Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2005 [04] Apr 07 {Book 33}
CITY Of ST. JOSEPH . www.cityofstjoseph.com St. Joseph City Council April 7, 2005 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order Administrdtor Judy Weyrens 2. Approve Agenda MdYor 3. Consent Agenda a. Bills Payable - Requested Action: Approve check numbers 035565 - 035655 Richdrd Cðrlbom b. Minutes - Requested Action: Approve the minutes of March 2005 c. Fireworks Permit - Requested Action: Authorize the Administrator and Fire Chief to Councilors execute a permit for a fireworks display to be held on April 22, 2005 in conjunction with AI Rdssier inauguration of the College President. d. Ordinance Amendments - Requested Action: Approve the amendments to the Sign Ross Rieke Ordinance regulating Height and landscaping and the Commercial and Industrial Zoning Renee Symdnietz Districts relieving Planning Commission approval for minor additions. Ddle Wick e. Ordinance Adoption - Requested Action: Accept the recommendations of the Planning Commission and adopt the R4 Ordinance with modifications to the development plan. f. Gambling Exemption - Requested Action: Accept the Gambling Application from the Church of St. Joseph for an event to be held July 3 - July 4, 2005. . 4. Public Comments to the Agenda 5. 7:05 PM - Graceview Estates 3rd - Rick Heid 6. City Engineer Reports a. Water Filtration Update b. Other Matters 7. Mayor Reports 8. Council Reports 9. Þ.chninistrator Reports 10. Adj ourn ~ File . 2)" College Avenue North PO Box 66s Sd i n t. joseph, Minnesotd )"6174 Phone ,20.,6,.7201 Fd x )20.,6,.0'42 . ST. JOSEPH CITY COUNCIL AflRlL 7, 2005 FOR THE OFFICIAL RECORD PLEASE SIGN YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS NAME .. ,:./} , -t¿. ADDRESS ~,~ Cl- 1. 'I ,',? ) .', L/ !Î 2. II v 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. _ 9. - 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. CITY OF ST JOSEPH 04/05/05 1: 19 PM Page 1 Bills Payable - Revised . ::lieck 'br Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ )35566 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE Reg pp 6 $1,186.19101 )35567 EFTPS Reg pp 6 $819.36 101 )35567 EFTPS Reg pp 6 $2,034.52 101 135567 EFTPS Reg pp 6 $2,651.85 101 )35568 ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY deferred camp pay $75.00 101 )35569 PERA retirement pay-Reg $3,686.24 101 ;35570 EFTPS Council pp 3.1 SS $62.00 101 ;35570 EFTPS Council pp 3.1 med $14.50 101 ·35571 PERA retirement pay-Cou $50.00 101 35572 TRAUT WELLS Water samples Sc $35.00 601 49420 312 35572 TRAUT WELLS Water samples Sc $35.00 601 49420 312 35573 US CABLE internet selVices $50.55 101 41430 321 35573 US CABLE franchise fees $0.00 101 00000 35574 XCEL ENERGY St. Joe rec ele bill $648.54 101 45125 530 35575 ZIEGLER INC cutting edges $614.42 101 43125 210 35576 ACCLAIM BENEFITS-REIMB February Depende $570.00 101 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC void check 35577 -$557.17 105 42270 210 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC gloves $4.15 105 42270 210 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC trauma shears - 23 $61.86 105 42270 210 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC safety glasses $154.62 105 42270 210 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC penlights, trauma s $51.34 105 42270 210 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC glove dispenser, gl $112.45105 42270 210 35577 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC bag oxygen/airway $172.75 105 42270 210 35578 MN CHAPTER IAAI 2005 Membership $25.00 105 42240 433 35579 MN DEPART. OF NATURAL RESOURCE Fire Traing-Orcutt, $630.00 105 42240 331 35580 MN DEPT OF NATURAL RESOURCES plastic liners $42.22 105 42270 210 1 POSTMASTER Apr billing $95.31 601 49440 322 _,1 POSTMASTER Apr billing $95.32 602 49490 322 35581 POSTMASTER Apr billing $95.32 603 43230 322 35582 BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC Sfty glasses, oxyge $553.02 105 42270 210 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $234.79101 41941 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $24.69 101 43120 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $130.14 101 45202 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $127.08 101 45123 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $32.55 101 45123 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $72.06 101 43120 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $1,271.05 101 43160 386 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $24.62 101 42610 386 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $690.40 101 41941 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $48.04 101 45201 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $147.74101 43160 386 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $144.92 101 43120 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $96.61 101 45201 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $175.55 601 49435 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $38.62 101 45201 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $349.21 101 41942 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $91.32 602 49470 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $308.49 602 49480 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $122.25 601 49410 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $742.23 601 49410 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $339.49 105 42280 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $273.92 601 49420 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $53.45 602 49471 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $46.78 101 45202 381 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $230.13 601 49420 383 35583 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $636.79 101 41942 381 3!1!)83 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $754.65 105 42280 383 '3 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $5.73 101 42500 326 . ~J3 XCEL ENERGY Feb usage $292.95 602 49480 383 35584 MOLITOR EXCAVATING Northland 8 payme $6,234.89 430 43120 530 35585 MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE 2005 GO Bond $5,300.00 333 47100 620 35586 TRAUT WELLS Test Well payment $19,844.55428 49430 530 CITY OF ST JOSEPH 04/05/051 :19 Pty Page ;; BiIls Payable - Revised Check . Nbr Search Name Comments Amount FUND DePART OBJ 035587 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE Reg pay 7 $1.381.50101 035588 EFTPS Reg pay 7 $3,147.29 101 035588 EFTPS Reg pay 7 $909.88 101 035588 EFTPS Reg pay 7 $2,394.56 101 035589 ING LIFE INS & ANNUITY COMPANY deferred comp pay $75.00 101 035590 PERA retirement pay-Reg $3,670.57 101 035591 STEARNS COUNTY AUDITOR-TREAS Refund assesment $400.14101 00000 035592 A-1 TOILET RENTAL Memorial Park $63.90 490 45203 531 035593 ABBOTT, LONNIE 2 park board mtgs $70.00 101 41120 103 035594 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WEST 2 50' hoses & filtin $117.09101 45201 240 035594 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WEST oil filters for genera $11.61 105 42220 210 035594 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WEST floor dry $29.82 101 43120 220 035594 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WEST Oil $55.12101 43120 210 035594 AUTO VALUE PARTS STORES - WEST receiver hitch pin $3.73 101 43120 210 035595 BANYON DATA SYSTEM GASB software mo $144.95 101 42120 215 035595 BANYON DATA SYSTEM GASB software mo $144.94 101 43120 300 035595 BANYON DATA SYSTEM GASB software mo $144.94 602 49490 215 035595 BANYON DATA SYSTEM GASB software mo $144.95 101 41530 215 035595 BANYON DATA SYSTEM GASB software mo $144.94 601 49440 215 035596 BERGHORST, BRUCE 3 park board mtgs $105.00 101 41120 103 035597 BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD MN May Health Insura $7,766.00 101 035598 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES 3/01 th ru 3/31/05 $54.54 602 49490 384 035598 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES 3/01 th ru 3/31/05 $54.53 105 42220 384 035598 BROWNING-FERRIS INDUSTRIES ResidentaI3/01/05 $11.157.38603 43230 384 035599 CARLBOM, RICHARD mileage-2 trips to $158.76101 41110 331 035600 CELLULAR 2000 cell phone-thru 3/1 $1.00105 42250 321 - 035601 CENTRAL HYDRAULICS hydralic elbow, O-ri $61.89 101 43120 220 035601 CENTRAL HYDRAULICS grease gun $30.46 101 43120 240 - 035602 CENTRAL MCGOWAN regulator & wrench $120.38 105 42270 210 035602 CENTRAL MCGOWAN Medical Oxygen 531.32105 42270 210 035603 CHADER BUSINESS EQUIPMENT 1 qtr maint agreem 548.29 101 42120 220 035604 COLD SPRING VETERINARY CLINIC kennel fees $8.00 101 42700 300 035605 DEUHS, DEEDRA 3 park board meeti $105.00 101 41120 103 035606 FARM PLAN sprocket for broom $49.25 101 45202 220 035606 FARM PLAN sprocket for broom $49.26 101 43120 220 035607 FEDEX Overnight-Northlan $12.42 101 41430 322 035607 FEDEX Overnight to Northl 516.00101 41430 322 035608 FIRE FIGHTERS CERTIFICATION BO State Cert for Brill, 5165.00105 42240 331 035609 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY discharge hose & fi $127.82 101 45202 210 035609 FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL COMPANY discharge hose & fi $127.83 602 49450 210 035610 GOODIN COMPANY ball valve 515.35 105 42260 220 035611 GRAEVE, JAMES Oct - Dec 2004 4 $140.00 101 41120 103 035611 GRAEVE, JAMES Jan - Mar 7 4 mtgs $140.00 101 41120 103 035612 GRANITE CITY TIRE & AUTO 4 tires 5427.66101 42152 220 035613 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP T-influent BOD test $80.00 602 49480 312 035613 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP T-Phosphorus test $29.00 602 49480 312 035614 INSPECTRON INC building inspection 58,300.00 101 42401 300 035615 KALINOWSKI, KATHLEEN S. 3 park board mtgs $105.00101 41120 103 035616 KLN DISTRIBUTING, INC Service time scann $95.00 101 41430 215 035616 KLN DISTRIBUTING, INC 2.8ghz Nobilis syst 51,095.89 432 41430 582 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE labels spools, balte 534.15101 45201 220 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE mirror 52.86 101 42120 220 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE garbage can $9.57 101 41941 220 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE screws, hinges, ca $53.55 101 43120 220 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE fuel filter 56.06 105 42210 220 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE PUC pipe $12.41 602 49450 220 035617 LEE'S ACE HARDWARE spray paint 517.49101 45202 220 035618 LESNICK, MARGE 3 park board mtgs $105.00101 41120 103 035619 LlNGL, GREG & JULIE cleaning service,- 5275.00 101 41942 300 - 035620 LOSO'S STORE office supplies 58.59 101 42120 200 035621 LOSO, ANDREW Fire Hall Cleaning $170.00 105 42281 300 035622 LOSO, BOB 5 meetings 5175.00 101 41120 103 CITY OF ST JOSEPH 04/05/05 1; 19 PM Page 3 Bills Payable - Revised - :ñãck 'br Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ 35623 LOSO, NATHAN 3 mtgs 1 bulletin u $120.00 101 41950 103 35624 MAIER TYPEWRITER SERVICE printer cartridge $30.87 150 46500 200 35624 MAIER TYPEWRITER SERVICE printer ribbons, fax $107.42 101 41530 200 35624 MAIER TYPEWRITER SERVICE toner-fire dept $29.73 105 42210 200 35624 MAIER TYPEWRITER SERVICE toner $92.60 101 41430 200 35625 MENARDS floor mat, tape me $43.51 602 49480 210 35626 MIES EQUIPMENT JD front mower $2,396.25 490 43120 580 35626 MIES EQUIPMENT JD front mower $2,396.25 490 43125 580 35626 MIES EQUIPMENT JD front mower $2,396.25 490 45202 580 35627 MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOCIATION Life Ins April-J Kle $38.84 101 35628 MINNESOTA ELEVATOR, INC elevator maint $74.56 101 41942 220 35629 NCPERS GROUP LIFE INSURANCE life insurance-April $9.00 101 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC flags & spray paint $30.63 601 49440 210 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC vice-grip sets $59.64 101 45201 240 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC pipe wrench $97.24 101 45201 240 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC cable ties, spray pa $40.59 601 49440 210 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC cable ties, spray pa $40.59 602 49450 210 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC flags & spray paint $30.63 602 49450 210 35630 NORTHERN STATES SUPPLY INC die grinder cutter $27.31 101 45201 210 35631 OFFICE DEPOT 2 police office chair $276.73 101 42120 570 35631 OFFICE DEPOT staples, cassettes, $35.07 101 42120 200 35631 OFFICE DEPOT index cards, tape $26.50 601 49440 200 35631 OFFICE DEPOT printer ribbons, ink $94.19101 41530 200 35632 OFFICE MAX Ink cartiridges $70.03 105 42210 200 35632 OFFICE MAX paper, misc office $219.38 101 41430 200 35632 OFFICE MAX Compost tags $10.26 603 43230 200 ~3 PFANNENSTEIN, DWIGHT Reimbursement sh $98.80 101 42120 240 4 PITNEY BOWES March Postage $85.34 101 42120 322 35634 PITNEY BOWES March Postage $357.06101 41430 322 35634 PITNEY BOWES March Postage $2.25 601 49440 322 35634 PITNEY BOWES March Postage $4.49 150 46500 322 35635 PRECISE REFRIGERATION INC preventive mainten $286.76 105 42280 220 35636 PRINCIPAL LIFE Dental & Life 4/15 t $1,312.19101 35637 RENGEL PRINTING Stray dog forms $64.18 101 42120 200 35637 RENGEL PRINTING letterhead paper $162.64 101 41430 200 35638 RISK'S SAFETY CONSULTING CO. 1st responder clas $1,159.50 105 42240 443 35639 SCHIFFLER INSURANCE License '89 Chev $19.75101 43120 446 35639 SCHIFFLER INSURANCE License '89 Chev $19.75 101 45202 446 35640 SEARS socket trays & sac $50.24 101 45201 240 35641 SEH Corridor Study(Sup $1,009.25 101 43131 303 35641 SEH Cloverdale Avea I $2,647.95 431 43120 530 35641 SEH Storm Sewer & Dra $142.50.101 43131 303 35641 SEH Feld Property $363.00 101 43131 303 35641 SEH Ace Hardware $392.00 101 43131 303 35641 SEH Misc Engineering S $196.00 101 43131 303 35641 SEH City mapping $400.75 101 43131 303 35641 SEH record drawings tra $285.00 601 49420 303 !5641 SEH New Water Treatm $240.00 434 49440 530 !5641 SEH Callaway Street $225.25 101 43131 303 \5641 SEH 2002 Street Improv $74.75 425 43120 530 15641 SEH Hillstreet & 3rd Ave $3,272.54 101 43131 303 15641 SEH Morningside Acres $622.25 101 43131 303 15641 SEH 2004 College Addit $280.00 101 43131 303 ,5641 SEH Northland Heights $2,676.41 101 43131 303 .5641 SEH Pond View Plat 9 $716.95 101 43131 303 .5641 SEH 2004 Test Well $6,711.99 434 49440 530 .5R41 SEH St. Wendel Sewer $3,142.25 101 43131 303 1 SEH Foxmore Hollow $408.75 101 43131 303 _+1 SEH Northland 8 $86.25 430 43120 530 15641 SEH CR 1211mprovem $342.75 425 43122 530 .5641 SEH Arcon/Rivers Bend $1,367.25 101 43131 303 ,5641 SEH SE Utility Improve $81.25 101 43131 303 CITY OF ST JOSEPH 04/05/05 1: 19 pt Page Bills Payable· Revised - Check - Nbr Search Name Comments Amount FUND DEPART OBJ 035641 SEH Liberty Pointe $362.75 428 43124 530 035641 SEH Northland Plat 7 $579.04 428 43123 530 035641 SEH Pond View Ridge 7 $35.75 101 43131 303 035641 SEH Graceview Estates $449.25 101 43131 303 035642 SHERBURNE COUNTY AUDITOR-TREAS Registration-B Mey $90.00 101 42140 331 035643 ST. JOSEPH NEWSLEADER legal ad for park bo $27.75101 45202 340 035643 ST. JOSEPH NEWS LEADER legal ad business s $155.40 101 41130 340 035644 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Feb usage $46.78 602 49471 381 035644 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Feb Usage $426.98 101 45201 381 035644 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Feb usage $57.08 602 49473 381 035644 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Feb Usage $45.50 602 49480 381 035644 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Feb Usage $537.75101 43160 386 035644 STEARNS COOPERATIVE ELEC. ASSN Feb Usage $54.29 602 49472 381 035645 TIREMAXX SERVICE CENTERS replace tire #4448 $44.00 101 42152 220 035645 TIREMAXX SERVICE CENTERS repair trailer tire $49.02 101 43120 220 035646 TORBORG, RANDY printing tape $22.46 105 42210 200 035647 TRAUT WELLS Water samples $35.00 601 49420 312 035647 TRAUT WELLS Water samples $45.00 601 49420 312 035647 TRAUT WELLS Water samples-Fir $35.00 601 49420 312 035648 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 1 O-laser cartridges $180.52 101 42120 210 035648 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED 2-batteries w/4 yr w $388.54 101 42120 240 035648 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Taser Cartridge XP $145.51 101 42140 210 035649 UNUM LIFE INSURANCE disability insurance $410.86101 035650 US CABLE Internet access $56.55 101 41430 321 035651 WINTER, MARK Reimbursement for $20.00 105 42240 331 035652 WSB & ASSOCIATES, INC Field Street Corrid $8,714.90 101 43131 303 - 035653 ACCLAIM BENEFITS-REIMB Reimbursement for $263.45 101 035653 ACCLAIM BENEFITS-REIMB Reimbursement for $192.31 101 -, 035654 SEARS socket tray & racks $39.55 101 45201 240 035655 TRAUT WELLS 2004 Test Well pay $8,136.28 428 49430 530 $157,307.07 Draft March 3, 2005 Page 1 of 6 - Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of St. Joseph met in regular session - on Thursday, March 3, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the St. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Mayor Richard Carlbom, Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke, Renee Symanietz. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. City Representatives Present: City Engineer Joe Bettendorf, City Attorney Tom Jovanovich Others Present: Kevin Carpenter, Ian Carpenter, Chris Baldwin, Jen Hitzemann Approve Aqenda: Rassier made a motion to approve the agenda with the following changes: Remove 3b Minutes Move 3c Contract payment- Move to 8d under City Engineer Reports The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Consent Aqenda: Wick made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows. a. Bills Payable - Approve check numbers 35450-35508 b. Removed c. Moved to 8d d. Firefighter Compensation Adjustment - Accept the recommendation of the Fire Board and increase the annual salary of the Fire Chief and Assistant Chief and increase the response compensation. e. Grant Application - Authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute a Grant Application to the DNR for funding assistance for bathroom facilities at Northland Drive. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Public Comments: No one present wished to speak. 2005 Improvement Bond Sale: Bond Counsel Monte Eastvold appeared before the Council to present the financing for the 2005 Improvements for the Cloverdale area and Hill Street. Previously, the Council authorized the issuance of a $ 1,655,000 Negotiated Bond. Eastvold presented the following information Project cost $ 1,521,134 Net effective Interest Rate 4.60% Average Interest Rate 4.03% Life of Bond Issue 15 Years Percentage of Assessment Revenue 77 Bonds Callable 2012 Due to the size of the Bond Issue and the type of bond issue (negotiated sale) the City must hire an independent financial advisor to review the bond sale for pricing fairness with the market. Mericor Financial Services is willing to provide this service at an estimated cost of $2,000. The Council must authorize execution of an engagement letter between the City of St. Joseph and Mericor Financial Services. Wick made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute the engagement letter between Mericor Financial Services, Inc. and the City of St. Joseph to provide a fairness opinion of the 2005 Improvement Bond Issue at an estimated cost of $ 2,000. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Draft March 3, 2005 Page 2 of 6 Rassier made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute the resolution issuing bonds in the amount of $ 1,655,00 for the 2005 Utility Improvements. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Rassier made a motion authorizing Northland Securities to purchase the bonds at the stated interest rates. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Noise Violation. 