/17/2015 23.101.0080 BLAKE SOLDNER $155,000 6/15/2015 23.176.0340 LYMAN FISCHER $155,000 7/06/2015 23.294.0040 KRZMARZICK JONES $155,000 7/16/2015 23.275.0190 JOHNSON PLATHE $155,500 5/12/2015 23.442.0030 BUTLER JACOBS $155,500 3/10/2015 23.112.0800 SCHMIDT RAABE $156,045 10/23/2015 23.050.3850 LERDAL MATTHEWS $156,500 8/12/2015 23.309.0380 BITZER BERGS $157,000 7/17/2015 23.352.0060 HERRICK STACEY $158,000 7/14/2015 23.224.0020 RIDDLE LANGENBERG $158,900 9/02/2015 23.300.0090 ENGFER CRANDALL $159,000 9/15/2015 23.435.0170 SOUTHWEST SALES FAULKNER $159,000 2/06/2015 23.436.0050 HARTSUIKER OKESON $159,400 6/24/2015 23.442.0270 DALBECK NELSON $159,900 11/02/2015 23.300.0150 CARRIGAN HAGEN $160,400 4/06/2015 23.372.0230 SCHWARZ NELSON $161,000 3/19/2015 23.453.0450 SAYRE BRIESEMEISTER $161,300 8/04/2015 23.468.0040 AMUNDSON SORENSEN $161,682 8/10/2015 23.342.0080 SCHUETTE ANDERSON $162,000 11/04/2015 23.442.0140 SCHWEDLER SMITH $162,900 8/05/2015 23.414.0090 ALBRECHT MCCORMICK $163,000 7/06/2015 23.244.0250 PETERSON BROWN $163,900 11/24/2015 23.453.0330 KELTGEN OLSON $163,900 10/16/2015 23.112.1750 NIKOLAISEN CORBIN $164,600 9/28/2015 23.453.0050 HANNEMAN MRKVICKA $164,900 9/15/2015 23.115.0020 HOEFT BURCHILL $165,000 6/17/2015 23.137.0010 NELSON HEINTZ $165,000 7/02/2015 23.414.0110 JENSEN HOME SERVICE $165,000 11/25/2015 23.423.0420 MAIN SIMMONS $165,000 2/24/2015 23.427.0020 SCHWARTZ KURTH $165,000 1/13/2015 23.192.0090 ZIMMERMAN WAGNER $168,900 5/22/2015 23.423.0390 GILK WILLETT $169,500 8/17/2015 23.266.0030 BRAUER WHITE $169,900 1/06/2015 23.141.0170 ENGFER OWEN $170,000 3/05/2015 23.389.0310 FLEMING ROBINSON $170,000 3/05/2015 23.423.0390 WILLETT PIERCE $170,700 8/17/2015 23.309.0200 WITTMAN JOHNSON $172,000 9/17/2015 23.389.0310 ROBINSON KROEGER $172,000 7/06/2015 23.244.0180 WIKE THODE $173,000 8/19/2015 23.252.0020 SCHLUETER RICHARDSON $174,900 8/06/2015 23.394.0010 SKOOG LENZEN $174,900 8/12/2015 60 16.9% 23.176.0350 MCCORMICK OESTREICH $175,000 12/01/2015 23.351.0040 ANDERSON CONRAD $180,000 8/11/2015 23.162.0170 LINGBEEK GROSS $180,100 7/30/2015 23.176.0360 LOEFFLER PETERSON $181,000 6/04/2015 23.244.0150 LOTRIET DAUWALTER $182,500 7/06/2015 23.452.0060 NAUSTDAL NEUBAUER $182,990 6/17/2015 23.328.0020 REYNOLDS KARG $183,450 8/06/2015 23.118.0020 SOREGAROLI LINDEKUGEL $183,800 7/06/2015 23.380.0060 LINDER NELSON $185,000 4/01/2015 23.437.0100 KLATT HANSEN $185,000 12/31/2015 23.141.0040 PHILLIPS RANNOW $185,800 5/22/2015 23.336.0830 EDDY JOHNSON $187,000 6/04/2015 23.453.0130 HORN ICK MICHEL $187,900 4/06/2015 5 of 7 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales 23.112.1030 RATTER KOHLS $188,000 8/04/2015 23.056.2870 BURLEY KING $189,500 8/11/2015 23.444.0270 ELLINGSON SCHMIDT $189,900 10/16/2015 23.382.0110 HARTMAN ARGO $191,050 11/19/2015 23.352.0020 MCKIMM PLOMBON $191,500 6/02/2015 23.253.0230 CROW RIVER VEGA $192,500 9/10/2015 23.444.0230 SCHWINT TORRES $194,000 12/03/2015 23.228.0010 STEFFEL HOME SERVICE $194,250 12/03/2015 23.230.0120 SUESS DENEKE $194,900 7/06/2015 23.413.0080 KUESTER DENNIN $195,000 8/10/2015 23.451.0070 JOHNSON VANHOUTTE $195,000 11/25/2015 23.270.0070 AUGER MIELKE $196,000 1/23/2015 23.336.0810 MUENCH MCELHINNY $197,000 7/29/2015 23.428.0340 GEHLEN ETTEL $197,500 1/23/2015 27 7.6% 23.220.0050 KLOBE DIVINE HOUSE $200,000 12/29/2015 23.296.0020 RUSTAD BRANDSOY $200,000 4/09/2015 23.108.0070 CARLSON JARMAN $207,500 7/09/2015 23.428.0430 BEACH SCHUETTE $209,000 11/04/2015 23.451.0275 BETKER STIBAL $209,500 8/11/2015 23.451.0110 WENDOLEK FORST $214,000 6/16/2015 23.452.0040 SORENSEN & NAUSTDA BATEMAN $214,533 4/22/2015 23.484.0070 BETKER BUSKE $215,000 8/20/2015 23.372.0060 MAYLAND ALLISON $216,800 9/17/2015 23.472.0210 NAUSTDAL RUNKE $217,078 8/24/2015 23.466.0770 NAUSTDAL SCHRAMM $219,100 8/10/2015 23.451.0330 BETKER ZIMMERMAN $219,900 5/22/2015 23.176.0310 STRAKA HOLMGREN $221,000 10/30/2015 23.441.0030 BATEMAN WOZNEY $221,900 5/27/2015 23.451.0335 BETKER UPTON $222,500 9/08/2015 23.501.0010 WURDELL TYDLACKA $223,748 7/06/2015 23.291.0030 STEARNS LENDING LLC PLOWMAN $224,000 10/13/2015 23.420.0100 KRUMREY WESELOH $224,500 2/03/2015 23.114.0060 HAGEMAN BEGNAUD $225,000 7/06/2015 23.364.0050 JOHNSTON SMITH $225,000 4/14/2015 23.112.0830 KRAFT WILSON $226,000 7/02/2015 23.224.0060 MEYER FISCHER $227,000 5/12/2015 23.274.0030 MURPHY PLOTZ $227,500 12/08/2015 23.195.0010 YOUNG KUTTNER $229,400 6/17/2015 23.468.0170 NAUSTDAL BOEFF $230,000 4/16/2015 23.437.0130 PLATH LOWINSKE $232,000 12/31/2015 23.387.0030 STEVENSON PEAVY $233,000 2/24/2015 23.287.0040 DAGGETT HOFFMAN $235,000 10/29/2015 23.501.0020 WURDELL HEIKES $235,864 5/01/2015 23.327.0020 SUKO ELBERT $236,500 3/27/2015 23.441.0140 CHRISTIANSEN RIEKE $239,900 9/30/2015 23.327.0010 DENAULT HARMS $240,000 6/11/2015 23.482.0060 COTE HOLLE $240,000 6/24/2015 23.274.0080 HANNA SCHLUETER $241,000 8/06/2015 23.451.0340 BETKER ORT $241,371 11/10/2015 23.365.0030 SZYMANSKI BURNS $244,900 8/04/2015 23.327.0060 STROBEL KUTTER $245,000 5/22/2015 23.455.0380 METZGER LADWIG $245,000 4/06/2015 23.195.0480 STARK KARG $249,900 6/24/2015 23.439.0210 NEUBAUER HARTSUIKER $250,000 6/17/2015 23.376.0060 RISTAU ROSTBERG $252,000 3/13/2015 23.445.0190 RUTKOWSKI SUESS $253,500 12/23/2015 6 of 7 2015 Hutchinson Year End Home Resales 23.223.0120 ALBRECHT KUVAAS $253,900 11/10/2015 23.468.0050 SORENSEN & NAUSTDA TRUSTY $255,250 12/08/2015 23.157.0060 WOODSIDE HAUTH $256,000 12/30/2015 23.270.0210 GOLDSMITH SCHOOLER $258,900 2/12/2015 23.433.0040 ZIEMER RYBERG $259,000 3/06/2015 23.485.0020 BETKER KADLEC $262,900 8/17/2015 23.451.0170 LUTHENS CZECH $263,000 9/10/2015 23.371.0070 PIEHL HARTMAN $264,000 8/04/2015 23.501.0050 WURDELL BLAZINSKI $268,077 6/10/2015 23.198.0120 POWELL HOFF $275,000 12/03/2015 23.445.0140 HOWELL SCHAEFER $275,900 2/24/2015 23.056.2810 HOFFMAN JOHNSON $305,000 1/15/2015 23.262.0040 MAHER SCHWEDLER $317,500 7/06/2015 23.271.0050 YOST GOETZ $317,900 1/23/2015 23.418.0060 KNORR CHRISTENSEN $320,000 3/05/2015 23.326.0010 MATTHEWS MCCORMICK $325,000 9/08/2015 23.428.0210 COMPTON-ANDERSON PERRAULT $352,076 12/08/2015 23.451.0480 BETKER BROWN $353,900 2/24/2015 23.267.0010 OJHA SCHROEDER $375,000 6/24/2015 23.002.1575 WILSON ANDERSON $429,000 8/11/2015 23.428.0190 BERG SOLIEN $432,500 8/04/2015 63 17.7% 356 100.0% Median $138,750 Average $146,611 7 of 7 Jean Ward Homes for Sale 130 120 UK 100 M Lward Qci. hutch! n so n. m n. us — Hutchinson MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association -f REALTORS"' 80 1-2413 1-2014 1-2015 1-2016 Each data point is 12 months of activity. Data is from February 11, 2016. Data from NorthstarMLS. Report provided by MAAR 0. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. Powered by 1 OK Research and Marketing. Jean Ward Median Sales Price $150K $140K $130K $120K $110K jward Cmci, hutchinson. mn.us — Hutchinson MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association of REALTORS" $100K 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2095 9utchinson �tG ZGlS ! ys�n o d t�•S �a Each data point is 12 months of activity. Data is from January B. 2016. Data from NorthstarMLS. Report provided by MAAR ®. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. Powered by 10K Research and Marketing. Jean Ward Average Sales Price $170K $160K $150K $140K $130K $120K Mard(�Dci.hutchinson. mn. us Hutchinson MINNEAPOLIS AREA Association or REALTORS' $110K 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1-2015 Hutchinson Each data point is 12 months of activity. Data is from January 6, 2416. Data from NorthstarM LS. Report provided by MAAR S. Data deemed reliable, but not guaranteed. Powered by 10K Research and Marketing. ?► $a Y f-a.s Zo r� Fairw y Es sAd i ♦ ` I 6HEHEB� mer I ma on � rk Mea Ad � I Ed edition MF�HlLH�L� HH �FUN�JJJI W 9 bdivision Ad #AE� wood Additio Westrid a resAdd— Ridg Addition - MrOgewarer Esta s ition � ee mm me View eig is Addition - ®® ♦. nwood Ell Ravenw dwest dl,*' - ottke ourtAd ition et Addiii , L—� � �-iSouthfork idge Addl n � U /1 � Southwind Ad ion % City of Hutchinson Vacant Lots -2016 N - citylimits WE S Vac -lots -Jan -2016 <all other values> New Additions Vacant Lots - January, 2016 Addition Zoning Year Avaiability Fairway Estates Add 'tion R -1 -PD 1999 14 Lots Park Meadows Addison R-3 2005 7Lots Br d ge wate r Estate s Ad or ti o n R-1 2000 28 Lots Island Vi ew He' ghts Addition R -2 -PD 2004 13 Lots Rave nwoodWest Adcrtion R-2 2005 7Lots Su m me rs etAd d't on R -2,R-3 2005 110 Lots Southw ndAddition, lst and 2nd R-2 2003 10 Lots SouthforkAdd't on R -3 -PD 2004 49 Lots KottkeC rtR oatto RverPonte%r as R -2 -PD 2008 10 Lots Westroge Shores Adcrtion R-1 1995 1Lots Santel Addition R -3 -PD 1993 9Lots StearnwoodAddition R-1 2004 5Lots Ravenwood R-3 1999 2Lots Hunte Rdg Addition R-2 2004 1Lots F—e r SudivisionAddition R-2 2005 1Lots Exce I si or Add't on R-2 2007 5Lots He l lands Sixth Additi on R-2 1984 4Lots Other Misc R-2 unknown 3Lots Totall 279 Lots Disclaimer The end user of this information agrees that these data and map sets have been created from information provided by various government and private sources at different moments in time and at various levels of accuracy. They are only a graphic representation and should not be considered as positionally accurate. The data is provided "as is' with no claim made as to its accuracy or its appropriateness to its intended use of the data. It is the responsibility of the end user to be aware of the data's limitations and to utilize the data in an appropriate manner and the end user agrees to hold The City of Hutchinson harmless for claims arising out of this exchange of information. Therefore under no circumstances shall the City of Hutchinson be held responsible for any costs, expenses, damages or injuries, including special or incidental or consequential damages to any person(s) or property that arises from the use, or misuse of the information provided. 2015 Hutchinson Foreclosures 2015 # SS Date Address Mortgagor Mortgagee Orig. Mortgage Claimed Amount Sold Amt 1 1/6/2015 1125 13th Avenue NW Douglas Woelfel Stearns Lending Inc. $175,920.00 $180,726.21 $192,160.57 2 1/6/2015 756 Ivy Lane SE Lucas & Amanda Gustafson Wells Fargo Bank, NA $119,800.00 $128,146.07 $84,550.00 3 1/6/2015 580 Peterson Circle NE Jolene Ellsworth Nationstar Mortgage LLC $240,000.00 $101,230.11 $73,000.00 4 1/7/2015 446 Erie Street SE Stephan Voelkel US Bank National Association $101,500.00 $118,920.23 $121,477.46 5 1/14/2015 542 Adams Street SE Waltraud Heldt JP Morgan Chase Bank $75,162.00 $87,644.86 $87,950.78 6 1/21/2015 902 Hassan Street SE Jean & Harold Ostrom Wells Fargo Bank, NA $155,500.00 $170,194.81 $173,955.94 7 2/5/2015 1000 Goebel Street SW Mark & Clarissa Thompson CitiMortgage Inc. $159,493.00 $151,532.25 $83,600.00 8 2/5/2015 567 Lynn Road SW Darell Lange Security Bank & Trust Co. $10,000.00 $6,179.11 $7,853.41 9 3/11/2015 938 7th Avenue NW Cheryl & Nassor Salim Federal National Mrtg Assoc. $124,000.00 $118,976.00 $120,179.81 10 3/11/2015 820 Spruce Street NE David & Cindy Wimmer Bank of America $126,529.00 $133,799.00 $96,000.00 11 3/19/2015 700 California St. NW Francisca Mendoza MHFA $94,000.00 $101,374.63 $84,150.00 12 4/8/2015 535 4th Avenue SW Gary Dullinger JP Morgan Chase Bank $107,500.00 $104,284.29 $52,720.00 13 4/8/2015 425 Hassan Street SE Holly Newman Wells Fargo Bank, NA $59,473.00 $54,055.88 $54,000.00 14 5/6/2015 966 Lewis Avenue SW Bradley & Kim Horstmann Federal National Mrtg Assoc. $103,000.00 $121,116.87 $82,800.00 15 6/18/2015 426 Huron Street SE Randall & Edith Carlson US Bank Trust National Associ $201,003.04 $227,792.77 $85,484.59 16 7/30/2015 317 Stoney Point Rd SW Thomas & Yvette Fischer Home State Bank $127,250.00 $132,995.33 $136,919.43 17 8/12/2015 643 5th Avenue SW Charles Gilbertson Bank of America $138,380.00 $126,908.83 $90,250.00 18 8/27/2015 1055 Jorgenson St. SE Gary Gustafson Freedom Mortgage Corp. $149,598.00 $151,998.88 $119,070.00 19 9/3/2015 17 5th Avenue NW Jennifer & Gordon Evenson Green Tree Servicing LLC $140,000.00 $151,646.19 $102,600.00 20 9/10/2015 1058 Jefferson St. SE Cheryl & Tom Moore Wells Fargo Bank, NA $92,700.00 $91,973.98 $72,000.00 21 9/23/2015 982 Jefferson Street SE Curtis & Tressa Hughes Wells Fargo Bank, NA $90,000.00 $72,842.72 $75,719.10 22 10/22/2015 110 Oakland Avenue SE Benita & Larry Quast US Bank National Association $150,300.00 $193,818.44 $200,256.05 23 10/28/2015 705 Dale Street SW Vincent Haag US Bank National Association $142,373.00 $142,129.25 $138,700.00 24 11/5/2015 617 Bluff Street NE Jon & Riana Mross MHFA $126,000.00 $147,632.81 $154,613.83 25 11/12/2015 7 - 9th Avenue NE Andrew Bonderman US Bank National Association $111,700.00 $119,074.28 $93,500.00 Cancelled: 1 1/20/2015 825 Ivy Lane SE Anthony Forcier Wells Fargo Bank, NA $79,150.00 $80,316.54 2 7/15/2015 338 4th Avenue SW Carola Laidemitt PNC Bank, NA $82,400.00 $68,375.19 3 9/10/2015 614 3rd Avenue SW Dennis & Barbara Wedge US Bank National Association $154,000.00 $209,248.77 4 9/16/2015 1027 Prairie View Dr. SW Shalee Miller MHFA $69,690.00 $54,636.40 5 10/20/2015 38 McLeod Avenue NE Christohper, Denise &Joyce Schramm Wells Fargo Bank, NA $143,350.00 $186,835.24 6 12/16/2015 1263 Denver Avenue SE Luana Issendorf Green Tree Servicing LLC $214,000.00 $218,423.28 7 12/16/2015 585 Juul Road SW Thomas & Rebecca Hudson Wells Fargo Bank, NA $76,587.00 $74,501.95 2016 Hutchinson Foreclosures 2016 # SS Date Address Mortgagor Mortgagee Orig. Mortgage Claimed Amouni Sold Amt 1 1/19/2016 45 Northwoods Ave. NE Kent & Renee Glessing Nationstar Mortgage LLC $153,980.00 $146,714.50 2 1/20/2016 1020 West Shore Dr. SW David & Betty Croghan JP Morgan Chase Bank $204,676.00 $219,363.17 3 1/27/2016 585 Glen Street SW Jason & Elizabeth Slepica Wells Fargo Bank, NA $130,159.00 $126,160.57 4 2/10/2016 305 Adams Street SE David Whiting E*Trade $82,600.00 $60,296.12 5 3/2/2016 924 Keith Street SW Gloria Rueckert Wells Fargo Bank, NA $145,166.00 $137,605.13 6 3/8/2016 545 Hassan Street SE Brittany Eckstein US Bank National Association $87,720.00 $84,802.05 Cancelled 1/26/2016 557 Main Street S. Justin Rooney CitiMortgage Inc. $128,150.00 $113,944.62 2/11/2016 615 Merrill Street SW Darlene & Chris Johnson JP Morgan Chase Bank $135,950.00 $142,718.50 Cancelled multi times HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2015 Year End by the Numbers General Occupancy Vacancy Rate 16.00% 14.00% 11.50% 12.00% 10.00% -4 8.00% 6.00% 4.00% 2.00% Market Rate General Occupancy Vacancy Rate 7.00% 14.90% 10.31% 9.00% 9.00% 8.38% 7.54% 4.60% 4.68% ° 4.07% 4.08% 2.12% 1.89% 1.85 0.00% -k-,- " 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 4.00% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% 2.00% 1.50% 1.00% 0.50% 0.00% 2015 Vacancy Rates 2015 Vacancy Rates Market Rate General Occupancy Subsidized General Occupancy ■ Senior Market Rate Rental Housing ■ Senior Subsidized Rental Housing 2015 Home Resales HOME RESALES CITY OF HUTCHINS ON 2006 throw h 2015 Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Price Range XL LLL XL LLL LLL XL P.. L XL Pry XL I aL XL 1 P. - L X[L P..e L XL LLL XL Lu - XL 29 10.2 44 Under $50,000 15 4.2% 18 5.7 15.3 30 12.4 24 11 9 4.2 6 2.7 5 1.8 6 1.6 $50,000 26 7.3% 17 5.4 11.5 31 12.8 12.5 11 4.9 2.6 $75,000 to $99,999 39 11.0% 34 10.8 36 12.7 62 21.6 46 19.0 32 14.8 36 16.7 23 10.2 17 6.1 22 5.8 $100,000 to $124,999 58 16.3% 59 18.7 � 49 17.3 52 18.1 48 19.8 38 17.6 47 21.8 43 19.0 39 14.0 56qr 14.8 $125,000 to $149,999 68 19.1% 68 21.5 59 20.8 41 14.3 33 13.6 38 17.6 46 21.3 34 15.0 63 22.6 67 17.7 $150,000 to $174,999 60 16.9% 51 16.1 29 10.2 16 5.6 22 9.1 23 10.6 20 9.3 51 22.6 59 21 88 23.2 $175,000 to $199,999 27 7.6% 21 6.6 16 5.6 13 4.5 9 3.7 12 5.6 12 5.6 22 9.7 36 12.9 45 11.9 $200,000+ 63 17.7% 48 15.2 31 10.9 26 9.1 23 9.5 33 15.3 19 8.8 36 15.9 54 19.4 85 22.4 Total 3561 100.0% 3161 100.0 284 100.0 287 100.0 242 100.0 216 100.0 216 100.0 226 100.0 279 100.0 379 100.0 Median $138,750 $133,500 $121,000 $101,400 5109,950 $121,600 $117,750 $146,750 $157,900 $158,000 Sources: Peterson -Paulsen Associates Inc. Realty Maxfield Research Inc. McLeod County Assessor's Office 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Residential Lots Available 09 299 284 279 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Number of New Dwelling Units Construction 32 19 4 7 4 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 23 20 i tt 2012 2013 2014 2015 200 150 100 50 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 Foreclosures McLeod County and Hutchinson Foreclosure Counts 176 2011 135 93 77 75 53 mows qqq"'O 45 39 ��25 28 ::�;7 2012 2013 2014 2015 ■ McLeod County ■ Hutchinson 2016 Priorities HRA Park Towers: • Complete the modernization of elevators at Park Towers. • Develop plans and establish funding to convert a regular unit to a handicapped accessible unit at Park Towers. City Center Operations, Downtown Rental Rehab Program: • The HRA Board has recently authorized using $80,000 in SCDP Local and ProgramA- Income as an owner match source with loan terms of 0% principal payments over a five year term. We encourage landlords in the downtown area to apply now for p spring construction. City Center Operations, Owner Occupied Rehab: • Administer the Minnesota Housing Rehab Loan Program for owner occupied rehab..,, a • Administer the City Deferred Grant Program (TIF available funds) for owner occupied rehab. City Center Operations, Rental Development: • Monitor availability of potential funding sources for Housing Development and determine feasibility of projects if TIF is requested City Center Operations: • Continue to request free radon test kits from the Minnesota Department of Health for distribution in Hutchinson. Free radon test kits are available at the Hutchinson Planning, Zoning, & Building front desk. Hutchinson is in a high radon area; radon N a mitigation is recommended at radon levels above 4.Opc/L. Program Changes for 2016 HRA City Center Operations, School Construction Program: • After a successful run since 20021 there will be no school construction project in 2016. • The HRA was unable to secure a forfeited, blighted property will betaking their training direction. and foreclosed or tax the High School program in a new • Ten homes were constructed and 4 homes were rehabbed throughout Hutchinson during the tenure of the program. • Thanks to all the High School construction class students, teachers and administration for partnering in this very successful program. School Year 2002-2003 School Year 2003-2004 School Year 2004-2005 School Year 2005-2006 School Year 2006-2007 966 Carolina PKWY NW 626 Harmony Lane SW 425 Maryland St. NW 1160 Prairie View Dr. SW 1150 Prairie View Dr. SW School Year 2007-2008 School Year 2008-2009 School Year 2009-2010 School Year 2010-2011 School Year 2010-2011 1170 Prairie View Dr. SW 1863 Island View Circle SW 1116 Lewis Avenue SW 755 Milwaukee Ave. SW 925 Stevens Street SW School Year 2011-2012 School Year 2012-2013 School Year 2013-2014 School Year 2014-2015 400 Lynn Road SW 734 Southview Dr. SW 907 Lewis Avenue SW 445 Adams Street SE 2016 Trends According to local realtors: • The median sales price according to the Minneapolis Association of Realtors for Hutchinson in December 2015 based on 338 closed sales was $145,000, an increase of 1.5% from $142,900 in December 2014. Current listing inventory is low and if the number of listings remains low, the resale price may continue to rise in 2016. Listings are down nationwide. • There were 20 newly constructed homes built in 2015. Many of the new construction homes in 2015 were patio or twin homes in the $225,000 - $250,000 with 2016 expecting similar numbers. • The impact of the buyout of HTI on housing remains unknown, because no one knows if there will be any changes. • With rental housing vacancy rates for general occupancy below 2% why are people renting instead of buying? The decrease in home values during the years 2008 — 2011 is still fresh in peoples' minds and this is also a national trend. People want the freedom to pick up and go whenever they want, without worrying about selling a home. However, if rents increase because of the shortage of rentals, homeownership will look attractive in 2016. PLANNING/ZONING/BUILDING DEPARTMENT 2015 ANNUAL REPORT Table of Contents Page Number BUILDING DEPARTMENT................................................................................. 