1k. Community Development Block Grant Program Year XXi
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF --
:�s
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX (612) 937 -5739
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager
FROM: Kate Aanenson, Planning Director
'c
DATE: August 3, 1994
SUBJ: Approve Resolution, Subrecipient Agreement, and Third Party Agreement;
Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to Execute Agreements
As a part of the Year XX Community Dev
the city council approve the attached resoh
City Manager to sign them. The county is
Agreement and Third Party Agreement) to
to have each agreement in a separate docui
Block Grant process, it is necessary that
agreements, and authorize the Mayor and
master agreements ( Subrecipient
per and streamline the process so as not
Approval is recommended.
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING MAYOR AND CITY MANAGER
TO EXECUTE SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH
HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR 1994 (YEAR XX) URBAN
HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City of has executed a Joint
Cooperation Agreement with Hennepin County for the purpose of participating in the
1994 (Year XX) Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant
Program; and
WHEREAS, Hennepin County is the recipient of an annual grant from the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development for purposes of the program, and the
City is a subrecipient under the program and receives a share of the grant; and
' WHEREAS, program regulations require that the City and County execute a
Subrecipient Agreement which sets forth the specific implementation processes for
activities to be undertaken with program funds.
' NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City
Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and the City Council to execute the
' Subrecipient Agreement on behalf of the City.
Date
ATTEST:
Mayor
THIRD PARTY AGREEMENT
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM '
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the CITY /IES executing this '
Master Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "City," and the SENIOR COMMUNITY
SERVICES, heinafter referred to as "Provider," 10709 Wayzata Boulevard, Minnetonka, MN
55305:
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the City is a cooperating unit in the Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant Program (CDBG) by virtue of a Joint Cooperation Agreement
effective October 1, 1993 and executed between the City and Hennepin County pursuant to
MSA 471.59; and
WHEREAS, the City executed a Subrecipient Agreement with Hennepin County
effective July 1, 1994 which allocates funds from the Fiscal Year 1994 Urban Hennepin
County CDBG Program for the purpose of supporting the activities as set forth in Exhibit 1 to
this Agreement, hereinafter referred to as "Activities."
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and promises contained in this '
Agreement, the parties hereto mutually agree to the following terms and conditions:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES '
A. Provider agrees to carry out Activities for the City as described in Exhibit 1, ,
subject to the requirements of this Agreement and the stipulations and
requirements set forth in Exhibit 1.
B. Provider shall take all necessary actions required to implement Activities and to ,
comply with any related requests by the City, it being understood that the City
is responsible to Hennepin County for ensuring compliance with such '
requirements. Provider also will promptly notify the City of any changes in the
scope or character of the Activities.
2. TERM OF AGREEMENT I
The effective date of this Agreement is July 1, 1994. The termination date of this
Agreement is December 31, 1995, or at such time as the Activities are satisfactorily '
completed prior thereto. Upon expiration, Provider shall relinquish to the City all
program funds unexpended or uncommitted for the Activities.
3. NON - ASSIGNMENT
Provider shall not assign, subcontract, transfer, or pledge this Agreement and /or the
Activities to be performed hereunder, whether whole or in part, without the prior
consent of the City.
0
U�
4. AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENT
Any material alterations, variations, modifications, or waivers of the provisions of this
' Agreement shall only be valid when reduced to writing as an Amendment to this
Agreement signed, approved and properly executed by the authorized representatives
of the parties. All Amendments to this Agreement shall be made a part of this
Agreement by inclusion as a numbered Exhibit, which shall be attached at the time of
any Amendment.
Substantial change is defined as a change in (1) beneficiary; (2) project location; (3)
purpose; or (4) scope, (more than a 50% increase or decrease in the original budget or
510,000, whichever is greater), in any authorized Activity. The total budget of multi -
community activities will be used in determining substantial change.