29 E Minnesota Street: Weyrens reported that the Police Department responded to a noise complaint at 29 Minnesota Street East on February 20, 2005. Roger Schleper and Brock Ketcher of Rock Properties own the property in question. Weyrens stated that the property owners have contacted her regarding the violation and they do not dispute that a violation occurred. Since an evidentiary hearing is not being requested the Council must acknowledge that a violation did occur. After acknowledgment the Council then must decide the disposition. Rassier made a motion acknowledging that a noise violation occurred on February 20, 2005 at 29 Minnesota Street East. The motion was seconded by Wick and passed unanimously. Carlbom stated that since an evidentiary hearing was not requested he will allow one representative of the property to approach the Council. It was also clarified for the Council that the noise violation that occurred in 2004 resulted in a City Council fine to the landlord in the amount of $ 250.00, of which $ 100 was assessed for lack of cooperation with the Police Department. The noise violation of February 20, 2005 also included a lack of cooperation with the police department and resulted in two agencies assisting the Police Department spending over two hours at the site. Roger Schleper, Rock Investments, approached the Council and stated that they own several rental properties in the City and to the best of their recollection the two noise violations mentioned at this meeting are the only violations they have received. Schleper stated they understand the severity of the noise violation and for that reason they have begun the eviction process. He further stated that new tenants are scheduled to move in on June 1 for the summer months. Carlbom questioned Schleper as to who will be paying the fine imposed by the City Council. Schleper responded that they will pass any monetary fine on to the tenants as they did with the first fine imposed by the Council in October 2004. Rieke questioned Jovanovich as to whether or not it matters who pays the fine. Jovanovich stated it is irrelevant who pays the fine. As far as the City policy, since the landlords own the property and receive a license to operate a rental unit within the City, it is best to handle issues with the landlords rather than the tenants. Carlbom stated that he is concerned that the landlord has no financial burden if they pass the fine on to the tenants. Rassier stated that the City Council has the authority to suspend the rental license, which would create a financial burden to the property owner. Rassier made a motion to fine the property owner of 29 Minnesota Street East $350 and to suspend their rental license until July 31, 2005. The motion was seconded by Wick. Schleper stated they took action after the first violation and tried to stress the seriousness of the violation to the tenants. He asked that the Council offer some leniency towards those students who are planning to move in June 1. Wick clarified that the students moving in on June 1 are new tenants. Kevin Carpenter, attorney representing the students, requested to speak. Wick stated that he is opposed to letting him speak, as this in not an evidentiary hearing. Carpenter stated that his son is one of the tenants and will speak on his behalf. Carpenter stated that when reading through the material presented to the Council, it stated that the tenants would be out by March 1. However, the judicial process is just beginning and as a result the tenants are still living in the house. He also stated that currently the Council deals with the landlords, it is his opinion that the tenants need to be involved to ensure that they receive the information and have an opportunity to dispute the claims. Draft March 3, 2005 Page 3 of 6 There was some discussion amongst the Council members regarding the motion by Rassier. Wick questioned whether or not Rassier would amend his motion to allow the summer tenants to occupy the residence. Carlbom addressed the possibility of suspending the license for the balance of the current license year rather then July 31. Rieke stated in his opinion that $ 350 is too low for this violation and questioned if there is a matrix for noise violations. Weyrens stated that the City does not have a matrix for noise violations, however the minimum fine for a noise violation is $ 150 as established by the City Council. The Council has previously discussed establishing a matrix for noise violations, however, there are too many variables and it was decided to not establish a matrix. Rieke stated that it may be better to keep the license intact and raise the fine. Carlbom stated to the best of his knowledge there is not a lack of housing in the summer months and the tenants scheduled to move in June 1 can easily find alternative housing. By suspending the license, the property owner will feel the impact as well as the tenants. On the other hand, Wick stated that the property owner did not invite the people over and the property owner did not receive the noise violation, the tenants did. As a result, he feels that the fine should be increased and the suspension time should be lessened. Symanietz made a motion to amend the motion to end the suspension period on June 1 rather than July 31,2005. The motion was seconded by Wick. Ayes: Wick, Rieke, Symanietz Nays: Carlbom, Rassier Amendment Passes 3:2:0 R.ieke made a motion to amend the motion to increase the fine from $ 350 to $ 750 with the suspension period ending June 1, 2005. The motion was seconded by Wick. Ayes: Rieke, Wick Nays: Rassier, Carlbom, Symanietz Amendment Fails 2:3:0 VOTE CALL - AMENDED MOTION Ayes: Symanietz, Wick Nays: Rassier, Carlbom, Rieke Amended Motion Fails 2:3:0 Carlbom made a motion to fine the property owner of 29 Minnesota Street East $750 and suspend the rental license until July 31,2005. The motion was seconded by Rieke. Ayes: Rieke, Rassier, Carlbom Nays: Symanietz, Wick Motion Carries 3:2:0 Schleper stated that he currently passes the fine on to the students so that they feel the impact that their violation had on the City. He questioned the Council what he should be doing differently. He stated that there is a lot of misconception of ofkampus college students in the City and that if the City would be interested in a meeting with the Council and Landlords, he would be the first to volunteer. ARCON Development: Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for the Preliminary Plat entitled River's Bend. The developer for the project is Arcon Development with Rick Packer the project manager. River's Bend includes utilization of the PUD process, seeking relief on lot sizes for 53 lots and reducing the sideyard setback on the accessory side from 10 feet to five feet. The Planning Commission is recommending that the Council rezone the areas identified as R1 on the plat and leave the portions illustrated as R3 as Agricultural. The developer has not provided a detailed site plan for the R3 portion of the plat, therefore, upon the recommendation of the City Attorney, that portion of the plat should remain agricultural. The final action by the Planning Commission is recommending approval of two variances on design standards, length of a block and cul-de-sac. Rick Packer approached the Council representing ARCON Development. He stated that this process began 3 years ago. This is a large project with 460 acres and 571 Single Family Lots. The project will be spread out in phases over time through 2018. He further stated that the environmental review process Draft March 3, 2005 Page 4 of 6 has been completed with the Council approving the AUAR in 2004. Once approved, the AUAR functions ~ as the Comprehensive Plan for the River's Bend Plat. Packer presented the following information: - · PUD Application - Packer stated that he has requested to develop the property under the PUD Ordinance to have varied side yard setbacks of 5' and 10'. Packer stated in his opinion varied setbacks lead to better looking subdivisions as well as allow for future expansion. Packer also stated that with these setbacks, most people will put the garage on the 5' side, which would eliminate any room for recreational vehicles on the side of the yard. · Their average lot is 13,500 sq. ft., however, there are 53 lots that meet both width and depth, but do not meet the minimum sq. ft. · Packer stated that he has withdrawn the R3 Zoning request, as the Planning Commission would not consider a R3 Zoning Application without a detailed site plan. Packer clarified that he would rather have this area zoned R4 but it is his understanding the Planning Commission did not approve the draft Ordinance. · The 1st phase will consist of approximately 50 lots. · The Storm Water Plan has been modified from the original plan with the Storm Water discharging to the Sauk River. Wick stated that the Park Board met and have finalized the Park Dedication requirements accepting land as the contribution. The Park Board acknowledges that not all the land donated is useable land, but it will add to the area that is useable. The proposed park for River's Bend will include a ball field, soccer field and shelters. The area abutting the shore of the Sauk River will not be developed with roads or equipment; rather it will remain natural with access to the river for canoeing. Jovanovich questioned Packer as to when they anticipate developing the multiple family dwelling area. He stated that the City is currently reviewing a R4 Ordinance and they would like to see a development plan for this type of community. Packer stated that he will wait until the City decides if they want R3 or R4, at that time he will present a proposed development plan. There was also some discussion on Lifecycle Housing. Wick stated that St. Joseph is participant in the area Affordable Housing initiative and questioned Packer if he is providing for any Affordable Housing. Packer stated that the housing in River's Bend will be approximately $30-40,000 above the price point established by the Affordable Housing committee. He further stated that he does not support subsidizing housing at the expense of others and at this point the plat does not include lots to be placed in the Affordable Housing Program. Wick also questioned why the trails have not been included on the preliminary plat. Weyrens responded that trails are not platted, they are dedicated in the form of easements which will be illustrated on the final plat along with separate easement documents. Wick made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the Preliminary Plat entitled River's Bend. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Discussion: Carlbom stated that he would like to see them reach the 15% for life cycle housing, as the area Cities have agreed to try and provide the same. When Packer questioned how he should try to meet that, Wick stated that they could possibly build lower priced houses on the 53 lots that do not meet the required square footage. Rassier made a motion to accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission and rezone the areas identified as single family R-1 and all areas marked R3 will remain Agricultural. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Rassier made a motion accepting the recommendation of the Planning Commission and approve the request of ARCON Development to develop River's Bend as a PUD, allowing for a 5' setback Draft March 3, 2005 Page 5 of 6 - on the side yard setback abutting the accessory building and allowing 53 lots a total area of less - than 13,000 square feet. In addition this motion accepts the recommendation of the Planning Commission granting the following variances: 1. 694 foot variance on the maximum block length - St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 52.46 Subd. 2(a). 2. 100 foot variance on the maximum length of a cul-de-sac - St. Joseph Code of Ordinances 54.16 Subd. 3(1). The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. CITY ENGINEER REPORTS 2004 MS4 Storm Water Permit - Public Input: Bettendorf reported that beginning in 2003, the City is required to submit an annual Storm Sewer System Report and accept public input on the management of the Storm Water System. The requirement in 2003 also required municipalities to apply for a Storm Water Permit, which included the development of Best Management Practices (BMP's) to control storm water discharge. The annual report then becomes a summary of the BMP's. Weyrens reported that the City has implemented the BMP's stated in the Storm Water Permit and with the assistance of the Building Official and Public Works Director monitor compliance with the same. Beginning in 2005 the City will be offering an annual hazardous waste pickup which is included in the BMP's. Water Update: Bettendorf stated that the water testing at the site of the future water filtration plant and well field has been completed and the final report will be available in April. The report indicates that there is sufficient water and good quality water. Once the final report is reviewed the City will need to prepare a - purchase agreement for the needed land. - MAYOR REPORTS District 742 Buildinq Facilities Committee: Carlbom stated that he attended the building facilities committee meeting where they discussed facility needs for the next 10 years. Carlbom stated that since Wick is a member of the S1. Joseph School Committee he will forward to him all the information received at the meeting. Sales Tax: Carlbom updated the Council on the status of the regional sales tax bill. Representative Knoblach has stated that he will not author a regional sales tax bill, he will however, sign a sales tax bill for the Cities he represents (S1. Cloud, Waite Park, S1. Augusta). Knoblach encourages St. Joseph to contract Representative Hosch to author a similar bill for 81. Joseph. The area Cities oppose this approach as it could leave one City without a tax if one bilUs not passed. Therefore, area Cities will be asking Representative Severson to author a regional sales tax bill with Hosch and Opatz co-authoring the bill. COUNCIL REPORTS RIEKE - No Report Although Rieke had nothing to report he did state that he would like to begin some dialogue about the city's hope for affordable housing. We should think of what the price points will be and discuss ways to keep this type of program active in the City. Draft March 3, 2005 Page 6 of 6 RASSIER - ~ Historical Society: Rassier stated that the Historical Society is currently displaying some of their artifacts at the St. Benedict Monastery Museum. He also reminded the Council that the Society is still looking for a permanent facility to call the St. Joseph Historical Society. Inauquration at St. Benedict: Rassier stated that the President's Inauguration is scheduled for April 22 and discussed a possible joint welcoming from the City. WICK Grant Application: Wick stated that the Park Board is working with SEH on a Grant Application for the construction of a shelter and restrooms at Northland Park. The grant requires a public hearing which will be conducted on March 21,2005 before the Park Board. Rivers Bend Park Dedication: Wick stated that Arcon Development is donating 110+ acres of land for park purposes. While a portion of the land dedicated is not useable, it will add green space and protect the shore of the Sauk River. SYMANIETZ APO Meetinq: Symanietz stated that she attended the APO Meeting. They discussed transportation as well as bikes and walking trails in the area. She stated that last year 650 people were killed in car accidents in Minnesota. She stated that based on the facts that she heard at the meeting, she urges people to wear their seatbelts. Rassier made a motion to adjourn at 8:30; seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. - - Judy Weyrens Administrator Draft March 17, 2005 Page 1 of 6 - Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City Council for the City of S1. Joseph met in regular session - on Thursday, March 17, 2005 at 7:00 PM in the S1. Joseph City Hall. Members Present: Mayor Richard Carlbom, Councilors AI Rassier, Dale Wick, Ross Rieke, Renee Symanietz. City Administrator Judy Weyrens. City Representatives Present: Building Official Ron Wasmund, Public Works Director Dick Taufen Others Present: Julie Klocker, Sauk River Watershed District Approve Aqenda: Wick made a motion to approve the agenda with the following change: Add 10d Job Descriptions The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. Consent Aqenda: Rassier made a motion to approve the consent agenda as follows. a. Bills Payable - Approve check numbers 35509-35565 b. Minutes - Approve the minutes for February 2005. c. Capital Equipment Request - Authorize the purchase of 2 lawn tractors: 1) 997 Z Tractor with 60' deck ($12,700); 2) 1545 Tractor ($6,750). The funds have been budgeted and included in the Capital Improvement Plan. d. Squad Car Lease - Authorize the Administrator to execute the lease with Travel Management for replacement of the 2003 Squad Car at a lease rate of $833. e. Application for Payment - Authorize the Mayor to execute application for payment #5, - Northland Improvements and authorize payment to Molitor Excavating in the amount of $6,234.89. - f. Application for Payment - Authorize the Mayor to execute application for payment #3 for the 2002 Test Well Improvement and payment to Traut Wells in the amount of $19,844.55. The motion was seconded by Symanietz and passed unanimously. Public Comments: No one present wished to speak. Sauk River Watershed. Water Manaqement Plan: Julie Klocker, Administrator of the Sauk River Watershed District approached the Council to discuss the Sauk River Watershed District. Klocker stated that 81. Joseph is part of the 8auk River Watershed District and with the annexation of the Arcon property, the River is within the municipal boundary. The SRWD is funded through levy and all property owners in St. Joseph are taxed annually for the functions of the SRWD. Klocker stated that SRWD is requesting that all affected member municipalities support an initiative to study and manage water quality and quantity within the Sauk River watershed, including management of storm water discharges, the effects of land use changes, development and other alterations to the environment on water quality and quantity management, and the management of natural and open space areas, including floodplains, in order to balance future economic and social growth with the water and other natural resources found within the watershed. The study will include: a) Complete diagnostic study of the lower reaches of the Sauk River in order to gain information upon which to build future water resource management strategies within the lower Sauk Region; b) Implement a long-term monitoring program on the lower reaches of the Sauk River, in order to augment the diagnostic study, provide statistically relevant trend data, and monitor the impacts of future development and management strategies; c) complete a land and water resource inventory and analysis within the Region, in order to enable targeted future water resource management strategies; d) Draft March 17, 2005 Page 2 of 6 Implement, in coordination with Petitioners, projects and programs to improve water and land resource - management, reduce adverse impacts on lower stretches of the Sauk River and other waters within the - Region, and improve application and implementation of Best Management Practices throughout the Region, in order to improve and protect regional water resources. Klocker stated that the following municipalities are being asked to participate in the study: St. Cloud, Waite Park, Cold Spring, Rockville, and St. Joseph. The project could extend over a 15 year period. Following is a summary of questions raised by the Council: · Carlbom asked about the financial impact of the project. Klocker stated that the entire Watershed District will pay the cost of the study, which is funded through the annual levy. It is anticipated that the financial impact to a residential homeowner will be $ 1.70 annually. In addition to the levy, drainage fees are collected from any person draining into the Sauk River. · Carlbom questioned what would happen if not all cities sign the petition. Rassier asked what would happen if only one city would sign the petition. Klocker stated that only one entity needs to sign the petition to proceed with the project, however that one city can stop the project as well before the project is done. · Carlbom also asked about the possibilities of the groups not agreeing with the study and if St. Joseph will be obligated to make any changes. Klocker stated that the SRWD does not have any authority over the City of St. Joseph they can only make recommendations. SRWD does not want to control planning or land use. · There was some question as to whether or not the execution of the resolution would place any additional burdens on the City. It was agreed to contact the City Attorney to review the document before executing. Klocker reiterated that there is no risk to the City if the petition is signed. Even if St. Joseph didn't sign the petition and the other municipalities did execute the petition, St. Joseph would be part of the study. The SRWD is requesting all municipalities to execute the resolution and petition to show that it is a - cooperative effort. Rassier made a motion authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute Resolution 2005-10 to execute the petition for the Lower Sauk River Water Management Project. Approval is continent upon 50% of the affected municipalities executing the same action and approval of the City Attorney. The motion was seconded by Wick. Ayes: Rassier, Wick, Symanietz, Carlbom Nays: None. Abstain: Rieke Motion Carried 4:0:1 BUILDING OFFICIAL REPORTS Plumbinq & Mechanical Permits - Rate Structure: Building Official Ron Wasmond addressed the Council in regards to the Plumbing and Mechanical Fee Schedules. Wasmond stated that he has previously requested authorization to modify the fee schedule for mechanical and plumbing permits. The former Building Official implemented the current fee structure with plumbing fees based on the number of fixtures and mechanical permits are based on the input BTU of the heat plan, type of ventilation and gas supply openings. Wasmund stated that the current fee raises questions for both staff and homeowners who are not familiar with the terminology for plumbing and heating. He stated that he has studied the fees over the past year and those fees collected by the former Building Official, AIISpec. There seems to be some discrepancies in the number of fixtures or the types of heating units being reported. In an effort to simplify the process, Wasmund suggested that the change the fee schedule to a flat fee based for residential and percentage based on the value for commercial projects. Commercial projects are percentage based since those projects require a plan review and are much larger projects. Draft March 17, 2005 Page 3 of 6 - - The proposed fees to be collected are as follows: Plumbina Permit Mechanical Permit Residential Alteration $50.00 Residential Alteration $50.00 Residential Water Conditioner $35.00 Residential Fireplace $45.00 (if not included in original permit) (if not included in original permit) Residential New $95.00 Residential New $95.00 Commercial % see below Commercial % see below If value is $0-5,000, fee is 50 or 1.5% of value. (whichever is greater) If value is $5,001 - $50,000, fee is $75 or 1 % of value (whichever is greater) If value is $50,0001 and up, fee is $500 or .5% (whichever is greater) Fire Suppression & Alarm Systems Valuation based on fee schedule Inspections outside normal business hours $60.00/hour (1 hour minimum) Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated $30.00 per inspection State Surcharae Fixed fee permit surcharge is $0.50 State surcharge, the greater of ($0.0005 x valuation) or $0.50 - Wasmund stated that he has three main goals for changing the plumbing and mechanical fee schedules. 1. To make the application process easier for both City Staff, Contractors, and Homeowners - 2. To charge a uniform fee for similar projects. 3. To allow Inspectron to add this type of permitting to the Permit Works software that is used for building permits. Carlbom questioned the fee schedules for other area cities. Wasmund stated that there are still three Cities that use a per fixture fee schedule. However, Waite Park is working on a similar schedule as proposed. Rieke made a motion to adopt the new fee schedule as presented effective April 1 , 2005. The motion was seconded by Rassier and passed unanimously. Rental Housinq Ordinance: Wasmund stated that last year was the first year Inspectron completed the rental housing inspections and he is preparing for the 2005 inspections. Last year they fell behind schedule and he hopes to be finished by August in 2005. Typically the inspections are completed between June 1 and August 30. Any property that is rented must complete the inspection process. Buildinq Permit Activity: Wasmund stated that the contractors have become accustomed to the new process and required inspections. Carlbom questioned Wasmund as to whether or not he anticipates a lot of Building Permit activity in 2005. Wasmund stated that last year 75 new single-family home permits were issued, however he anticipates that 188 new single-family home permits will be issued in 2005. PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR REPORTS 2004 Annual Water Report: Public Works Director Dick Taufen presented the Council with the 2004 annual water pumping report. Taufen stated that unlike 2003, the City accounted for over 98% of all - water pumped, well within the DNR requirements. Draft March 17, 2005 Page 4 of 6 Surplus Property: Taufen stated that the recent equipment purchase of two trucks and the sewer rodder - allow for the disposal of the following equipment: - 1 . 1970 Tanker Truck 2. 1965 Sewer Rodder Truck 3. 1985 Chevy Van Municipalities are limited on how to dispose of surplus equipment. First, the equipment must be declared surplus by the City Council and then the City can either accept competitive bids for the surplus equipment or place them for sale via an auction. Annually Stearns County conducts an auction for surplus equipment and the surrounding Cities are invited to participate. Therefore, Taufen is requesting that the Council declare the equipment identified above a surplus and auction the Tanker Truck and Chevy Van and seek competitive bids for the sewer rodder. The sewer rodder is a specialized piece of equipment and the City may receive a higher return seeking competitive bids, advertising through the League Magazine. Rassier made a motion to declare the three items identified above as surplus property auctioning the Tanker Truck and Chevy Van and seeking competitive bids on the Sewer Rodder. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. MAYOR REPORTS District 742 Buildinq Facilities Committee: Carlbom stated that he attended the District 742 School Committee meeting at which they further discussed the long-term goals for District 742. He further stated that they are planning to form sub-committees to look at the different areas identified as District concerns. Carlbom recommended that the District contact Councilor Wick has he has been involved in the School Committee that has been meeting in S1. Joseph. CSB President: Carlbom announced that the College of S1. Benedict has hired a new President for the - College and that her inauguration will be the third week in April. Carlbom and Rassier will be hosting a - welcome lunch on behalf of the City on April 19. Partnership: Carlbom stated that he attended the meeting with the Partnership on Wednesday morning. At the meeting the Partnership discussed the difficulty they are having meeting rising expenditures. Carlbom reminded the Partnership that the decision to join the Partnership was not unanimous and the City cannot afford an increase in membership fees. To help offset the rising operating costs, the Partnership is considering expanding the membership to include associate members for smaller businesses. Carlbom stated that as the City currently has an EDA, it might be best for the City to become an associate member. Chamber Lunch: Carlbom stated that he attended the Chamber lunch along with Rassier. There seems to be some confusion over who attends what meetings. As a result, he stated he will be doing an addendum to the Mayor Appointments to clarify the City representatives. COUNCIL REPORTS RASSIER - No Report RIEKE Minutes: Rieke questioned whether or not the minutes are available on the website. Weyrens stated that the minutes of City Council meetings are posted on the website. Typically they are posted at the end of every month. - Draft March 17, 2005 Page 5 of 6 . SYMANIETZ Sloqan Contest: Symanietz stated that she met with the three chamber members who were on the Chamber sub-committee for the City Slogan. The submission deadline has passed and 75 slogans were submitted. It is anticipated that the winner will be present at the City Council meeting on April 7. Rassier questioned if the Chamber is aware of the selected slogan as some Chamber members have approached him stated that they are not aware of the selected slogan. Carlbom stated that it was brought up at the March meeting and no questions were asked. Symanietz stated that the Chamber will hear more about it at the Chamber meeting after the winner is revealed. WICK Recreation Association: Wick stated that the St. Joseph Recreation Association is preparing for the upcoming softball season preparing the fields and seeking teams. In addition, the Recreation Association is working with the St. Cloud Boys and Girls Club to provide summer recreation for youth. Park Board: Wick stated that the Park Board will be holding a public hearing on March 21, 2005 to discuss the DNR grant submittal requesting funding for a shelter and restrooms. TAC Meetinq: Wick mentioned that the TAC Committee for the Field Street corridor met and the minutes are included in the Council Packet. State Softball Tournament: Rassier questioned Wick as to whether or not the Recreation Association will be hosting the State Tournament for Softball. Wick stated that the City will host the tournament in July. ADMINISTRATOR REPORTS - Field Street Study: Weyrens stated that he TAC Committee has met twice. The information given to the ~ Council will be available on the Website as well to keep everyone involved. Zoninç¡ Amendments: Weyrens stated that the Planning Commission has been working to amend the following Ordinances: 1. R4 Zoning District: The Planning Commission has been working on the creation of a R4 Zoning District. The purpose of this district is to allow for Townhome or Patio home construction on smaller lots. Typically residents purchasing a Town/Patio home are not interested in a large yard or the desire property maintenance through an association. The proposed Zoning District will allow for 6,000 square foot lots. Before the Ordinance is enacted, the Planning Commission must conduct a public hearing, which "viII be scheduled for April 7, 2005. 2. Sign Ordinance: The Planning Commission is also looking to make some changes to the Sign Ordinance. The changes include: · Limitation on the size of the structure holding the sign face · Establishing the maximum height · Requiring landscaping around the base of the sign. 3. Business and Industrial Zoning Districts: Currently, the Planning Commission must review all building permits in these zoning districts. Both Staff and the Planning Commission have agreed that small additions to existing buildings should not need to come before the Planning Commission if all Ordinance requirements are fulfilled. The Planning Commission has identified small additions as those additions not exceeding 25% of the main structure. Gamblinç¡ Ordinance: Weyrens reported that she has been presented a Premise Permit Application for Loso's Main Street Pub. In reviewing the Ordinance requirements it states that organizations are limited to one premise permit. Before the Council can consider the new application the Ordinance must be Draft March 17, 2005 Page 6 of 6 reviewed. Weyrens will contact the current license holders to discuss a proposed Ordinance and report . back to the Council. Job Descriptions: Weyrens requested authorization to contract with Rajkowski Hansmeier to update the job descriptions for the Maintenance Department. The updating of job descriptions will assist the City in establishing any new positions such as water and sewer operators. Rassier made a motion authorizing Weyrens to work with Rajkowski-Hansmeier to review and update the job descriptions for the Maintenance Department. The motion was seconded by Rieke and passed unanimously. St. Wendel Township: Weyrens stated that she contacted the St. Wendel Township Clerk, Renee Salzer, requesting and update on the proposed extension of services. Salzer indicated that the St. Wendel Township Board is sending a survey to all affected households and it is anticipated that it will be mailed over this coming weekend. . Adjourn: Symanietz made a motion to adjourn at 8:15 PM; seconded by Wick. Ayes: Symanietz, Rieke, Carlbom, Wick Nays: Rassier Motion Passed 4:1:0 Judy Weyrens - Administrator -- - - I Attachment: Yes or No I - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Fireworks - College of St. Benedict DATE: April 7, 2005 Administration ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AGENDA ITEM Fireworks - College of St. Benedict PREVIOUS ACTION - RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION ~ Authorize the Administrator and Fire Chief to execute the Fireworks permit for a display to be held at the College of St. Benedict on April 22, 2005. FISCAL IMPACT COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS The City Fireworks Ordinance requires that a permit be secured for displays within the City limits. The City does not have a permit application as required by Ordinance, so we have substituted the State Permit. The permit lists the required information and also assure that the City is listed as an additional insured for the display. The insurance certificate has been submitted to the City. The Fire Chief has also been contacted and is aware of the event. He has agreed to provide a truck and personnel during the event. - APPLICA TION FOR DISPLAY OF FIREWORKSIPYROTECHNIC SPECIAL EFFECTS Applicant instructions: - 1. This application must be completed and returned at least 15 days prior to date of display. - Name of applicant (Sponsoring Organization): College of Saint Benedicts Address of applicant: 37 South College Ave, St. Joseph, Minnesota 56374 Name of authorized agent of applicant: Melrose PYrotechnics. Inc. Address of agent: 9405 River Road SE, Clear Lake, MN 55319 Telephone number of agent: 320-743-6496 Date of display: April 22, 2005 Time of display approx.9:30pm Location of display: St. Joseph. Minnesota- College of St. Benedicts Manner and place of storage of frreworks/pyrotechnic special effects prior to display: Deliverv and storage in truck on day of display Type & number offrreworks/pyrotechnic special effects to be discharged: I.3G Aerial shells - up to 4 inch shells Minnesota State law requires that this display be conducted under the direct supervision of a pyrotechnic operator certified by the State Fire Marshal. - Name of supervising operator: Mike Iburg Certificate No.: B 0540 ~ I understand and agree to comply with all provisions of this application and the requirements of the issuing authority, and will ensure that the frreworks/pyrotechnic special effects are discharged in a manner that will not endanger persons or property or constitute a nuisance. Signature of applicant (or agent): Date of application: 3-14-05 ; í Required attachments. The following attac ' ents must be included with this application: 1. Proof of a bond or certificate of insurance in amount of at least $ 5.000.000.00 2. A diagram of the grounds, or facilities (for indoor displays), at which the display will be held. This diagram (drawn to scale or with dimensions included) must show the point at which the fireworks/pyrotechnic special effects are to be discharged; the location of ground pieces; the location of all buildings, highways, streets, communication lines and other possible overhead obstructions; and the lines behind which the audience will be restrained. For proximate audience (e.g. indoor) displays, the diagram must also show the fallout radius for each pyrotechnic device used during the display 3. Names and ages of all assistants that will be participating in the display. Erin Stock, 37, Jeff Jahnke,39 The discharge of the listed fireworks on the date and at the location shown on this application is hereby approved, subject to the following conditions, if any: Signature of fue chief/county sheriff: Date: Printed name of above official: Phone: Signature of issuing authority: Date: - (City clerk/county auditor) Printed name of above official: Phone: ACORDm CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE I DATE(MMIDDNYYY) 3/10/2005 PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION Britton-Gallagher and Associates, Inc. ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE 6240 SOM Center Rd. HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR 411feveland OH 44139 ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC# INSURED INSURER A: Lexington Insurance Co Melrose North Pyrotechnics, Inc. INSURER B: Grani te State Insurance Co. 9405 Riber Road SE INSURERC: Arch Specialty Ins Company Clear Lake MN 55319 INSURERD: MN WC Assigned Risk Plan INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. I~~ ,p,.~: POLICY NUMBER POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIMITS A ~NERAL LIABILITY 5315723 4/1/2005 4/1/2006 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1000000 ~ 5MMERCIALGENERAlLlABILlTY ~~~~~~ ?E~~~~~~nce} $ 50000 _ CLAIMS MADE ~ OCCUR MED EXP (Anyone pemon) $ PERSONAL &ADV INJURY $ 1000000 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 2000000 ~'LAGGR[5flE LIMIT APn PER: PRODUCTS - COMP/OP AGG $ 2000000 POLICY X ~¡;'f?r LOC B ~OMOBILE LIABILITY CA62659312 4/1/2005 4/1/2006 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT $ 1000000 ~ ANY AUTO (Ee accident) I- ALL OWNED AUTOS BODILY INJURY $ SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per pemon) f-- X HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY I- $ X NON-OWNEO AUTOS (Pe, accident) I- PROPERTY DAMAGE $ (Per accident) RRAGE LIABILITY AUTO ONLY - EA ACCIDENT $ ANY AUTO OTHER THAN EA ACC $ AUTO ONLY: AGG $ C ¡TIESSIUMBRELLA LIABIUTY 42ULP1485100 4/1/2005 4/1/2006 EACH OCCURRENCE $4,000,000 X OCCUR 0 CLAIMS MADE AGGREGATE $4,000,000 $ f;i DEDUCTIBLE $ X RETENTION $10000 $ D WORKERS COMPENSATION AND WC2204088770 4/1/2005 4/1/2006 X I T"ð~~If'rJI~S I ¡OTH- ER EMPLOYERS' UABILITY $ 500000 ANY PROPRIETORlPARTNERÆXECUTIVE E.L. EACH ACCIOENT OFFICERlMEMBER EXCLUDED? E.L. DISEASE - EA EMPLOYEE $ 500000 ff yes, describe under 1$500000 SPF'ClAL PROVISIONS below E.L. DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT OTHER . DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS / LOCATIONS /VEHICLES J EXCLUSIONS ADDED BY ENDORSEMENT J SPECIAL PROVISIONS DISPLAY DATE: April 22, 20D5 LOCATION: St. Joseph, MN; St. Benedicts College ADDITIONAL INSURED: City of St. Joseph, MN; College of St. Benedict CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED College of St. Benedict BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING INSURER WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL 30 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE Attn: Ms Molly Renslow CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO 37 South College Ave SHALL IMPOSE NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON St. Joseph MN 56374-2099 THE INSURER, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. - AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ~~ ACORD 25 (2001/08) ©ACORD CORPORATION 1988 IMPORTANT If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL iNSURED, the policy(ies) must be endorsed. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). If SUBROGATION is WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). DISCLAIMER The Certificate of Insurance on the reverse side of this form does not constitute a contract between the issuing insurer(s), authorized representative or producer, and the certificate holder, nor does it affirmatively or negatively amend, extend or alter the coverage afforded by the policies listed thereon. ACORD 25 (2001/0B) Melrose Pyrotechnics, Inc. Site Inspection Form .'omer Name: CO }_L ie, C ,., f 5 (+ì~J-} De.l1!t"'A : ( I . address and name jf ~pplicable 3 7 S-:¡(.+~ (oUe<c'u:LLe A If, fJ e. . Sf- T~ . i (! i ~I 3;'zL¿ . ,. o§I'fî ; 15\1.. :, . ... .. ) ) I) Site contact person (day of display) [¡a¡'fÝ c..h·(;·<,1.·A!J / /~J _~~I Ii flUó,/ r¡;.J . ( Site Diagram: (See Example below). When diagramming the shooting location, mark area where low level products shall be placed. Make sure your measurements include the following distances: A. Spectators B. Parking C. Residences Maximum size shell based on D. Commercial Buildings measurements taken: i ¡ )l I I I I I I ¿J r I :Ð~d, 1~\Nt. (G~----~ ~ ' I~Rot~ð OyÚiv t:¡TJ1{t4luCC I I ' .' nJJ --1\~''''''---/ J__.___- r I . I I 6 ~ 0'(' J+:lL f I I I ' rFLf+ìA-rt\~~ ); I ¡ .- 'f~ ' D ' R J ¡/ I i -- ¡; ~.; " i :~ì \~/I (( ,-_)JJ '" '-l,' .- "\. . - -,.--- ~ ',.. É ¡..\ __'.'_'_'\1"-_.''--'- \ - .- - .- ~ \) ,.\/ I W:Ll" r""~l"'Y.\;0¡ 1 ;'1 /, . '/ -v-.___~.- ,.. _\~'d"" ~ \ \ '7 /\ ~S~\Ù, t p~:\ ! I u l,de. fN'''~. i i ¥'-. 1 ; ,. ! ! ,I fvt,L. ¡ \ t \;" , 130)rls. ~: 6t ~¡l. :.¡j. M- n ~ t\f\.ìJV f. I. I " / ßLL1 . ( / 4( Example Directions.to site: c.t# 1> -to éTr c11./ 5t) io.J--02/ Spc:CUku'5 ÜJt>61 in HW¡/.lff M ,to, (ty' 7-"l) W -to sf. ~/(ý:'e:f~ (,nLLeý Ave:.. So To t'V\J:\Ilùt f Juth!\lufr' '20' P""",,~ - - Signature of person completing form: Date: . I Attachment: Yes or No I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Ordinance Amendments DATE: April 7, 2005 Administration ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AGENDA ITEM Ordinance Amendment - Business Sign and COInmerciallIndustrial Zoning Districts PREVIOUS ACTION The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 4, 2005 for the purpose of amending the Business Sign regulations and amending the provision for receiving approval trom the Planning Commission for minor additions in the Commercial and Industrial Zoning Districts. . No one appeared before the Planning Commission to testify, therefore the Planning Commission is recommending Council approval of the amendments, causing the same to be published. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION Accept the recommendation of the Planning Commission authorizing the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Ordinance Amendments causing the same to be published. FISCAL IMPACT COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS - - AMEJ\TDMENT TO ORDINA.NCE 52 , ZONING ORDINANCE REGARDING BUSINESS SIGNS . ; - The City Council for the City of St. Joseph hereby ordains that Ordinance 52 is amended as follows: 1. That section 52.11, Subd. 3 shall be amended by the addition of subparagraph m) which shall read as follows: "m) Momunent Sim. A free standing sign in which the entire base of the sign structure is in contact with t he ground, providing a solid and continuous background for the sign face that is the same width as the sign fì'om the ground to the top of the sign. The base of the sign shall be constructed of a permanent material such as concrete block or stone. The sign face shall occupy at least 50% of the monument sign. Signs should be constructed of materials either the same as the principal structure or that appear the same." 2. That section 52.11, Subd. 5 shall be amended to read as follows: "Subd. 5: Business Si0.1S. Business or industlial signs may be erected, attached or painted onto a structure, and maintained in conjunction with a commercial or industrial use provided the Business Sign meets the minimum standards as stated in each zoning district. The maximum height of a Business Sign shall be 15 feet. All freestanding Business Signs shall be landscaped around the base. Except for monument signs, the surface area of the base of any Business Sign . shall not exceed 25% of the face area unless structural engineering illustrates the face cannot meet the wind loading requirement of the Building Code." 2. That Section 52.30, Subd. 9.a. is an1ended by the addition of subparagraph 4 which reads as fo11O\vs: "4. All freestanding Business Signs shall be landscaped arolmd the base. Except for monunlent signs, the surface area of the base of any Business Sign shall not exceed 25% of the face area unless stlLlctural engineering illustrates the face cannot meet the wind loading requirement of the Building Code." " That Section 52.31, Subd. 10.b. is amended by the addition of subparagraph 4 and .J. subparagraph 5 \vmch read as follows: "4. All freestanding Business Signs shall be landscaped around the base. Except for monument signs, the surface area of the base of any Business Sign shall not exceed 25% of the face area unless structural engineering illustrates the face Calmot meet the wind loading requirement of the Building Code. 5. The maximum height ofa Business Sign shall be 15 feet. " 4. That Section 52.32, .Subd. l1.b. is amended by the addition of subparagraph 4 and - subparagraph 5 \vmch read as follows: - 1 . "4. All :&eestanding Business Signs shall be landscaped around the base. I Except for monument signs, the surface area of the base of any Business Sign shall not exceed t ¡ 25% of the face area unless structural engineering illuStrates the face cannot meet the wind loading ì ! requirement of the Building Code. 5. The maximum height of a Business Sign shall be 15 feet. " 5. That Section 52.33, Subd. II.e. is amended by the addition of subparagraph 4 and subparagraph 5 which read as follows: "4. All freestanding Business Signs shall be landscaped around the base. Except for monument signs, the surface area bf the base of any Business Sign shall not exceed 25% of the face area unless structural engineering illustrates the face cannot meet the wind loading requirement of the Building Code. 5. The maximum height of a Business Sign shall be 15 feet. " These amendments are adopted the _ day of , 2005, and shall be effective upon publication. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH . By ( Richard Carlbom, Mayor By Judy Weyrens, Administrator/Clerk These amendments were published on ,2005 L:\city\stjoe\2005 - ; 2 Þ.MENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 52 ZOl\:1JNG ORDINA.NCE REGARDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN . A.PPROV AL FOR ADDITIONS IN B-l. B-2. B-3 A.l\TD L-l DISTRlCTS The City Council forthe City of St. Joseph hereby ordains that Ordinance 52 is amended as follows: 1. That section 5230, Subd. 10, shall be amended to read as follows: "Subd. 1 0: Development Plan Reauirements. No building permit shall be issued until the Planning Commission reviews the development plan to determine that the use and development is compatible with adjacent land uses, and consistent with the stated intent of tIns zone. The requirements of this Subdivision shall not apply to additions to existing buildings which will increase the size of the building by 25% or less. Upon the request of the Planning Commission, the City Council \'lill make the final detennination on site plan approval. The developer shall provide the follmving items to the Planning Commission for any development located in the CentIal Business District:" [All subparagraphs shall remain the same.] ') That section 52.31, Subd. 9 shall be amended to read as follows: "Subd. 9: DeveloDment Plan Reauirements. No building pem1it shall be issued until the . Planning Commission revie·ws the development plan to determine that the use and development is compatible ìNith adjacent land uses, and consistent with the stated intent of this zone. The requirements of this Subdivision shall not apply to additions to existing buildings \vhich váll increase the size of the building by 25% or less. Upon the request of the Planning Commission, the City Council will make the fmal determination on site plan approval. The developer shall provide the following items to the Plamnng Commission for any development located in the Highway 75 Business District:" [All subparagraphs shall remain the same.] " That section 52.32, Subd. 10 shall be amended to read as fo110·ws: J. "Subd. 1 0: Development Plan Reauirements. No building pennit shall be issued until the Plam1Ì11g Commission revievvs the development plan to determine that the use and development is compatible \'lith adjacent land uses, and consistent \vi.th the stated intent of this zone. The requirements of tIns Subdivision shall not apply to additions to existing buildings "\vhich viill increase the size of the building by 25% or less. Upon the request of the Plam1ing Commission, the City Council will make the final detennination on site plan approval. The developer shall provide the follovling items to the Planning Commission for any development located in the General Business District:" [.AlI subparagraphs shall remain the same.] - 1 ; '. 