3 A. Overview of Building Department........................................................... 3 B. Number of Building Permits Issued........................................................ 4 C. Construction Valuation........................................................................ 4 D. Inspections....................................................................................... 5 E. New Dwelling Unit Construction............................................................ 5 F. Computerization and Technology........................................................... 6 G. Evergreen Senior Dining...................................................................... 6 H. Nuisances, Complaints, and Housing Standards Enforcement ........................ 7 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT............................................................ 7 A. Overview.......................................................................................... 7 B. Planning Applications......................................................................... 8 C. Miscellaneous Meetings.........................................................................8 D. Site Plan Review.................................................................................9 E. Joint Planning Board...........................................................................9 F. Annexation.......................................................................................9 G. Technology........................................................................................9 H. Building Permit Review....................................................................... 9 I. Number of Zoning Reviews................................................................... 9 J. Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Amendment ....................................... 10 ADDENDA Count of Building/Plumbing/Mechanical Permits............................................11 Yearly Permit and Valuation Totals............................................................ 12 New Residential Construction.................................................................... 13 2015 Construction Activity........................................................................14 PopulationGrowth.................................................................................. 15 2015 New Housing Starts......................................................................... 16 Residential Lots Available as of January 1, 2016 ............................................ 17 InspectionCounts.................................................................................. 18 Building Permit Summary for the Year of 2015 ............................................ 19 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 2 BUILDING DEPARTMENT A. Overview of Building Department - MN Rule 1300.0030 states that the purpose of the MN State Building Code is to establish minimum requirements to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare, through structural strength, means or egress facilities, stability, sanitation, adequate light and ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire and other hazards attributed to the built environment and to provide safety to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The code applies to the design, construction, addition, alteration, moving, replacement, demolition, repair, equipment, installation, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, and inspection of any building, structure, or building service equipment in a municipality. The code includes among other provisions: The MN Building Code, the MN Residential Code, the MN Conservation Code for Existing Buildings, the MN Floodproofing Regulations, the MN Accessibility Code, the Prefabricated Structures Code, the Industrialized/Modular Buildings Code, the MN Plumbing Code, the MN Commercial Energy Code, and the MN Residential Energy Code. The purpose and scope of the MN State Building Code clearly convey the complexity and significance of building code administration. The practical administration of the code includes education, communication, plan review, correspondence, permit administration, field inspection, and enforcement to ensure the purpose of the code is accomplished throughout the breadth of its scope. Building Department Staffing In 2015, the Building Department has experienced multiple changes. In March of 2015, the Permit Technician position was modified from a 0.5 fte position to a full-time position. This change was necessary due to repeated increases in the workload of the Building Department over the previous two years. The Department continued to be served by both the Designated Building Official and the Planning and Building Specialist, as it had been in 2014. However, in October of 2015, Designated Building Official Lenny Rutledge resigned his position after approximately 16 years of service to the City of Hutchinson. Planning and Building Specialist Kyle Dimler has been designated as the City's Building Official during the interim period while a permanent Designated Building Official is sought by the City. Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 3 B. Number of Building Permits Issued — A total of 866 building permits were issued in 2015, compared to 779 in 2014. This is an 11% increase from 2014. In addition, 245 plumbing and mechanical permits were issued by the City in 2015 for new construction, alterations, additions, and repairs to both residential and commercial structures. Number of Permits Issued 2005 Through 2015 1000 - 915 92i 925 905 946 858 833 879 866 788 779 800 600 400 200 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 C. Construction Valuation — 2015 provided approximately $ 14.9 million in construction valuation, which is an increase over the $14.2 million from 2014. The construction activity report, included in this report's addenda, provides details on some of the largest valuation based permits issued in 2015. Construction value over the last six years has been as follows: 2015 - $14.9 million, 2014 - $14.2 million, 2013 - $15 million, 2012 - $7.85 million, 2011 - $8.68 million, 2010 - $26.77 million, and 2009 - $19.23 million. The valuation of construction projects in the past 3 years indicates a more moderate and sustainable level of construction in contrast to the volume experienced between 2000 and 2007. CONSTRUCTION VALUATION MILLION $ VALUATION 2005-2015 50 40 30 20 10 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 4 D. Inspections — A total of 1,841 inspections were completed by Building Department staff in 2015. The inspection totals for the previous five years are as follows: 1,958 in 2014, 1,698 in 2013, 1,508 in 2012, 1,381 in 2011, and 1,707 in 2010. Throughout the year, the overall monthly average of inspections is 153, or approximately 38 per week. During the typically busiest construction season of May through October, the average number of monthly inspections is 179. 2005 — 2015 Total Building Inspections 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 E. New Dwelling Unit Construction - In 2015, a total of 20 single family dwelling units were constructed within the City of Hutchinson. In 2014, a total of 23 single family dwelling units were constructed. As noted in Section C above, the construction industry in general in this area appears to have returned to a more moderate and sustainable level of growth and activity after a very rapid rate of growth and then decline experienced over the period of approximately 2000 - 2008. 80 73 70 60 58 50 40 32 30 19 23 20 20 12 10 4 7 4 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 5 Staff has researched recent trends of new residential construction in this region by surveying other communities in the area with populations similar to Hutchinson in an effort to attempt to verify if the level of new residential construction activity in Hutchinson is common to the surrounding regions. The majority of similarly sized communities in this region indicate construction trends similar to what Hutchinson has experienced in recent years. As may be expected, communities that are metropolitan suburbs or regional hubs have experienced higher total volumes of construction. However, the overall trend of construction activity in the surveyed region is very similar between communities. 160 140 120 100 80 ■ 2012 60 ■ 2013 ■ 2014 40 ■ 2015 20 IL 0 No a�\��O atr,�0 \\o � 'o \,6 \a \\�a� ¢, o�' �o� F. Computerization and Technology — A very significant change was made to the Hutchinson Building Department's computerized permitting and record management system in 2015. The City has transitioned from the Permit and Inspection Management System (PIMS), provided by LOGIS, to a new system offered by BS&A. The new permitting system has facilitated more efficient use of the inspectors' time by eliminating the need for duplicative data entry. The BS&A system has also provided the opportunity for staff to use tablet computers while performing field inspections, which provides the inspectors access to digital versions of the building code while they are on project sites. These new capabilities allow staff members to more fully serve the public and contractors while they are out of the office setting. G. Evergreen Senior Dining — Department staff provide maintenance and janitorial services for the Evergreen dining area. Staff also administers the reservations of available rental space for private gatherings on site. The senior dining facility prepared approximately 37,305 meals in 2015, 37% of which were for Hutchinson area residents. The remaining meals are delivered to the cities of Silver Lake, Glencoe, Brownton, and Stewart. The number of meals prepared in 2015 was an increase of approximately 37% over 2014 (37,167 meals prepared in 2014). Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 6 Total Meals Prepared at Evergreen Senior Dining Facility in 2014 In 2015 the Dining Room was again available for rent; however it was only rented out 3 times. H. Nuisances, Complaints, and Housing Standards Enforcement — The Building Department continues to regularly process nuisance and complaint calls which are often redirected, based upon the nature of the complaint, to the appropriate City department. Department staff has also worked closely with the Hutchinson Police Department's Nuisance Code Enforcement Officer in 2015 to address multiple buildings that have been cited as hazardous structures. In 2015, Planning and Building Specialist Kyle Dimler became involved with a group of McLeod County Public Health Nuisance providers. The focus of this group is to facilitate a more uniform approach to serve residents, throughout the county, who are directly affected by nuisance or hazardous living conditions. This group also works to efficiently direct residents to case specific social services that are available. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT A. Overview — Planning and Zoning Department staff provide a variety of customer services, coordination, and review services, including processing and reviewing of land use applications. The Department provides long range planning services and reviews land use plans for consistency with city plans. Demographic information, as well as projections about population growth are monitored and planned for by this department. The Department also drafts policies and revises ordinances to implement the goals of the City regarding growth management and development practices. The Department works closely with the Engineering, Housing and Redevelopment, and Economic Development Departments. Zoning is the regulation of property to ensure general health, safety, and welfare standards for the community. The Zoning Department assists residents and applicants with zoning requests, development requests and flood plain information. Staff coordinates efforts to communicate with the property owner or developer by arranging pre -development meetings "up -front' to get questions answered at the beginning of the project. Department staff issues applications for Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Rezoning, Annexations, Lot Splits, Platting, and Sign permits. Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 7 Meals in 2012 Percent of Total Hutchinson 13,990 37 Park Towers Residents 6174 16 Glencoe 8,083 21 Stewart 3,884 10 Silver Lake 2,644 9 Brownton 2,530 7 Total 37,305 100 In 2015 the Dining Room was again available for rent; however it was only rented out 3 times. H. Nuisances, Complaints, and Housing Standards Enforcement — The Building Department continues to regularly process nuisance and complaint calls which are often redirected, based upon the nature of the complaint, to the appropriate City department. Department staff has also worked closely with the Hutchinson Police Department's Nuisance Code Enforcement Officer in 2015 to address multiple buildings that have been cited as hazardous structures. In 2015, Planning and Building Specialist Kyle Dimler became involved with a group of McLeod County Public Health Nuisance providers. The focus of this group is to facilitate a more uniform approach to serve residents, throughout the county, who are directly affected by nuisance or hazardous living conditions. This group also works to efficiently direct residents to case specific social services that are available. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT A. Overview — Planning and Zoning Department staff provide a variety of customer services, coordination, and review services, including processing and reviewing of land use applications. The Department provides long range planning services and reviews land use plans for consistency with city plans. Demographic information, as well as projections about population growth are monitored and planned for by this department. The Department also drafts policies and revises ordinances to implement the goals of the City regarding growth management and development practices. The Department works closely with the Engineering, Housing and Redevelopment, and Economic Development Departments. Zoning is the regulation of property to ensure general health, safety, and welfare standards for the community. The Zoning Department assists residents and applicants with zoning requests, development requests and flood plain information. Staff coordinates efforts to communicate with the property owner or developer by arranging pre -development meetings "up -front' to get questions answered at the beginning of the project. Department staff issues applications for Conditional Use Permits, Variances, Rezoning, Annexations, Lot Splits, Platting, and Sign permits. Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 7 In 2015, City Staff worked to develop a Wayfinding and Signage Master Plan for Downtown Hutchinson and the Luce Line Trail. Hoisington Koegler Group, Inc. of Minneapolis assisted with the development of the Plan. In 2016, plans and specifications are being developed and if everything goes well the wayfinding signs should be in place by the fall of 2016. B. Planning Applications - In 2015, 14 planning applications were received, which was down from last year. There is typically a strong relationship between the amount of planning applications and the amount of building activity that takes place in a given year, however that wasn't the case in 2015. In 2014, 32 applications were reviewed; in 2013, 22 applications were reviewed, in 2012, 31 applications were reviewed, in 2011, 17 applications were reviewed; 45 applications in 2010; 45 application in 2009; 52 applications in 2008; 81 applications in 2007; 63 applications in 2006; 69 applications in 2005; 82 applications in 2004 and 56 applications in 2003. Of the 12 applications in 2015, 8 requests were for conditional use permits, 2 for site plan review, 1 variance, and 1 vacation of easements. Additionally there was 1 zoning ordinance amendment; 2 site plan reviews, and 1 resolution approval. A bar chart comparing the number of applications since 2005 follows. 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 TOTAL ANNUAL PLANNING APPLICATIONS 2005-2012 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 C. Miscellaneous Meetings - There were approximately 257 miscellaneous meetings attended by staff during 2015. There are a number of groups and committees that meet monthly and weekly along with other miscellaneous meetings with City and County individuals. The Planning Department did review plans for several commercial remodeling projects and other miscellaneous projects. There were approximately 26 predevelopment/pre-application meetings with property owners, developers, etc. by planning staff members. There were 61+ site visits Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 8 with violations. Also, staff cited 30+ zoning enforcement cases which included site visits and/or letters. D. Annexations — There were no annexations in 2015. E. Technology — The Department continues to update web site information with current information, maps and new ordinances. The web site information has been an excellent source of data to communicate with customers that are able to access pertinent planning data to make decisions about property. In 2015 the Planning and Building Department upgraded to a new software system called BS&A which is a much more comprehensive system for planning and building record management. F. Building Permit Review — The Planning Department reviews building permits for new structures and additions received by the building department for compliance with zoning ordinance requirements and development approvals. In 2015, the lot coverage for properties in the shoreland area and airport zone continued to be monitored closely. Staff reviewed approximately 22 building and land use permits and 63 sign and banner permits for zoning compliance. G. Number of Zoning Reviews for Building Permits — The Planning Department reviewed 85 building permits for compliance with the zoning codes in 2015. H. Number of Zoning Reviews for Land Use Permits — There were 137 zoning reviews of land use permits which are permits such as fences, small utility sheds, driveways, patios, pavers, detached decks, etc. Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 9 ADDENDA CITY OF HUTCHINSON COUNT OF BUILDINGIPLUMBING/MECHANICAL PERMITS ISSUED AND VALUATION Total Number Inspections 1850 Building Permits Issued by Type Year to Date Number Permits & Valuation Commercial new 2 - $1,757,000 Commercial Additions/ Remodels 86 - $6,993,599 Industrial new 0_$0 Industrial Additions/Remodels 0_$0 Fire Sprinkling 8-$163,930 Total New Residential Units (Single Family, twins, townhomes) 20 - $3,623,304 Residential misc. additions, repairs, remodels, etc 126 - $799,831 Set fee permits (reside, reroof, window replacement, misc.)* 548 HRA Building Permits 7-$67,980 Waived Fees started in March 5-$284,200 Subtotal Building Permits: $13,689,844 Mechanical 164 - $1,247,905.52 HRA Mechanical 2 Plumbing* 78 Signs* 62-$100 Total Permits issued and valuation 1109 - $14,938,121.52 *Set fees not included in valuation Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 10 Yearly Permit and Valuation Totals YEAR TOTAL NO. OF PERMITS TOTAL VALUATION 2015 Building 865 $13,690,216 Mechanical 166 $ 1,247,905 Plumbing 78 $ $14,938,121 2014 Building 779 $12,378,612 Mechanical 219 $ 1,821,629 Pluming 83 $ $14,200,241 2013 Building 879 $14,099,677 Mechanical 190 $ 898,781 Plumbing 70 $ $14,998,458 2012 Building 946 $ 6,670,152 Mechanical 168 $ 1,183,714 Plumbing 68 $ $ 7,854,157 2011 Building 919 $ 6,438,050 Mechanical 175 $ 2,240,584 Plumbing 55 $ $ 8,678,634 2010 Building 788 $25,935,474 Mechanical 244 $ 767,772 Plumbing 74 $ 69,300 1106 $26,772,546 2009 Building 833 $17,885,707 Mechanical 195 $ 1,336,884 Plumbing 81 $ 14,253 1109 $19,236,844 2008 Building 925 $14,802,531 Mechanical 207 $ 1,208,482 Plumbing 113 $ 6,400 1,247 $16,017,413 2007 Building 858 $24,047,333 Mechanical 223 $ 2,319,851 Plumbing 118 $ 1,199 $26,367,184 2006 Building 921 $36,620,381 Mechanical 259 8,030,317 Plumbing 128 269,000 1,308 $44,919,698 2005 Building 233 $23,443,345 Special 682 915 • Special permits are fixed fee permits for residential reshingle, resides, window replacements, and excavations, signs, manufactured homes, fences, moving, demolitions, decks, residential sheds, and fire sprinkler permits. Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 11 New Residential Construction YEAR HOUSING TYPE BUILDINGS UNITS CONSTRUCTION COST 2015 Single Family Dwellings 20 20 $ 3,623,304 2014 Single Family Dwellings 23 23 $ 4,770,652 2013 Single Family Dwellings 12 12 $ 2,378,254 2012 Single Family Dwellings 5 5 $ 935,140 2011 Single Family Dwellings 4 4 $ 852,053 2010 Single Family Dwellings 7 7 $ 1,156,000 2009 Single Family Dwellings 4 4 $ 773,000 2008 Single Family Dwellings 10 10 $ 1,488,000 Twinhomes 4 8 1,087,000 14 18 $ 2,575,000 2007 Single Family Dwellings 24 24 $ 3,692,000 Twinhomes 4 8 1,044,000 28 32 $ 4,736,000 2006 Single Family Dwellings 44 44 $ 6,509,000 Twinhomes 7 14 $ 1,911,000 51 58 $ 8,420,000 2005 Single Family Dwellings 59 59 $ 7,110,000 Twinhomes 7 14 $ 1,553,000 5 Family of More 1 32 $ 2,700,000 67 105 $ 11, 363, 000 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 12 2015 Construction Activity NEW CONSTRUCTION STARTS Valuation New Homes $ 3,623,304 Goodwill 1,379,000 Aspen Dental 378,000 Detached Garages — 325 Monroe St SE 19,000 738 L�rnn Rd SW 18,700 5554 h Ave SW 12,000 107 Mark Dr SE 16,700 570 Miller Ave SW 15,033 989 Jefferson St SE 31,320 Total New Construction $ 5,493,057 ]JiIJiI�:03Fail wa_1kiIIlIN111RAINFa_1Wail QC111161LIKI 1I7:7=lJi161C=1%? Crosspoint Church — remodel — 1215 Roberts Rd SW 1,990,000 Solar Aray — 1100 Adams St SE 1,200,000 Hutchinson Health — MRI — 1095 Hwy 15 S 454,000 Qdoba — 1380 Hwy 15 S 441,250 Landy Lodge — remodel — 35 3rd Ave SE 420,000 Hutchinson Health — reroof — 1095 Hwy 15 S 305,000 Aspen Dental — interior — 964 Hwy 15 S 247,000 McLeod County — fence — 1065 5 h Ave SE 166,000 Caribou — Cashwise remodel — 1020 Hwy 15 S 152,000 Crosspoint Church - remodel — 1215 Roberts Rd SW 113.000 Novation — remodel — 45 Hassan St SE 95,000 1310 Hwy 15 S — interior remodel 55,000 1605 Roberts Rd SW — fence 54,000 Qdoba — add bathrooms — 1380 Hwy 15 S 25,000 Total Addition and Remodel Work $ 5,717,250 All Other Commercial/Industrial Work 1,276,349 All Other Residential Work 755,058 Waived Fees 284,200 Mechanical 1,247,905 Plumbing 0 Fire Sprinkler 163,930 Signs 372 Total Construction Valuation $ 14,938121 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 13 Population Growth NO OF HOUSING NEW FACTOR DWELLINGS TOTAL YEAR TYPE BUILDINGS UNITS FORMULA PER FACTOR POPULATION *Due to economic conditions from 2008 to 2014 staff is not making a population estimate based new home construction, however the 2010 Census data that was released in early 2011 showed Hutchinson's population was 14,178. The 2012 estimated population for Hutchinson from the U.S. Census Bureau is 13,929. 2015 Single Family Dwellings 20 20 20 Demo Single Family Dwelling 4 4 -4 16 14,580 2014 Single Family Dwellings 23 23 23 Demo Single Family Dwelling 2 2 -2 21 14,564 2013 Single Family Dwellings 12 12 12 14,543 2012 Single Family Dwellings 5 5 5 14,531 2011 Single Family Dwellings 4 4 4 14,526 2010 Single Family Dwellings 7 7 7 14,511 2009 Single Family Dwellings 4 4 4 14,515 2008 Single Family Dwellings 12 12 Twinhomes 3 6 18 14,511 2007 Single Family Dwellings 24 24 2.41 58 Twinhomes 4 8 2.41 19 Demo Single Family Dwelling 1 1 2.41 -1 76 14,493 2006 Single Family Dwellings 44 44 2.41 106 Twinhomes 7 14 2.41 33 Demo Single Family Dwelling 3 3 2.41 -7 138 14,423 2005 Single Family Dwellings 59 59 2.41 142 Twinhomes/Duplex 7 14 2.41 34 3 Family Dwelling or More 1 32 1.96 63 Demo Single Family Dwelling 21 21 2.41 -51 188 14,285 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 14 City of Hutchinson New Housing Starts 2015 Site Address Sub Type Owner Name Valuation Contractor Issued Date 1360 Bradford st SE Single Family Bruce Naustdal $155,067 Bruce Naustdal 03/26/2015 955 Texas Cir NW Single Family Bruce Naustdal $183,025 Bruce Naustdal 04/23/2015 141 Morningside Dr NE Single Family Crow River Habitat for Humanity $34,000 John Lofdahl Carpentry 05/05/2015 830 Willow Dr SW Single Family Bruce Naustdal $185,813 Bruce Naustdal 05/04/2015 404 Toronto Blvd SE Single Family Betker Homes $248,000 Betker Homes 05/11/2015 1193 Bluejay Dr. SW Single Family Gustav Wurdell $199,000 MP Builders 05/22/2015 1450 Calgary Ln SE Single Family Betker Homes $198,000 Betker Homes 05/19/2015 270 Ottawa Ave SE Single Family Betker Homes $205,000 Betker Homes 06/10/2015 274 Ottawa Ave SE Single Family Betker Homes $205,000 Betker Homes 06/10/2015 823 Texas Ct NW Single Family Betker Homes $168,165 Betker Homes 06/29/2015 1444 Heritage Ave NW Single Family Joe & Kristen Perrault $233,700 Compton Anderson Const. 07/16/2015 1130 Prairie View Dr SW Single Family Gustav Wurdell $159,000 Utecht Construction 07/24/2015 1140 Prairie View Dr SW Single Family Gustav Wurdell $159,000 Utecht Construction 07/24/2015 113 Summerset Ln SE Single Family Merrill & Donna Johnson $219,500 Framers Plus 08/11/2015 1800 Scenic Heights Ct SW Single Family Gustav Wurdell $156,017 Utecht Construction 09/11/2015 1803 Scenic Heights Ct SW Single Family Gustav Wurdell $156,017 Utecht Construction 09/11/2015 1205 Oakwood Ct NW Single Family Bart & Melissa Bradford $197,000 Froemming Construction 10/23/2015 1460 Calgary Ln SE Single Family Betker Homes $182,000 Betker Homes 10/16/2015 985 Texas Cir NW Single Family Bruce Naustdal $188,000 Bruce Naustdal 10/28/2015 1440 Calgary Ln SE Single Family Betker Homes $192,000 Betker Homes 11/19/2015 New Construction Count 20 Total Valuation $3,623,304 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 15 Vacant Lots - January, 2016 Addition Zoning Year Availability Fairway Estates Addition R - 1 - PD 1999 12 Lots Park Meadows Addition R - 3 2005 7 Lots Bridgewater Estates Addition R - 1 2000 28 Lots Island View Heights Addition R - 2 - PD 2004 13 Lots Ravenwood West Addition R - 2 2005 5 Lots Summerset Addition R-2, R-3 2005 109 Lots Southwind Addition, 1st and 2nd R - 2 2003 2 Lots Southfork Addition R - 3 - PD 2004 49 Lots Kottke Court Replat to RiverPointe Villas R - 2 - PD 2008 10 Lots Santelman's Addition R - 3 - PD 1993 9 Lots Stearnwood Addition R - 1 2004 5 Lots Ravenwood R - 3 1999 1 Lot Hunter's Ridge Addition R - 2 2004 1 Lot Fraser Subdivision Addition R - 2 2005 1 Lot Excelsior Addition R - 2 2007 5 Lots Hellands Sixth Addition R - 2 1984 4 Lots White Hawk Village R - 3 2014 2 Lots Other - Misc R - 2 Unknown 1 Lot Total 264 Lots Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 16 City of Hutchinson Inspection Counts for 2015 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 17 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total Building Certificate of Occupancy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Consult with 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 9 Final Inspection 64 93 76 35 46 55 36 40 36 29 20 22 552 Footings 0 0 2 7 16 10 14 12 7 7 6 4 85 Foundation 1 1 0 1 5 3 9 8 1 6 5 1 41 Framing 10 15 10 4 11 15 24 15 20 12 14 1 151 Insulation 9 10 2 2 7 4 10 2 9 9 4 4 72 Lath 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 Manufactured Home 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 7 Other Inspections 1 3 0 1 1 3 0 0 2 0 0 0 11 Poured/Block Wall 0 1 1 4 5 6 3 1 0 0 0 1 22 Preinspection 3 1 5 17 16 22 18 22 17 17 9 4 151 Rated Fire Assemblies 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Reinspections 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Slab 3 1 0 1 0 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 14 Soils 1 1 1 0 8 5 1 8 0 1 0 0 26 Structural 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Total 92 126 99 74 118 127 122 111 96 83 60 37 1,145 Fire Air Test 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Aboveground 1 1 2 Alarm Test 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Final Inspection 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 8 Rough -in 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total 0 4 0 5 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 13 Mechanical Duct 3 6 1 0 2 4 1 2 1 2 1 0 23 Appliance Replacement 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 2 0 0 9 Final 19 9 16 15 14 15 10 8 9 16 7 12 150 Gas Piping 11 13 11 19 12 6 14 8 10 18 9 6 137 Insulation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Other Inspections 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 Piping 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 Rated Fire Assemblies 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Rough -in 3 1 1 1 0 1 6 3 3 3 2 1 25 Underground 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 36 31 29 36 28 28 36 25 23 41 19 19 352 Plumbing Backflow Prevention 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Consult with 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Final 5 11 11 7 9 8 6 6 9 3 4 8 87 Other Inspections 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Rough -In 1 11 4 4 6 5 8 5 7 5 4 1 61 Sewer and Water 0 0 1 2 3 8 5 1 2 2 1 0 25 Underground 4 2 5 2 4 8 7 3 1 4 5 1 46 Total 10 24 21 15 22 29 27 15 19 14 14 10 220 Public Works BMP Installation 0 0 5 3 5 1 13 2 1 0 2 1 33 Drainage Connection 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 0 0 5 Erosion & Sediment 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 Final 0 0 3 0 0 0 5 1 6 0 4 1 20 Total 0 0 12 4 5 1 20 4 9 1 6 2 63 Sign Final Inspection 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 Footings 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total 0 0 0 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 Total Inspections 138 185 161 138 173 185 207 157 147 139 99 69 11798 Year -End Report — 2015 Planning/Zoning/Building Department - Page 17 G Building Permit Summary for the Year of 2015 Description April May June July Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Totals Est. Value 130,410.00 1 75,000.00 1 772,017.00 1 2,896,921.00 1 4,060,067.00 1 1,205,924.00 1 1,386,871.00 1 391,058.00 1 1,820,822.52 1 1,156,148.00 742,373.00 1 300,510.00 1 14,938,121.52 Surcharge 1 194.57 140.25 547.78 1,707.13 2,267.29 655.83 815.00 240.13 962.65 629.94 399.43 170.88 8,730.88 Blda. Dept. Fees Permit Fee (New/Remodel) 1,034.04 1,615.06 5,696.74 19,837.70 25,704.93 9,277.03 8,864.96 4,775.99 12,691.09 11,931.14 6,717.95 3,114.76 111,261.39 Plan Check Fee 548.10 8,122.44 1,939.86 8,308.44 15,525.94 4,878.39 4,564.49 2,554.07 5,792.69 6,674.12 3,881.52 1,698.80 64,488.86 Excavation Fee 35.00 235.00 535.00 705.00 470.00 370.00 370.00 305.00 440.00 205.00 35.00 3,705.00 Set Fees (Residential) 500.00 685.00 1,250.00 3,425.00 3,000.00 2,300.00 2,600.00 2,750.00 2,750.00 2,750.00 1,000.00 300.00 23,310.00 Mfg'd Home 1 1,960.00 720.00 370.00 1,200.00 1,000.00 400.00 185.00 Const Water/Well Conversion 150.00 50.00 555.00 Moving 150.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 220.00 1,400.00 Total Permit Fees to Others 290.00 4,990.00 13,285.00 35,850.00 14,491.50 14,908.86 220.00 Demolition 225.00 11,925.00 126,019.22 300.00 125.00 125.00 300.00 1,075.00 Sign 120.00 240.00 120.00 240.00 660.00 240.00 692.00 358.00 622.00 381.00 180.00 60.00 3,913.00 Mechanical/Plumbing 1,000.00 578.00 3,199.88 2,518.11 4,611.55 1,743.00 6,725.28 1,112.00 1,126.50 2,348.44 1,548.25 1,411.50 27,922.51 Fire Sprinkling 449.98 450.00 454.41 520.63 1,875.02 Other 500.00 500.00 0.00 Total Bldg. Dept. Fees 1 3,877.12 11,725.50 12,441.48 36,188.66 50,427.42 1 18,908.42 24,116.73 11,920.06 24,117.91 24,649.70 13,832.72 6,620.06 238,825.78 Fees to other Departments Plbg. Water Meter. 140.00 140.00 140.00 840.00 1,955.00 420.00 140.00 1,460.00 420.00 375.00 6,030.00 Parks & Playgrd. 135.00 725.00 430.00 388.86 173.86 485.00 175.00 2,512.72 Elect. Territory 800.00 1,600.00 1,600.00 800.00 800.00 5,600.00 SAC Connection 2,300.00 7,360.00 17,250.00 5,359.00 6,900.00 2,300.00 4,600.00 6,900.00 5,750.00 58,719.00 WAC Connection 1,750.00 5,600.00 13,125.00 4,077.50 5,250.00 1,750.00 3,500.00 5,250.00 4,375.00 44,677.50 Tree Fees 1 1,960.00 720.00 1,800.00 1,200.00 1,000.00 400.00 7,080.00 Const Water/Well Conversion 150.00 50.00 350.00 350.00 150.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 50.00 1,400.00 Total Permit Fees to Others 290.00 4,990.00 13,285.00 35,850.00 14,491.50 14,908.86 4,240.00 11,033.86 15,005.00 11,925.00 126,019.22 Total Permits Fees 1 $ 4,361.69 1 $11,865.75 1 $17,979.26 1 $ 51,180.79 1 $ 88,544.71 1 $ 34,055.75 1 $ 39,840.59 1 $ 16,400.19 1 $ 36,114.42 1 $ 40,284.64 1 $ 26,157.15 1 $ 6,790.94 1 $ 373,575.88 Total Building Permits 26 32 46 105 113 102 102 89 88 99 44 20 866 Total Mech & Plbg Permits 16 12 14 28 31 22 33 14 18 26 16 15 245 Total Permits Issued 42 44 60 133 144 124 135 103 106 125 60 35 1,111 Total Inspections 145 1 187 1 161 1 132 1 173 1 205 1 202 1 165 1 162 1 165 1 99 1 71 1 1,867 HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Ordinance to sell City-owned land to Titanium Partners, Second Reading Department: EDA LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Miles R. Seppelt Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Miles R. Seppelt Reviewed by Staff ❑ Unfinished Business Time Requested (Minutes): 0 License Contingency N/A Attachments: No BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: The City has been approached by a developer who wishes to construct a 54-room hotel on the northeast corner of State Hwys 7 & 15. The first step in the process would be signing a Purchase Agreement with the developer, Titanium Partners. City staff is proposing a sale price of $1 for the property, which encompasses all the lots from State Highway 7 over to Prospect Street. The developer is in the process of putting together a site plan for the project and a one-stop-shop is planned for February 16th. The developer is hoping to break ground on the project in early May and have the project completed by the end of October. No changes have been made to the ordinance or the purchase agreement since the last Council meeting at which this was presented. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Approval of ordinance to sell land and authorization to sign purchase agreement Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source: N/A FTE Impact: 0.00 Budget Change: No Included in current budget: No PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: ORDINANCE NO. 16-753 PUBLICATION NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF MUNICIPALLY OWNED REAL PROPERTY THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON ORDAINS: Section 1. That the municipally owned real property legally described as follows: That part of Tracts A, B, C, D and E described below: Tract A. Lot 8, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract B. The south 146 feet of Lot 9, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; the title thereto being registered; Tract C. The south 200 feet of Lot 10 and the south 200 feet of the west half of Lot 1, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract D. The south 132 feet of the east half of Lot 11, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Count Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract E. The south 97 feet of Lot 12, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract F. Lot 7, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; which lies northerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Corner B4 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-46 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County; thence northwesterly on an azimuth of 295 degrees 14 minutes 20 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 246.14 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B3; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 1492.40 feet and a delta angle of 04 degrees 52 minutes 30 seconds, for 126.98 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B2; thence on an azimuth of 290 degrees 21 minutes 51 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 97.59 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B 1; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 4417.08 feet and a delta angle of 03 degrees 06 minutes 57 seconds, for 240.21 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B4305 and the north and south quarter line of Section 31, Township 117 North, Range 29 West, and there terminating; together with that part of Tract F hereinbefore described, adjoining and westerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of Line 1 described above and easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. Beginning at the point of termination of Line 1 described above; thence northerly on an azimuth of 03 degrees 09 minutes 38 seconds along the north and south quarter line of said Section 31 for 200.00 feet, more or less, to Right of Way Boundary Corner B4401 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-44 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County; thence on an azimuth of 13 degrees 28 minutes 51 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 43-44 for 152.49 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B 12 and there terminating; Subject to the following restriction: No access shall be permitted to Trunk Highway No. 7 or to Trunk Highway No. 15 from the lands herein conveyed, except that access shall be permitted along the most southeasterly line thereof by way of Prospect Street. for good and valuable consideration in the amount of $1.00 is hereby transferred and conveyed to Titanium Partners LLC. Section 2. The City Administrator, Matthew Jaunich, or his designee is authorized to sign any and all documents on behalf of the City to effectuate the closing of this transaction. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication. Adopted by the City Council this 23rd day of February, 2016. Gary T. Forcier Mayor ATTEST: Matthew Jaunich City Administrator VACANT LAND PURCHASE AGREEMENT This Vacant Land Purchase Agreement ("Agreement') is made by and between the City of Hutchinson, a public body corporate and politic ("Seller') and Titanium Partners, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, or its assigns ("Buyer') as of this 11th day of January, 2016 ("Effective Date"). In consideration of this Agreement, Seller and Buyer agree as follows: 1. Sale of Proyerty. Seller agrees to sell to Buyer, and Buyer agrees to buy from Seller, vacant real property located in the City of Hutchinson, County of McLeod, Minnesota, described as fotlows: That part of Tracts A, B, C, D and E described below: Tract A. Lot 8, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract B. The south 146 feet of Lot 9, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; the title thereto being registered; Tract C. The south 200 feet of Lot 10 and the south 200 feet of the west half of Lot 1, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract D. The south 132 feet of the cast half of Lot 11, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Count Recorder in and for Mcleod County, M innesota; 'Pratt E. The south 97 feet of Lot 12, Block 13, "Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; Tract F. Lot 7, Block 13, Townsite of Hutchinson, North Half, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for McLeod County, Minnesota; which lies northerly of Line 1 described below: Line 1. Beginning at Right of Way Boundary Corner B4 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-46 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County; thence northwesterly on an azimuth ot'295 degrees 14 minutes 20 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 246.14 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B3; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 1492.40 feet and a delta angle of 04 degrees 52 minutes 30 seconds, for 126.98 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B2; thence on an azimuth of 290 degrees 21 minutes 51 seconds along the boundary of said plat for 97.59 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence deflect to the left along the boundary of said plat on a tangential curve, having a radius of 4417.08 feet and a delta angle of 03 degrees 06 minutes 57 seconds, for 240.21 feet to Right of Way Boundary Comer B4305 and the north and south quarter line of Section 31, Township 117 North, Range 29 West, and there terminating; together with that part of Tract F hereinbefore described, adjoining and westerly of the above described strip, which lies northerly of Line I described above and easterly of Line 2 described below: Line 2. Beginning at the point of termination of Line 1 described above; thence northerly on an azimuth of 03 degrees 09 minutes 38 seconds along the north and south quarter line of said Section 31 for 200.00 feet, more or less, to Right of Way Boundary Corner B4401 as shown on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 43-44 as the same is on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder in and for said County; thence on an azimuth of 13 degrees 28 minutes 51 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 43-44 for 152.49 feet to Right of Way Boundary Comer B 12 and there terminating; Subject to the following restriction: No access shall be permitted to Trunk flighway No. 7 or to Trunk I lighway No. 15 from the lands herein conveyed, except that access shall be permitted along the most southeasterly line thereof by way of Prospect Street. together with all casements and rights benefitting or appurtenant to the Iand (collectively, "Property' }. The purpose of this transaction is to allow Buyer to construct a mid-level (or higher) hotel on the property. 2. Purchase Price and Manner of Payment. The total purchase price ("'Purchase Price' } to be paid by Buyer to Seller for the Property shall be One Dollar ($1.00), and shall be payable in cash or certified funds at closing. Buyer shall pay Two Thousand, Five Hundred Dollars ($2,500.00) earnest money to Seller ("Earnest Maney'}, which will be held at Title Company (defined below). Seller acknowledges and agrees that at Closing (defined below), Buyer is entitled to a return of any Earnest Money remaining after payment of the Purchase Price and any Buyer closing; costs. 3. Cl_ osin . The closing on the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement (the "Closing') shall occur within 15 days after the end of the Due Diligence Period (as hereinafter del ined), or such other time as mutually agreed to by the parties (the "Closing Date"), at a title company reasonably selected by the parties ("Title Company"). Seller agrees to deliver possession of the Property immediately after Closing. 4. "As Is" Sale. Seller and Buyer agree that upon Closing, the Property shall be sold and that Buyer shall accept possession of the Property on the Closing Date "as is", where is, with all faults, except as specifically warranted and represented by Seller in this Agreement. 5. Gaud Faith, The parties agree to cooperate and act in good faith in completing this transaction as soon as reasonably possible. 6. Contin encies. The obligations of the Buyer under this Agreement are contingent upon the following: (a) Representations and Warranties. The representations and warranties of Seller contained in this Agreement must be true now to the best of Seller's knowledge and on the Closing Date, as if made on the Closing Date. M Performance of Seller's Obligalions. Seiler shall have performed all of the obligations required to be performed by Seller under this Agreement, as and when required by this Agreement. W Title Evidence. The condition of the Title Evidence (defined below) shall be found acceptable to Buyer. (d) Due_Diligence and Disclosures. The period of time commencing on the Effective Date and ending on the date that is ISO days after the Effective Date, or such earlier date as Buyer elects, at Buyer's sale option and discretion, is referred to herein as the "Due Diligence Period'. Buyer shall have the right to conduct a due diligence inquiry as to the condition of the Property and Buyer's intended use of the Property during the Due Diligence Period. Such. investigation shall be at Buyer's expense, although Seller shall provide reasonable cooperation, including, but not limited to, (i) permitting Buyer or its agents to physically enter and inspect the Property, and (ii) providing Buyer with copies of any and all surveys, appraisals, engineering reports and any and all other documents in Seller's possession, if any, related to the condition and location of the Property. Buyer shall repair and restore any damage to the Property caused by or occurring during Buyer's inspection, and return the Property to substantially the same condition as existed prior to such entry. If Buyer is dissatisfied with the results of the due diligence investigations(s), Buyer may terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Seller on or before the Due Diligence Period. Buyer may close the Due Diligence Period early, at Buyer's sole option and discretion, by providing Seller with written notice that Buyer has completed due diligence and is electing to close on the purchase and sale contemplated by this Agreement. 7. Termination. Buyer shall have until the end the Due Diligence Period to cancel this Agreement for any failed contingency or any other reason, in Buyer's sole option and discretion. 8. Documents to be Delivered to Buyer at Closing. On the Closing Date, Seller shall execute and deliver to Buyer the following documents: (a) Warran Deed. A Warranty Deed conveying marketable title to the Property, subject to the following exceptions; (i) zoning laws, ordinances and regulations; and (ii) agreements, easements, conditions, reservations, covenants and restrictions of record, reasonably acceptable to Buyer. (b) Other Documents. Any other document(s) reasonably determined by Buyer or Title Company, to be necessary to transfer the Property, free and clear of all encumbrances except as otherwise provided herein. 9. Items to he Delivered to Seiler at Closing. On the Closing Date, Buyer shall execute and/or deliver to Seller the following: (a) Purchase Price. The Purchase Price by cash, cashier's check or wire transfer. (l3) Other Documents. Any other document(s) reasonably determined by Seller to be necessary to carry out the terms of this Agreement and close the transaction. 10. Evidence of Title. 'Within 30 days after the date of this Agreement, or such longer period as the parties hereto may agree, Seller shall, at Seller's sole cost and expense, deliver to Buyer the following: (a) SMev. A current ALTA survey of the Property prepared by a registered land surveyor in form acceptable to and including all information requested by the Buyer (the "Survey"); and (b) Title Commitment. A commitment from Title to issue an ALTA Owner's Policy of Title Insurance, insuring Buyer's title to the Property (the `Title Commitment"). Title Commitment shall have an effective date no earlier than the date of this Agreement, The Survey and the Title Commitment are sometimes referred to in this Purchase Agreement collectively as the "Title Evidence," Buyer will have until the end of the Due Diligence Period to provide Seller with written objections ("Objections") to the Property based upon the Title Evidence. Seller will have 60 days from receipt of Buyer's written. Objections to cure the Objections to the reasonable satisfaction of Buyer. Seiler will have 10 business days after it receives the Objections to notify Buyer whether Seller intends to cure the Objections. If Seller notifies Buyer that Seller intends to cure the Objections, then Closing will be delayed for up to bQ [lays, pending cure of the Objections. Cure of the Objections by Seller shall be reasonable, diligent, and prompt, Pending cure of the Objections, all Payments required herein and the Closing will be postponed. If the only Objections are for liens or encumbrances for liquidated amounts that can be released, then there will be no delay in the Closing. If Seller does not notify Buyer that Seller intends to cure the Objections or if Seller notifies Buyer that Seller intends to cure but the Objections are not cured within the 60 day period provided for above, then, at Buyer's option: (i) this Purchase Agreement shall be null and void and neither party shall be liable to the other, and all Earnest Money paid by the Buyer will be refunded to Buyer or (ii) Buyer may elect to proceed, subject to uncured Objections, in which event, Closing shall proceed. 11. Proration$ and Casts. Seller and Buyer agree to the following prorations and allocation of costs regarding this Agreement: (a) Title Insurance and Closing Fee. Seller will pay the cost of the title search for obtaining the Title Commitment. Buyer will pay the premium for the cost of the issuance of any Owner's Title Policy. Buyer will pay any reasonable and customary closing fee or charge imposed by the Title Company, (b) Deed Tax. Any and all deed tax shall be paid by Seller. (e) Propm Taxes and Special Assessments. On or before the Closing Date, all real estate taxes and special assessments shall be paid as follows: i Seller shall pay all real estate taxes payable in all years prior to the year of closing. ii Seller shall pay all special assessments including, but not limited to, sewer and water assessments payable in all years prior to the year of Closing and the year of Closing. iii General real estate taxes and special assessments payable in the year of Closing shall be prorated between Seller and Buyer as of the Closing Date. iv Buyer shall pay all general real estate taxes and installments of special assessments payable in all years following the year of Closing. (d) Atlgrns' Fees. Each of the parties shall pay their own attorneys' fees, except that a party defaulting under this Agreement shall pay the reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs incurred by the non -defaulting party, including such fees and costs incurred to enforce its rights regarding such default. 1.2. Representations and Warranties by, Seller. To the hest of Seller's knowledge, Seller represents and warrants to Buyer as follows. (a) Seller's Documents. The documents delivered by Seller to Buyer at Closing will be valid and binding obligations of Seller, and will be enforceable in accordance with their terms. (b) Title toPronerty. Seller owns the Property which is, and/or at the time of Closing will be, free from all liens and encumbrances, except as specifically indicated by this Agreement or otherwise agreed to by Buyer. (c) Authorily and Ca acit . Seller has full authority to enter into this Agreement and complete capacity to understand the terms hereof. (d) Risk f Loss. To the extent the Property suffers any damage prior to the Closing Date, Buyer shall have the option of canceling this Agreement. (e) FIRPTA. Seller is not a "foreign person," "foreign partnership," "foreign trust," or "foreign corporation" under Internal Revenue Code Section 1445, and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. (f) MetharriphetgMi:ne Disclosure. Seller discloses and certifies that, to the best of Seller's knowledge, methamphetamine production has not occurred on the Property. (g) Wells and Septic Systems. Seller certifies that Seller does not know of any wells within the Property. Seller certifies that Seller is not aware of any septic system or other private sewer system on the Property. (h) Environmental Condition. To the hest of the Seller's knowledge, there are no Hazardous Substances located on the Property; the Property is not subject to any liens or claims by government or regulatory agencies or third parties arising from the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances in, on or about the Property; the Property has not been used in connection with the generation, disposal, storage, treatment or transportation of Hazardous Substances; and there have been no releases, spills or other discharges of Hazardous Substances on the Property. For purposes of this Agreement, the term "Hazardous Substance" includes but is not limited to substances defined as "hazardous substances," "toxic substances" or "hazardous wastes" in the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation Liability Act of 1980, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§9601, et seq., and substances defined as "hazardous wastes," "hazardous substances," "pollutants or contaminants" as defined in the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 115B.02, et seq. The term "Hazardous Substance" also includes asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls, petroleum (including crude oil or any fraction thereof), petroleum product or heating oil. Seller agrees that Seller shall indemnify and hold Buyer, its officers, employees, attorneys, successors and assigns, harmless from any costs, actions, damages, claims, liens, judgments or any expenses of any type or nature whatsoever relating to or arising from any environmental hazards, conditions or contamination or any hazardous waste or materials or substances existing upon the Property on the date of Closing. (i) Airport Zoning Disclosure. If airport zoning regulations affect the Property, a copy of those airport zoning regulations as adopted can be viewed or obtained at the office of the county recorder where the Property is located. 0) Rights of Others to Purchase Proyerty. Seller has not entered into any other contracts for the sale of the Property, nor are there any rights of first refusal or options to purchase the Property or any other rights of others that might prevent the consummation of this Agreement on the terms herein. (k) Proceedings. There is no action, litigation, investigation, condemnation, or proceeding of any kind pending or threatened against Seller or any portion of the Property. 13. Representations and 'Warranties by Buyer, Buyer hereby represents and warrants to Seller (as of the date of this Agreement and as of the Closing Date) that Buyer has full power, authority and capacity to enter into and perform this Agreement in accordance with its terns. 14. Final Property Inspection. Seller covenants that between the date of the execution of this Agreement and the Closing Date, Seller will continue to maintain the Property in a fashion that is lawful and consistent with Seller's past practices. Seller will not change or permit the change of the Property in any material way. In addition, Buyer shall be entitled to a final inspection of the Property prior to Closing. 15. Condemnation. If, prior to the Closing Date, eminent domain proceedings are commenced against all or any part of the Property, Seller shall immediately give notice to Buyer of such act and this Agreement shall terminate, in which event neither party shall have any further obligations under this Agreement and the Earnest Money shall be refunded to Buyer. 16. Damage. If, prior to the Closing Date, all or any part of the Property is materially damaged casualty, the elements, or any other cause, Seller shall immediately give notice to Buyer of such fact. If the property is damaged by casualty, the elements or any other cause, then this Agreement shall be null and void at Buyer's option provided, however, that if Buyer desires to proceed with its purchase of the Property, Seiler shall assign any available insurance proceeds to Buyer. 