5. PAYMENT OF CDBG FUNDS
' The City agrees to provide Provider with CDBG funds not to exceed the budget as
described in Exhibit 1, to enable Provider to carry out the Activities. It is understood
that the City shall be held accountable to Hennepin County for the lawful expenditure
of CDBG funds under this Agreement. The City shall, therefore, make no payment of
funds to Provider and draw no funds from Hennepin County on behalf of Provider prior
to having received from Provider a request for reimbursement, including copies of all
documents and records needed to ensure that Provider has complied with all appropriate
regulations and requirements.
6. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE
1 A. Provider does hereby agree to release, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
from and against all costs, expenses, claims, suits, or judgments arising from or
growing out of any injuries, loss, or damage sustained by any person or
' corporation, including employees of Provider and property of Provider, which are
caused by or sustained in connection with the tasks carried out by Provider under
this Agreement.
' B. Provider does further agree that, in order to protect itself as well as the City under
the indemnity agreement provisions hereinabove set forth, it will at all times
during the term of this Agreement and any renewal thereof have and keep in
1 force: a single limit or combined limit or excess umbrella commercial and general
liability insurance policy of an amount of not less than $1,000,000 for property
damage arising from one occurrence, 51,000,000 for damages arising from death
and /or total bodily injuries arising from one occurrence, and 51,000,000 for total
personal injuries arising from one occurrence. Such policy shall also include
contractual liability coverage protecting the City, its officers, agents, and
1 employees by a certificate acknowledging this Agreement between Provider and
the City.
7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
A. In the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction, and services by Provider, '
the conflict of interest provisions in 24 CFR 85.36 and OMB Circular A -1 10 shall
apply.
B. In all other cases, the provisions of 24 CFR 570.611 shall apply.
8. DATA PRIVACY
Provider agrees to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices
Act and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, and regulations relating to data
privacy or confidentiality, and as any of the same may be amended. Provider agrees to
defend and hold the City, its officers, agents, and employees harmless from any claims
resulting from Provider's unlawful disclosure and /or use of such protected data.
9. SUSPENSION AND TERMINATION '
A. If Provider materially fails to comply with any term of this Agreement or so fails '
to administer the work as to endanger the performance of this Agreement, this
shall constitute noncompliance and a default. Unless Provider's default is excused
by the City, the City may take one or more of the actions prescribed in 24 CFR
85.43, including the option of immediately cancelling this Agreement in its
entirety.
B. The City's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to exercise ,
any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or waiver of
the same. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or relinquishment
throughout the entire term of the Agreement.
C. This Agreement may be cancelled with or without cause by either party upon 30
days written notice according to the provisions in 24 CFR 85.44.
D. CDBG funds allocated to Provider under this Agreement may not be obligated or
expended by Provider following such date of termination. Any funds allocated to
Provider under this Agreement which remain unobligated or unspent following
such date of termination shall automatically revert to the City. '
10. REVERSION OF ASSETS
Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, Provider shall transfer to the City any
CDBG funds on hand or in the accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG
funds, including CDBG funds provided to Provider in the form of a loan. Any real
property acquired or improved, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds in excess of
$25,000 shall either be:
3 1
a
A. Used to meet one of the national objectives in 24 CFR 570.208 and not used for
the general conduct of government until:
Or,
(1) For units of general local government, five years from the date that the unit
of general local government is no longer considered by HUD to be a part of
Urban Hennepin County; or
(2) For any other Provider, five years after expiration of this Agreement;
B. Not used in accordance with A. above, in which event Provider shall pay to the
City an amount equal to the current market value of the property less any portion
of the value attributable to expenditures of non -CDBG funds for acquisition of, or
improvement to, the property. The payment is program income to the City. No
payment is required after the period of time specified in A. above.
PROCUREMENT
Provider shall be responsible for procurement of all supplies, equipment, services, and
construction necessary for implementation of the Activities. Procurement shall be
carried out in accordance with the requirements of 24 CFR Part 85, and OMB Circulars
A -110, A -122, as applicable. Provider shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, all
advertisements, negotiations, notices, and documents; enter into all contracts; and
conduct all meetings, conferences, and interviews, as necessary, to ensure compliance
with the above described procurement requirements.