4. That section 52.33, Subd. 10 shall be amended to read as follows: i ~ j "Subd. 1 0: Development Plan Requirements. No building permit shall be issued until the I Planning Commission reviews the development plan to determine that the use and development is compatible with· adjacent land uses, and consistent with the stated intent of this zone. The I requirements of this Subdivision shall not apply to additions to existing buildings which will increase the size of the building by 25% or less. Upon the request of the Planning Commission, the City Council will make the fmal determination on site plan approval. The developer shall I provide the following items to the Planning Commission for any development located in the \ Light Industrial District:" [All subparagraphs shall remain the same.] This amendment is adopted the day of March, 2005, and shall be effective upon publication. CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Richard Carlbo1l1, Mayor . By ¡ Judy Weyrens, Administrator/Clerk This amendment was published on ,2005 L:\ClTY\STJOE\2005 - ; i 2 I Attachment: Yes or No I . REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Ordinance Adoption - R4 Residential DATE: April 7, 2005 Administration ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AGENDA ITEM Ordinance Adoption - R4 Residential PREVIOUS ACTION The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April 4, 2005 for the purpose of creating and adopting a R4 Zoning District. The purpose of the new zoning district is to allow for town/twin/patio/row homes with reduced lots. The R4 Zoning district must be used in conjunction with a PUD application. . During the hearing, Rick Packer appeared and requested that the Ordinance include a definition for twin homes and also questioned some of the lot requirements and required development plan. The Planning Commission agreed to add the definition of twin home and to modify the development plan requirements. The majority of development plan requirements pertained to apartment construction. With regard to lot requirements, the Planning Commission agreed that through the POO process the developer has the ability to request relief £fom specific provision if needed. RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION Accept the reconm1endation of the Plamîing Commission and authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the Ordinance Adoption causing the same to be published. FISCAL IMPACT COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS ~ AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 52 ZONING ORDINANCE . S-\ ,::1ôse f L, The City Council for the City of~T"'ite Park HEREBY ORDAINS: That Ordinance 52.30 (R-4 To\vnhouselPatio Home Residential District) of the St. Joseph Code of Ordinances is revoked in its entirety and the following enacted in its place: "Subd. 1: Intent: It is the intent of the R -4 Tow11houselPatio Home District to .accommodate a variety of single-fan1ily housing types, including patio homes and single-family common wall attached housing units such as townhouses or rowhouses at low to moderate residential densities. The R-4 District is intended for those areas designated as medium and/or high density residential areas or residential planned unit developments under the Comprehensive Plan. The R-4 District shall be developed by Planned Unit Development in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 52.09. For the purpose of this ordinance, the following definitions váll apply: a) Patio home: A single-family attached or detached unit constructed on a separate relatively small lot consisting of one level living area with open space setbacks on tvvo (2) sides. b) Ro\vhouse: One of a series of essentiallv identical sin!:Üe fmailv residential - ~- structures situated side by side and joined by common walls. . c) Townhouse: A single-family dwelling in a row of at least tl1Iee (3) such units in which each unit has its own front and rear access to the outside, no unit is located over another unit, and each unit is separated from any other unit by one or more -- common fire resistant walls. d. ~\Aji~\ ~I"t.~ Subd. 2: Pennitted 'ses: a) Patio homes. b) Townhouses of not more than tvvo stories each. c) Ro\v Houses of not more than t\vo stories each. cF, l}Uih ç..!-CV1.~ Subd. 3: ses Under Special Use Permit: The following uses shall require a Special Use Permit based on the procedures set forth in this Ordinance. a) Governmental and public utility buildings and structures necessary for the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. b) Public or semi-public recreational buildings and community centers. ~ c) Licensed day-care centers serving 13 or more persons 1 1 d) Licensed residential group care facilities with seven or more boarders. ,e e) Nursing Homes and Board 'and Care Homes, provided that adequate parking is I \ provided and the site is accessible to commercial service areas. ì i J f) Public Libraries ; ¡ g) Public or private schools, providing, however, that the area and location of any school and off-street parking heretofore shall be subject to the approval of the i Plamnng Commission. , h) Churches i) Institutions of a religious, eleemosynary or philanthropic nature. j) Nurseries and greenhouses. k) Planned Unit Residential development 1) Bed and Breakfast m) Uses which in the judgment of the Planning Commission and City Council are similar to those listed in tins zoning district. e n) Non~owller occupied rental provided the housing is elderly housing. , 0) Manufactured homes as defined by tins Ordinance. p) Manufactured Horne Parks, in accordance with Section 52.14 Subd.4: Permitted Accessorv Uses. a) Private garages, parking spaces and carports for passenger cars, trucks, recreational vehicles and equipment. b) Home Occupations per Section 52.16. c) Houses and similar buildings for storage of domestic equipment and non- commercial recreational equipment. d) Swimming Pools, tennis courts, and detached screen porch or gazebo, provided that the maximum lot coverage requirement is not exceeded. All swimming pools must be fenced around the perimeter. The fence must meet tile requirem ents of Ordinance 52.12 Subd. 2. e) Fences ( 2 f) Accessory building (s) and/or private garage (s), either attached or detached, shall be subj ect to the follovving limitations and the general requirements of Section . 52.12, Subd. 1. 1. One or nvo accessory buildings covering a combined area not greater than 1,350 square feet are permitted. 2. The combined area of the lot covered by the accessory buildings authorized in subparagraph 1 above shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total lot size fordetached patio homes. The combined area of the lot covered by the accessory buildings authorized in subparagraph 1 above shall not exceed fifteen (15) percent of the total lot size for townhouse, group or rovvhouses. " Accessory buildings of less than 50 square feet shall not be considered .J. when computing the limitations of subparagraphs 1 and 2 above; but the combined area of accessory building ofless than 50 square feet shall not ex.ceed a total of 100 square feet. 4. The plincipal building shall be constructed prior to or at the same time as any accessory building or structure. 5. Accessory buildings not specifically permitted by tllis paragraph shall be prohibited unless authorized by a variance granted pursuant to Ordinance 52.07.02. . Subd.5: Lot Area Reauirements. I I I \ Minimum Lot I I Land Use Minimum Lot Minimum Lot \ Þù:ea Width ! De th i a) \ Detached Patio \ I I I Horne 6,000 60' I 100' ¡ I b) I Townhouse, group I I I \ I or row houses I 12,000 I 75' I 120' I I c) I Churches, chapels, I I I ! temples, synagogues . 22,000 100' I I d) I Public Buildings I 40,000 I 100' I I e) Day care facilities I serving 15 or more persons and residential facilities 9,000 75' 120' I serving more than 6 , persons ; I If) I Schools I 22,000 100' I 120' I g) The minimum lot area per tovmhouse, group or ro\v house unit shall be four thousand square feet (4,000 sq. ft.) 3 h) The net housing density within the district is six (6) units per acre of net buildable area of the subdivision. Net buildable area shall be the total area less public street . right-of-way, wetlands, drainage ways, water bodies and slopes greater than ( . twelve (12) percent. Subd.6: Setback Requirements. Land Use Front Yard Interior Side Street Side Rear setback Yard setback Yard setback Yard Setback a) Patio Home* 30' 10' 20' 20' b) Townhouse, group or row houses 30' 10' 25' 20' c) Churches, chapels, temples, synagogues 30' 20' 30' 35' d) Day care facilities serving 15 or more persons and 30' - 10' 25' 35' residential facilities serving more than 6 persons . e) All other uses 50' 50' 50' 50' ( f) Accessory Uses - Same as Same as Same as principal principal principal 10' * Attached patio homes would be relieved ÍÌ'om the setback requirements where attachments occur at the lot line. Subd.7: Building Requirements. a) Building Height shall not exceed two (2) stories or 35 feet as .measured from the average grade. b) No more than 8 dwelling units shall be constructed within one structure. c) Each dwelling unit shall have two or more individual, separate entrances. d) All dwelling units shall have a minimum roof pitch of 4:12 as defIned by the building code. e) All dwelling units shall have a frost rree foundation as defined by the building code, or an engineered concrete· slab with concrete above-grade exterior foundations walls. - , f) The exterior of townhouse and rowhouse dwelling units shall include a variation { in building materials, which are to be distributed throughout the building facades - and coordinated into the architeètural design of the structure to create an 4 architecturally balanced appearance. The preferred materials are: brick, stucco, stone, steel/vinyl/aluminum and fiber-cement siding. In addition, a minimum of . 25 percent of the combined area of all building facades of a structure shall have an ex'ierior finish of brick, stucco and/or natural or artificial stone. For the purpose ofthis section, the area of the building façade shall not include the area devoted to windo\vs, entrance doors, garage doors or roof areas. g) Buildings shall be designed to prevent the appearance of straight, unbroken lines in their horizontal and vertical surface. There shall be no more than two contiguous townhouse dwelling units without a break in the horizontal and/or vertical elevations of at least thirty-two (32) inches. h) ìi\'here more than one (1) principal use building is to be located upon the same site, the separation between buildings shall notbe less than forty (40) feet. i) Provision shall be made for possible decks, porches or additions as part of the initial dwelling unit building plans. The site plan for each dwelling unit shall be configured and sized to include decks, patios or porches. j) All dwelling units shall have a minimum floor area of 676 square feet. k) Provisions for shelter in the event of severe weather for each dwelling unit shall be demonstrated either in the form of the construction of a free-standing severe weather structure, a reinforced concrete safe room "Yvithin each d\velling unit and/or basement/crawl space sufficient to house four (4) adults per dwelling unit. . l. The entrance to a development shall be one that abuts a collector or arterial road. Subd. 8 Parkin£! Provisions. All driveways and parking areas shall be hard surfaced and each d\velling unit shall be provided \\lith a minimum of two parking spaces one of which shall be in an attached garage. Subd. 9 Site Covera£!e. On lots developed for townhouse or mwhouse or attached patio home units, no structure or combination of structures shall occupy more than 50% of the lot area. On lots developed for detached patio home units, no structure or combination of structures shall . occupy more than 35% of the lot area. Subd. 10 SÜms. a) No sign shall be placed closer than ten (10) feet to any property line, except directional signs which have a zero (0) foot setback. 6. No sign shall be placed in any interior side yard. 7. No sign shall be mounted on the roof of a building. 8. No signs shall violate the front, side or rear yard requirements. 9. Signs shall not be placed in the public right-of-·way .or easements. ~ 5 , , . 10. Flashing or rotating signs resembling emergency vehicles shall not be permitted. ( . 11. Illuminated signs are not allowed. ; c) One unlighted sign per vehicle entrance identifying a dwelling unit complex shall be allowed. Such signs· may indicate the name and address of the building and rental or management offices. 1. Such signs shall have a surface area of all faces not exceeding an aggregate offifty (50) square feet. For complexes of three or more structures, the aggregate surface area shall not exceed 100 square feet if double faced. 2. The height of the sign shall not exceed eight feet (8'). 3. Landscaping must be provided around the base of the sign. d) Wall sign: One wall sign shall be allowed for the purpose of street identification. Such sign cannot exceed twelve (12) square feet. e) Sign Removal: All signs not maintained and kept in good repair or otherwise not in compliance with the St. Joseph Code of Ofêlinances shall be subject to removal . upon direction of the City Building Inspector. . , Subd. 11 Yard Cover. Every yard 011 a premise on which a dwelling stands shaU,within 3 months of issuance of the certificate of occupancy, be provided with lawn or combined lawn cover of vegetation, gardens, hedges, shrubbery, and related decorative materials and such yards shall be maintained consistent with prevailing community standards. Motor vehicles may not be left parked or unattended on or within a yard. Grass shall be maintained so as not to exceed a height of 6 inches. Subd. 12. Additional Requirements. Uses may be subject to additional requirements contained in tIns Ordinance including, but not limited to the sections governing parking, home occupation, floodplain, signs. Subd.13. Re~mlation of Activities Adiacent to Wetlands. a) The following activity shall be subject to a 50 foot setback from wetlands: The construction or maintenance of a building attached to a foundation, including but not limited to, pole buildings. For purposes of this paragraph, pump houses, moveable storage sheds, recreational docks and stonn water or erosion control devices shall not be considered buildings. b) The following activity shall be subject to a 75-foot setback horn wetlands: The - construction or maintenance of paved driveways or areas designed for the parking of a vehicle or trailer. - 6 Subd. 14. Common .-'\.Teas. All common areas within an R-4 development, including but not limited to, open space, wetlands, greenways, drainage ponds, driveway, parking areas, play . t areas, etc., shall be ovvned and maintained by a condominium, association, cooperative or other common interest community created pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 515Band approved by the City Attorney. The agreement shall provide for all e},,'terior building maintenance, approval of any exterior architectural modifications, landscaping, snow clearing and regular maintenance of private driveways and other areas ovvned in common. Subd. 15. DeveloDment Plan Requirements. No building permit shall be issued until the Planning Commission reviews the development plan to detemIine that the use and development is compatible with adjacent land uses, and consistent with the stated intent of this zone. Upon request of the Planning Commission the City Council will make the final determination of site plan approval. The developer shall provide the following items to the Planning Commission for any development located in the R-4 Townhouse Residence District. a) Building location on the lot, dravvn to scale. b) Building elevatioI1ß; front, rear and side c) Building eÀ.'terior materials and color d) Locations of ingress and egress points ê) Dumpster and solid "\vaste pick-up areas and proposed screening material i . I t) Sign location and dimensions ------- 1) J) -~ I I Drainage by the use of arro\vs and/or contours ------- j) Screening of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning equipment k) Landscaping material including location, type of plan and size. 1) Fire hydrant and fire lane locations m) Utility locations n) A description of provisions which shall be made on site for adequate open space, recreational areas, transit options, etc. to properly serve residents of the facility including a discussion of the perceived needs of the residents (i.e. senior citizens, students, families with children) 0) A copy of proposed covenants and/or homeo·wner's association agreement (s). - - 7 ; p) Any other fencing, screening, or building accessories to be located in the .; development area. ( q) When required, evidence of completion of National Pollutant Discharge j Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program and/or the City of St. Joseph Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP). I i i r) If applicable, evidence of compliance with federal, state and local pollution and nuisance laws and regulations, including, but not limited to glare, smoke, dust, I odors and noise. The burden of proof for compliance with appropriate standards shall lie with the applicant. I s) Required Fee / AgreemeJft I í 1. PaV111ent Required. Any person filing a petition requesting development ; plan review shall pay a fee according to the schedule established by the , , City Council. i 2. Amount. Fees payable under this section for development plan review i shall be in the amount as established by resolution of the City Council. Preparation and review of all elements of the required development plan, ¡ as listed and described above, is to be at the sole expense of the developer and at no expense to the public. The fee is payable at the time of filing a petítion and is not refundable. In addition to the above fees and in the .' event the City incurs professional fees, either legal, engineering or t , professional plam1ers, or any other costs including but not limited to, postage and publication expenses, the applicants shall reimburse the City for those fees, and the City Officials may require an escrow deposit, cashier's check or letter of credit for these fees prior to the final action on . the application for development plan review. Such escrow or letter of credit shall be in the form approved by the City Attorney. ,., Development AQreement. In the event additional review by the City or its :). assigns is anticipated and/or needed during implementation of Development Plan, or other similar circumstance, the City shall require the property owner (5) and/or developer (s) enter into a development agreement with the City. The Development Agreement shall stipulate the conditions for approval and the City's authority to inspect the development. The agreement shall fmiher require the owner or developèr, as the case may require, furnish a cashier's check, escrow amount or irrevocable letter of credit in favor ofthe City in an amount equal to 125% of all costs associated with the City's review of the development, including but not limited to, engineering, legal, fiscal and administrative, as estimated by the City. Such escrow or letter of credit shall be in the form approved by the City Attorney, shall be conditioned upon the approval of the development plan." _1 i - 8 This amendment is adopted the _ day of ,2005, and shall be effecti ve upon publication. . CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Richard Carlbom, Mayor By Judy Weyrens, Administrator/Clerk This amendment "\vas published on ,2005 L :\city\stj oe\2005 . - - 9 i CITY OF ST. JOSEPH .' ORDINANCE 52 (ZONING ORDINANCE) (, SUMMARY PUBLICATION Î I i The City ofSt. Joseph has adopted an amendment to Section 52.30 of the Zoning I I Ordinance. Tills amendment governs the R-4 TownhouselPatio Home Residential District within ¡ the City. j. The Ordinanèe: (1) establishes the intent of the R-4 District; (2) defines patio homes, j rowhouses and t?wnhouses; (3) sets forth the qualifications for a special use permit, (4) describes \ the permitted accessory uses within the R-4 District, (5) establishes the lot area, setback and ! buildings requirements; (6) outlines the parking provisions, site coverage, signage, yard cover, I ! I and regulations of activities adjacent to wetlands requirements within the R4-Distlict; (7) ; describes the common areas of the district; and (8) sets forth the development plan requirements of the City. . i. Tills matelial is a summary of Ordinance 52, Section 52.30 (R-4 TownhouselPatio Home ¡ Residential District). The full text of Section 52.30 is available for inspection by any person during regular office hours at the office of the S1. Joseph City Administrator-Clerk. I TIns Ordinance was adopted by the City Council ofSt. Joseph on the day of ; ')()().c:; "'....rI cob",1l hP pf'Fp"t-;up 11-non .....UP"l;,,"'t;,..,p , .....v v oJ, I..C..L:'-.... ~ .l."""'.L uv v..L..Lv....."J,. v....... \..Ll-" 1:" U.1..1"""'-4.L-.1.V.I... CITY OF ST. JOSEPH By Richard Carlbom, Mayor By Judy Weyrens, Administrator/Clerk This summary publication was published on , 2005 -,' , L:\citylstjoe\2005 ~ Ii> Minnesota Lawful Gambling Page 10f2 06/03 . LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Fee $50 I For Board-Use unly - Fee Paid Organization Information CheckNo. Organization name Previous laWful gambling exemption number Church 0 f St. Joseph '736/ð· Street (mailing address) City Statelzip code County 12 W Minnesota St. St. Joseph MN 56374 Stearns Name of chief executive officer (CEO) Daytime phone number of CEO First name Last name Include area code Rev. Gregory Miller, OSB . . (320) 363-7505 Name of treasurer Daytime phone number of First name Last name treasurer. Include area code Bill Lorentz, Trustee ( 320) 363-7505 . Type of Nonprofit Organization . . Check the item that best describes your organization: Fraternal ~ Religious ~ - - Veteran _ Other nonprofit organization Check the item that indicates the type of proof your organization attached to this application: _ IRS letter indicating income tax exempt status (501 c designation) _ Certificate of Good Standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office (must be current .. _ A charter showing you are an affiliate of a parent nonprofit organization .. ~ Proof prE;Yiou~ly submitted and on file with the Gambling Control. Board Catho11cD1rectory . Gambling Premises Information Name of premises where gambling activity will be conducted (for raffles, listthe site where the drawing will take place) Church. of St. Joseph, Church and Sc·ho·ol Grounds Address (do· not use PO box) City State/zip code County 12 W Minnesota St. St. Joseph HN 56374 Stearns Date(s) of activity (for raffles, indicate the date of the drawing)· . 