1.7. Assignment. Either party may assign its rights under this Agreement before or after the Closing. 18. Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party upon the other is deemed delivered in accordance with this Agreement (a) four (4) business days after it is deposited in the United States trail; (b) 24 hours after it is deposited with a nationally - recognized over -night courier; (e) when it is personally delivered; or (d) when it is sent by electronic transmission, and addressed as follows - If L o ollows: Imo Seller: City of Hutchinson Attn: Miles R. Seppelt Economic Development Director 11 l Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55354 Email: mse elt(iu ci.hutchinson,tnn.us If to Buver: Titanium Partners, LLC Attn.: Brian ,Forcier 207 Misquah Rd. Duluth, MN 55804 Email: bforcier a.titaniumpartnerslle.coin With copy to: Paul A. Loraas Fryberger, Buchanan, Smith & Frederick, P.A. 302 W. Superior St., Suite 700 Duluth, MN 55802 Email: ploraas a.frybergencom Notices shah be deemed effective on the date they are deemed to be delivered. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other patty, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. 19. Survival. Those provisions set forth in this Agreement relating to representations, warranties, indemnification, proration and payment of expenses, and the availability of attorney's fees upon default of the surviving provisions, shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 20. Remedies. If Buyer defaults under this Agreement, Seller shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving five (5) business days written notice to Buyer. If Buyer fails to cure such default within 5 business days of the date of such notice, this Agreement shall terminate and Seller may retain the Earnest Money and/or exercise any and all rights and remedies available at law or in equity, including, but not lirnited to, the right to recover money damages and seek specific performance. If Seller defaults under this Agreement, Buyer shall give written notice to Seller. If Seller fails to cure such default within five (5) business days, Buyer shall have the right to terminate this Agreement without further notice and the right to seek recovery of money damages or to seek specific performance of this Agreement. If any dispute arises from the default of either party, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover their reasonable attorneys fees and expenses. 21. Binding Effect. This Agreement, including the reversionary clause contained in Section 27, binds and benefits the parties and their successors and assigns. 22. Choice of Law. This Agreement shall be subject to and governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota and all questions concerning the meaning or intention of the terms of this Agreement or concerning the validity thereof, and questions relating to the performance hereunder shall be adjudged and resolved in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota. 23. Representation by Attorney, Seller and Buyer acknowledge that each has been represented by an attorney of its own choice with respect to entry into this Agreement or has had an opportunity to be represented by an attorney. Seller acknowledges and agrees that Fryberger, Buchanan, Smith & Fredericks, P.A. is representing Buyer in regards to this Agreement, and has not provided any legal advice to Seller. 24. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in all terms herein. 25. Scrivener's Errors. Seller acknowledge and agree that Buyer may correct any typographical or scrivener's errors in this Agreement without the consent of Seller in order to effectuate the terms of this Agreement. In the event Buyer makes any such revisions, Buyer will provide a copy of the revised document(s) to Seller. 26. Entire Agreement; Modification; Counterparts and Electronic Signatures. 1 -his written Agreement constitutes the complete agreement between the parties and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements between the parties regarding the Property. There are no verbal agreements that change this Agreement and no waiver or amendment of any of its terms shall be effective unless in writing executed by the parties. This Agreement or any amendments may be executed in counterparts, which, taken together, shall constitute one original. The parties agree that this Agreement may be transmitted between themselves by facsimile, email or other electronic means. The parties intend that scanned, faxed, emailed or other electronically produced and/or transmitted signatures constitute original signatures and that a faxed, emailed or other electronically produced and/or transmitted agreement or counterparts containing the signatures of all the parties is binding upon the parties. 27. Reverter. Should Buyer fail to obtain a certificate of occupancy for a mid-level hotel or greater prior to October 31, 2017, Buyer shall forfeit all right, title and interest in the property, and any improvements thereto, and the property shall revert to Seller with Buyer executing all documents, including a Warranty Deed in favor of Seller, in order to complete the reverter. Seller and Buyer have executed this Agreement as of the date set forth above. SELLER CITY OF HUTCHINSON By: Its: -and- By: Its: BUYER TITANIUM PARTNERS, LLC By: Brian Forcier Its; ' r HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Ordinance on Mayor and Council Salaries Department: Administration LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Matt Jaunich Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Matt Jaunich Reviewed by Staff ❑ New Business Time Requested (Minutes): 10 License Contingency N/A Attachments: Yes BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: During the 2016 budget discussions late last year, it was requested by the Council that staff bring forth an ordinance for consideration that addresses raising the salaries of both the Mayor and Council Members to a level that is similar to our other regional centers. Attached for your consideration is a first reading of that ordinance. The proposed ordinance would raise the Mayor's salary from $8,247.20 annually to $9,247. It would also raise the salary of each council member from $5,279.04 annually to $6,279. The Mayor's per diem would also be raised from $60 for a half day to $65 and $95 for a full day with a maximum per diem payment of $5,395 per year (up from $4,980). The increase is basically $1,000 across the board with a minor adjustment to the Mayor's per diem. The maximum financial impact this would have on the City would be an increase of about $5,415 which would go into effect in 2017. It would have no impact on this year's budget. Please note that the current salaries of the Mayor and Council Members have been in place and have not been adjusted since 1994. I have also included a copy of comparative salaries of the Mayor and Council Members of other regional centers, along with areas that we have used as our "defined market" when it comes to comparing other salaries here at the City. Please note that I have simply tried to get the salaries of the Mayor and Council Members closer to the "average". If there is a desire to raise or decrease those proposed salary adjustments, I would say that should be a decision at the council meeting. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Consideration of first reading of ordinance and a request to set the second reading and consideration for adoption of the ordinance at the March 8 council meeting. Fiscal Impact: $ 0.00 Funding Source: FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: Yes PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: Ordinance No. 16-754 Publication No. AN ORDINANCE SETTING THE SALARIES OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS The City Council hereby ordains: WHEREAS, the Hutchinson City Charter, Section 2.08 notes that the salaries of the elective officers shall be established by Minnesota Statute 415.11, as such statute may be amended from time to time; and WHEREAS, City Code, Chapter 30.33 notes that pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statute 415.11, as it may be amended from time to time, salaries shall be set by ordinance and no change in the salaries shall take effect until after the next succeeding municipal election; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 415.11 notes that governing bodies of home rule charter cities may, by ordinance, fix their own salaries in such amount as they deem reasonable; and WHEREAS, no such changes in salaries shall take effect until after the next succeeding municipal election; and WHEREAS, the next Municipal Election is scheduled to take place on November 8, 2016; and WHEREAS, the City Council last raised the salary of the Mayor and Council Members to its current level in October of 1993 which became effective in January of 1994; and WHEREAS, the current annual salary of the Mayor is $8,247.20 and the current annual salary of each Council Member is $5,279.04; and WHEREAS, the Mayor is also allowed as additional compensation the sum of $60.00 as per diem payment for each half day meeting, defined as a meeting lasting three hours or less in length, and $90.00 as a per diem payment for each full day meeting, defined as lasting in excess of three hours, attended by the Mayor on behalf of the City of Hutchinson. The per diem allowance shall not be paid for City Council meetings and regular Board meetings and shall be limited to a total per diem payment of $4,980.00 per year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, THAT 1) The annual salary of the Mayor shall be $9,247 2) The annual salary of each Council Member shall be $6,279 3) The Mayor shall be allowed as additional compensation the sum of $65.00 as per diem payment for each half day meeting, defined as a meeting lasting three hours or less in length, and $95.00 as a per diem payment for each full day meeting, defined as lasting in excess of three hours, attended by the Mayor on behalf of the City of Hutchinson. The per diem allowance shall not be paid for City Council meetings and regular Board meetings and shall be limited to a total per diem payment of $5,395.00 per year. 4) The salaries provided herein shall be effective January 1, 2017 Adopted by the City Council this 8th Day of March, 2016. Attest: Matthew Jaunich, City Administrator Gary T. Forcier, Mayor Mayor/Council Salaries Regional Centers (2015) Mayor Additional Council Additional City Population Salary Compensation Salary Compensation $60 meeting <3 hr; $90 meeting >3 hr; HUTCHINSON 14,073 $8,247 $4,980 max $5,279 NA Albert Lea 18,061 $12,000 NA $8,000 NA Alexandria 12,441 $7,964 NA $6,124 NA Austin 23,743 $9,000 NA $6,600 NA Bemidji 13,541 $12,000 $25 per 2 hr meeting $10,000 $25 per 2 hr meeting Brainerd 13,956 $7,800 NA $6,600 NA $40 for special $40 for special Fairmont 10,619 $4,800 meetings $2,400 meetings Faribault 23,312 $8,480 NA $7,220 NA Fergus Falls 13,733 $12,900 NA $7,800 NA Marshall 13,156 $8,579 NA $5,426 NA New Ulm 13,396 $10,500 NA $8,000 NA Northfield 19,786 $9,600 NA $7,200 NA Owatonna 25,433 $9,000 NA $7,200 NA Red Wing 16,294 $7,550 NA $7,550 NA $20/hr for Special $20/hr for Special Willmar 19,072 $12,000 Meetings $7,500 Meetings Winona 27,474 $9,407 NA $6,696 NA $50/meeting; max $50/meeting; max Worthington 11,405 $10,000 $50/day $6,000 $50/day Average 17,029 $9,402 $6,800 LMC Annual Wage Information - 2015 Study Mayor Defined Market - Cities Search Results for Mayor. No comparison salary provided. IMbert Lea 18,061 Southeast 1 $12,000.00 $1,988.53 $3,754.00 Champlin 23,934 Metro 1 $9,550.00 ($461.47) $1,304.00 0 .Chanhassen 23,629 Metro 1 $6,000.00 ($4,011.47) ($2,246.00) $50 per meeting Chaska 24,177 Metro 1 $8,208.00 ($1,803.4-7) ($38.00) 0 Cokato 2,760 Central 1 $3,000.00 ($7,011.47) ($5,246.00) $50 East 13ethe! 12,090 Metro 1 $6,300.00 ($3,711 A7) ($1,946.00) Farmington 18,959 Metro 1 $8,440.00 ($1,971.47) ($206.70) Glencoe 5,743 Southwest 1 $5,100.00 ($4,911.47) ($3,146.00) ❑ Hastings 22,491 Metro 1 $8,400.00 ($1,611.47) $154.40 0 Hutchinson 14,073 Central 1 $8,246.00 ($1,765.47) $0.00 $603hr $4980max Litchfield 6,813 Central 1 $6,000.00 ($4,011.47) ($2,246.017) Mankato 37,032 Southeast 1 $18,138.00 $8,126.53 $9,892.00 n/a New Ulm 13,396 Southwest 1 $10,500.00 $488.53 $2,254.00 Northfield 19,785 Central 1 $9,600.00 ($411.47) $1,354.40 0 Norwood .Young 3,637 Metro 1 $3,600.00 ($6,411.47) ($4,646.40) 0 Olivia 2,528 Southwest 1 $3,600.00 ($6,411.47) ($4,646.00) $75 Owatonna 25,433 Southeast 1 $9,000.00 ($1,011.47) $754,00 Council Pres. = $9000.04 Prior Lake 23,335 Metro 1 $9,420.00 ($591.47) $1,174.04 $50.00 per meeting Red Wing 16,294 Southeast 1 $7,550.40 ($2,46..07) ($695.60) Savage 27,567 Metro 1 $8,040.00 ($2,011.41) ($246.04) Shakopee 34,691 Metro 1 $15,000.00 $4,988.53 $6,754.00 0 St. Cloud 65,741 Central 1 $45,000.00 $34,988.53 $36,754.00 AVERAGE 20,099 $10,011.47 LMC Annual Wage Information - 2015 Study City Council Member Defined Market - Cities ....................... Search Results for Council Member, No comparison salary provided. 1 Albert Lea 18,061 Southeast 6 $8,000.00 $1,810.71 $2,722.00 Champlin 23,934 Metro 4 $6,610.00 $420.71 $1,332.00 0 Chanhassen 23,629 Metro 4 $4,800.00 ($1.,389.29) ($478.00 $50 per meeting Chaska 24,177 Metro 4 $6,948.00 $758.71 $1,670.00 0 Cokato 2,760 Central 4 $2,100.00 ($4.089.29) ($3,178.00) $50 East Bethel 12,090 Metro 4 $5,700.00 ($489.29) $422.00 Farmington 18,959 Metro 4 $7,020.00 $830.71 $1,742.00 Glencoe 5,743 Southwest 5 $4,200.00 ($1,989,29) ($1,078.00) 0 Hastings 22,491 Metro 6 $6,000,00 {$189.29) $722.00 0 Hutchinson 14,073 Central 4 $5,278.00 ($911.29) $0.00 Litchfield 6,813 Central 6 $3,600.00 ($2,589.29) ($1,678.00) Mankato 37,032 Southeast 6 $9,068.00 $2,878.71 $3,790.00 n/a New Ulm 13,396 Southwest 5 $8,000.00 $1,810.71 $2,722.00 Northfield 19,786 Central 6 $7,200.00 $1,010.71 $1,922.00 0 Young America 3,637 Metro 4 $2,400.00 ($3,789.29) ($2,878.00) 0 Olivia 2,528 Southwest 4 $2,550.00 ($3,639.29) ($2,728.00) $75 Owatonna 25,433 Southeast 7 $7,200.00 $1,010.71 $1,922.00 Prior Lake 23,335 Metro 4 $7,440.00 $1,250.71 $2,162,00 $50.00 per meeting Red Wing 16,294 Southeast 7 $7,550.40 $1,361.11 $2,272.40 Savage 27,567 Metro 4 $6,000.00 ($189.29) $722.00 0 Shakopee 34,691 Metro 4 $7,500.00 $1,310.71 $2,222.00 0 St, Cioud 65,741 Central 7 $11,000.00 $4,810.71 $5,722.00 AVERAGE 20,099 $6,189.29 HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Consideration of Ordinance No. 16-755 - Amending Section 2.04 - City Charter Department: Administration/Legal LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Matt Jaunich/Marc Sebora Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Matt Jaunich/Marc Sebora Reviewed by Staff ❑ New Business Time Requested (Minutes): 10 License Contingency N/A Attachments: Yes BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: At the last City Council meeting, staff was directed to prepare a proposed ordinance to change the length of the mayor's term of office from two years to four years with the understanding that the ordinance would be forwarded on to the voters to vote on at this Fall's general election. The enclosed ordinance provides for the change to a four year mayoral term and contemplates the change being voted on by the people this fall. Of particular note, the proposed ordinance would have the changes go into effect with the mayoral election in 2018. The Council certainly has the prerogative to change the effective date to 2020 or some other election year as the Council sees fit. Procedurally, as we talked about the last Council meeting, the Charter Commission has the right to review the proposed ordinance and suggest changes to it before it gets forwarded onto the people to vote on. That review period can extend up to 150 days. Finally, for the sake of convenience, I have taken the liberty of also incorporating changes in the same ordinance that the Charter Commission already forwarded to you with regard to when the terms of office for elective officers shall commence. Our current Charter says that the term of office shall commence the first business day in January. The Charter Commission had already recommended changes to have that change to be the first Monday in January or if the Monday is a holiday than the first Tuesday. I simply incorporated those changes into this ordinance. Staff will be available for any questions you have about this proposed ordinance at the Council meeting. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: First reading of Ordinance 16-755, set second reading and consideration of adoption Fiscal Impact: Funding Source: FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: No PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: Ordinance No. 16-755 Publication No. AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING REVISIONS TO SECTION 2.04 OF HUTCHINSON CITY CHARTER The City Council hereby ordains: WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 410.12, Subd. 5 permits amendments to a City Charter by way of an ordinance proposed by the City Council; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to that statute, said ordinance is to be reviewed by the City's Charter Commission; and, WHEREAS, after such Charter Commission review, the City Council may submit the Charter change contained in the ordinance to the voters for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUTCHINSON, THAT 1. The Hutchinson City Charter be amended as follows: Section 2.04 ELECTIVE OFFICERS. The elective officers of the City shall be registered voters of the City and shall consist of a mayor who shall serve for two years and four council members elected at large who shall serve for four years. The term of office of each elective officer shall begin the first business da Monday in January following the city election and qualification of such elective officer and shall continue until a successor is elected and qualified. If the first Monday is a holiday, the term of office shall then begin the first Tuesday in January. 2. Upon passage of this ordinance it shall be forwarded to the Hutchinson Charter Commission for its review and comment. 3. Following the review of the Charter Commission, the City Council may submit the question of this Charter amendment to the voters at the November 8, 2016, General Election. 