ACQUISITION, RELOCATION, AND DISPLACEMENT
A. Provider shall be responsible for carrying out all acquisitions of real property
necessary for implementation of Activities. Provider shall conduct all such
acquisitions in its name and shall hold title to all real property purchased. Provider
shall be responsible for preparation of all notices, appraisals, and documentation
required in conducting acquisition under the latest applicable regulations of the
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 and of
the CDBG Program. Provider shall also be responsible for providing all relocation
notices, counseling, and services required by said regulations.
B. Provider shall comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,
as required under 24 CFR 570.606(a) and HUD implementing regulations at 24
CFR Part 42; the requirements in 24 CFR 570.606(b) governing the residential
anti- displacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act); the relocation
requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(c) governing displacement subject to Section
104(k) of the Act; and the requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(d) governing optional
relocation assistance under Section 105(a)(11) of the Act, as pertaining to the
Activities.
4
A. Used to meet one of the national objectives in 24 CFR 570.208 and not used for
the general conduct of government until:
Or,
(1) For units of general local government, five years from the date that the unit
of general local government is no longer considered by HUD to be a part of
Urban Hennepin County; or
(2) For any other Provider, five years after expiration of this Agreement;
B. Not used in accordance with A. above, in which event Provider shall pay to the
City an amount equal to the current market value of the property less any portion
of the value attributable to expenditures of non -CDBG funds for acquisition of, or
improvement to, the property. The payment is program income to the City. No
payment is required after the period of time specified in A. above.
PROCUREMENT
Provider shall be responsible for procurement of all supplies, equipment, services, and
construction necessary for implementation of the Activities. Procurement shall be
carried out in accordance with the requirements of 24 CFR Part 85, and OMB Circulars
A -110, A -122, as applicable. Provider shall prepare, or cause to be prepared, all
advertisements, negotiations, notices, and documents; enter into all contracts; and
conduct all meetings, conferences, and interviews, as necessary, to ensure compliance
with the above described procurement requirements.
ACQUISITION, RELOCATION, AND DISPLACEMENT
A. Provider shall be responsible for carrying out all acquisitions of real property
necessary for implementation of Activities. Provider shall conduct all such
acquisitions in its name and shall hold title to all real property purchased. Provider
shall be responsible for preparation of all notices, appraisals, and documentation
required in conducting acquisition under the latest applicable regulations of the
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 and of
the CDBG Program. Provider shall also be responsible for providing all relocation
notices, counseling, and services required by said regulations.
B. Provider shall comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of the
Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,
as required under 24 CFR 570.606(a) and HUD implementing regulations at 24
CFR Part 42; the requirements in 24 CFR 570.606(b) governing the residential
anti- displacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act); the relocation
requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(c) governing displacement subject to Section
104(k) of the Act; and the requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(d) governing optional
relocation assistance under Section 105(a)(11) of the Act, as pertaining to the
Activities.
4
13. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Provider shall provide all necessary information and relevant documents to the City to '
enable the City and Hennepin County to maintain the environmental review record on
all Activities.
14. LABOR STANDARDS EMPLOYMENT AND CONTRACTING
The City shall be responsible for the preparation of all requests to Hennepin County for
HUD wage rate determinations on Activities. The Provider shall notify the City prior to
initiating Activity, including advertising for contractual services, which will include costs
likely to be subject to the provisions of Federal Labor Standards and Equal Employment
Opportunity and related implementing regulations.