3 and 4, July 2005 Raffle Drawing.July 4, 2005 . Check the item(s) that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will be cònducting: -X. *Bingo JL Raffles (cash prizes may not exceed $12,000) :.ll *Paddlewheels L 'Pull-tabs _ *Tipboards *Equipmentforthese activities must be obtained from a licensed distributor. ThisJorm will be made available in name and address will be public Board whose work assignment requires altemative format (i.e. large print~ Braille) information when reèeivedby the Board. that they have access to the information; upon reqUest. The information requested All the other information that you provide the Minnesota Department of Public on this form(and any attachments) will be will be private data about you until the Safety; the Minnesota Attomey General; used by"the Gambling Control Board . Board issues your permit. When the Board the Minnesota Commissioners of (Board) to determine your qualifications to issues your permit, all of the information Administration, Rnance, and Revenue; the be involved in lawful gambling activities in that you have provided to the Board in the Minnesota Legislative Auditor, national and Minnesota. You have the right to refuse to process of applying for your permit will international gambling regulatory agencies; supply the information requested; however, become public. If the Board does not issue anyone pursuant to court order; other if you refuse tosupply this information, the you a permit, all the information you have individuals and agencies that are Board may not be able to determine your provided in the process of applying for a specifically authorized by state or federal qualifications and, as a consequence, may permit remains private, with the exception law to have access to the information; refuse to issue you a permit. If you supply of your name and your organization's name Individuals and agencies for which law or the information requested, the Board will and address which will remain public. legal order authorizes a new use or sharing . be able to process your application. Private data about you are available only to of information after this Notice was given; Your name and and your organization's the following: Board members, staff of the and anyone with your consent. LG220 Application for Exempt Permit Page 2 of2 06/03 Organization Name Church of St,· Joseph. St. Joseph, MN Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment . If the gambling premises is within city limits, the If the gambling premises is located in a township, both city must sign this application. the county and township must sign this application. On behalf of the city, I acknowledge this application. On behalf of the county, I acknowledge this application. Check the action that Check the action that the city is taking on this application. the county is taking on this application. ~. The city approves the application with no D The county approves the application with no , waiting period. waiting period. . D The city approves the application with a 30 day D The county approves the application with a 30 day waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a permit after 30 days (60 days for a first class permit after 30 days. city). D The city denies the application. D The county denies the application. Print name of county (Signature of county personnel receiving application) Title Date---.J---.J_ >.... ,---- Date --'I ;:J-(IO~ TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that --- . the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity within the township limits. [A township has no statutory authority to approve or deny an applicatibn (Minn. Stat. sec. 349.213, subd. 2).] Print name of township (Signature of township official acknowledging application) Title Date_I_I_ Chief Executive Officer's Signature The information provided in this application is complete and accu~ate Chief executive officer's signature & Name (please print) Rev. Gregory Date 3 /16 ¡OS Mail Application and Attachments At least 45 days· prior to your scheduled activity date send: · the completed application, · a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and · a check for $50. Make check payable to "State of Minnesota". Application fees are not prorated, refundable, or transferable. Send to: Gambling Control Board 1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South Roseville, MN 55113 . I Attachment: Yes or No I . REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Final Plat - Graceview Estates 3rd DATE: April 7, 2005 Administration ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AGENDA ITEM Final Plat - Graceview Estates 3rd PREVIOUS ACTION The Planning Commission and City Council have both reviewed and approved the preliminary plat for Graceview Estates. As all developers with large tracts of land, final plats are completed for phases. The Planning Commission has determined that as long as the final plat is consistent with the Preliminary Plat, the developer does not need to seek final plat approval rrom the Planning Commission. . RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION The final plat has been reviewed and determined to be consistent with the Preliminary Plat, therefore we recommend the Council authorize the Mayor and Administrator to execute the final plat and development agreement. FISCAL IlVIP ACT COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS I have discussed the plat with Tracy and after review of the construction plans we wì11 prepare the final development agreement. - - ~ o '" , 0 . . "0 ~ ï ~ ~å ~ ~ € 0 if... ~.8 ë ~ ~ g è .; E g~~~ ~ 2 ~ :~'i ~ ._ .Š i ~~~~ 5 ~ ~ 5:5~ X S i = ~ o o..¡. 4.0 (> Þ ·~n 1 e Ü \; .. f M tQ ~ ~;Q~: £; ë f .Õ~2 ~ $ b Ê ¡:~m ~ J:.: õ 5 ~: ~ 2: ~:. ~ 6 ~ en .; ¡: ~ ~ i: g~ ~" ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ '* ~'~ ~ ·.ffi IU c2 u " ~~.- I c --~ .. "'" n..I 'õ ê\::~o ~ -g .g ~ß.I: ß .5$t;_ .8 ~ ~,,~ Q g n: 1) &.~ ~. "'tI ~ W~,...~ .3 Õ ~ _~ 2i (.I l; " u &. I 0 I iii ... M II) 0..... :J 1::5 Q...'-" ill ,2.0 U,g g. Q. 0 ¡ 3 ~ 8 I ~iD. :: ~ 5 ~ :5 g -2 ò 0 0'£ ..: N. 0 ~ : o ~ gog ~'E ~ ~ N .!!] giN .~ ): Eo U8 t :J U b-'¿:; 8 ~ o 2õ ~..... a. ê ä. a..:;; N 2 i:I " tñ òog] ~ ~ :i .!!f:8 :- £ 'ö~ :.5 Õ :St~ £, u ¡;.2B·~0 .I 2 '" êíoN 0 -g CD:;' ~ 4.0 :š 5(.10 ..... :J ð~·Ç8"Q ~ II) ..88 .... 0 ~ ~ ü 8~ n~ ~;.. U 1"};::1l'I Õ 0 .~ .~ c i.~o~~ "'tI~ : ~):~ >- ~ cOO ~ ~ 5 C g'~ -g 1'1 0 ~~ c: ~ '0 ~ £ ~ Õ~ æ P- ~ Õ ~; ~ : 8 ~ w Ë ~ I "- õ ~ 'õ ,S .... 0 ~ 8 ): ..J ,.,-tC be- -. . êc 0 >. w< ~! ~gl()~'O as. ~ol ~ ~E"i b f;' 'g ~.g ~ ~~m .g. 0 4J1D 0 Õ '0.....(',1 ~ () -0 l;' ._ "U:S 0 ~ u t¡j 5 a: :J.3 ~5€zcò };~ ~. D U € ~"ij-tl ~ þ I p I ~ ~ (¡1 1L. ~l58 Bg 0a:iO~ f~ c: ¡:;:¡.f 0 CI~6 õ ~ ~ U ~ !ž ~~Q 'Ê'~ ":~~t~ ~~.~ ~~ õ: g~~ g ~:~ ~ J. J: ª ~~ ~~ó :,):1 ~~ ~:5:§ .g 0.c. ~ e >.·õ 15..1 ~ ê: g .- ~ .~ ~ þ t:¡ ::>::> (f)CI¿:; :lU" "e ~,,00'l _0 c f Þ <C:5 0 Q. ~ ~ ~~ 5 .s"õ :5oÞg~ "g go ~ ~ 5 ~b Q.,E g ~ g õ þ _ ~ ~ ~ ! :I ~lIÎo . ~ 0 b ~ .. - g 0.1.: 't: a: CI .!! 0 !tI (f) t) 0 g >. ~ Z %;. ij 15 (I) t;ï ~$ ã.'g~~..... !"if ~ õ :6.... 0 Q. ~ p £; ~ 5 ~ 5- 0 Ii: i:Jg"~ CUI p- .0 't) ~ c: 0 q) c: õ.. f!: - m 0 ~ . ~õ ~~ ~ m ~ ~ .8 2 0 1 ~ 0:i g. .2 6 I ~ ~OCl~ o~ o~~:~ <C: ~ ~ g ~v.5 0 ~ 0 ~ ~~ ~~~õ . ~ EO>" 0 :.J 41.0 ~ ~ ._ 41 VJ .... 'õ 0 0 u ~o ~ 8~ 8~ 13" 1j ~.~ ~U £.~ Õ ~ ~ ~ 1: ~ 1 ~ '" ~!ii!~¡)i g. Ë ~ t'£ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ .g ~ 'Q Ë~. þ 0 ] ~ ~ 0 õ::J ~ g :2ß .3~~~o (5c: :.J'õ 8- ~ .e-"g~ 41 ~ ö d E c.... 00 ~t}a.f3 O::V) 11'~~'t)o ~o 0>., .'!!~ ~ 8.0-;:; .2 ~ C/ .... ð ~ ~ ~~«~ ~.!: ~~5~:; è ~ !-8 ;;. ° K]Õ. .8 0 :: Q ë ~ ~ . 0 æ~!:2~ ~s 3~'5¡i ~~ .ª E5 4I.!:£ '2 : & ~ ~ .!!£ 0 J:::! 50 g 41 QI '2 n 2 ,,~ :6 c i ° Ð (I €' ~ë' Q.~ _rf;.s:~{: £0 (I 5~ 'O~o _ £ "0 !i CEO .... ~ C'C 1) ~ C ~ .2.D . 'õ~ ~ Q."(; ~ 'Ê .... ~ U .- :I (It ~ '9.>§~ 0..6 ~ .0'0 o~( cEo ~ ~ ~g ~o..~.~l)"~ -g~ '3\. ~:1 g 8 u ii g Io=e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ú1 g ; g ~ f ~ g ~ ~ ~ g 8 5 " ~ s ID~ ~~.s:~~ ~~ oc go. ~J~ 4 ~ b .8 : ~I ~ g: ~ ~ 8 8..¡;: ,S: ~.... ~.!:! 'ð f ~ VI ~ b ëL õ 0 ° v E 0 :J: (II ~ ." e E VI 0' >.r. 0 U :I >.E (,:: Ð " ..c U \. .6 ë F ~: CI~~:g8 ~ov~ g ~ ~~ ;~ ~ fæ ~$ z :. : õ. ~ $ ~ .s3' i I f- c: .'0 o ~ "0 CL. ú "ò 00.... t<') t<') 0 n ~ ~ I- (11"0 ~ ~ t;j I ~ 'j m.v . u .... 0!f ë"- W .z; u 0 J; N n N Üi .- .... N tI...." ~ 41 fII ~ 0 ø Èjjo :gge.... ( ~ :'120 4.f~ f t-: _ Ç'I . .~. ~ (.11 'g ~ :5 ~. ffi £0 \. ....... 'E rZ~ '2~h~n ~~ ~r. ¡:] gh ! ~g:~~ §~ gf~ ! ~~ ~ <>oJ! ~~ ~ g~ j 109! ~ ~ ~ ~:"~~8~ 0, .mn 0 õ e " w ~~ E 0 "'~ !3 ," 0 ~ ~ 0 . <iJ 0 c ~ . ·1 "'@ ~* (IJ 'P Õ (7I.N <0 co s= ~ e Q. a:: \. ~.-.'::! c If¡ è U 0 0'1 ¿ C Z UI ç coo èJ.þ þ ~ 111 ..¿. ~ a: 1; 0 Þ 10.. e -tñ:( ffi.....s:g .... 0 2 w g Z (71.0:: ·0 U._ C'Q n ~ 8 Z 0'8 ü.Q CJ ....I . C U ~ ~.- o. c . . We a.0 ~~....~~ ~o :t~ :r::~ ~1J...s:"O ~.~ UI "t-a§o f:.J 21J..'"!::.J :ß~ ~ ~ c Õ ~ ~ ~ ~:J ....... _ g & ß iJ:j g a _.:.-.___-.J zð~~~ ~e 8.~~~~ 5f S~ a:æ ~o~~ æ'e ~ ~~.&g ~~ ~o~~ æ'~ 5 0 e â 0 (IJ ~ ~~ a: ~ >. ~ Ik: ~ ~ ~ -----~ -Z5~~ ~ 1)vgsv Uu .5] ~ë w~.2b ~~ èJ ~õ~: Xn ~~.2n ~o a. ã. e. 0 ã. ~ ê EU g a. ê E ~ ~ E . ·.-r m3i~§~ ~~ ££2~~ ~l 'jc: mU ~ 4I-é 2° 6= ~(;!10 ~ê <5C1ê ~~ ~._ :g ~.!2 ~ Õ:' Q~ c S.z; 0 Õ.z; 0 . I ~.:J~ 2 ~ ;¡õ'¡¡££ ,j! a ~.~ ~~ 1ñ8iÓ& B' ¡;: _£ ¡:j¡ ::¡'i Iño iÓ'i z:> ¡:¡ iÓ 0 0 iÓ :> 0 - ij" ;¡" - ij 0 ij ~ ê t; 1 ~~æ¡;i~ ., ~ I z !!s¡t; w ~ ~ I ii!o~~ F I '/1 3N ./1 3N L - - ~;~I1~..)_ - - -J'- - -}- T-... - - - - --- - - - - - - ZS:o£rl3.or.oo.lo S ..... ~ ;, - .~, c ~,C> i~:! I; . m"'+ w-N z ",. ··,v o.....~ ~ t '" ~;Q gª:~~ .' . ~~m2 ~ Z U t> ~ 6 õ .... ...... '. Z . ~:¡:;: 2,:::¡; . ...... z;~roa¡ 3 .O£,OO.lO S"· .h", 8 101100 ..:10 3Nn Á1M31SV3 ......... i ...... 6(;·(;99 3 .OC.OO.~O s l oo·or oo·or 9L·68 --, I lO·OL ,,- W·S6 L£·S6 ZI·",I ~ I I I I . ;t¡1. ~ I 1 I I r N ":1 iR..: I I I I f5u. g 1/)1 m I{) I r-') 10 thom~a. I Z Lñ I I ('1'1 ~I 1 I ~ '" ~'" -w I!) .;1 I :;¡I I N I ¡!:~§~I;;¡ 9t<ïr_ ~ 1 rl I w oc. I ~8ã~~ ..rI.O~.t.o..."'J1 3=1: N ~I I t4") I ¡Ev~ ('f') - -- u - ___H L____________-1 \ ~ 81 I ;31 I ~::-;: r--------- bl I 81 I wwlJ"Î I 90T" 3 .00,00.00 N g I I ~I I I Sz- rl"'\ <n vZ ..., ..J 1 wi I wi I 1'::-6 rT" I~ . . I 1 .... I ~~~ ~ "'. I" .,¡- ~ ~ .::',. I I b~\1 ,5 4ð 1 I ~ I \ On"'· .('" I L L~70.64 .J ...., .' '(.~ ç-,. ---- .... I XtSI^ ~"\. ~~'J - ï··· ~'. " ;> - ~ __. L______ '\~~- ~ I...~ r ~ ,'::1. I u. 6£"lL1M..Zl,OO.rOs-- _ OO'OOl~ I ~ ;:::: I¡;; ~~ lfÌ~ .1~L,l.,9.~~~V- ¡ rl"l ;,r l:ž S:~~"'. I " ..J. l''. I ~ Z ~g ?i I'") rT'" r:: I o~wf:3~ ~ ci f-'-4 I..·· ~ L Z I- ZUlI- ,.....; '.'.' I ~ ~;.;; : ::::; : o ' I'" o II ...., '", . . 0 ~... 0 ".;r g N ~ ..... '" rT1 :;~. : g ;:~ I: ~ ';h~ "0 OJ N )0000-1 :.r. ~ Z >-:--: ~ / I rT 1 ::: Z r LSTlI 3 .00,00.00 N :" ",' Æt' I!) I ~ I ",,,:' ::,; U "--..-- I ~WI ~ I 1 Z ~... ~ I ~i56 % / o;;.~.. ;,;,:~~u ~ ;I ~ I ~~~ I N ~ . ~ I ~ ~ I .....8v~ I z' '':-:'f.. CT, ~ I ~ ~ ~ ';:-~ r- I I ~ v ~ ~".) ~ ~ I f'o. f5 . ~ z· I 10- ';:-1- ..' ..... I ~ ~. !..... ~ § v ~ ~/ 0 w IIÎ ~"'::·i.·· - '<t N I 8 ~>;: OJ....'i ~~ ~. ~::-;:. I ;:~3:,^ ,..../ I-:::-~ I f5~~ ..... ~ I__z-=-~-=-_;~ U) ° ~~õ ~(»~ I ."')~/ I o:~ ro ~" I·~"" / ~ Z VI íi ~ i 1.= ~ / r- \. ............ \ 4.:::,0:: L -..¿ ....... ······...·"£1£<;9 ON 1N3h:O::>OO ..\ I . ...... (033Q 3 ~9l,60.00 S) ...~ "" N - '- -=-_~.~~~q~OO_S_~~ I~··.. . ~ ;;8 ~~ ~ ~ , ': _I":, 0.' I '\ I .< i ~;;;}\ , "0'000 '" "" ¡" ;" ."'to",v,:, "~¡ ¡ ~¡ I ~. v' . '::1' wz--v> w 3: w I ....':.._ ll}ZVI I ..... i ~ ~~:~~ ~g~~; ~~~~ ~ ~~!~~ ~~~=~ no~n i:J ..... N I'") ! ~ ð.....NI'")~~ ð-Nn~1{) ð.....~nT I 9 ~9~999 ~99§§§ ~§§§§ \ . . . w 1:1:. ::JO ~ ~2 ¡:¡: r<1 0 LO 'N 00 0 zr<1 W, 1-1'- wO <t:o -IW 0' -0 '<t lL., 0 l- (/) ct ~ en w w a: a.. w 0 ::c a: I- a.. ~ ...I W N 0 5 w ...I C) W e I- ...I æ w I- u:: 2 ...I :5 ...I W a.. 3: l- e 2 w w :E en 0 ~ a.. w 0 a: a: I- a.. ~ :i~ a.. 0 wen enW O2 :2 1-- en:E ~~ . U6POS013I.:1113M-dOJd-W£fS\S)!WPawouaJ aq 0) Mau£O·lO£O\oow£o\aof)s\s\:x 311.:1 H3S 'IfV v£:n:Q¡ ÇO.V ,. . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF STEARNS IN DISTRICT COURT SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Ian Carpenter, Darryl Smoleroff, Ryan Langenbrunner, Thomas Hartman, Michael Hanke, Adam Hanna, Chris Baldwin and Mike Ellena, Plaintiffs, SUMMONS v. City of St. Joseph, Brock Ketcher, Roger Schleper and Rock Investments, LLC, Defendants. . TO THE ABOVE-NAMED DEFENDANTS: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Kevin S. Carpenter, plaintiffs attorney, whose address is 204 Midsota Center, 3701 North 1ih Street, St. Cloud, Minnesota, 56303, an answer to the Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, which is herewith served upon you, within twenty (20) days after the date of service of this Summons upon you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief. MINNESOTA STATUTES, § 543.22 STATEMENT: All civil cases are subject to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes, except for those actions enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 484.76 and Rules 111.01 and 310.01 of the Minnesota General Rules of . Practice. This means that parties to a lawsuit are generally required to engage in ADR j in the interest of resolving their case. ADR includes mediation, arbitration, and other .. · processes. More information about ADR is available: 1) Rule 114 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice; and 2) from the Court Administrator of the judicial district where you have been sued. CARPENTER INJURY LAW OFFICE Dated: 3~1~t?Ç ~~ Kevin S. Carpenter; ego No. 15258 Attorney for Plaintiffs 204 Midsota Center 3701 12th Street North S1. Cloud, Minnesota 56303 (320) 251-3434 · · AFFIDAVIT OF PERSONAL SERVICE STATE OF MINNESOTA ) . ) COUNTY OF STEARNS ) The undersigned, being first duly sworn upon oath, deposes and says that on the 291h day of March, 2005, he personally served the following documents: 1. Answer of Defendants to Complaint in Unlawful Detainer; 2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Complaint in Unlawful Detainer; 3. Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss Complaint in Unlawful Detainer; 4. Affidavit of Kevin S. Carpenter; 5. Affidavits of Mike Hanke, Ian Carpenter, Mike Ellena, Chris Baldwin, Ryan Langenbrunner, Darryl Smoleroff and Thomas Hartman; 6. Summons and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; 7. Plaintiff's Application for Temporary Restraining Order Pursuant to Rule . 65.01; and 8. Proposed Temporary Restraining Order. upon Christopher Harmoning , by leaving with him a true and correct copy thereof at his office, Gray, Plant, Mooty, Suite 600, 1010 West St. Germain, City of St. Cloud, County of Stearns, State of Minnesota. 4J~ Kevin S. Carpenter r!~¡iDENISE C. SCHAEFER . K !-, }.~. ;':'NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA " - h~ My Commission Expires Jan. 31. 2010 . ~. D' /Uì Carpenter Injury Law Office · "ì~J~~ helping injured people resolve disputes with insurers I~ KEVIN S. CARPENTER, ATTORNEY Certified Civil 'Jì'ial Specialist Member, American Board of Trial Advocates March 29, 2005 Tom Jovanovich Rajkowski Hansmeier, Ltd. P.O. Box 1433 St. Cloud, MN 56302 Re: Rock Investments v. Hanke, et al Dear Tom: Enclosed and served upon you are copies of the following: · 1. Answer of Defendants to Complaint in Unlawful Detainer; 2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Complaint in Unlawful Detainer; 3. Defendants' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismiss Complaint in Unlawful Detainer; 4. Affidavit of Kevin S. Carpenter; 5. Affidavits of Mike Hanke, Ian Carpenter, Mike Ellena, Chris Baldwin, Ryan Langenbrunner, Darryl Smoleroff and Thomas Hartman; 6. Summons and Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief; 7. Plaintiff's Application for Temporary Restraining Order Pursuant to Rule 65.01; and 8. Proposed Temporary Restraining Orâer. Sincerely, Kevin S. Carp nter kevin@carplaw.com KSC/ds Enclosures · 204 Midsota Center · 3701 12th Street North · St. Cloud,MN 56303 Phone: 320-251-3434 · Fax: 320-251-5132 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF STEARNS . IN DISTRICT COURT SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. Ian Carpenter, Darryl Smoleroff, Ryan Langenbrunner, Thomas Hartman, Michael Hanke, Adam Hanna, Chris Baldwin and Mike Ellena, Plaintiffs, v. City of St. Joseph, Brock Ketcher, Roger Schleper and Rock Investments, LLC, Defendants. COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF . 1. Plaintiffs, all college students at St. John's University, are currently renting a house from Brock Ketcher and Roger Schleper, doing business as defendant Rock Investments, LLC. The house is located at 29 East Minnesota Street in the City of St. Joseph. The lease is for a fixed term beginning 6/1/04 and ending 5/25/05. The residential lease, dated October 22, 2003, is attached as "Exhibit A" [the original lease is on two sides of one piece of 11.5" x 17" paper; Exhibit A has been reduced in size to 8.5" x 11" paper in order to comply with court rules pertaining to page sizes¡ but is otherwise an accurate reproduction of the lease document]. 2. On October 2,2004, Officer P. Janssen, Sergeant J. Young and Officer J. Klein of the City of St. Joseph Police Department investigated a complaint from an anonymous caller of a loud party at 29 East Minnesota Street. A St. Joseph Police . . Department record pertaining to this investigation is labeled "RMS Report" and attached as Exhibit B. Following the investigation, one or more of the police officers issued plaintiff Ian Carpenter "Administration Citation no. 1065," for an alleged "noise violation." Carpenter was never given any summons or criminal citation relating to the alleged noise violation. Plaintiff Darryl Smoleroff was also issued an "administrative citation" for an alleged "noise violation." Smoleroff was never given any summons or criminal citation relating to the alleged noise violation. None of the other plaintiffs (Langenbrunner, Hartman, Hanke, Hanna, Baldwin and Ellena) was given any sort of citation alleging they had committed a noise violation on October 2, 2004. Carpenter and Smoleroff each were each fined $100 by the City and these fines were paid. See Affidavit of Ian Carpenter, paragraph 2, and Affidavit of Darryl Smoleroff, paragraph 2. . 3. As a result of the alleged noise violation on 10/2/04, the City of St. Joseph also issued an administrative citation to Rock Investments as owner of the property at 29 East Minnesota Street. Presumably, this was pursuant to § 102.04 of the City of St. Joseph Ordinances. In response to the administrative Citation, Rock Investments waived its right to an evidentiary hearing under subdivision 10 of § 55.11 of the City of St. Joseph Ordinances. After Rock investments had waived its right to an evidentiary hearing, the City of St. Joseph City Council, at a meeting on October 21, 2004., found that a noise violation had occurred at 29 East Minnesota Street on October 2, 2004. The City of St. Joseph, by its City Council, at the same meeting levied a fine against Rock Investments in the amount of $250.00, specifically fining Rock Investments $150.00 for the noise violation and an additional $100.00 "for not being cooperative with . the officers at the scene." An "EXTRACT of the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES" for the 2 council meeting on October 21, 2004 is attached as Exhibit C. A letter from St. Joseph . City Administrator Weyrens to Rock Properties dated October 25, 2004, sending a statement assessing the $250 fine, is attached as Exhibit D. The "STATEMENT" assessing the $250 fine is attached as Exhibit E. 4. After the City fined Rock Investments $250.00, Rock Investments gave notice to the plaintiff tenants that Rock Investments was assessing the tenants a total "fine" of $1,750.00, representing the $250.00 fine from the City of S1. Joseph plus an additional $1,500.00. Tenants have not paid the assessed fine of $1,750.00. 5. At approximately 0036 hours (12:36 a.m.) on the morning of Sunday, February 20, 2005, Officers P. Janssen and J. Klein returned to 29 East Minnesota Street in response to a loud music complaint made by an anonymous caller. The police department records pertaining to this investigation are labeled "RMS Report" [Exhibit F], ST. JOSEPH POLICE DEPARTMENT Investigation Report Narrative" (Officer Janssen) . [Exhibit G], and "ST. JOSEPH POLICE DEPARTMENT Follow-Up Report" (Officer Klein) [Exhibit H). 6. Upon arriving at the residence, Officer Janssen reported that he could hear loud voices and music coming from the residence as he got out of his squad car parked in the gravel parking lot on the west side of the residence, and Officer Klein reported afterward that when he first arrived as he stood on Minnesota Street in front of the house he could hear multiple voices from inside the residence yelling and speaking very loudly and he could also hear music playing loudly. Later, the officers noted in their reports that at that time when the officers observed loud voices and music at the residence, none of the plaintiff tenants were in the residence (none of the people inside . 3 . of the house allegedly making noise were tenants of the house, and none of the tenants were home when the noise was being made). Both officers reported that after Officer Janssen knocked on the door several times the music was shut off and everything went silent inside the residence. 7. According to the reports from the investigating officers, after the noise quieted down at the residence, plaintiff Thomas Hartman walked up to the house and the officers and spoke with them. Also according to the officers, after things had quieted down and after Thomas Hartman had arrived at the residence, plaintiff Adam Hanna arrived at the residence. According to Officer Janssen, after he had been at the residence for approximately an hour, plaintiff Michael Hanke met him outside. Officer Janssen told Hanke that even though no renters were in the house at the time of the . violation, the renters were still responsible for their "guests." Officer Janssen told Hanke that he (Officer Janssen) would be issuing an administrative citation to one of the renters. Officer Janssen then issued administration citation no. 1073 to Michael Hanke. 8. The basis for giving plaintiff Hanke an administrative citation is uncleaL Although not explicit, City Ordinance § 55.11 suggests an administrative citation might· be issued to a registered ûpeïatûí ûf rental property located in the city of St. Joseph; and ordinance § 102.04 specifically provides: "Violations of the noise control regulations shall be the act of the owner of the residential dwelling unit even though he does not reside in the unit as well as the persons on the premises who violate. said regulations . . . " Neither § 55.11 nor § 102.04 authorizes issuing an administrative citation to someone other than a registered operator of rental property. . 4 9. Somewhat confused by the "administrative citation" he had received, . plaintiff Hanke went to the City and told Police Chief Jansky that he (Hanke) wanted an evidentiary hearing on any noise violation being charged against him. Hanke subsequently received by mail summons no. ST391237, asserting a "noise violation" 'and referring to ordinance "Section 102.2." There is no ordinance Section 102.2. Ordinance 102 is titled "Regulation of Noise." Section '1 02.01 reads as follows: Noises Prohibited. No person shall make or cause to be made any distinctly and loudly audible noise that is likely to unreasonably or unnecessarily annoy, disturb, injure or endanger the comfort, repose, health, peace, safety, or welfare of any person or precludes their enjoyment of property or affects their property's value. This general prohibition is not limited by the specific restrictions of unlawful acts listed in § 2. Section 102.02 and its subdivision 6 provide as follows: Unlawful Acts. The following acts are declared to be loud, disturbing and unnecessary noises in violation of this ordinance, but . said enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive. Subdivision 6: Participation in noisy parties or gathering. No person shall participate in any party or other gathering or permit any party or other gathering of people giving rise to noise, which is likely to disturb the peace, quiet or repose of another person. When a police officer receives a complaint and determines that a gathering is creating such a noise disturbance, the officer may order all persons present, other than the owner or the tenant of the premises where the disturbance IS occurring to disburse immediately. No person shall refuse to leave after being ordered by a police officer to do so. Every owner or tenant of such premises who has knowledge of the disturbance shall make every reasonable effort to see that the disturbance is stopped. Any such noise is presumed to have the effect of disturbing the peace, quiet or repose of another person if it is heard outside the limits of the real estate from which the party is occurring. Such a noisy party or gathering constitutes a violation of this ordinance. 