4. Upon approval of this Charter amendment by a majority of the voters, the change in the mayoral term shall commence with the mayoral election in 2018 and be effective when the mayor commences his or her duties in January 2019. Adopted by the City Council this day of , 2016. Attest: Matthew Jaunich, City Administrator Gary T. Forcier, Mayor HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: Review of Construction Documents for Aquatic Center/Pool Project Department: Administration LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Matt Jaunich Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Matt Jaunich/Others Reviewed by Staff ❑ New Business Time Requested (Minutes): 15 License Contingency N/A Attachments: Yes BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: Please see the attached memo and related documents in regards to this agenda item. I'll walk you through these documents on Tuesday. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Fiscal Impact: Funding Source: FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: Yes PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: Memo To: Mayor Forcier and City Council Members From: Matt Jaunich, City Administrator Date: 2/19/16 Re: Memo for Aquatic Center Agenda Item Office of the City Administrator 111 Hassan Street SE Hutchinson, MN 55350-2522 320-234-4241/Fax 320-234-4240 Back in May of 2015, the City hired USAquatics to execute a Design Development Agreement for a new outdoor pool and aquatic center. Following a series of meetings and an open house for the public to view and comment on the proposed project in August of 2015, the Council approved the final study phase and conceptual design with a five-year Pro Forma in October of 2015. That same month, the Council entered into an agreement with USAquatics to proceed with Construction Documents for the proposed project. Staff has worked with USAquatics over the past 3-4 months to finalize the Construction Documents which are being presented to you on Tuesday for final approval. On Tuesday, staff from the City and USAquatics will review the proposed construction documents for the new Aquatic Center/Pool with the Council. Staff will also go through the updated cost estimate for the project including funding sources and a project time line. I'll touch on some of those additional items and a couple of other items down below. Preliminary Budget Estimate Aquatic Center/Pool Costs Lobby/Bathhouse/Locker Room Costs Admin/Professional Fees Subtotal Costs: Alternative Bid Costs Total Overall Costs: October 2015 $3,457,840 $518,300 $1,014,250 $4,990,390 $532,450 $5,522,840 February 2016 $3,924,090 $743,400 $1,086,956 $5,754,446 $557,383 $6,311,829 When looking at the costs, please take into consideration the following two items. One, the total overall costs include a contingency amount of $228,397 (4.5% of construction costs). Two, the total costs also include $81,500 in City/HIJC fees for utilities and building permits. A more detailed breakdown of the project costs has been included with this memo. Preliminary Budget Estimate Changes from October As you will see, there have been some significant changes to the estimated project costs since we last met in October. Here is a breakdown of those changes: In regards to the aquatic center/pool portion which increased by $466,250: • $50,000 was added for utility extensions and hook-ups • $20,000 was added to replace the sidewalk on the south side of the pool • $180,000 was added to correct the soils after a soils report was received • The remaining cost increase are due to estimated square footage costs increasing by $10- $15 a square foot In regards to the lobby/bathhouse-locker room area which increased by $225,100: • $85,000 was added for a new air handler and boiler system • $45,000 was added for additional roof work • $35,000 was added for anew fire alarm system • The remaining cost increase are due to estimated square footage costs increasing by $10 a square foot Please remember that all of these costs are simply estimates by our professionals working on the project. We won't know final numbers until we bid the project out. Bidding Process for this Project Bidding for this project will be done through a bid deduct process which will more or less allow us to "drop" portions of the project if they do not meet our budget needs. The two areas noted in red above would be where we would look to drop portions of the project if costs get to high. As staff worked through this process we felt it would be prudent of us to incorporate the best possible project noting the needed work to the bathhouse/locker room area at the rec center. On top of this, we had budgeted roughly $300,000 in 2018 & 2019 within our capital projects fund for improvements on the roof at the rec center. From an economy of scales perspective, we moved those projects up to be included within this project resulting in some of the increase in costs. Items within the project that are identified as "alternatives" and/or that may be "dropped" because of costs will be pursued from the third part/sponsorship angle or will be included as a "future" project item to be added at a later date. Staff has done its best to be respectful of the $5 million dollar budget set by the Council, but we also want to be able to present you with a project that is done right. Staff feels that to do this project right, additional funds should be allocated to the bathhouse/locker room area. Once again, we won't know final costs until we bid the project out and we still have some security locked into the process with our ability to drop portions of the project through the bid deduct. Funding Sources for this Project Most of the funding sources for this project have remained relatively the same since we identified those sources back in May of 2015. The one addition (noted in read below) is the identification of future capital dollars that we are recommending to be moved up to help cover 4 the costs for the repairs to the roof at the rec center. Here is that breakdown: Unspent hospital money from the Community Improvement Fund Non -designated money from the Community Improvement Fund: 2016 Facilities Money from the Capital Projects Fund: Non -designated money from the Capital Projects Fund: 2018 & 2019 Facilities Money from Capital Projects Fund: (Money was designated for Rec Center Roof Repairs) Excess General Fund Balance Reserves: Total Overall Funding Sources Identified: $1,350,000 $1,150,000 $700,000 $800,000 $300,000 $1,000,000 $5,300,000 At this time, staff feels comfortable in noting that $5.3 million is available for this project. Any projects costs coming above the $5.3 million would have to be properly vetted. In the end, depending on final project costs, we may have to drop portions of the project, seek sponsorships or 3rd party sources for funding, or have a discussion on additional funding sources. Remaining Projected Project Timeline Council Approve Construction Documents and Call for Bids Advertisement for Bids go Out Deadline for Bids Council Approve Bids and Award Contract Start of Construction Substantial Completion of Bathhouse/Locker Room Final Completion of Bathhouse/Locker Room Substantial Completion of Aquatic Center/Pool Final Completion of Aquatic Center/Pool Grand Opening Action Requested February 23 (Tuesday) March 2 March 29 April 12 May November 29 December 1 May 10, 2017 May 24, 2017 May 29, 2017 At Tuesday night's meeting, staff will be seeking two actions from the City Council. One will be to approve the proposed construction documents (plans & specs) for this project. A summary of those documents has been included with this memo. If you would like a full -copy of the documents (42 pages) please let me know. Staff has reviewed the plans including our building official and we are comfortable with what has been provided. The second action item will be to authorize the advertisement for bids on this project. If you have any questions and or concerns, or if you need any additional information, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks! Matt Estimate Date: 2118/2016 ' Project: Hutchinson Aquatics Bid Date: TBD - Revised Outdoor Layout Descriptlon Oct. 2015 81dg Work Alternates Demo $ 70,000 $ 10,000 5T Site Work including soils corrections $ 120.000 $ - $ ST -1 Landscaping Allowance $ 10,000 $ - $ 10,000 ST -2 Utility extentions and hook-ups $ 50,000 $ - ST -3 Sidewalk replacement, on South Side $ 20,000 $ Additional Soils Corrections and Engineered Fill $ 180,000 $ Per Soils Report SP Aquatics Lap pool 5,220 sqft @ $170 sqft $ 887,400 $ - $ ADA ramp area 220 sqft @ $270 sqft $ 59.400 $ $ - Splash Pool 3,300 sqft @ $165 sqft $ 544,500 $ $ Plunge Pool 1,100 sq fl. @$165 sgft $ 181,500 $ $ - Lazy River 2,800 sqft 0$225 sqft $ 630,000 $ $ - SP -F Features Pop Jets $ 2,200 $ - $ - Geysers $ 5,500 $ - $ - 1 M & 3M Diving $ 40,000 $ - $ - Climbing Wall $ - $ - $ 38.000 Splash Area Feature Allowance $ 30,000 $ $ 65,000 Tot Slide $ 15,000 $ - $ - Lazy River Feature Allowance $ 7,000 $ - $ 30.000 Zip Line $ 28,000 $ - $ - Play Feature Mech. $ 40,000 $ - $ Enclosed Bodyslide wl Tower $ 225,000 $ $ Open Flumeslide $ 95,000 $ _ $ InnerTube Waterslide $ - $ $ 205,000 Slide Mechanical $ 45.000 $ - $ - A Building Remodel 3660 sqft @ $115 sqft $ 420.900 $ - $ A-1 Mechanical Bldg 1.050 sqft @ $180 $ 190,800 $ $ A-2 Building Canopy 900 sqft @ $75 $ 67,500 $ $ - A -3q Built-up Roof Replacement $ 125,000 $ E Flectrical $ 173,320 $ - $ - E-1 Night Lighting $ 3,500 $ - $ 45,000 E-3 Security and PA system $ 2,500 $ - $ 25,000 MP Mech & Plumb. $ 173,320 $ - $ - New air handler and boiler $ 85,000 $ _ Fire Alarm system replacement $ 35,000 $ - SF Site Flat work 17,000 sqft @ $6 $ 102,000 $ - $ - 5 Sod/Seeding 8000 sqft @ $3 $ 24,000 $ $ F Fencing 870 If 2 $45 $ 39,150 $ $ - Total construction contracts: $ 4,162,490 $ 505,000 $ 418,000 Owner Direct Costs Budget Costs Bldg Work Alternates Owner direct general conditions (2%) $ 83,250 $ 10,100 $ 8.360 State Health plan review (.5%) $ 20,812 S _ $ _ Permits and inspections $ 25,000 $ 4,500 $ 2.000 Fixtures, Furniture & Equipment $ 30,000 $ 30,000 $ - Shade Structure (8) $ - $ - $ 32,000 Cantilever structures (3) $ - $ - $ 13,000 Contingency (4.59'x) $ 187.312 $ 22,725 $ 18,810 Total Owner Direct Costs $ 346,374 $ 67,325 $ 74,170 Construction Cost Including Owner Direct Cost; $ 4,508,864 $ 572,325 $ 492,1170 USAquatics fee thru construction documents (5.75%) S 259,260 $ 32.909 $ 28.300 USAquatics fee thru bidding and construction (2%) $ 90.177 $ 11,447 $ 9,843 Signature Aquatics Management fee (4.25%) $ 191,627 $ 24,324 $ 20.917 City Fee (1,25%) $ 58,361 $ 7,154 $ 6.152 Total Professional Fees $ 597,425 $ 75,833 $ 65,213 Total Project Costs $ 5,106,289 $ 548,158 $ 557,383 Total Project Costs wl Alts. & =Building Work $ 61311,829 bk AOU. V IA IA -Alums- Lq m pp oop AREA �r� 'OT Fit eui�oor�Z F / � r �re e�evicr�rn��� j lel 8 y i I o vcsvmiFr �c Arvx i _ 1 n m I � I m ---— � � I � -- �rvEw corvc ecce i v fi ®� axe Noecr scA�iis -_ - - - - iaEMoo.Eoa 1-1 IT rva�ARea w��FOE�� � � x -zes.�6P>aK�s�m� DEMOLITION KEY NOTES' O 11 �111NI 111K CIINTEI IND IETI —ETI IND ITZIILEAUL�7��Nl Dowr"D,Giz" um. —1ED,D Drums. IEE PLI-NO D-1— IL.PE ".11-11 'oa s ,o T-11 ru�lIL I—M — of PLAN GENERAL NOTES: MEA1oA /111Ea�A, oN a ,AE E�IE,INI AONSAo111oK N111"' III 1IN11 IEIIINIEI�Tl .1 TIE I.NT.Ilol. 'A"E" 'ENT Al lElllEl 11 1111 AllEll 11 TIE E' NZEIAl"Al4l' �1511% 11H PLAN KEY NOTES: 0 1-11 z=aN: 3�oo�N000wE� Mo ExI NI EN I .IIE ,N as EAogEA'�IN P o''1' .11 'N' I �E wnu zE-`es'NaN.�NNaN� a,�N o aE�, .aP aE 1 111E NE1111-1 N Il, — IANNAID E. P a.P NI -1 I.NTNIII eE �l NI 11 ,i. ---E A N�E'n�, iE�o',s 11P1w 1— .11. IEE 1-11 11A4,o r eoNo EEA.o ,oP of E. N1,w�No. 11 III 1111 111111 lEAl I Ewes — 1111 — -I N.z 7 axva Ew —.Nay IENwc. EEE N11a�iA9,A s/' N1AwN� n. ax /I uwEE A, NEI -D uAmNev oE1NNN. E 11111E ,/_0 _ a ND, ,o. .AmNav EPENNI sn.'l —EE A, NE—E—EEED NEI ,i 1,aNN,AwA 111"1 ah,00N ,1lEE I E— E,N 1111 it 11 9 4oN� ND epi®�� �a� - PRMRL N ,AI KEN 11. ����. v �a„=j.-®o ROOF PLAN GENERAL NOTES: 11EATI�NA A�A 1 sI NI D111 IT FF, _F, 111AIoE1 1, E 11EAT1�NI PRATE ANT aNIIo -A TAP aE �NT0aT�AN T- "TNN1 ANE"ILILN FE F' A 1115N AAA£ ILII T11 N1= 1,1,1L 11 IN IF IR�n'FE111'1 AN N�ME�TMaEa ' Ao BE- IF�> LAI ENFEN IAL LAI P.ENT ANN PENELIANNI Al FEEL III ILL IIINIINID IND ON I` I.F T11 -NAN 111N FILL LINITI 11�A'E'l.,111111 111111 11 NIELF ,EE/R TEPN _ 11 _ RENIS PE, ALN"AI�NN" w�E, TEA 11s 1 11111ITS 11 411 TEA "FEAR aT 1111111T G ��11 PIIIN m0 ROOF =T�NII�NA=EIRMELAN KY �AEAT11-ELI M. Ell ARE E���.. ILIIAE NSAL�oN �s Ta e„ IEA �,�AN �S Ta BE�„P'APEA ELI. ,ALL FF LA P"T 'LIFE �o —E. TEOTE AE �NTOLAT�AN Ta REI'/I TEa _11 -STINA NEI 1101- LEEIATIN NIL NEI ARE- ELA E -TIN, ,�aPPRE-F,N�IEo METAL nAENo�NI IEAM IIoF nnEM. 11, L0 -NN FF D-NSP101 INILEEE IAIIEN,N11111,1,1 IA NNETEIIEEDAIME T1,1 All NIL LANI - AE LEFT IN EET:EA IAAF N e;z,Ek TT AT NAPPA�T ANN`INAT:EA EAI I MAELAPN. P. WE won I mamom— -ol i' 74—)10:1� � AaI 1N. OLIF I IVA Ly �ool �o � T � ON IIx .,.se p ROOF =T�NII�NA=EIRMELAN KY �AEAT11-ELI M. Ell ARE E���.. ILIIAE NSAL�oN �s Ta e„ IEA �,�AN �S Ta BE�„P'APEA ELI. ,ALL FF LA P"T 'LIFE �o —E. TEOTE AE �NTOLAT�AN Ta REI'/I TEa _11 -STINA NEI 1101- LEEIATIN NIL NEI ARE- ELA E -TIN, ,�aPPRE-F,N�IEo METAL nAENo�NI IEAM IIoF nnEM. 11, L0 -NN FF D-NSP101 INILEEE IAIIEN,N11111,1,1 IA NNETEIIEEDAIME T1,1 All NIL LANI - AE LEFT IN EET:EA IAAF N e;z,Ek TT AT NAPPA�T ANN`INAT:EA EAI I MAELAPN. P. WE won I mamom— -ol i' M WE n M m AIR � AaI 1N. OLIF I IVA Ly �ool �o � T � ON IIx .,.se p LxJ x J o.00 o.00 RooTSEA .g. � Ea a.000 IF � o F� -J Gm M WE n M m I�oaoe`R�°MEr"6`.."PRP�PM�A ME„� 4i —NN nwn�@b 1, oroLn Ia z /a. oc N. cc viE �o rec I-- ION11-11 —Y -11IN3 1.NN mll ouP uoUSEh ElE 1— BneuT ou ALL h 100 NAILS O 8” O.C. �zxq CSEEUJsT 4MVP6ETH®DSE4�VHG G BRSECTION 11 If FT ---------------- U AEWLHPMfflT HOUSE LOOKING NOKNH I I s11. v, ISNT 01-1 -� z r ° B—K ° L—� LEIEL I E°°nT E�H�H�VL EIEWH ,-�E�Q9'®°9VPNNEIfT HOUSE RRILINIG �O SZAIEa H®E° �O a� J INN N <N`� a eANiN Es° ppp1:,OI ®O EQUIPT HOUSE I00 O PH TANK 10 0 O O e Q O CI TNZK Elle P3HH T U SQTlBE:1/9me�°� PLAN NOTES GENERAL NLY -E`N MMN °N�a/NZN:N,M EF oFFI-INI IIN 211 o o° � C£EE PLRN STALE: NO SCRNE „z. °� s, °nE t12 z ,TE E,NTE °� 1/2° TAIIµ;51c„° A NIS Ta aE 11. B SECTION 1,/z'oi . P1 IE"DEDNTE IL I IE I—LE To o2'iio.s o 11 16 2 El w Tl 1� o M, ll Na aNK °a° ° NE,°,° s, n�TE INNI-E IL. A PLAN �. L HMDIIFII ®PRITISET a �NM�NNM TTaa N°ESN° a a =1 C-N -1 ME °°N°aETE sin PIOIIDE Ba .11 E.1 w w s:woNaRwE PPEa ====e== TVIP COAL STAIR TPER1® TYP RALLINC, �O SZPLE: L W2W °-G° STRLE:1 99�e9.,E J E®MVMT G➢®➢1ME M®41TH E4ENMTVE U M4MLE: ➢/Ems➢°� E�UDVMT �J GI ME ST ELEMMITIEN IM E�➢DVM'T G➢®"RTH ELET"M ON U WOE�BDV�A MT 1-0 jg WST ELE RTV®IM LF ➢/gym=➢°A1� ELEVATION KEY NOTES: IAIINI Al 11 1111 11111— 1— —11 ELEVATION GENERAL NOTES: 0 IINI ETE —1 IN 111 11 111, NII 1,E, NEI INE IN IE E` lElIl 111NI IEAE NE- INII. NII —El— 111INI .11NNI NII 11IN1111 —11 11-1 11- 11 NII 11-11 sa. Ilf 1.° °r NIN I .o s:oPre oP , .11oeeo TI—E—El IN 11, E—NNI ElEIlIllAl —El 11.Tee. ,I —lEE sua°ueo e+,re� ». o��. . °ro° re°oI I °E, mreM "I" MC ®4➢Vl®Vud� IME TV➢ E4EN RMN W ®l➢VE®VPd� �PPTV-0 E4E➢9MTV®N U fE.1/�me ? U Sm 7 ELEVffrDN W 8 a HAY DOBBS ©o°° re�ore=s reESE NJ P: a G9 W NUJ g �6 az w Ag0 i1 .. . . ............ . . .... ....... .... ... ..... ... - ......... . . ......... . ...... . ........... . ......... ... ......... 6 .... .. ..... ... . ......... ... .. .... ........ PR E L M N R -r H, N6T —NOT FOR C-1 ........... . .......... .... ..... ..... ............... . .......... ..... . ..... .................. ..... .. ....... ........... ............... o . ................. Lg........... 11.11, 17 ---------- - ------- -- J J ..... . ...... ...... . . . ........ ....... ... . ............. 11.2"Ill"IVIII P1101 _PIM 11 PRE0 M N -NOT FOF Q MU.IYIbJSl MR11 `%uie=rte J HVAC GENERAL DEMO NOTES HVAC KEYNOTES: HVAC GENERAL NOTES � P�P.��o���o..ER�o.a.�E�����a,�o�aRE E�e..�P�P.�a.o�.o����o�eeo�.a.Eo�Ra�.ew° Q O �* O H,;CPP EQVNTBUIlNG LE IEET z zi z 11 Z LI -- ----— ------ —4N z w i 21 W 0 z C) U) E E — ---------- u u F— c) -- V ------ ---- --max ml ------ ---- Revisions Notes 10 v . 0 = Of 00 CIC, H,;l g� o —LE IEET —LE IEET CHECKSET M3.0 HRA HUTCHINSON HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Regular Board Meeting Tuesday, January 19, 2016, 7:00 AM Minutes CALL TO ORDER: Vice Chairman Steve Jensen called the meeting to order. Members Present: Gary Forcier and LouAnn Holmquist. Staff Present: Jean Ward and Judy Flemming. Visitor: Pat Lembcke 2. CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES OF THE REGULAR BOARD MEETING ON DECEMBER 15, 2015 Gary Forcier moved to approve the Minutes of the regular board meeting as written. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 3. FINANCIAL REPORTS a. Gary Forcier moved to approve the City Center General Fund payments of $11,245.60 for checks 8718 to 8726. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously. b. LouAnn Holmquist moved to approve the Park Towers operating account payments of $143,443.85 for checks 13476 to 13513 and approval of Park Towers Security Account payments of $876.93 for checks 1534 to 1536. Gary Forcier seconded and the motion carried unanimously. c. LouAnn Holmquist moved to approve the November 2015 Park Towers financial statements. Gary Forcier seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 4. CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2016-1 TO ADOPT 2016 CITY OF HUTCHINSON COMPENSATION PLAN Gary Forcier moved to approve Resolution #2016-1 to Adopt 2016 City of Hutchinson Compensation Plan. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 5. PARK TOWERS UPDATE a. Occupancy Report: one vacant apartment at the beginning of the monthly but will be filled by the end of the month. b. Elevator Project --- Gary Forcier moved to approve Change order #I and 2016-2 Resolution to approve $6,437.81 additional operating funds for a total revised construction contract of $425,232.81 (Construction Sources as follows: POHP funds $234,000 CFP $90,525 Operating Reserves of $100,707.81). LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously. c. Gary Forcier moved to approve the revised Resident Handbook. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously. d. FYI: Park Towers January 2016 Newsletter 6. CONSIDERATION OF BUDGET AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR 445 ADAMS STREET Jean Ward reviewed with the Board the budget and purchase agreement for 445 Adams Street. Gary Forcier moved to approve the budget and accept the purchase agreement. LouAnn Holmquist seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 7. REVIEW OF DRAFT TIF HOUSING APPLICATION FORM Jean Ward reviewed with the Board past housing TIF projects and the draft TIF Housing Application form. LouAnn Holmquist moved to approve the TIF Housing Application form. Gary Forcier seconded and the motion carried unanimously. 8. 2015 YEAR END RENTAL REHAB UPDATE Judy Flemming reviewed with the Board the 2015 Year End Rental Rehab Programs Update. January 19, 2016 Minutes Page l of 2 9. 2415 YEAR END OWNER OCCUPIED REHAB/HOME IMPROVEMENT LOAN PROJECTS Judy Flemming reviewed with the Board the 2015 Year End Owner Occupied Rehab/Home Improvement Loan Projects. 