15. PROGRAM INCOME
Any program income generated as a result of any Activities shall be forwarded '
immediately to the City upon receipt by Provider and the provisions of 24 CFR 570.504
shall apply. '
16. USE OF REAL PROPERTY
The following standards shall apply to real property acquired or improved through
Activities, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds:
A. Provider shall inform the City at least 30 days prior to any modification or change
in the use of the real property from that planned at the time of acquisition or
improvements, including disposition.
r he City in an amount B. Provider shall reimburse y equal to the current fair market q
value (less any portion thereof attributable to expenditures of non -CDBG funds) '
of property acquired or improved with CDBG funds that is sold or transferred for
a use which does not qualify under the CDBG regulations. Said reimbursement
shall be provided to the City at the time of sale or transfer of the property. Such
reimbursement shall not be required if the conditions of 24 CFR 570.503(b)(8)(i)
are met and satisfied. Fair market value shall be established by a current written
appraisal by a qualified appraiser. The City will have the option of requiring a
second appraisal after review of the initial appraisal.
17. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The uniform administrative requirements delineated in 24 CFR 570.502 and any and all
administrative requirements or guidelines promulgated by Hennepin County shall apply
to all Activities undertaken by Provider as provided in this Agreement and to any
program income generated therefrom.
i
18. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
A. During the performance of this Agreement, Provider agrees to the following: In
accordance with the Hennepin County Affirmative Action Policy and the County
Commissioners' Policies Against Discrimination, no person shall be excluded from
full employment rights or participation in, or the benefits of, any program, service
or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age, sex, disability,
marital status, affectional /sexual preference, public assistance status, ex- offender
status, or national origin; and no person protected by applicable federal or state
laws against discrimination shall otherwise be subjected to discrimination.
B. Provider will furnish all information and reports required to comply with the
provisions of 24 CFR Part 570 and all applicable state and federal laws, rules, and
regulations pertaining to discrimination and equal opportunity.
' 19. NON - DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY
A. Provider shall comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended, to ensure that no otherwise qualified individual with a handicap, as
defined in Section 504, shall, solely by reason of his or her handicap, be excluded
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
by Provider receiving assistance from the City under Section 106 and /or Section
108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended.
B. When and where applicable, Provider shall comply with Public Law 101 -336
' Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Title I "Employment," Title II "Public
Services" - Subtitle A, and Title III "Public Accommodations and Services
Operated By Private Entities" and all ensuing federal regulations implementing said
' Act.
20. LEAD -BASED PAINT
Provider shall comply with the Lead -Based Paint notification, inspection, testing and
abatement procedures established in 24 CFR 570.608.
21. FAIR HOUSING
Provider shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funds for Activities subject to this
Agreement if it impedes actions taken by the City to comply with the City's fair housing
certification.
C.1
22. LOBBYING
A. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of
Provider, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or
employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of
Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the ,
awarding of any federal contract, the making of any federal grant, the making of
any federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
B. If any funds other than federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of
any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an
employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract,
grant, loan, or cooperative agreement Provider will complete and submit Standard
Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its
instructions.
23. OTHER CDBG POLICIES
Provider shall comply with the general condition of 24 CFR 570.200, particularly
sections: (b) Special policies governing facilities; (f) Means of carrying out eligible
activities; and (j) Constitutional prohibitions concerning church /state activities.
24. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
The City agrees to provide technical assistance to Provider in the form of oral and /or ,
written guidance and on -site assistance regarding CDBG procedures and project
management. This assistance will be provided as requested by Provider, and at other
times at the initiative of the City when new or updated information concerning the
CDBG Program is received by the City from Hennepin County and deemed necessary to
be provided to Provider.
25. RECORDKEEPING AND ACCESS TO RECORDS I
Provider shall maintain records for the receipt and expenditure of all CDBG funds it
receives, such records to be maintained in accordance with OMB Circular A -1 10 and A-
122, as applicable. All records shall be made available upon request of the City for
monitoring by the City. The City shall have authority to review any and all procedures
and all materials, notices, documents, etc., prepared by Provider in implementation of
'
the Activities and Provider agrees to provide all information required by any person
authorized by the City to request such information from Provider for the purpose of
reviewing the same.