10. By letter dated February 22, 2005 [Exhibit I] the City of St. Joseph gave ~ notice to Rock Investments (only; no notice was given to the plaintiff tenants) of possible . 5 . suspension or revocation of the rental license at 29 Minnesota Street East "because of an alleged violation of Ordinance No. 102," arising "out of an incident on February 20, 2005." 11. By letter dated February 22, 2005 [Exhibit J], Roger U. Schleper of Rock Investments, LLC notified the S1. Joseph City Council members: "We have already verbally notified the tenants that they have until the end of February to evict ·the premises and we of course plan on the property being vacant March 1 through May 31 of 2005." 12. A "REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION" dated March 3, 2005 [Exhibit K] is a document from the City of S1. Joseph Administration to its City Council, outlining the need to address the noise violation occurring on 2/20/05 and pointing out that, as part of . addressing that noise violation, the Council should also consider the previous noise . violation that had occurred in October 2004. 13. On about February 24, 2005 defendant Rock Investments by defendant Brock Ketcher served the eight plaintiff tenants in this action with an "Eviction Action Complaint," Stearns County District Court File No. C7-05-816, alleging "the tenant has broken the terms of the rental agreement with property landlOíd by: "2 Noise Violation (sic)."· A copy of this first Eviction Summons and Eviction Action Complaint is attached as "Exhibit L." Attached to the Eviction Summons and Eviction Action Complaint was an "Invoice" through which Rock Investments also alleged that it is entitled to $750.00 for "First noise violation," $1,650.00 for "Second noise violation," plus another $250.00 for "First noise penalty from S1. Joe paid by Rock Investments," $1,000.00 for "Second . 6 noise penalty from St. Joe paid by Rock Investments," plus rent due for March and April . in the amount of $4,800.00 and "Court Fees for evictions" in the amount of $480.00. 14. At a meeting of the St. Joseph City Council on March 3, 2005, the council noted that Rock Investments had waived its right to an evidentiary hearing on the claimed noise violation occurring on February 20, 2005. In view of that waiver, the City Council determined that a noise violation had occurred. The City Council then assessed a fine of $750.00 to Rock Investments and also suspended Rock Investments' rental license for 29 East Minnesota Street effective immediately (March 3, 2005) through July 31,2005. 15. On March 4, 2005, defendant Schleper and Ketcher met with plaintiffs and threatened that if plaintiffs did not sign a written agreement whereby plaintiffs agreed to reimburse Rock Investments $5,180.00 for fines from the City of S1. Joseph, rent for the months of June and July 2005, court fees for evictions and cleaning and shampooing of . the house, in addition to agreeing to pay rent for March and April (May's rent was pre- paid months ago) and in addition to agreeing to forfeit their security deposit, Rock Investments would proceed with the eviction action and also seek an additional award of $3,500 in attorney fees. See Affidavit of Ian Carpenter, paragraph 8, and attached. Exhibits N, 0, and P. 16. By letter dated March 8, 2005 [Exhibit M], the City of S1. Joseph advised Rock Investments that the premises at 29 East Minnesota Street must be vacant "no later than April 2, 2005." [The copy of the letter provided to plaintiffs' counsel has "$1367.03" handwritten on it; plaintiffs do ~ot know what this refers to or who wrote it]. . 7 . 17. On March 10, 2005, the Stearns County District Court dismissed the first Eviction Action Complaint. In the hallway after the dismissal Roger Schleper angrily told attorney Kevin Carpenter that the landlords would simply refile the Complaint and add the allegation that the tenants had allowed minors to consume alcohol (and Schleper commented that attorney Carpenter's actions in having the first Complaint dismissed had improperly taught "the boys" [the tenants] about "personal responsibility"). See Affidavit of Kevin Carpenter. 18. Landlord Rock Investments has now served plaintiff tenants with a second Eviction Summons, this one dated March 16, 2005, together with a "Complaint in Unlawful Detainer" [the latest Eviction Summons and Complaint in Unlawful Detainer are attached as Exhibit R]. Although the current Complaint in Unlawful Detainer does . not directly assert the October 2004 noise violation as grounds for eviction, it refers to actions of the City of S1. Joseph, which actions appear to have been based in part on the alleged noise violation occurring in October 2004; and paragraph 9 of the Complaint in Unlawful Detainer refers to plaintiffs "permitting noise violations" [plural] and "allowing· gatherings" [plural]. 19. The stated grounds for eviction in the current Complaint in Unlawful Detainer appear to be three, all set forth in paragraph 9: (1) permitting noise violations; (2) allowing underage consumption of alcohol; and (3) allowing gatherings between 1 0:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. [use of the plural in the words "violations" and "gatherings" suggests reference to both the incident occurring in October 2004 and the incident on 2/20/05]; and paragraph 9 of the Complaint in Unlawful Detainer states all three of these . activities "resulted in the summoning of the police," and "constituted material violations 8 under the terms of the Lease." Paragraph 4 of the Complaint in UnlaVfful Detainer cites . the following language from the lease: If a party or gathering occurs and/or the police are summoned, each resident present will be assessed a $200.00 fine payable to management immediately, the residents entire security deposit may be forfeited (at the option of Management), and management may evict resident [note use of singular] for violating the terms of the lease (at the option of Management). 20. The City of S1. Joseph Noise Ordinances which form the basis for the attempted evictions of plaintiff tenants are unconstitutionally vague as applied to these plaintiffs because they do not reasonably apprise plaintiffs of what conduct is prohibited and also lend themselves to arbitrary enforcement, depriving plaintiffs of due process of law in violation of both the United States and Minnesota Constitutions. WHEREFORE, plaintíffs seek a judgment from this Court as follows: . (1) Declaring that City of S1. Joseph ordinance Section 102.01 and Section 102.02, Subd. 6 are unconstitutionally vague as applied to plaintiffs herein and thereby deprive plaintiffs of due process of law, in violation of both the United States Constitution and the Minnesota Constitution; (2) Permanently enjoining the City of S1. Joseph from prosecuting plaintiffs for. alleged violations of the cited ordinances; (3) Permanently enjoining the City of S1. Joseph from evicting plaintiffs for the alleged violation of the cited ordinances, and specifically directing the City of S1. Joseph not to take action as threatened in the letter indicating plaintiffs should vacate the premises by April 2, 2005; . 9 . (4) Permanently enjoining the City of 81. Joseph from issuing "administrative citations" to these plaintiffs; (5) Permanently enjoining defendant~ Rock Investments, Roger 8chleper and Brock Ketcher from attempting to evict plaintiffs for alleged violations of the cited city ordinances or for conduct related to the alleged violations; (6) Permanently enjoining defendants Rock Investments, Roger 8chleper and Brock Ketcher from attempting to collect from plaintiffs herein fines assessed to Rock Investments, Schleper ancHor Ketcher by the City of 81. Joseph; (7) Permanently enjoining defendants Rock Investments, Roger Schleper and Brock Ketcher from attempting to assess "fines" against plaintiffs herein for alleged violations of the lease agreement; . (8) Permanently enjoining defendants Rock Investments, 8chleper and Ketcher from attempting to collect from plaintiffs rent for June and July on premises with a lease period ending May 25,2005; (9) Permanently enjoining defendants Rock Investments, Schleper and Ketcher from attempting to declare plaintiffs' security deposit "forfeit" due to an alleged violation of the lease agreement; (10) Awarding plaintiffs herein such further legal and equitable relief as the Court deems appropriate under the circumstances, including an award of costs and attorney fees. . 10 CARPENTER INJURY LAW OFFICE 3· d-/-()ç- . Dated: . . 11 I MArx 1 7 2005 Minn. Stat 504B.321 ~tate of Minnesota D·istdct Court :::ounty SkCVU1S'·· . .' .J Judicial District: Court File Number: CaseT e: Housing C~ tnvl~~~ds Uc., laintitT(Landlord) . EVICTION SUMMONS (Minn. Stat § 504B.321) rOD ARE SU1vfMONED to appear before this Court On!he date, time and place indicated below for a hearing m the attached· Complaint The original comp1aillt is on filewith the court. If you do not appear and contest.. he claim, judgment may be entered for the p1aintiffi'landlord. ìearingDate set for: (Date:) . at (Time) County Courthouse :>cated at (Address) d-1 {) (jVU's-fvpfw-, I-JdAJrto~ ~'A~. . . ..) ) dS.J-'14/~ .elephone . . . This is an EVICTION SUMMONS· )i1 the date and atthe time shown above, the judge will decide whether you will have to move or whether you . ~an continue to stay in your home. You must ·be on tÍIÏle for GOurt. IF YOU DON'T COME TO COURT The judge can order you to move iriImediately; and if you do not move, the sheriff can move you ouf and put 111 your belongings into storage. You will then have to pay the storage and moving costs before you can get . {our belongings back.· . ~ . YOU HAVE RIGHTS rOU HAVE THE RIGHT to come to court and tell your side of the case. For example, . If you believe that all or some of the things·that your hindlord says in the attached papers are wrong, you' . . . can tell those things to the judge. . If you believe that your landlord is trying to evict you because of something you did to protect your rights . . as a tenant, you can explain that to the judge. - .th~ ~ttached papers·sa~ that you have not paidre~t, and yo~ believe that your apartment is ~ bad . ndItlOn and needs reparrs, you can tell thatto the Judge. Bnng tötal rent owed to court heanng. . You may have other defenses. You should research the.1awor ask an attorney. You may come to court and speak for yourself or you may have a lawyer with you to represent you. If you want a lawyer, you must get one fight away. EXHIBIT R )riginal- ~eturn to the Court Administrator with Proof of Service . Yellow -: Defendant's Copy Pink - Plaintiff s Copy Goldenroi . , STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRlCT COURT COUNTY OF STEARNS SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT . Rock Investments, LLC, , CASE TYPE: 12, Unlawful Detainer Plaintiff, . COURT FILE NO.: c...1- 06 - J d-} '7 vs. COMPLAINT IN UNLAWFUL . DETAINER ,0· Mike Hanke, Adam Hanna, Ian Carpenter, Darryl Smoletoff, Ryan Langenbrunner, Mike Ellena, Chris Bàldwin, and Tom Hartman, Defendants. Plaintiff Rock Investments, LLC, as and for its Complaint against Defendants Mike Hanke, Adam Hanna, Ian Carpenter, Darryl Smoleroff, Ryan Langenbrunner, Mike Ellena, Chris Baldwin, . and Tom Hartman, states and alleges as follows: l. Plaintiff is, and at all times relevant to this action was, the owner of certain real property located at 29 East Minnesota Street, S1. Joseph, Minnesota, which is located in Stearns County and hereinafter refèrred to as the "Propèrty." 2. At all times relevant to this action, Defendants have occupied the Property under a written lease (the "Lease'') dated October 22, 2003. 3. Plaintiffis unaware of Defendants' respective dates of birth. 4. The Lease provides that Defendants shall not conduct herselfì'bimself in a loud, boisterous, unruly or thoughtless manner so as to disturb the rights of other residents to peace and quiet, or to allow her/his guests so to do -:- this includes that there shall be no parties, no beer kegs brought onto the premises, no drugs, no sales or excessive use of alcohol, no èonsumption of alcohol· . by minors, and no gathering between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. which can beheard from a I -.--,....-----..,.....-.-------..- . , . distanc~ of 50 feet from the apartment or from an adjoining apartment unit or . hallway. If a party or gathering occurs and/or the police are summoned, each resident present will be assessed .a $200.00 fine payable to management immediately, the· residents entire security deposit may be forfeited (at the option of Management), and management may evict-resident for violating the tenns bfthe lease (at the option of Management). 5. On February 20, 2005, at approximately 12:30 a.m., the St. Joseph police department received a complaint ofloud music còming from the Property. The police issued an administrative citation for a noise violation against Defendant Mike Habke. 6. St. Joseph pblicè officers entered the Property and discovered several male individuals under the age of21 who were hidÏ!1g in a locked bedroom on the second floor. ;Each of . the underage· individuals had consumed alcohol for which the police issued ten misdemeanor citations. .. 7. Plaintiff received from the City ofSt. Joseph (the "City") a letter dated February 22, . 2005, stating that the City Council would conduct·ån administrative hearing to consider the . . . suspension and/orrevocation of Plaintiff s rental license for the Property based on a violation of the City's noise ordinance. - - . 8. Plaintiff received from the City a letter dated March 8,2005, stating that Plaintiff's. ; rental license for the Property had been suspended imme.diately and that the Property "must be vacant no later than April 2, 2005.n The City also imposed a fine against Plaintiff in the amount of $750.00. 9. Defendants actions, including but noflimited to permitting noise violations, allowing underage consumption of alcohol, and allowing gatherings between 10:00 ·p,m. and 7 :00 a.m., all of . . which resulted in tb.e summoning of the police, constituted material violations under· the terms of the . Lease. -;. 2:- .. . .. I , WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Rock Investments, LLC respectfully requests that the Court enter . judgment ordering that Plaintiff is entitled to the imrnedi~lte recovery of possession of the Property and for its costs and disbursements incurred herein. +/... . Dated this I ~ day of March, 2005. .. ·.Lý Christopher W. Harmoning (#285 '8) GRAY, PLANT, MOOTY, MOOTY & BENNETT, P.A. ~ . 1010 West St. Germain Suite 600 .St. Cloud, MN" 56301 (320) 252-4414 Attorneys for Plaintiff ACKNO\VLEDGMENT The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorney and . . witness fees may be awarded under Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 2, for the party against whom the . allegations in this pleading are asserted. Ly?- Christoph r W. Harmoning GP: I 690392 vi " . .... - 3 - ~ · STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF STEARNS IN DISTRICT COURT SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. Ian Carpenter, Darryl Smoleroff, Ryan Langenbrunner, Thomas Hartman, Michael Hanke, Adam Hanna, Chris Baldwin and Mike Ellena, Plaintiffs, v. City of St. Joseph, Brock Ketcher, Roger Schleper and Rock Investments, LLC, Defendants. · PLAINTIFFS' APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER PURSUANT TO RULE 65.01 Plaintiffs hereby apply to the court for a temporary restraining order pursuant to Rule 65.01 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, restraining defendants from evicting, or attempting to evict, plaintiffs from a residence located at 29 East Minnesota Street in the City of St. Joseph. The application is made on the Affidavits and Memorandum filed by plaintiffs herein and their counsel in the case of Rock Investments v. Hanke, et aI., Stearns County Court File Number C1-05-1217. As is noted in those documents, plaintiffs herein are tenants currently renting a house at 29 East Minnesota Street in the City of S1. Joseph from defendants Brock Ketcher and Roger Schleper d/b/a defendant Rock · Investments, LLC. The City of St. Joseph has served Rock Investments with a letter indicating that plaintiff tenants must vacate the property on or before April 2, 2005, and ^ defendants Ketcher, Schleper and Rock Investments as landlords have demanded that . plaintiffs vacate the premises on or before April 2, 2005. The attempted eviction of plaintiffs from the residence at 29 East Minnesota Street is unlawful, improper and in violation of plaintiffs due process rights under the Minnesota and United States Constitutions. Accordingly, plaintiffs respectfully request that the court issue its order restraining defendants from evicting or attempting to evict plaintiffs pending further order of the court. CARPENTER INJURY LAW OFFICE Dated: 3~?-1-0S-- ~~58 Attorney for Plaintiffs 204 Midsota Center 3701 North 12th Street St. Cloud, Minnesota, 56303 . (320) 251-3434 . 2 ;.0;. . STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF STEARNS IN DISTRICT COURT SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Court File No. Ian Carpenter, Darryl Smoleroff, Ryan Langenbrunner, Thomas Hartman, Michael Hanke, Adam Hanna, Chris Baldwin and Mike Ellena, Plaintiffs, v. City of S1. Joseph, Brock Ketcher, Roger Schleper and Rock Investments, LLC, Defendants. . TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER TO: DEFENDANTS CITY OF ST. JOSEPH, BROCK KETCHER, ROGER SCHLEPER AND ROCK INVESTMENTS, LLC: You and each of you are hereby ordered to refrain from any attempts to evict or dispossess plaintiffs herein of possession of the property located at 29 East Minnesota Street in the City of S1. Joseph until further order of this court. A hearing on an application to convert this restraining order to a temporary injunction is scheduled for , 2005, at o'clock _.m., at either the Stearns County Courthouse or Stearns County Courts Facilities building. You are to check with Court Administration for the specific location for this hearing. . 3/21/2005 1:11 PM FROM: Ra·kowsk· . . . ] 1 HanSrne1er RaJkwosk1 Hanmeier TO: 9,363-0342 PAGE: 002 OF 013 ,~ I Law Office I helping injured people resolve disputes with insurers I KEVIN S. CARPENTERI ATTORNEY - I Certified Civil Trial Specialist Member, American Board of Trial Advocates I March 18, 2005 MAR 2 I 2t\¡~ Torn Jovanovich Rajkawski Hansmeier. Ltd. P.O. Box 1433 St. Cloud, MN 56302 VIA FACSIMILE ~D U.S. MAil RE: Rock. Investments v. Hanke, et al . Dear Tom: I am writing to you in your role as attorney for the City. of st. Joseph. I believe you are somewhat familiar with the dispute involving Rock Investments as landlord of the h9use located at 29 Minnesota Street in St. Joseph. the tenants currenfly renting that house, - and the City of St Joseph. There was an incident at the house in October, 2004 which resulted in two administrative citations for noise violations being issued. one to Darryl Smoleroff and one to my son, Ian Carpenter. As a result of the same incident. there was an administrative citation issued to the landlord, Rock Investments. Rock Investments waived the right to an evidentiary hearing (apparently for themselves as well as for their tenants) and the City Council assessed a $250 fine against Rock Investments. I am not exactly certain how, but the City also fined Darryl Smoleroff and my son, Ian $100 each. There was another incident at the house on February 20, 2005. None of the tenants were home, but some other people were in the house and the police came in response to a loud noise complaint The police issued a noise violation citation to one of the tenants, Mike Hanke. even though Hanke wasn't present when the loud noise occurred. An administrative citation for a noise violation was also issued to the landlords. . In response to the February 2005 incident, the landlords again waived the right to an evidentiary hearing. The City Council at its March 3. 3005 meeting fined the landlords $750 and suspended their rental license through July 31, 2005. When I spoke with the Mayor before the March 3 City Council meeting, he had mentioned that he wanted to 3/2112005 1: 11 PH FRo.'· Ra· k . k· . . .. J ows Á HansmeÁer RaJKwoski Hanmeier TO: 9,363-0342 PAGE: 003 OF 013 , "."'1 Tom Jovanovich Page 2 . March 18, 2005 have the city assess a fine that would be imposed upon the landlords and not passed on to the tenants; that is why he voted for suspending the license of the landlords beyond the period of the current lease, which ends May 25, 2005. After the city council meeting on March 3, I spoke with the Mayor and told him that the landlords are 'trying to pass on to the tenants the rents lost for June and July. The mayor seemed to be rethinking the wisdom of suspending the rental license through the end of July. Even before the City Council meeting on March 3, 2005, the iandlords served the tenants with an Evlction Summons and an Eviction Action Complaint. At the initial hearing ·on March 10,2005, the district court dismissed the Eviction Action Complaint The stated grounds for the eviction had been "two noise violations. ) With regard to the first noise violation in October, the court found that the landlords had waived that nOÎse violation as grounds for an eviction by not raising it earlier and by accepting rent payments in the intarim. With regard to the second alleged noise violation, even though the landlords had waived their right to an evidentiary hearing, the tenant involved, Mike Hanke, had not (he is scheduled to make a first appearance on March 22, 2005). The landlords have now served another Eviction Action Complaint, scheduled for a hearing on March 30, 2005. Yesterday, I spoke with the landlords' attorney, Chris Harmoning. He said the landlords feel they have no choice but to pursue an eviction . action, given what was done by the City Council. With this letter lam sending you a copy of a letter from City Administrator Judy Weyrens to Rock Investments dated March 8, 2005. With this letter I also am sending you a "Complaint for Declaratory ~nd Injunctive Reliee' I have not yet served or flIed this complaint. At the heart of tþis matter is the fact that the Cnys noise ordinance is most likely unconstitutionally vague. See Gíty of Edina v. Dreher, 454 N.W.2d 621 (Minn. App. 1990). I would like to work out a reasonable solution to this problem. I would tike the City to revoke its suspension of the landlords' license. I do not know, but have been told, there have been other cases where the City has not suspended a rental license until there has been a third noise violation. Alternatively, I would like the City to only suspand the rental license for May 15-May 31, 2005. I would like the City and the landlords to allow the tenants to remain in the house through May 15, 2005. I also would like the Ci1y to dismiss the noise complaint against Mike Hanke (scheduled for a 'first appearance March 22, 2005). I would be happy to be involved in efforts to revise the noise ordinance. I also think the ordinances need to be clarified concerning administrative citations to landlords versus administrative citations to tenants. I also am willing to discuss other, more reasonable consequences to these tenants for these noise violations. . 