10. OTHER COMMUNICATIONS a. FYI: 2015 Year End Preliminary Numbers for foreclosures & resale values b. FYI: Steve Cook is looking into the feasibility of arts spaces and tiny homes in Hutchinson. 11. ADJOURNMENT LouAnn Holmquist moved to adjourn and Gary Forcier seconded. Where beim; no other business, Vice Chairman Steve Jensen declared the meeting adjourned. Recorded by Jean Ward, HRA Executive Director Gary F4cier, Secretary/Treasurer January 19, 2016 Minutes Page 2 of 2 HUTCHINSON CITY COUNCIL ci=V�f� Request for Board Action 79 M-W Agenda Item: December 2015 Financial and Investment Reports Department: Finance LICENSE SECTION Meeting Date: 2/23/2016 Application Complete N/A Contact: Andy Reid Agenda Item Type: Presenter: Reviewed by Staff ❑ Governance Time Requested (Minutes): 0 License Contingency N/A Attachments: Yes BACKGROUND/EXPLANATION OF AGENDA ITEM: Attached are the preliminary 2015 financial reports for the General fund and Enterprise funds. As we progress through the audit preparation over the next two months we may have some adjustments but I do not anticipate any material changes. Overall, 2015 was a good year for each fund as we added cash and fund balance in each fund except Water and Sewer. Those two funds incurred substantial capital costs with the planned automatic meter reading project and solar array. In the sewer fund, the solar grant was not received by year-end so we have a receivable on the books for the grant proceeds of $958,369. Feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you. BOARD ACTION REQUESTED: Fiscal Impact: Funding Source: FTE Impact: Budget Change: No Included in current budget: No PROJECT SECTION: Total Project Cost: Total City Cost: Funding Source: Remaining Cost: $ 0.00 Funding Source: General Fund — 2015 Preliminary Financial Results Summary The preliminary 2015 financial statement for the General fund is positive with a surplus of $126,707. These results are preliminary and subject to change as we prepare for the 2015 financial audit, however I don't anticipate any material adjustments. Total revenues exceeded expectations by $135,924 while expenses came in under budget by $175,341. We amended our 2015 budget during the year to account for the construction of the cemetery columbaria shelter, using reserves to fund the project. The amended budget reflects a net deficit of $(184,558). The $126,707 surplus results in a positive variance of $311,265 from budgeted expectations so we were able to absorb the columbaria cost and still add a moderate surplus. Each year we expect a moderate surplus due to budgeting conservatively for operational revenue and expenses in addition to the reality of employee turnover. While the surplus may seem fairly substantial to some, it represents only 1.1% of our general fund budgeted expenses. Actual Budget Variance % Used Total Revenues $11,316,368 $11,180,444 $135,924 101.2% Total Expenses $11,189,661 $11,365,002 $175,341 98.4% Net Revenue $ 126,707 $ (184,558) $311,265 Revenues Total revenue exceeds the budget in most revenue categories. The positive results are driven by higher than expected revenues in the following areas, with amounts in parentheses representing the revenue in excess of the budgeted amount: Building Permits ($71,773) Police Pension Aid ($34,158) Motor Vehicle Fees ($23,519) Transfer from Refuse ($55,000) There are a few revenue accounts that underperformed during the year. The following revenue failed to meet budgeted levels, with the deficiency in parentheses. Recreation Activity Fees ($38,855) Building Rentals ($10,908) Civic Arena Fees ($8,13 8) Expenditures Total expenses are under budget by $175,341, or 1.5% of total budgeted expenses. The mild weather helped to keep utilities under budget by $55,285 and lower gas prices resulted in a fuel expense savings of $57,490. A portion of the gas savings can also be attributed to the mild weather as less gas was consumed in the lighter than average snow removal operations. Other expenses coming in under budget are as follows, with the savings in parentheses: Small Tools & Minor Equip ($20,866) Contracted Snow Removal ($18,197) Automotive R&M ($34,857) Street Maintenance Materials ($11,837) Travel/Conference Expense ($26,607) The expenses that exceeded the budgeted amounts are as follows: Other Professional Fees ($41,597) Software & Licensing ($30,629) Workers Comp Audit ($29,428) Contracted R&M ($19,318) The single largest expense category in the General fund is Wages & Benefits with a total 2015 expense of 7,434,109. Currently the total expense is under budget by $57,887, or a 0.8% savings. Regular full-time and part-time wages came in under budget by $223,510 while wages and fringes related to Temporary employees exceeded the budget by approximately $45,000. The expense savings in regular wages is attributed to several vacant positions that were backfilled later in the year than what was budgeted in addition to employee turnover. Overtime, which includes premium pay and comp -time paid, exceeded the budget by $83,699. The majority of the overtime excess is in the Police department ($50,991) as the department dealt with officer turnover and the many special events in the community. Several other departments incurred unbudgeted overtime during the year as well. The Wages & Benefits category was able to absorb the HSA Contributions of $113,763. We did not budget for HSA contributions in the past more as a mechanism to temper the budget for anticipated employee turnover. This budgeting philosophy was changed for 2016 to include the budgeted expense for the HSA contributions and temper the budget with a vacancy factor in wages and benefits to account for anticipated turnover. We did budget a transfer of $39,000 from the Self Insurance fund to cover the increased HSA contributions that resulted from the council approved increase in employee medical deductibles. The higher deductibles helped to mitigate the increase in medical premiums and in return the City increased the HSA contributions to help offset the higher cost exposure to the employees. The transfer of $39,000 has been made and is reflected in total revenue. Departmental Results The following departments have exceeded their annual budgeted expenditures by the amounts shown in parentheses: Legal ($31,485) Building Inspections ($17,618) IT ($23,386) Senior Center ($12,814) Fire ($12,930) Park & Recreation Admin ($6,909) Parks ($4,499) Recreation Bldg & Pool ($2,606) Senior Dining ($1,917) Unallocated Expenses ($39,575) Library ($5,636) While the above departments incurred unbudgeted HSA contributions, most also exceeded the budget in Overtime, Temporary Wages, and Services & Charges. There were several big projects that occurred during the year that may have factored into the expense overage, such as the BS&A software conversion, website redesign, email server issues and ordinance recodification. The recodification was budgeted in 2014 but only a portion of the expense was incurred in that year with the remainder of the service and cost being recognized in 2015. Building Inspections was budgeted to convert to the Caselle software system however due to issues with the product we decided to stay with the LOGIS product which cost substantially more at approximately $19,000 annually. This is no longer an issue in 2016 as we have converted to the BS&A software that has an adequate product for Building Inspections at a substantially lower annual cost. Building Inspections also paid out the vacation balance to Lenny Rutledge upon his resignation. Unallocated Expenses was hit with an additional $29,428 in workers compensation expense related to the audit of the 2014 premiums. The League has reclassified certain employee positions across all cities, moving classes of employees out of the lower premium "municipal employee" category to higher premium categories more accurately reflecting the potential liability associated with more demanding physical duties. State Aid for fire pensions came in $8,100 higher than expected. The State Aid is a pass-thru of revenue to the pension fund and has a net zero impact on our financial statement, however we do show the funds received as revenue and the pass-thru to the pension fund as expense. Fund Balance The fund balance for the General fund increased by $126,707 to a total of $6,861,233. This equates to a 60% fund balance as compared to the 2016 budgeted expenditures. The State Auditor recommends a fund balance for working capital be approximately 40% to 50% of planned expenditures. Our 60% fund balance is very healthy and is still an effective funding option for a portion of the planned aquatic center. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 GENERALFUND TAXES OTHER TAXES LICENSES & PERMITS INTERGOVERNMENTALREVENUE CHARGES FOR SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES TRANSFERS -IN FINES & FORFEITURES CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS TOTAL Revenues WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL Expenditures BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 4,514,125 4,491,446 (22,679) 100.5 4,500,826 4,491,446 100.2 264,610 257,500 (7,110) 102.8 271,034 245,000 110.6 324,082 267,900 (56,182) 121.0 283,487 240,000 118.1 1,260,580 1,225,766 (34,814) 102.8 1,172,473 1,094,270 107.2 2,031,488 2,031,070 (418) 100.0 2,064,128 2,045,923 100.9 660,497 666,225 5,728 99.1 706,842 646,500 109.3 2,215,537 2,160,537 (55,000) 102.6 2,121,653 2,066,653 102.7 45,449 55,000 9,551 82.6 59,737 50,000 119.5 - 25,000 25,000 - - - - 11,316,368 11,180,444 (135,924) 101.2 11,180,179 10,879,792 102.8 7,434,109 7,491,996 57,887 99.2 6,865,625 7,009,709 97.9 664,248 782,636 118,388 84.9 788,237 781,887 100.8 2,293,381 2,303,346 9,965 99.6 2,286,618 2,262,536 101.1 510,543 498,116 (12,427) 102.5 597,829 533,068 112.2 96,850 96,850 - 100.0 143,776 96,000 149.8 190,530 192,058 1,528 99.2 13,800 - 100.0 11,189, 661 11, 365, 002 175,341 98.5 10, 695, 885 10, 683, 200 100.1 NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES 126,707 (184,558) (311,265) 68.7 484,294 196,592 246.3 General Fund Expenditures by Department 2015 2015 2015 Budget 2014 2014 Department Actual Budqet Balance % Used Actual Budqet % Used Mayor & City Council 38,892.16 46,380.00 7,487.84 83.9% 48,215.07 48,823.00 98.8% City Administrator 390,260.09 410,458.00 20,197.91 95.1% 356,599.09 412,884.00 86.4% Elections 7,950.04 7,378.00 (572.04) 107.8% 15,713.96 15,962.00 98.4% Finance Department 367,024.44 428,830.00 61,805.56 85.6% 271,317.26 295,894.00 91.7% Motor Vehicle 180,939.01 184,836.00 3,896.99 97.9% 274,111.85 254,100.00 107.9% Assessing 60,910.50 60,911.00 0.50 100.0% 60,963.00 60,963.00 100.0% Legal 274,982.27 243,497.00 (31,485.27) 112.9% 257,585.73 256,142.00 100.6% Planning 144,729.95 145,943.00 1,213.05 99.2% 135,892.56 135,012.00 100.7% Information Services 437,674.42 414,288.00 (23,386.42) 105.6% 395,346.68 427,012.00 92.6% City Hall Building 94,353.69 95,343.00 989.31 99.0% 87,081.98 83,494.00 104.3% Police Department 3,024,430.87 3,072,077.00 47,646.13 98.4% 3,159,940.85 3,197,339.00 98.8% Hospital Security 275,935.27 291,299.00 15,363.73 94.7% _ _ 0.0% Emergency Management 6,585.88 14,388.00 7,802.12 45.8% 5,833.18 14,839.00 39.3% Safety Committee 9,516.35 9,590.00 73.65 99.2% 8,583.96 13,276.00 64.7% Fire Department 305,128.75 292,199.00 (12,929.75) 104.4% 271,112.36 273,924.00 99.0% Protective Inspections 250,865.50 233,248.00 (17,617.50) 107.6% 193,029.86 178,407.00 108.2% Engineering 385,290.70 452,058.00 66,767.30 85.2% 401,835.41 424,543.00 94.7% Streets & Alleys 1, 361, 023.43 1, 409, 089.00 48, 065.57 96.6% 1, 422, 457.96 1, 374, 733.00 103.5% Park/Recreation Administration 230,874.76 223,966.00 (6,908.76) 103.1% 211,598.10 218,929.00 96.7% Recreation 210,042.07 222,940.00 12,897.93 94.2% 211,492.91 218,072.00 97.0% Senior Citizen Center 87,608.65 74,795.00 (12,813.65) 117.1% 81,571.91 68,620.00 118.9% Civic Arena 323,170.75 324,826.00 1,655.25 99.5% 310,257.70 309,957.00 100.1% Park Department 844,320.40 839,821.00 (4,499.40) 100.5% 788,000.59 794,003.00 99.2% Recreation Building & Pool 191,337.96 188,732.00 (2,605.96) 101.4% 187,987.99 190,756.00 98.5% Events Center 229,326.62 234,707.00 5,380.38 97.7% 218,879.12 219,027.00 99.9% Evergreen Building 14,604.78 12,688.00 (1,916.78) 115.1% 14,385.08 17,393.00 82.7% Library 204,359.59 198,724.00 (5,635.59) 102.8% 190,940.22 190,606.00 100.2% Cemetery 289, 882.30 301, 398.00 11, 515.70 96.2% 109, 056.71 107, 072.00 101.9% Airport 84,630.17 107,159.00 22,528.83 79.0% 88,544.48 99,776.00 88.7% Unallocated General Expense 863,009.35 823,434.00 (39,575.35) 104.8% 917,549.01 781,642.00 117.4% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 11 189 660.72 11 365 002.00 175 341.28 98.5% 10 695 884.58 10 683 200.00 100.1% REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 Water Fund SALES LOCAL SALES TAX CHARGES FOR SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS TOTAL Revenues WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPRECIATION EXPENSE DEBT SERVICE TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 2,382,210 2,300,000 (82,210) 103.6 2,324,418 2,381,500 97.6 608,704 725,000 116,296 84.0 661,476 650,000 101.8 56,979 50,000 (6,979) 114.0 48,454 42,500 114.0 85,890 84,153 (1,737) 102.1 68,426 84,192 81.3 - - - - 835,319 - 100.0 3,133,783 3,159,153 25,370 99.2 3,938,104 3,158,192 124.7 455,693 500,766 45,073 91.0 424,594 427,480 99.3 126,861 123,250 (3,611) 102.9 105,327 124,250 84.8 483,178 457,724 (25,454) 105.6 515,852 409,618 125.9 13,138 16,700 3,562 78.7 10,800 22,000 49.1 277,058 43,145 (233,913) 642.2 315,507 43,145 731.3 728,980 543,750 (185,230) 134.1 - 250,000 - 1,122,000 1,104,000 (18,000) 101.6 1,093,809 1,105,500 98.9 389,687 1,312,414 922,727 29.7 417,019 1,229,916 33.9 3,596,595 4,101,749 505,154 87.7 2,882,908 3,611,909 79.8 (462,812) (942,596) (479,784) 49.1 1,055,196 (453,717) 232.6 Local sales tax still has the final December payment to receive from the State. Tax revenue for 2015 is substantially below last year due to significant capital equipment refunds made to various local companies. Transfers -Out include the funding of a portion of the year's roadway projects. Capital Outlay includes the cost of the automatic meter reading project. Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet to reduce the bond payable. Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 Sewer Fund SALES LOCAL SALES TAX LICENSES & PERMITS INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE CHARGES FOR SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS TOTAL Revenues WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPRECIATION EXPENSE DEBT SERVICE TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 3,336,356 3,203,000 (133,356) 104.2 3,237,624 3,132,000 103.4 608,704 725,000 116,296 84.0 661,821 650,000 101.8 6,100 7,000 900 87.1 6,700 7,000 95.7 958,369 - (958,369) 100.0 - - - 3,584 4,000 416 89.6 7,691 7,000 109.9 83,152 101,153 18,001 82.2 110,010 84,192 130.7 - - - - 573,254 - 100.0 4,996,265 4,040,153 (956,112) 123.7 4,597,101 3,880,192 118.5 598,745 679,626 80,881 88.1 605,415 608,184 99.5 187,609 249,300 61,691 75.3 196,910 249,810 78.8 681,596 762,511 80,915 89.4 746,169 743,765 100.3 22,266 24,000 1,734 92.8 31,900 26,100 122.2 79,025 43,145 (35,880) 183.2 147,520 43,145 341.9 1,693,900 691,250 (1,002,650) 245.1 - 350,000 - 1,492,000 1,495,000 3,000 99.8 1,571,081 1,589,300 98.9 337,635 1,573,470 1,235,835 21.5 373,716 1,590,266 23.5 5,092,776 5,518,302 425,526 92.3 3,672,709 5,200,570 70.6 (96,511) (1,478,149) (1,381,638) 6.5 924,391 (1,320,378) 70.0 Local sales tax still has the final December payment to receive from the State. Tax revenue for 2015 is substantially below last year due to significant capital equipment refunds made to various local companies. Intergovernmental Revenue consists of the Xcel grant received for the Solar project. The actual dollars will be received in 2016 but the revenue is being recognized in 2015 as the project is complete. Transfers -Out include the funding of a portion of the year's roadway projects. Capital Outlay includes the solar array project costs and a portion of the automatic meter reading project costs. Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet to reduce the bond payable. Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 Refuse Fund SALES INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES TOTAL Revenues WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPRECIATION EXPENSE DEBT SERVICE COST OF SALES TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 1,146,344 1,133,700 (12,644) 101.1 1,142,108 1,138,287 100.3 12,608 12,500 (108) 100.9 12,600 12,500 100.8 6,506 2,500 (4,006) 260.2 13,602 2,500 544.1 1,165,458 1,148,700 (16,758) 101.5 1,168,310 1,153,287 101.3 183,349 179,288 (4,061) 102.3 171,718 153,350 112.0 54,054 65,400 11,346 82.7 65,474 68,500 95.6 698,126 702,650 4,524 99.4 738,266 720,873 102.4 5,169 3,250 (1,919) 159.0 3,068 1,250 245.4 55,000 55,000 - 100.0 55,000 55,000 100.0 75,083 159,418 84,335 47.1 - 110,000 - 121,000 131,500 10,500 92.0 121,877 116,100 105.0 2,139 24,261 22,122 8.8 2,984 24,260 12.3 - - - - 2,640 - 100.0 1,193,921 1,320,767 126,846 90.4 1,161,026 1,249,333 92.9 (28,463) (172,067) (143,604) 16.5 7,284 (96,046) 7.6 Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet to reduce the capital equipment payable. Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 Liquor Fund SALES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES TOTAL Revenues COST OF SALES WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPRECIATION EXPENSE DEBT SERVICE TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES Gross Margin on Sales BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 5,850,584 5,695,000 (155,584) 102.7 5,612,731 5,395,000 104.0 3,705 3,000 (705) 123.5 3,117 3,000 103.9 5,854,290 5,698,000 (156,290) 102.7 5,615,848 5,398,000 104.0 4,399,681 4,271,071 (128,610) 103.0 4,236,118 4,045,650 104.7 537,857 521,408 (16,449) 103.2 524,203 502,400 104.3 19,027 16,600 (2,427) 114.6 17,626 15,600 113.0 205,526 196,793 (8,733) 104.4 206,559 186,264 110.9 3,920 5,500 1,580 71.3 3,572 5,500 65.0 465,000 465,000 - 100.0 450,000 450,000 100.0 24,164 27,000 2,836 89.5 - 27,000 - 82,000 82,075 75 99.9 77,965 73,600 105.9 27,951 128,305 100,354 21.8 32,045 128,385 25.0 5,765,126 5,713,752 (51,374) 100.9 5,548,088 5,434,399 102.1 89,164 (15,752) (104,916) 566.1 67,759 (36,399) 186.2 24.8% 25.0% 24.5% 25.0% Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet to reduce the interfund loans to the Water and Sewer fund. The loans were used to fund the 2005 store upgrades. Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 Compost Fund SALES CHARGES FOR SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES TOTAL Revenues COST OF SALES WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPRECIATION EXPENSE INVENTORY COST ADJUSTMENT TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 3,034,891 2,729,160 (305,731) 111.2 3,007,552 2,508,850 119.9 62,164 58,500 (3,664) 106.3 142,856 133,500 107.0 19,617 6,000 (13,617) 327.0 37,187 6,000 619.8 3,116,672 2,793,660 (323,012) 111.6 3,187,594 2,648,350 120.4 2,336,524 2,357,500 20,976 99.1 2,357,752 1,947,380 121.1 718,417 797,164 78,747 90.1 699,553 571,684 122.4 127,118 154,500 27,382 82.3 174,182 134,500 129.5 295,201 344,350 49,149 85.7 445,672 540,555 82.5 12,363 13,500 1,137 91.6 43,943 13,000 338.0 110,000 110,000 - 100.0 102,847 102,847 100.0 152,104 250,000 97,896 60.8 - 157,888 - 126,000 142,600 16,600 88.4 132,600 140,500 94.4 (986,638) (1,054,568) (67,930) 93.6 (1,122,409) (972,802) 115.4 554,565 757,546 202,981 73.2 2,834,139 2,635,552 107.5 533,648 (321,386) (855,034) 166.0 353,455 12,798 2,761.8 Creekside recently completed a software conversion and is in the process of working through some issues. This fund may have some adjustments in the Cost of Sales and Inventory Cost Adjustment categories as we finalize the books the books for the audit. Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 Storm Water Utili SALES LICENSES & PERMITS CHARGES FOR SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS TOTAL Revenues WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TRANSFERS -OUT CAPITAL OUTLAY DEPRECIATION EXPENSE DEBT SERVICE TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 793,095 790,200 (2,895) 100.4 729,105 719,500 101.3 4,552 - (4,552) 100.0 1,780 - 100.0 630 - (630) 100.0 - 1,000 - 13,864 6,000 (7,864) 231.1 17,118 1,250 1,369.4 - - - - 559,630 - 100.0 812,141 796,200 (15,941) 102.0 1,307,633 721,750 181.2 189,914 241,318 51,404 78.7 177,918 208,737 85.2 18,525 34,175 15,650 54.2 35,845 33,150 108.1 134,994 146,350 11,356 92.2 130,748 146,450 89.3 9,983 11,250 1,267 88.7 8,642 8,050 107.4 127,454 - (127,454) 100.0 - - - - 128,000 128,000 - - 128,000 - 128,000 116,000 (12,000) 110.3 124,220 111,200 111.7 14,780 193,992 179,212 7.6 50,244 193,932 25.9 623,650 871,085 247,435 71.6 527,617 829,519 63.6 188,492 (74,885) (263,377) 251.7 780,015 (107,769) 723.8 Transfers -Out include the funding of a portion of the year's roadway projects. Depreciation Expense is an estimate at this point and will be adjusted to actual during the audit preparation. Debt Service is budgeted to include the principal payments but in reality the principal payments are moved to the balance sheet to reduce the capital equipment payable. REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REPORT FOR CITY OF HUTCHINSON PERIOD ENDING 12/31/2015 ACTUAL BUDGET AVAILABLE % BDGT ACTUAL DESCRIPTION 2015 2015 BALANCE USED 2014 HATS Operation INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUE CHARGES FOR SERVICES MISCELLANEOUS REVENUES TRANSFERS -IN TOTAL Revenues WAGES & BENEFITS SUPPLIES SERVICES & CHARGES MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES CAPITAL OUTLAY TOTAL Expenditures NET OF REVENUES & EXPENDITURES BUDGET % BDGT 2015 USED 151,138 151,500 362 99.8 147,070 147,070 100.0 279,547 546,000 266,453 51.2 521,223 535,000 97.4 11,550 3,250 (8,300) 355.4 36,799 3,600 1,022.2 96,850 96,850 - 100.0 94,030 94,030 100.0 539,085 797,600 258,515 67.6 799,122 779,700 102.5 57,958 57,898 (60) 100.1 52,447 52,235 100.4 291,881 546,925 255,044 53.4 511,659 536,825 95.3 149,644 159,700 10,056 93.7 157,599 147,500 106.9 5,060 6,550 1,490 77.3 6,515 5,100 127.7 35,910 26,527 (9,383) 135.4 83,277 37,960 219.4 540,453 797,600 257,147 67.8 811,496 779,620 104.1 (1,368) - 1,368 100.0 (12,374) 80 15,467.4 Low fuel prices and a mild winter resulted in substantially lower fuel expense (Supplies category) which ultimately resulted in lower fuel sales to the various entities (Charges for Services). N Executive summary as of December 31, 2015 Asset allocation review Value on % of 12/31/2015 ($) portfolio A Cash 3,079,164.32 22.10 Cash 3,079,164.32 22.10 B Fixed Income 10,850,725.47 77.90 us 10,610,544.38 76.17 International 240,181.09 1.73 C Equity 0.00 0.00 D Commodities 0.00 0.00 E Non -Traditional 0.00 0.00 F Other 0.00 0.00 Total Portfolio 13,929,889.79 100% Balanced mutual funds are allocated in the 'Other' category Equity sector analysis Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income Expected cash flow $ Thousands 54 45 36 27 0A 18 9 B 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016 2016 Taxable income Total taxable income: $217,353.58 Total expected cash flow: $217,353.58 Cash flows displayed account for known events such as maturities and mandatory puts. Portfolio does not contain applicable holdings - exhibit intentionally left blank. Credit quality of bond holdings Value on % of Effective credit rating Issues 12/31/2015 ($) port. A Aaa/AAA/AAA 6 4,847,873.14 44.63 B Aa/AA/AA 3 1,532,792.08 14.07 C A/A/A 0 0.00 0.00 D Baa/BBB/BBB 0 0.00 0.00 E Non -investment grade 0 0.00 0.00 F Certificate of deposit 20 4,470,060.24 41.30 G Not rated 0 0.00 0.00 Total 29 $10,850,725.47 100% Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 1 of 3 N Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income summaryIncludes all fixed-rate securities in the selected porfolio. Average yields and durations exclude Structured Product, Pass -Through, Perpetual Preferred, and Foreign securities. as of December 31, 2015 Bond overview Total quantity 10,799,000 Total market value $10,800,788.51 Total accrued interest $49,936.96 Total market value plus accrued interest $10,850,725.47 Total estimated annual bond interest $212,498.25 Average coupon 1.97% Average current yield 1.97% Average yield to maturity 1.75% Average yield to worst 1.74% Average modified duration 3.06 Average effective maturity 4.52 Credit quality of bond holdings Value on % of Effective credit rating Issues 12/31/2015 ($) port. A Aaa/AAA/AAA 6 4,847,873.14 44.63 B Aa/AA/AA 3 1,532,792.08 14.07 C A/A/A 0 0.00 0.00 D Baa/BBB/BBB 0 0.00 0.00 E Non -investment grade 0 0.00 0.00 F Certificate of deposit 20 4,470,060.24 41.30 G Not rated 0 0.00 0.00 Total 29 $10,850,725.47 100% Investment type allocation Investment type Taxable ($) Tax-exempt / deferred ($) Total ($) % of bond port. Certificates of deposit 4,470,060.24 0.00 4,470,060.24 41.20 Municipals 2,016,133.75 0.00 2,016,133.75 18.58 U.S. federal agencies 4,364,531.48 0.00 4,364,531.48 40.22 Total $10,850,725.47 $0.00 $10,850,725.47 100% Bond maturity schedule $ Millions 2.5 18.7% 18.5% 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2026 + Other 0 Effective maturity schedule Cash, mutual funds and some preferred securities are not included. Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 1 of 2 N as of December 31, 2015 Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income SIncludes all fixed-rate securities in the selected porfolio. Average yields and durations exclude Structured Product, Pass -Through, Perpetual Preferred, and Foreign securities. Summary of bond holdings Maturity Year Issues Quantity Est. annual income ($) Current Yield to yield (%) maturity (%) Yield to Modified worst (%) duration Adjusted cost basis ($) Unrealized gain/loss ($) Mkt. value ($) 2015 0 0 NA NA NA 2016 4 865,000 8,772.50 1.01% 0.89 % 0.89 % 0.85 865,000 763.95 867,213.481 2017 7 1,996,000 49,308.75 2.43% 1.06 % 1.06 % 1.27 2,013,317.59 13,574.19 2,045,653.651 2018 3 736,000 9,564.00 1.31% 1.55 % 1.55 % 2.30 736,000 -4,609.92 733,838.991 2019 5 1,327,000 29,145.50 2.18% 2.03 % 2.03 % 3.60 1,332,299.95 2,315.25 1,341,127.071 2020 2 1,500,000 30,450.00 2.02% 1.97 % 1.90 % 1.48 1,499,995 4,020.00 1,507,423.331 2021 2 1,145,000 12,062.50 1.07% NA NA NA 1,144,100 -11,488.35 1,133,661.651 2022 2 490,000 10,045.00 2.07% 2.63 % 2.63 % 6.27 490,000 -5,000.45 485,706.691 2023 2 2,000,000 44,750.00 2.24% 2.38 % 2.38 % 6.81 1,999,250 1,727.50 2,014,410.141 2024 1 500,000 13,000.00 2.70% 3.09 % 3.09 % 7.77 486,750 -5,575.00 483,341.671 2025 1 240,000 5,400.00 2.27% NA NA NA 240,000 -1,651.20 238,348.801 2026 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2027 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2028 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2029 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2030 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2031 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2032 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2033 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2034 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2035 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2036 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2037 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2038 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2039 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2040 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2041 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2042 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2043 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2044 0 0 NA NA NA 1 2044+ 0 0 NA NA NA 1 Other 0 0 NA NA NA 1 Total 29 10,799,000 $212,498.25 1.97% 1.75 % 1.74% 3.06 $10,806,712.54 $-5,924.03 $10,850,725.47 % of bond portfolio maturi - S.02 % 1 S.77 - 6.77% 12.36% - 13.93% - 10.49% .4.49% 16.53% .4.45% 2.21% Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 1 of 7 N Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued) Details of bond holdings Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal. g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. 10,799,000 1.97% 07/06/2020 NA $212,498.25 1.75% 3.06 $10,806,712.54 NA $10,800,788.51 100% Total Bond Portfolio 1.97% 1.74% $-5,924.03 $49,936.96 Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2016 $10,850,725.47 Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 2 of 7 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2016 AMERICAN EXPRESS C NY US RT CD 145,000 1.25% 08/09/2016 1,812.50 0.73% 0.60 145,000.00 100.315 145,456.75 1.35% 01.2500% MAT 08/09/16 FIXED 1.25% 0.73% 456.75 715.07 RATE CD /NY BMW BANK NORTH AME UT US CD 240,000 0.95% 11/14/2016 2,280.00 0.89% 0.87 240,000.00 100.051 240,122.40 2.22% RT 00.9500% MAT 11/14/16 0.95% 0.89% 122.40 293.59 FIXED RATE CD /UT CAPITAL ONE BANK U VA US RT CD 240,000 1.00% 11/14/2016 2,400.00 0.94% 0.87 240,000.00 100.051 240,122.40 2.22% 01.0000% MAT 11/14/16 FIXED 1.00% 0.94% 122.40 322.19 RATE CD /VA FIRSTBANK P R SANT PR RT CD 240,000 0.95% 12/12/2016 2,280.00 0.92% 0.95 240,000.00 100.026 240,062.40 2.22% 00.9500% MAT 12/12/16 FIXED 0.95% 0.92% 62.40 118.69 RATE CD /PR Total 2016 865,000 1.01% 11/06/2016 $8,772.50 0.89% 0.85 $865,000.00 $865,763.95 8.02% 1.01% 0.89% $763.95 $1,449.53 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2017 MASSACHUSETTS DEPT TRANS Aa3/AA-/NR 500,000 2.41% 01/01/2017 12,040.00 1.00% 0.98 505,334.84 101.398 506,990.00 4.69% TAX SR B RV BE/R/ 2.408 NR/NR/NR 2.37% 1.00% 1,655.16 6,020.00 010117 DTD 113011 /MA FED FARM CREDIT BANK 04.875 Aaa/AAA/AA+ 431,000 4.88% 01/17/2017 21,011.25 0.97% 1.01 442,982.75 104.048 448,446.88 4.15% % DUE 011717 DTD 010907 FC NR/NR/NR 4.69% 0.97% 5,464.13 9,571.79 07172007 STATE BK INDIA NY US RT CD 248,000 2.00% 04/27/2017 4,960.00 1.11 % 1.30 248,000.00 101.170 250,901.60 2.32% 02.0000% MAT 04/27/17 FIXED 1.98% 1.11 % 2,901.60 883.29 RATE CD /NY COMENITY BANK DE US RT CD 200,000 1.15% 06/19/2017 2,300.00 1.56% 1.45 200,000.00 99.400 198,800.00 1.84% 01.1500% MAT 06/19/17 FIXED 1.16% 1.56% -1,200.00 176.44 RATE JUMBO CD /DE Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 2 of 7 N Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued) Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income Maturing 2018 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating CD 248,000 Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond 247,151.84 (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2017 1,078.63 /UT GE CAP BK UT US RT 01.7500% CD 130,000 1.75% 08/03/2017 2,275.00 1.26% 1.57 130,000.00 100.770 131,001.00 1.21% MAT 08/03/17 FIXED RATE CD 248,000.00 99.658 247,151.84 2.29% 1.74% 1.26% 1,001.00 168.29 1.30% /UT -848.16 1,130.61 FIXED RATE CD /NY GE CAP RETAIL BK UT US RT CD 247,000 1.75% 08/03/2017 4,322.50 1.26% 1.56 247,000.00 100.770 1 248,901.90 2.30% 01.7500% MAT 08/03/17 FIXED 3,240.00 1.80% 2.70 240,000.00 1.74% 1.26% 1,901.90 MAT 10/04/18 FIXED RATE CD 1,764.53 RATE CD /UT 1.37% 1.80% -2,913.60 239.67 /UT SUN NATL BK NJ US RT CD 240,000 1.00% 10/03/2017 2,400.00 0.56% 1.74 240,000.00 100.771 241,850.40 2.24% 01.0000% MAT 10/03/17 FIXED 736,000 1.30% 05/09/2018 $9,564.00 0.99% 0.56% 1,850.40 177.53 6.77% RATE CD /NJ 1.31% 1.55% $-4,609.92 $2,448.91 Total 2017 1,996,000 2.49% 04/19/2017 $49,308.75 1.06% 1.27 $2,013,317.59 $2,026,891.78 18.77% % of Underlying rating 2.43% 1.06% $13,574.19 income ($)/ $18,761.87 cost basis ($)/ Effective rating/ Mkt. value ($)/ bond Est. annual Quantity Adjusted maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) % of Unreal.g/I ($) Underlying rating Accr. interest ($) port. Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2018 ALLY BK UT US RT 01.2500% CD 248,000 1.25% 02/26/2018 3,100.00 1.41% 2.11 248,000.00 99.658 247,151.84 2.29% MAT 02/26/18 FIXED RATE CD 1.25% 1.41% -848.16 1,078.63 /UT GOLDMAN SACHS BK U NY US CD 248,000 1.30% 02/26/2018 3,224.00 1.46% 2.11 248,000.00 99.658 247,151.84 2.29% RT 01.3000% MAT 02/26/18 1.30% 1.46% -848.16 1,130.61 FIXED RATE CD /NY ENERBANK UT US RT 01.3500% CD 240,000 1.35% 10/04/2018 3,240.00 1.80% 2.70 240,000.00 98.786 237,086.40 2.20% MAT 10/04/18 FIXED RATE CD 1.37% 1.80% -2,913.60 239.67 /UT Total 2018 736,000 1.30% 05/09/2018 $9,564.00 1.55% 2.30 $736,000.00 $731,390.08 6.77% 1.31% 1.55% $-4,609.92 $2,448.91 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2019 RIVERSIDE CA CMNTY COLGE Aa2/NR/AA 500,000 2.35% 08/01/2019 11,725.00 1.81% 3.40 505,299.95 101.858 509,290.00 4.72% TAX SR B BE/R/ 2.345 NR/NR/NR 2.30% 1.81% 3,990.05 4,885.42 080119 DTD 052914 /CA AMERICAN EXPRESS F UT US RT CD 247,000 2.15% 11/13/2019 5,310.50 2.16% 3.68 247,000.00 99.960 246,901.20 2.29% 02.1500% MAT 11/13/19 FIXED 2.15% 2.16% -98.80 698.37 RATE CD /UT Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 3 of 7 N Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued) Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 4 of 7 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2019 CIT BK SALT LAKE C UT US RT CD 240,000 2.10% 11/13/2019 5,040.00 2.16% 3.69 240,000.00 99.776 239,462.40 2.22% 02.1000% MAT 11/13/19 FIXED 2.10% 2.16% -537.60 662.79 RATE CD /UT BARCLAYS BK DE US RT CD 240,000 2.05% 12/17/2019 4,920.00 2.15% 3.78 240,000.00 99.629 X39,109.60 2.21% 02.0500% MAT 12/17/19 FIXED 2.06% 2.15% -890.40 188.71 RATE CD /DE AMERICAN EXPRESS C UT US RT CD 100,000 2.15% 12/18/2019 2,150.00 2.19% 3.78 100,000.00 99.852 99,852.00 0.92% 02.1500% MAT 12/18/19 FIXED 2.15% 2.19% -148.00 76.58 RATE CD /UT Total 2019 1,327,000 2.20% 10/13/2019 $29,145.50 2.03% 3.60 $1,332,299.95 $1,334,615.20 12.36% 2.18% 2.03% $2,315.25 $6,511.87 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2020 MASS ST GO CONSOL LN TAX SR Aa1/AA+/AA+ 500,000 2.09% 05/01/2020 10,450.00 1.90% 4.11 499,995.00 100.773 503,865.00 4.67% B BE/R/ 2.090 050120 DTD NR/NR/NR 2.07% 1.90% 3,870.00 1,741.67 052814 /MA FHLMC NTS 02.000 % DUE NR/AAA/AA+ 1,000,000 2.00% 11/25/2020 02/25/2016 20,000.00 2.00% 0.15 1,000,000.00 100.015 1,000,150.00 9.26% 112520 DTD 113015 FC NR/NR/NR 100.00 2.00% 1.90% 150.00 1,666.67 05252016 Total 2020 1,500,000 2.03% 09/17/2020 $30,450.00 1.97% 1.48 $1,499,995.00 $1,504,015.00 13.93% 2.02% 1.90% $4,020.00 $3,408.33 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal. g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2021 FNMA NTS STEP-UP 01.000 % Aaa/AAA/AA+ 900,000 1.00% 11/19/2021 05/19/2016 9,000.00 NA NA 899,100.00 98.804 889,236.00 8.23% DUE 111921 DTD 111915 FC NR/NR/NR 100.00 1.01% NA -9,864.00 1,050.00 05192016 MIZRAHI TEFAHOT BK CA US RT CD 245,000 1.25% 11/30/2021 05/30/2016 3,062.50 NA NA 245,000.00 99.337 243,375.65 2.25% 01.2500% MAT 11/30/21 STEP 100.00 1.26% NA -1,624.35 0.00 RATE CD /CA Total 2021 1,145,000 1.05% 11/22/2021 $12,062.50 NA $1,144,100.00 $1,132,611.65 10.49% 1.07% NA $-11,488.35 $1,050.00 Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 4 of 7 N Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued) Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 5 of 7 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2022 DISCOVER BANK DE US RT CD 245,000 2.45% 11/18/2022 6,002.50 2.63% 6.27 245,000.00 98.860 242,207.00 2.24% 02.4500% MAT 11/18/22 FIXED 2.48% 2.63% -2,793.00 707.14 RATE CD /DE WELLS FARGO BK NA CA US RT CD 245,000 1.65% 11/23/2022 11/23/2018 4,042.50 0 NA NA 245,000.00 99.099 242,792.55 2.25% 01.6500% MAT 11/23/22 STEP 100.00 1.67% NA -2,207.45 0.00 RATE CD /CA Total 2022 490,000 2.05% 11/21/2022 $10,045.00 2.63% 6.27 $490,000.00 $484,999.55 4.49% 2.07% 2.63% $-5,000.45 $707.14 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2023 FHLB BOND STEP-UP 02.000 % Aaa/NR/AA+ 750,000 2.00% 06/20/2023 03/20/2016 15,000.00 NA NA 749,250.00 100.122 750,915.00 6.95% DUE 062023 DTD 062013 FC NR/NR/NR 100.00 2.00% NA 1,665.00 458.33 12202013 FFCB BOND 02.380 % DUE Aaa/AAA/AA+ 1,250,000 2.38% 07/24/2023 29,750.00 2.38% 6.81 1,250,000.00 100.005 1,250,062.50 11.57% 072423 DTD 072412 FC NR/NR/NR 2.38% 2.38% 62.50 12,974.31 01242013 Total 2023 2,000,000 2.24% 07/12/2023 $44,750.00 2.38% 6.81 $1,999,250.00 $2,000,977.50 18.53% 2.24% 2.38% $1,727.50 $13,432.64 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2024 NEWYORK CITY TRANSITION Aa1/AAA/AAA 500,000 2.60% 11/01/2024 11/01/2022 13,000.00 3.09% 7.77 486,750.00 96.235 481,175.00 4.45% TAX C-3 RV BE/R/ 2.600 NR/NR/NR 100.00 2.70% 3.09% -5,575.00 2,166.67 1 10124 DTD 120412 /NY Total 2024 500,000 2.60% 11/01/2024 $13,000.00 3.09% 7.77 $486,750.00 $481,175.00 4.45% 2.70% 3.09% $-5,575.00 $2,166.67 Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal.g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. Maturing 2025 HSBC BANK USA DE US RT CD 240,000 2.25% 03/11/2025 03/11/2020 5,400.00 NA NA 240,000.00 99.312 238,348.80 2.21% 02.2500% MAT 03/11/25 STEP 100.00 2.27% NA -1,651.20 0.00 RATE CD /DE Total 2025 240,000 2.25% 03/11/2025 $5,400.00 NA $240,000.00 $238,348.80 2.21% 2.27% NA $-1,651.20 $0.00 Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 5 of 7 m% UBS Bond holdings - as of December 31, 2015 (continued) Prepared for City of Hutchinson RP 38446 • City of Hutchinson • Business Service Account Risk profile: Conservative Return Objective: Current Income Effective rating/ Est. annual Adjusted % of Underlying rating Effective Call date/ income ($)/ YTM (%)/ Modified cost basis ($)/ Market Mkt. value ($)/ bond (Mdy/Fitch/S&P) Quantity Coupon maturity Call price ($) Curr. yield (%) YTW (%) duration Unreal. g/I ($) price ($) Accr. interest ($) port. 10,799,000 1.97% 07/06/2020 $212,498.2V 1.75%3.06 $10,806,712.5 NA $10,800,788.51 100% Total Bond Portfolio 0 1.97° 1.74% $-5,924.03 $49,936.96 $10,850,725.47 Report created on: January 04, 2016 Page 6 of 7