26. AUDIT
r
A. Provider agrees to provide City or Hennepin County with an annual audit report
consistent with the provisions of OMB Circular A -110 Uniform Requirements for
Grants to Universities, Hospitals and Non - Profit Organizations, OMB Circular A-
122 Cost Principles for Non - Profit Organizations, and OMB Circular A -133 Audits
of Institutions of Higher Education and Other Non - Profit Institutions.
(1) The audit report is to be provided to City or Hennepin County on July 1 of
each year this Agreement is in effect and any findings of non - compliance
affecting the use of CDBG funds shall be satisfied by Provider within 6
months of the provision date.
r �
I'
u
1
1
(2) The audit is not required, however, in those instances where less than
$25,000 in assistance is received from all federal sources in any one fiscal
year.
(3) The cost of the audit is not reimbursable from CDBG funds.
(4) City reserves the right to recover from Provider the full amount of any
CDBG funds found to be improperly expended or otherwise disallowed.
B. Provider's assurance and certification regarding its financial management system
is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein by reference.
E]
CITY EXECUTION
The City of having duly approved this Agreement on , 1994,
and pursuant to such approval and the proper city officials having signed this Agreement, the
city agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth.
Upon proper execution, this Agreement will be legally valid and binding.
Dated: , 1994 CITY OF
STATE OF MINNESOTA
By
Its Mayor
And
Its
7
PROVIDER EXECUTION
Provider, having signed this Agreement and the City having duly approved this
Agreement, and pursuant to such approval and the proper officials having signed this
Agreement, Provider agrees to be bound by the provisions of this Agreement.
Dated: , 1994 PROVIDER:
By
Its
And
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
1994, by and , the
and the of , a Minnesota
on behalf of said
Notary Public
10
EXHIBIT 1 1
The City /ies, as identified in this Exhibit, will provide the Provider with Urban Hennepin '
County Community Development Block Grant funds in the not -to- exceed amount indicated
to assist Provider in funding the activity /ies in the amount and under the stipulations
individually specified in the Project Description /Projected Use of Funds attached hereto: '
THIRD PARTY AGREEMENT
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
EXHIBIT 1 1
The City /ies, as identified in this Exhibit, will provide the Provider with Urban Hennepin '
County Community Development Block Grant funds in the not -to- exceed amount indicated
to assist Provider in funding the activity /ies in the amount and under the stipulations
individually specified in the Project Description /Projected Use of Funds attached hereto: '
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY CDBG
STATEMENT OF PROJECTED USE OF FUNDS YEAR XX /1994
' 1. COOPERATING UNIT See Below
' 2. ACTIVITY Public Service - Senior Community Services/
Senior Center Operations
I I
3.
LOCATION
'
ADDRESS
Citywide
CENSUS TRACT
4.
NUMBER
See Below
5.
ACCOUNT
59970
'
6.
BUDGET /SOURCES
$ 94.706 / FY1994 CDBG
-0- / Program Income
'
$ 94.706 / TOTAL
7.
ELIGIBILITY CITATION
570.201(e)
'
8.
NATIONAL OBJECTIVE CITATION:
[ ] L/M Area Benefit 570.208(a)(1) [ ] S/B Area 570.208(b)(1)
[X] L/M Limited Clientele 570.208(a)(2) [ ] S/B Spot 570.208(b)(2)
[ ] L/M Housing 570.208(a)(3)
[ ] P/A Exempt
'
[ ] Job Creation or Retention 570.208(a)(4)
'
9.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW STATUS:
[ J Exempt (EX)
[ J Categorically Excluded (CE)
[XJ Categorically Excluded /Exempt (CE /EX)
[ ] Assessment Required (AR)
'
10.