3/21/2005 1:11 PM FROM' R·k k· H . . . aJ O\"S.~ ansme~er RaJkwoski Hanmeier TO: 9,363-0342 PAGE: 004 OF 013 . .. . Tom Jovanovich Page 3 March 18, 2005 A copy of this letter goes to Bill Kain, who represents Mike Hanke on the noise violation citation against him, and a copy of this letter goes to . Christopher Harmening, attorney for Rock Investments. 'hope to hear from you soon. Thanks. Sincerely, KSCfds Enclosures cc am Kain (via facsimile and U.S. Mail) Christopher Harmoning (via facsimile and U.S. Mail) . , . 3/21/2005 1:11 PI~ FRO'" R ·k 'k·· . . . ... aJ o"s J. HansmeJ.er RaJkwoski Hanmeier TO: 9,363-0342 PAGE: 005 OF 013 CITY Of ST. JOSEPH wwv.Cityo¡stjoseph.com . March 8, 2005 Rock Investrnen1;g jÞ {? ~ 7~ 0 > & Brown Ferris Properties AdministrðtOr PO Box 7184 Judy 'Weyrens 81. Cloud:M.N 56302 Mdyor Dear Roger and Brock: Richðrd Carlbom Councilors Ai:, you are aware on March 3, 2005 the City Council suspended your rental license for the AI R.ðssìer property located at 29 East Minnesota Street. The rental license has been suspended due to Ross Rieke two successive noise violations withìn the same rental1icense period, The suspension begins Renee SymollÌclz . immediately and the license is eligible for renewal August 1,2005. To be in compliance Dale Wick with the suspension, the property must be vacant no later tha.n April 2,2005. In addition to the suspension of the rental license, the Council also imposed a fine in the amount of $ 750.00. Pleasesubwt the fme no later than Apri12, 2005. If you have any questions or need additional infoD11ation please do not he.sit.ate to contac1 me . at 320-363-7201. SinCerely, CITYj;TÇJ~5 Jud . Weyrens A . . sirator cc: Tom Jovanovich. City Attorney Ron Wasmond, BuildinglRental Housìng Official File (Hwsíng, Noise VIOlations 2005) . 2.) College Avenue North' PO Box 668 . Sðint. Joseph. Minnesotð )"6374 REceiVED APR 1 Z005 . VRajkOWSki CITY OF ST. JOSEPH 11 Seventh Avenue North ~~~~~~l~l lid. P.o. Box 1433 St. Cloud, MN 56302-1433 March 31, 2005 320-251-1055 Toll Free 800-445-9617 -- VIA FAX ONLY -- Cindy Murphy Fax 320-251-5896 145 University Ave. West St. Paul, MN 55103 rajhan@rajhan.com RE: Rock Investments v. Hanke et al www.rajhan.com Our File No: 24252 Dear Ms. Murphy: Thank you for discussing the above referenced matter with me yesterday. Enclosed, please find the following documents that were served upon the City Attomey for the City of St. Joseph on March 29, 2005: . (1) Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief brought by Carpenter, et al against the City of St. Joseph; Frank J. Rajkowski·· (2) Plaintiffs Application for Temporary Restraining Order Pursuant to Gordon H. Hansmeier Rule 65.01; (3) Temporary Restraining Order; Frederick L. Grunke (4) Summons; Thomas G. Jovanovich" (5) Affidavit of Personal Service; and (6) Letter dated March 29,2005 from Attomey Kevin Carpenter to City Paul A. Rajkowski" AttomeyTom Jovanovich. Kevin F. Gray William J. Cashman This case arises out of an unlawful detainer action brought by Rock Investments, LCC against the son of Attomey Carpenter and his roommates. Brock Ketcher and Roger Richard W. Sobalvarra Schleper own Rock Investments and are the landlords of the property. The City is not a Susan M. Dege party to the unlawful detainer action, although its interests are somewhat tied to that case. I have sent you the documents relating to the unlawful detainer via U.S. Mail. LeAnne D. Miller Sarah L. Smith-Larkin' In its claims against the City, Carpenter is seeking to declare a city noise ordinance Troy Ä. Paetz unconstitutionally vague. I have researched this issue, and the ordinance does not appear to be unconstitutionally vague on its face or as applied. Carpenter also claims that the Joseph M. Brameland ordinance infringes on his due process rights because it allows a third party (in this case, Gregory J. Haupert the landlord) to waive a hearing and pass on a violation to the tenants. This argument is . J. Pugh also faulty because the City's relationship is with the landlord, not the tenants. If the landlord decides to evict a tenant based on a fine the landlord receives, that seems to be Jason T. Bretto an issue between the landlord and the tenant. Frank J. Rajkowski and Richard W Soba/varro are admitted to practice in North Dakota, Gordon H. Hansmeier in North Dakota and Wisconsin. Paul A. Rajkowski and Sarah L. Smith-Larkin in Wisconsin. and IIVil/iam J. Cashman in South Dakota. V ·March 31, 2005 · Cil1c(v A1z1/phy Page 2 of2 I ha·ve not yet received a notice of a hearing on the claims against the City. However, there is a trial scheduled for the unlawful detainter action on April 8,2005 at I :30 p.m. before Judge Hayden in Steams County. Again, the City is not a party to that action. Please let me knO\V as soon as possible whether the defense ofthis case may be tendered. Please call me with any questions. Sincerely, Of~ By Laurel 1. Pugh LJP Ikj s Enclosures cc: Judy \Veyrens · · . I Attachment: Yes or No I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION DATE: March 30, 2005 EDA ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AGENDA ITEM EDA monthly report. PREVIOUS ACTION None. . RECOMMENDED BOARD ACTION For review and approval. FISCAL IMPACT N/A. COMMENTS/RECOMMENDATIONS EDA monthly report offered for your review and approval. . ~. . MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMEt(f GROUP, INC. DATE: March 30, 2005 MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor Carlbom Members of the City Council City Administrator Weyrens FROM: ,}¡rIÎ F t LS Joanne Foust & Cynthia Smith-Strack, Municipal Development Group RE: Economic Development Activity Report March 2005 Municipal Development Group, Inc. has been interacting with a number of prospects throughout the past three and a half years. Following is a summary of activities that have transpired. If you have any questions on any of these or other projects, please do not hesitate to contact us at 952-758-7399. A project number has been assigned to protect the confidentiality of the businesses prospects. Project 01-E: This project involves the expansion of a service within the community. MDG has been keeping in touch with the project contact over the past three and a half years. The latest contacts with the prospect occurred on . March t1d, 3rd, 9th, 16th and 30th. Project 01-F: This project has been inactive for the past several months but involves a national commercial enterprise. MDG continues to occasionally follow up on the lead, including most recently on March 16th. Project 01-1: This business originally contacted the City in 2001. In 2002 they noted their project was on-hold. The company contacted MDG again in June of last year requesting information on available commercial sites in the City. MDG has forwarded additional information and remained in contact with this prospect, most recently on March 9th. Project 02-L: This prospect owns industrial incubator lease space in the City of St. Joseph. MDG contacted the project representative on March 23rd re: Project 05-B's interest in industrial lease space. MDG and the project rep. spoke/exchanged emails several times on the 23rd, 28th and 30th. Proiect 02-R: This contact owns a business in the area and is currently leasing space. In 2004 the developer entered an agreement to purchase an 8+ acre industrial site in the City. The developer is not prepared to undertake development on the parcel at this time. MDG continues to remain in contact with the prospect most recently on March 30th via email. Project 03-A: These developers are interested in a large highway commercial development in an area not yet annexed into the City. MDG has been working with them over the past few years. Follow up and discussion continues on a routine basis. MDG most recently followed up with this lead via phone and email on March 16th. . EDA Monthly Project Report March 2005 Page 1 · Project 03-1: This lead contacted the City in search of 5,000 s.f. of retail space to lease. MDG, Inc. remains in contact with this prospect. MDG followed up with the project lead most recently via mail on March 16th In addition, MDG provided project 05-A with this prospects name/contact information on March 25th. Project 03-S: This project involves the potential development of additional platted industrial acreage with a full compliment of municipal services. EDA staff met with development representatives, the City Administrator and City Engineer on February 16th. Issues affecting this project were be discussed at the St. Joseph staff meeting on March 16th. Confirmation on questions re: the project are being addressed at this time. Project 03-U: Inquiry forwarded to MDG in October 2003 regarding a commercial development in St. Joseph. MDG, Inc. remains in contact with the prospect regarding the project. Most recent contact occurred via email on March 9th. Project O4-F: This prospect contacted MDG in May of 2004 regarding commercial lease space in the downtown area. MDG remains in contact with this prospect with the latest follow up occurring by phone on March 9th. MDG provided Project 05-A with this prospect's contact information on March 25th. Project 04-H: This project involves an historic building in the downtown which recently changed owners. MDG met with the new property owner's representative to discuss how potential rehabilitation related to image/ambiance in the downtown corridor and financial incentives potentially available to the project. MDG sent a follow up email on March 9th and spoke to the contact on March 23rd and March 25th. Information re: contact information for Project 04-F and Project 04-0 were forwarded to this project's representative on March 25th. · Project 04-M: This business is currently located in another community and has committed to relocating to St. Joseph. Staff follows up with the contact on a weekly/bi-weekly basis as needed. MDG spoke with project contact on March 200, 9th and 16th and met with the prospect on March 23rd. A purchase agreement has been drafted and presented to property owners, execution of the agreement is expected shortly. Project 04-N: This business owner contacted the City in September 2004 regarding available industrial acreage. MDG representatives have met with the prospect on a few occasions and remains in contact with the prospect and/or the associated project (i.e. O4-D) on a regular basis, including by phone on March 9th and by mail on March 16th. Project 04-0: This prospect contacted MDG in November 2004 requesting information on existing commercial lease space and vacant acreage available for purchase. This prospect has indicated he has been contacted by Project 01-1 re: potential lease deal. MDG provided Project 05-A with this prospect's contact information on March 25th. Project 05-A: This prospect contacted the City in March 2005 regarding a possible redevelopment project. MDG mailed general information to the prospect on March 17th, metwith the prospect on March 23rd and mailed additional information to the prospect on March 25th. MDG spoke to the prospect on March 30th and met briefly with the individual later in the day. Project 05-8: This lead was forwarded to the Mayor by the SCAEDP on March 22nd. MDG followed up with the Mayor on · March 23rd and contacted Project 02-L on the same day re: the request. MDG followed up again on March 29th and phoned the project representative directly on March 30th. EDA Monthly Project Report March 2005 Page 2 Project 05-C: · This lead was forwarded to the Mayor by the SCAEDP on March 29th. MDG followed up on the lead on March 29th. The prospect is looking for tax advantages in conjunction with the desire to lease industrial space. MDG performed additional information on March 30th re: JOBZ acreage. Spoke to DEED, Region 5 and West Central EDC representatives. Timeline is extremely tight. After speaking with reps from DEED, Region 5 and West Central EDC it appears JOBZ assistance for this project is not warranted/feasible. Other: MDG is part of the T AC for the southern collector street corridor study. MDG represents the EDA and will act as an information conduit between those facilitating the study and the EDA. MDG has been asked to provide active leadership in the formation and facilitation of a downtown redevelopment committee. MDG is working on MIF progress report to DEED. · · EDA Monthly Project Report March 2005 Page 3 . MEMO TO: St. Joseph Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Ollie Lesnick, City Assessor DATE: April 1,2005 RE: Assessor's Report - 2005 Assessment 69 Residential Sales Current Ratio 95.72% Average increases for 2005 assessment Residential 06% . Commercial 10% Apartments 02% . · March 25, 2005 Mr. Ollie Lesnick Box 41 St. Joseph, :MN 56374 Dear Ollie: I'm writing you to bring your attention to the increase in valuation on the property I own (Tax LD. #R84.53546.003). I feel the new property valuation increase is too high based on the following reasons: 1. The entire site is unbuildable at this time because it is basically a hole. We've been hauling in fill this past summer, but because of the shallow sewer line, a significant amount of fill is still required to have a buildable site. 2. On September 13,2004, I met with Tracy Ekola from S.E.H. (City of St. Joseph's Engineer). Tracy informed me the pond that had been designed during the · original platting process was inadequate and S.E.H took the liberty to redesign a new pond plan.. (See Exhibit "A".) This ponding area has been determined by the city to be set aside for water only, and therefore, cannot be used for anything but its intended water retention purpose. Because of the above site problems, I ask you to consider to maintain the valuation on that part of our property that would one day be considered "buildable" and to completely do away with the valuation for that area set aside for storm water ponding. Thank you for taking time to consider our request. Sincerely, D£Þ;~D1V . Domm Davidson ~ President Encl: Notice of2006 Taxes Exhibit "A" Pictures of Site(2) · 1, \ ~ -~ !!, 'Ii I I II ~ ~ ~ 0 \ . x x t')~ I I· . . ;,. r 7! ;íi 1 ~ .. ..,...... -.,.'..' .'_. 'x' c·-' (;, - \ x I' ,1// J ~:J~ r I "f 1/ x f oot' \. . o:¡ 0 ~8·)C~. t . , \ % - L ~ . x . a..;,.",;~· ~ ¡ I I 8.~ \, ~~.. ò:~ ~~ III ~8B / x . x ~.. J .,;""." . 0__ I :1:8' .0.. ~ ~/ F--( I -... . \ ~\ \- \p. '\. ~ ì ~ x I I , I x I I I I ~ '\ I / '" I I ~~ \ I ò I / æ V ./£ '\.\ % x ~ 1 \ o Ii '1 Ii óI ì ;~¡~. ~ .. , .' c1' ,x I~"" '- / ~i ~ I " I a. :'" x, "\ I xl \ & ~ '(\f x t . I õ .. 0 ~, ...,. . "'-.,1 \) " ./ .. ì 2~~·: l' x \ I i\ I (§....ffi ~ I %\ I' 1/ e ß5!a I I I x \ ;! I., ! I . . . , ., '" I I 'è-~- - . ~' I ~ ~ "'-.,\ '.' \ ~ ' I / I . I co I ( I. ) _~_.J "- I :I'I~. I ~ I ~'" I __>:"_~J ~-- . '1 /. - -- ,- . ~~5 :~~5t~!r ~:;~-< ~:~~_:_:_ ->:~'"-\ ._~~ ~<~~~S;'" ~ ': ' ~ '.;.:: -<~ .~ ~Ol:1.-&9&(Ol:&) ,,'V~ lN3W1NIOdd'd N'V ~O::l "1'VH AlI~ 3Hll 'fI WdO&:9 .l 'fI 900Z 9 llHd'tf 'ssa::JoJd eadde ewJoJ ,a\-n lnoqe UOnewJoJu! lU~µOdW! JOJ e:)!lOU S!Yl JO } ::Jeq eYl peeJ eseald . . 'alq81!8A8 ..aJesùOndO leadde lewJoJ aJQLU ~pa^lQSeJ }ou· aJe . SUJa::>uo::> JO suonsanb JnoÁ JI ' aAal S!Yl }e paAlosaJ aq ue::> sanss! JnoÁ ua»o 'SUJa::lUO::l JO suo Jsanb ~ùe ssn::ls!p oJ 099&-999-0Z& Je JSJ!J. . Jossasse . Jno~ . J::IeJuo::l aseald 'a:)nou slY} }noqe. suonsanb Ja4}O aAey nOÁ J! JO 'san 8A a4} \H!M aaJ68~!p noÁ J! 'l:)EWO::> }OU S! Üo!}eWJoJu! ÁµadoJd aYl JI . ;5u!laaW palS!! Áue puane JO JOssasse JnoÁ pe}uo::> . O} ÁJesse::¡au }OU S! }! 'paJJo::> eJe sse ::> ÁµedoJd pue uO!len BA JnoÁ aAa!laq noÁ JI \ 1"11' 11111111111111111.11111111111111111111111111"1111' 11'111 , - L6Lo-\1L\:99 NW Hd3S0r 1S l6l XOS Od dIHS}J3NUI\1d we -'uo!¡e3!l!SSep pue uo!¡enle^ S!4¡ uo paseq aq IJ!M 900Z U! ,{ed II!Mno,{saXe¡ ,{µadoJd a4! '900Z Jea,{ ¡uawssasse JOl ,{µadoJd JnO,{ JoUo¡¡e3!llsSeI3 pue anle^ ¡a}fJew a4¡ lO no,{ ,{l¡¡OUO¡ S! WJOl S!4! - - II!q e .lON S! S!4.l - &0&99 NIN 'pnol~ '}S - 900Z U! alqe~ed SÐXelJO - .- aJenbs asno4J·mo~ 90L == l£ woo~ 'JaJua~ UOneJJs!u!WP'tf U~,}e~1:~!~~~.JJ ~_~e UO!.I~^ O a~!J0N Jossass'tf ~Juno~ .aJS SUuG ~ (. ú~};J Uj/\L:1J3tf . . · -- c ~ \ .- f ~ - . .- t '" :> ( ( ( \ - ~ /. SA APPRAISAL SYSTEM /2005 17:49=27 -------- --- ------------- ---- :i~~~~~É;~§~>Êj~~~Ji'Þ4 2,43 NUMBER OF PROPERTIES TOT AL LAND 48. TOTAL GREEN AC T. IMPR 1,17\ TI! A P P R 2,261 . -~-~-' . IVla 1. L't. LUU~ j : :iL PM GOOUIN CO No. 8823 P. 2/9 COUNTY OF S TEA R N S' . &~S~1)~ Administration Center Rm 343 · 705 courthouse Square · St. Cloud, MN 56303 320-656-3613 . Fax 320-656-6484 · 1.800-:450-0852 MEMORANDUM TO: St. Wendel Township Board of Supervisors St. Wendel Township residents . FROM: Donald w. Adams, Dlrectó[~1\~I~'/ . DATE: March 16, 2005 RE: Answers to your questions of March 11, 2005 - I will attempt to answer your questions to the best of my ability and in sufficient detail to assist in understanding the broad issues raised in regard to the potential of extending water and wastewater services to the area of St. Wendel Township in question. 1) Breakdown of septic systems: How many are known to be in compliance,· how many are non-compliant and ho~ many are questionable? The County developed a map of the Pleasant Acres subdivision and immediate vicinity in preparation for the meeting that was recently held in St. Joseph to discuss possible annexation. In this area, there were a total of 327 parcels. Information available to the County through its various databases indicates that 69 of the parcels have no septic system permit information. Based upon our long experience with unpermitted systems throughout ~he County. we can assume· that these systems are non-compliant and will need to be replaced. There are 6 septic systems that were installed between 1980 and 1983. Systems installed befor,e 1984 aenerallv do not meet specifications and need replacement. ·Again, that is based upon our; historic experience with systems of this age. There are 59 systems that were installed between 1984 and 1989·, The typical life of a septic system is typically between 15 and 25 years, and is dependent upon many factors, including maintenance (pumping), soil type, water usage and materials and chemicals placed in the septic system. Systems installed in this time period are really "on the bubble" because they are nearing or have slightly exceeded their life expectancy. The County routinely sees systems in this age category fail, primarily because of poor maintenance, lack of appropriate separation between the Ma r. 24. 2005 3:32PM GOODIN CO No. 8823 p, 3/9 drainfield and the groundwater table or because the soil has .become clogg~d with organic . material.. There are 87 systems that were installed between 1990 and 1994. The vast majority of these systems will pass a certffication, but owners should carefully consider the long term life . expectancy of the system and determine whether or not there are adequate replacement sites on their lot. There are 106 systems that were installed between 1994 and 2005. Again, based on our experience with certifications County-wide, the vast majority of these systems will pass a ~rtification. As wi~h the previous category, however, owners should carefully consider the long term life expectancy of the system and determine whether or not there are adequate replacement sites·ön then.; lot. 2) How many systems will fail in the next 10 years? It is dìfficult to predict with any degree of accuracy how many systems will actually fail in the next 10 years. Based on areas of Stearns County in which the County has conducted extensive inspections of systems, the average failure rate is between 30 and 35%. Failure, however, can be impacted by so many factors, such as water usage, the kinds of chemicals and other materials flushed into the septic system, soil type, compaction of the soil, frequency of pumping, etc. Ag.ain, it is important to look at the long term life expectancy of 15 to 25 years and assess where¡ your individual system fits into that time frame. 3) What is the expected lifetime of a newly installed septic system? As previously stated, in Steams County, we are typically seeing a 15"25 year functional lifetime as an average life for septic systems. The functional age of a system is influenced by many factors~ the initial installation, the soil type (clay versus loam or sand soils, for instance), compaction of the soil before or after installation, maintenance of the system, water usage and the types of chemicals allowed to be flushed into the system. Systems can, and do last longer as the maintenance of that system is more frequent and if the volume and content of tile sewage are controlled. 4) What other waste water treatment options might the county recommend for the township for the next ten years if annexation does not occur? ' The county will not recommend a kind of systE?m for you, Those are decisions that must be made by the St. Wendel Township Board of Supervisors with input from the residents of the township. That said, however, there are a number of wastewater treatment options that should be explored. One of my concerns, especially for the Pleasant Acres area, i~ the long term viability of individual . on"site sewage treatment. As. stated previously, many òf these systems (about 40%) need replacing right now. Approximately another 25% are fast approaching their life exp·ectancy. The long term options for replacement sites is very limited, leaving several options available, including "' a r. L't. L U U ? j:jj~M bUUOIN CO No. 8823 P. 4/9 . l . the extension of sewer and water services from st. Joseph. That is an option that should be carefully considered, as area planners in a number of jurisdictions are in the process of calculating the needed treatment capacity at the S1. Cloud regional wastewater treatment facility. They Will need to know in a timely manner whether or not to plan for the capacity generated through an annexation of a portion of St. Wendel Township. Another viable option may be decentralized wastewater treatment systems or "cluster systems" as they are sometimes called. Over the past several years, technologies for decentralized wastewater treatment have improved considerably as companies have gained experience with design, installation and operation. Constructed wetlands, recirculating sand filters and peat filters have all been used successfully for both new and existing developments, and could have application in St. Wendel Township. I would highly recommend a feasibifity study to aid you in your decision so that'you are able to make an informed decision ·on which alternative to choose. It is my opinion that if you choose not to participate with St. Joseph at this time that you will still be faced with a decision for some other form of collective treatment in the near future. 5) Is the state considering forcing counties to require all non-compliant systems to be replaced in the next five years? I am not sure of the time frame, but am anticipating that some comprehensive program for - bringing hon-compliant systems into conformance is going to emerge from the Legislature. During each of the last three Legislative sessions, there have been bills introduced that would ~ have the counties do inventories of all their systems and require upgrades. While those bills have not passed, the parties affected are moving closer and closer to a compromise position, so I do expect that some form of requ.irement for upgrades will emerge in the next year or so. Please be aware that the County is currently required to upgrade all non-compliant systems in shoreland any time a land use or construction 'permit is issued to a property and also at time of property transfer. 6) What is the county position on the condition of well water over the next 10 to 15 years if annexation doesn't take piace? The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has installed some monitortng wells in Pleasant Acres and hi several other rural residential developments in stearns County, some served by individual on-site sewage treatment systems and some served by municipal sewer and water. Those studies indicate higher levels of nitrate-nitrogen in the areas served by the on-site systems, and my experience tells me that at some point in time drinking water quality in this area has a high likelihood of degrading due to increasing nitrate-nitrogen levels. Township officials and residents should carefully consider this possibility as you research the options available to deal with these issues. I thank you for the opportunity to provide my perspective on this matter, and offer any assistance that you may need in researching and considering the many options available in addressing the issues of wastewater treatment and safe drinking water supply. . Ma r. 24, 2005 3:33PM GOODIN CO No, öen l! '/ Y I, To: St. Wendel Sewer SeNIce District Residents From: $t:. Wendel Township Board of SUpervlsars Subject: Possible Option far City ServIces with at. Joseph through Orderly Annexation . Date: . March 17. 2Q{J5 S1. Wendel Townsh1p has been approached by the City Of St. Joseph to explore 1he possibility of entering Into an örder1y annexation agreement with St. Joseph. TOOre are many factors prompting these discussions. In an attemJ)t to keep everyone informed about these dlscu$Sions and the reasons for them, we wanted to present some Information and get feedback from taxpayers in the affected areas. The information presented below is based on what is known today. ~ Discussions of a future need for municipal water and septic Servicas have been held many times In the TcWO$hJp over the pa$t few decades. Over the years, these discussions have been held with various neighboring governments, including St. Cloud, Waite Park, Rice, Cold Spring, $1. Joseph, st. Stephen, Sarte!1 and Stearns County. In 1995, as part of a long range planning effort for the T()WNjhip, St Wendel Township spent nearty $20,000 to complete a study to identify areas of growth, detem1ìne housing densities, and to help plan a Sewer SGrvIce Dis1rict for the township. Thls was done in conjunction with the Area ?tanning Organization, which worked closely with multipl~ local governments in ~ area to develop lena range plans for the entire area. This study Identified the area generally south of Country Road 4 as a high growth areal which al&o warranted apecia1 attention due to the presence ofWatøb and Rass!er lalœ5 and houslog densttie6 \oYtrich are mUQh higher than other areas of1he Township. Thi¡ area can be seen (Areas A, B. C & D) on the enc:lo$eó map. CUITén11Y In the past few years, Sl Wendel Township has worked with Steams Gounty to review Zoning and Land Use Issues within . the Township. /As part of this process, it was requested 1hat St. Wendel Township wor\( with the County to identify growth areas within the Township and renew long range plannIng actMties. There was also cnsoussion of the Sewer Service District autJine<I in the 1995 study. and some of the current c:haI1enges in this area. - In the past few yeaB, there have been failing septic systems in this area which could not be easily replaced due to a Jack of ~ optlonaJ drain field locatiOns on the lot, proximity to neighbor1ng wells and required setbacks from the property lines, roads and the lakeshore. Due to these constra!nt$, some property owners were forced to request a-vsrlanœ to construct a new drain field, which was built partlaJly on TOWMhlp Road right-of-ways. Others had to e.xoavate the entire existing drain fle!d, dispose Of the contaminated soils and replace all soüs in an effort to reconstruc:t a compliant septic ft;stem I resulting In a .~ costly replacement sys1em. In Ofder to avoid instaltatlon of these COSUy systems, as more and more septic systems in this area wiU need replaœment In the coming years, other possible options need to be considered. Str~ The $l Wend&! TownshJp Board has been approached in recent mamhs by the St. Joseph Mayor and members of the City CounCil as St. Joseph continues to develop long rangé þIam for 1helr water and sewer services. IMY have indicated that they are get1Jng ready to d9$!gn a new water tr~nt fadrtty for the City and are also looking at putting the necessary Infm6trucWre in place to handle increaaed volumes of waste water as development In the arN Increases. Currently I an waste water generated in 1he CIty of St Joseph is pumped to a treatment facility in St. ctoud. Due to the increased development in the greater St. Cloud area, St. Cloud win be expand1ng if s treatment faClTrty. In order to determine how large the ~ion will need to be. $t.. Cloud has asked neighboring communities, including St Joseph, to p~ sewage volumn for the next few deœdes. Once this data has been received, St Cloud will use these figures to plan the expansion of ifs treatment fadlltJe$ and the neighboring communities usIng this service will need to help pay for the resulting expansion. The plannIng currently beina done covers a span of about 15 ~o 20 years. With this in mind, St. Joseph has asked whether or not we could foresee a need, during this tlmeframe, for city water and septic services in any portion of the Township. At this time, there have been Issues with a few septic systems in the sewer service diWiå. as previously mentioned. According to Steams County Environmentel SeMœs, an average septic system Is effective for about 15 yeart and County records show that somewhere between 23% and 41 % of the septic systems in the Pleasant Acres area ere probably no longer compliant with County Standards. Currently, there is no known Issue with well water In this area, but with the density of the housing and the relatively smaH lot sizes and aging septic systems, well water problems could beoome a reality ~t some pomt. What Next? At the TO\Vnsnip's February 1st meeting, St Joseph provided some very basio cost infol'l"nStlon regardil'\g water and sewer services and reouested that Townshlc $ur>eMsorn attend a meetina on February 1T" with the Mavor and City Council Ma r. L4. LOO~ 3:34PM GOODIN CO No. 8823 P. 6/9 . members at which time. more detailed cost figu!'esih maps and other information about a possible annexation would be presented. This meeting was held·on February 17 . A decision was then made to hold a Public Meeting on February 28'" í to share tl\Islnfonnaticn with members of the Township. . In order to proceed with their plannJng, St Joseph is requesting that we make a decision on whether to pursue an Orderiy Annexation Agreement which would allow portions of the Township to be annexed Into the City beginning in the next couple years. The enclosed map shows the areas that would be affected. The first area under consideration would likely be the araa around Watab and Rassier Lakes (denoted as Area A on the map). Although the planning is still being developed, it is proposed that this area would potentially be connected to City services in 2008, if this plan Is pumued by the Township and the City. . Other areas of the sewer service district would b& annexéd Into the City over the nElxt few decades at times which are yêt to be determined: \ ~omè projected costs h8'l6 been developed whid1 provide a "best guess" at this point, as to what the cost would be per dWelling In 1he affected area to connect to these services. These costs are only projections. If a decision Is made to continue pursuing an Orderly Annexation Agreement with the City of $t. JO$eph, a Feasibility Study wnl be conducted in prder to obtain more accurate figures based on a detailed review of the area. The projected future oosts (in 2008 dollars) per unit (home or V8cartt lot) far this improvement could approach $30,000. QuestiOns You MaX Ha~~ Q. When would this take Dlace~ rt annexatIon is' pursued, the area which would be annexed first would be the area designated as Area M A" on the enclos$d map. It Is projected that water and sewer would be avaUable In that area in 2008. Areas M8", ·C· and "0" would be annexed at a later time. to be detennined as the orderty annexation agreement with St Joseph Is negotiated. Q. tfthe annexation takes place~ WDuld I need to pay the whole amount up-front? No. only a portion of this amount would be payable at the time of hookup. The fees that make up the estimated $30,000 are broken up into the fo~owing components: - Tronk Fees $1.320 Payable at the time of hook-up SACIWAC $5,900 Payable at the time of hook-up - Water Meter Installation $aS Payable at the time of hook-up Connedion Costs $1,000... $2,000 Payable at the.time of hook-up Specíal Assessments $18,000 - $22,000 Paid evenly over 15 or 20 years The figures quoted above æ:e only estimates and represent the projected cösts in future (2008) donars. The first 4 items, estimated to be about $9.200. would need to be paid at the time of hookup. The Special Assessments portion, estimated to be between $18,000 - $22.000. would be paid ave~ 15 or 20 years. dependll1g on the best ftmdin~ method l';IVai!able to the City of St. Joseph. In order to g1ve an Idea of the annual costs to payoff the Special Assessments, if the City obtains funding at 3% and camé$ these SpecåaJ Assessments for 20 years, and the Special Assessments for the project amounts to $20,000 per unit, the cost per unit would be between $1.300 to $1.400 per unit; eaCh year, for 20 years, These figures are only for lIIU9trative . purposes. The actual figure would depend on the Special As$essment cost and the terms of the financing chosen by the City. So, in simple ·terms. based. upon these estimated costs, there would be a cost of about $9,300 at the time of connecticm and annual costs for 15 or 20 years to pay of the Special As.s~ment portion of the project costs. There will also be a monthly water charge based on water usage. , Q. What if I own land il1 the affected area with no building¡¡? Will I still be obligated to pay these fees? Based on feedback from st. Joseph, if you own a platted, vacant lot or a larger parcel of undeveloped land along the road . where services are run. you win be ctJ~ the Special Assessment, but the other up-front costs would be deferred until the time Of future hook"up. Q. If annexation proçeøœ. will my property faxe$ go up? If thé annexation proceeds, you win no longer pay 1axes to the Township. but wl1l instead pay taxes to the City of 8t. Joseph. Your property tax statement fi'om the County shows the amount of1axe$ that are currently paid to the Township. The tax rate for St Josaph is about twice that of the Township. For example, if you carrent1y pay $200 in Township taxes, you wOuld psy roughly $400 In City taxes after the annexation. based on current tax rates. Along with these higher taxes. you wUl get services offered by the City that are not available through the Township. Examples might be PoflCe protection, garbage pickup, street lighting, etc. Q. Isn't it cheaper to Just keep private wells and septic systems? Mar. 24. 200) 3:34PM GOODIN CO No. ~~L3 r. In This is a tough question to answer. If your lot is large enough to allow for a new drain field to be ins1alled when your current septic system needs to be replaoed, it may ba cheaper to avoid annexation. However, if you're lot is smaUer. It Is possiblè that when your septic system needs to be replaced. you may not have another area suitable for a draIn fæld on the lot. In that OBSe, your entire drain field may have to be excavated and rep\aced with new soH In order to acl1ieve a comprJant septic . system. Thit; can be quite expensÎl/e. One area resident was fOrced to use this option last year at a cost of about $17,000. One couJd reasonably assume 1hat small lots have a limited number of suitable drain fie!d Icx:ations which will become exhausted at some poInt in the future. The other concern in this regard Is the quality of well s1'1d lake water in the area. With small lots and increased resIdential density, there may be a greater nkeHhood of contaminated wells at some point. At this point in time, we have not heard of any prob1ems with the quality of well water. The Issue really boils down to a matter of plannll'\g. If annexation does not take place and well water problerm develop, It may take severa! years before ci1y services could provide relief, Tnt costs for il1S1allation of1hese services at that time would afmDSt certainly be considerably more expensive than If It can be done In advance of problems. Also, there could be an effect on property values in the affected area. Q. Couldn't the TOWl\$hlp get services from Sl Joseph wfthcut being annexed? No. Annexation of these proposed areas would be required. Q. Couldn't we hold off for now and request annexation into St. Joseph In a couple yeal'$, if problems develop? St. Joseph is at.a crossroad$ right now wJth their planning. They will be bui(ding a water treatment plant in the next couple years based en expected growth. They also need to commit to st. CloOO for the expansion of St Cloud's sewage treatment eXl?ansIon based on this same expected growth. They win need to pay 80",e of the costs of this expansion. base<! on the volume of sewage they expect to send to St. Cloud. Proper planning will aHow St Joseph to best plan for these Improvements as Inexpensively as possJble. If annexation Into St Joseph is pursued, the cost of pro\liólng water and $$Wer to the annexed areas will be less expensive beœU$e they will be able to include these homes and lots In their expansion plannIng. If annexation into St. Joseph is not pursued at this time, and beœmas neœssary in the next several years. st. Joseph may not be In position to handle the adãrtìonaJ capacity without costly J unplanned expansions. If th1s occurs, it would lIKely take several years before they ccutd offer these services to areas of our Townahip and the cost could be substantìa!Jy higher than the estJmated $30,000 per unit that is being COl'ISldered at this time. Feedbacl\ would be appreciated Hopefully this mailing provides some basic Infonnatkm about what Is being considere<l, why it is being considered and what the assooated costs would be. Steams County Environmental Services was asked to provide feedback to some ques1ions re1ated to this topic. Their rasponses to these questions are also included in this mailing. This Is a very big decision for the Township. Si Joseph has requested a decision from the $t. Wendel Township Board by April1Sl as to whether or not the Township would liKe to prooeed with annexation planning. They are pressed for time to begin design of the11' WatJM Treatment Plant so 1hat it can functionaJ in time for the new growth in st. Joseph expected In the next couple years. In view of the fact that st. Joseph only presented attual maps and cost estimates to the Township Board on February 17~, they were told that a deCb;ion would be made as 500n as is praotlcal. However, they were informed that this decision wm not be made before a reasonable.proce$S can take plaœ wh1ch shares information, soJlcits feedback and provides an opportllnlty for reasonable discussion atJd thoughtful consideration. The decision will uitlmate!y be made by the Township Board. However, feedback, comments and questions are being rec¡uested from residents so that the best possible decision can be made for the Township and residents in the proposed . ares, one that Is based on the wishes of the people who will be most affected. At. members of the affected area and the Township Board work through thIs prooen over the next days, weeks and months. th~ will undoubtedly be disagreement& and differing poíl'lts of view. That Is to be expected with a decision of thIs magnitude. Our hope is that by looking at this as objectively as possible, and allowing an view pOints to be exchanged, ~ best possible decision can be made. The TowrWlip Board Is Interested in obtainIng as much feedback as possible. Please fill out the attached questionnaIre and retum It In the enclosed envelope no later than March 31st. Also, please feel free to contact any of the Board members, if needed. Thanks!! 51. Wendel Township Su~rv!sors, Dave Douvier. Grea $alk &. Cart Stich 'ud.l. L't. LVV:J j.]:JrlV] llUUUlN l,U No. 8823 P. 8/9 ! '''IF''[~ ~ -¡ -------r·:...=II.-r~ " .-- ... ) I, ~.. . -~ \1 i ¡ , ! r ----., ~ ~~ I ¡ r~ ; ~1! ,..,.........,..t;. I ~ I ~ j, ¡ I çS' J ~ I .~~ : '=-=1b -.... ~~ / ¡ L..€, ~ u!' f : .., . I ..-: ~ l : ...:.._..._~- ~ ï', I f fß' __ __, ¡ f< ¡ I ,. ¡ í W i .Ç'; ¡-.- . ~ : ; -...:. '\ ! ... .. i ¡ 'f~4- : I " ! ~ 'I¡ -..;~.. . (;Ç ; ~i ,. ! ..___. -; .....- J I I' . I : . j ¡j 0 ',~! : II ----"- : :' f ì{l¡~l : 1 I r J. 1'1 , 'OJ . . I ë I : ¡;Oil: II I I . : ..) r f I I I I - ~-e::5"; ~ "~~~ I I '\? . t"\ . t :Tf------~~~. :. ; ...~-I : f : iIT1~~~ i . : ._ ; l¡~~ Ht I ;;;~~~; I ~, I .:. ~ S, .,., I J ~~, I .'! :._ L - u...:....:i.. ;¡ :.~ I, 1. ~~... I ""g¡Z:'¡¡'- I...., . ' !1 'I C . ; "'" ~~'!'f,-- ~ ' I ;r -, oj I J II Ii.. ...~r:r;c . ~::..,.- : I ~ I Ji ~~.~~;..~- ..~~, I =--.. , ....c·.. " "~" l' \ I ~......'" .3 ' --:-.. {" I I~-" I· '.. . Iv"',\.. : ,.-\ r) 1,_.J - \~ I I il ~ ~ i _ ...~ _ .. ~ '-.) \~';J.' ", , ¡ 1~7"'''~ ,. I ~ ,,\ -po ; . -ì·~':.ri)\ '~"'r-~~ ~ I ¡ · \ ¡ . \ r- : .. ~pi ) 1J ¡ :P:t. '; . ~ I'~ ~ ~ ! . ¡j ~ ). . ~ . z . /\ . \) ~ .; ~ ~ ''1- t!; ./" ,~ ".. I~ y !+:~r ~ ;, 7 I -....J: , =.,.~ ~...~~ ,i . <; ~~ >--v .~ , " "=~I"~i\...~~}!\ ~ p .¡. ~ ~ I ~ ' .~ I Þ ß ,~? .""+ f '# ~ I') ~ .. ;: __ _; ¥ . ...j oj,. ~. ~ .. \.. " 7 ¡. :Y i . .. · ~. . '~,. 1 ..;.~ ð ~,' I tV ~ j . .4 ~ . . L 0\. ..,. ;¡- . ''"\t ï.--~...,r i- . .¡ 7i ~ 1;..' I.~. . : ----,..~_f. . t:·--, ~ .. 'I ¡:? H . .... : I . ~ ~ \ _.__~_ 11: J " A: -i< ~. .V\ II;:: I ~ .; I J:. I I ;. I; 1 ?i--......-.. _L_ __-----.¡ ., H . ! i u~_.·,.__.--,____, . . ~ ~i :. ~ ~ "-_"'--'!""'.' . : Ii ! ¡ ~; ,~~~¡.~¡~ d I· ~ ~# ~ ~ ~i oj .þ .; Ii t! ~ N -) :r ~ ~ ;¡ ~ ~ ¡' .! .; ¡ ~. ~ ~ .¡ ¡ ~ . ~ ~ ,I I * ii' ~ . ~ ;. ~I .. ~ !! ~ ! ~ It ~ of ~ I.. .. .. .,,-.--'-. ~._, ~; 'I' i i ''t:t~;~ il , I ! .)~! I I I; : . , ;.. i : 1-, , I t A:' I !l--.! : ¡ . ! f:! J !H ~ ! I ~; t I' _1.-.01 r r I ' j.___'_-'_¡_M_. ! " ¡ ~ Ie. ~ ! ~ i i ~ : ¡-.n4 j ! : à1 : ¡ "; ¡ ! ! , . !. I I , I , ~. j f_ i :~ i ¡.. . _ -" ~ ---:----~--r . . I I : : Ä'· ~ ¡ ~1 ì ¡ i ¡ I L: d Çl I' , J ---;1 ¡. J...... -t l ~ oft. \ I ~ '1~, ! I! '.- ; w<tl !.~{"! t --2-. . ~-t--t-.~D --1 í ¡ëi~iL: ' ~<\"~=!j.Jç;:~/ _ :3 --:¡. ~ Iw < I 1>- "'I <t ~ltX1~ I ìí/ o ~~ ::¡ W ~w I :?;;Wi ~ II~~I'~¡; l ~--=ï J- > e:::: , I J ~I ¡<>."J. . ¡' "=f---4J ; .... . I I i'::1.\~.J CQ. '..J ~ =. <t:! rv <: : LL I :f!-~ . ~ .. I ::s'! ï " :::æ:,""- :. , ! ~ \ I ~.,... -¡W t! . I '., ".-':.:.~ !\ . î::1r~"·'-~;----f'----""~·(A--", ,- ':^It µJ..oo- .f,~. ..- ¡ ~ 1 t~ --'! 1: i . J rf '.,. ,I ~ ! '. }¡ . '11" I I f I I J. ~ ~ : ."... ~ '9--+=--"-,..~~ ='¡ ! ¡.!! I r~ ~t\L.L.;?1T~·~~"Ó;Z ..., I \.) -\. I I .- ^ t ~ I.-.;¡ ,.1_ " , ~?( '..;" r-. -, ~_..11 ¡ ., ¡ V' I I~ !:-~0=~,nD-\\"~ ,- ~.. ~ l--.. - ~ II ! ; I 'E" ; ¡¡L.J~---H-+ ¡' L1 1-3~"j~;? l .. ~ :.. ] r:. ¡'. '._~~ ~_. -r---.....~~y--~~___ ~ . __... } ~o¿ -:> -U:~..".; ft : .. ~ . ..;) ~. I I !~- . . \, . , .. 'h' . I I Ma r, 24. 2005 3:35PM GOODIN CO No. öo¿j r. ~/ I The St. Wèndet Townshtp Board woutd Ib to SOI1cit feedback from area residents In Ofder to determine If there Is an intele$t in pursuit of an Oràerty AnneJœtion Agreement with tt'9 C}ty of St Joseph. . Please answer the questia'ts beloW and ¡)roVÎQe any comments you may ~ on thí$ topic. Also. if there are questiOns that you have which are not addressed in ttûs maIRng, please write them betow so that we can attempt to get answers. 0pti0naI\y. you may Ho include your NJme, address af1d phone number. Once you have completed the questionnaire. ¡lease send It ba<* In the énVeIope provided with tM mairtng. PleaSe &elK! this back no later than Match 31 . Once this feedbaok.ls rev\ewed, a pubUc meeting wIR be héId to allow far any additiOnal question$, CDI11ments or debate in ttris matter. This~ wm be announced In 1he Sl ClOUd TImeS, The St. Joseph NewsIesdet anCi the steems-MorriSOn Enterprise. 1. 00 you feel there is a need før continued 1ol1g.range pIannlng In St. W~ Township? Yes I No I Unsure . . 2. What statement 1*oW sums up your feeIingç about how the Township Šho\id approach conœms regarding the future of the $ewe( seMœ District (Areas A, Sf C & D in fue ~ map) as it pertains to water ~ sewer? A We would 6ke to see a plan de~ which is aimed at aw1d\ng ~ befofe they OCCiIr. We , feef 1hIs.\IIiII be needed sooner or later, so Jt maKes sense to worK with at: Joseph as tney continue with their current planning. B. We would ake to see a plan deYetoped whtctI would only take effect after problems begin showing up and ~ that It could take severs! year& before the plan coukI be f1i)y can1ed out, at which time the costs ~r unít could be higher than what Is now befng þ(OpOSed. C. we don't feel a p4an wm be needed for msny more years. - D. We have not yet formed an opinion. E. other ~ We would ñke to see Orderly Annexation into tM City of St. Joseph occur in our area on the I'1IåIl: A.. As soon a$ posslble B. In the next 5 -10 years C. In the next 10 - 20 years D. Never Questions I Comment~! that we have: . . Name / Addre&$ / Phone (optioMO: · STEARNS COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES ENVIRONMENTAL SERVices COMPLAINT INVESTiGATION COMPLAINT # (J3 ..... I D TIME: 7\- .IV) k'" Phone Can 0 letter 0 In Person -.........,,,.,.* SEE CONFIDENTIAL FILE FOR COMPLAINANT INFORMATION ***-*""'"'- PART 11- COMPLAINT U tL."'7J1! f,..-, -rI- ~ . .j LOCATION OF COMPLAINT: ~ "5.p~[ {fJY{.n ,3 -4 'f : (Sf ere) f Ü yJ ß f;J¡J'fj ~b (I()¡J1J Lhl'(Jd (J ~ OWNERAND/OROCCUPANT, íEoJ.hGr-lc .AAVC, dU1f 2 -- ()\.., M <Lf' ~ í?1'dtlbOlì . ÞIR ~*- ;?6h-;YJl!J," ô \ . r1()~~i'h () - 3102:;-0%lÐQ PART 111- ANDINGS DATE --iD\3/ D3 TJME, ~ U ' I ,( I , , , .' I . \ .1JU)LQd 2{) ,~ 1·10 -'~. RESOLVED (Date): REFERRED TO: OTHER (List): ~ M:\ES\FORMS\Complaint investigation,doc t") . 0 0 N N C ::¡ ...., ~ ro "tj c ::J 0 w ~ Ü 0::: - « ü 0... W - ~ - ro c.. (/) ...; c ro 0 'l :g Q) :¡:;- (/) (/) DO <:lz '-' Co (\ <J Co <J ~ IL.. .::.:= ... 0 Co ..... .c .... 0 c:: ~ N .... Cl> .... 0 c. >< w (.) ", < ë2 en w . r.~.!-7:--.:. :;'Ly*";}"",¡ - -::,...,.-. . =-cl'-'. ."" -: -