DESCRIPTION
Funds will be used for the salary of the
center coordinators, program staff and transportation service for the
period between July 1, 1994
to June 30, 1995. The project will allow for
the continuation of the center operations and outreach services. Senior
Community Services, a local
non - profit organization, has a contract with
1
the municipally owned senior
administration.
centers for the staffing and program
This multi -year activity is
funded from the following cooperating units
to the extent indicated:
Cooperating Unit
Activity # Budget
'
Southshore Center - 301 County
Road 19, Excelsior, MN
Chanhassen
023 $ 5,000
Deephaven
036 13,243
'
Excelsior
050 8,669
Greenwood
057 3,075
Shorewood
132 10,625
Tonka Bay
151 3.609
Subtotal
$44,221
I I
Westonka Center - 5600 Lynwood Boulevard, Mound, MN
Minnetrista
094
$ 6,335
Mound
100
24,670
Spring Park
133
5.896
Subtotal
$36,901
Tamarack Senior
Center - 133 South Brown Road, Long Lake, MN
Long Lake
069
$4,160
Wayzata
153
3.000
Subtotal
$7,160
Delano Center -
205 Bridge Avenue East, Delano, MN
Greenfield
055
$1,200
Independence
065
2,950
Loretto
072
524
Maple Plain
082
1,000
Rockford
128
750
Subtotal 6 424
TOTAL $94,706
J
1
1
11. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: Requirements with an "X" are applicable to this
activity and are to be included in this section and made a part of this
agreement.
[X] Supplemental Agreement
Type: [X]
[ ]
[ ]
Non - Profit Agency
Public Agency _
Other
An agreement must be executed between subrecipient and any other
agency providing a service or implementing an activity on behalf of
subrecipient. Said agreement must contain all pertinent sections
contained in Subrecipient Agreement and such other requirements as
are identified herein.
[X] Schedule
Activity must be implemented in a timely manner and completed by
December 31, 1995.
[ ] Labor Standards /Equal Employment Opportunity
All construction projects of $2,000 or more and financed in whole or
part with federal funds shall comply with the provisions of the
Davis -Bacon Act (prevailing wage), the Contract Work Hours and
Safety Standards Act and the Copeland (Anti- Kickback) Act.
All federally funded or assisted construction contracts or
subcontracts of $10,000 or more shall comply with Executive Order
11246, Equal Employment Opportunity, as amended by Executive Order
12086, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto in 41 CFR Part
60.
[ ] Procurement
Standards and guidelines are established in 24 CFR Part 85.36 for
the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction and services
for federally assisted programs. All procurement shall be made by
one of the following methods. The method used shall be adequately
documented and contracts shall contain standard conditions as
appropriate.
Small Purchase. (Informal Method) To be followed for the
purchase of services, supplies or other property costing in
the aggregate not more than $25,000; If small purchase
procurement is used, written price or rate quotations must be
obtained from an adequate number of qualified sources.
Competitive Sealed Bids. (Formal Advertising) To be followed
when the purchase /s, costing in the aggregate, exceeds
$25,000. Sealed bids shall be publicly solicited and a firm
fixed -price contract is to be awarded to the lowest
responsible bidder. This method is preferred for soliciting
construction bids.
Competitive Proposals. This method is normally used when more
than one source submits an offer, and either a fixed -price or
Senior Community Services
cost - reimbursement type contract is awarded. This method is
typically used for procuring professional services.
[ J Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968
In connection with the planning and implementation of any project ,
assisted under the Act, to the greatest extent feasible,
opportunities for training and employment be given to low and
moderate income persons residing within the unit of local government '
or the metropolitan area in which the project is located, and that
contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to
eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in ,
substantial part by persons residing in the same metropolitan area
as the project. Contracts for work may include, but are not limited
to, contracts for supply of goods and /or services.
[ J Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition ,
The standards described in 24 CFR 570.606 shall apply to activity '
that involves the acquisition of real property or the displacement
of persons, including displacement caused by rehabilitation and
demolition. '
[ ] Residential Antidisplacement and Relocation Assistance
All occupied and vacant occupiable low- moderate income dwelling '
units demolished or converted to another use as a direct result of
activity shall be replaced and relocation assistance shall be
provided to each displaced low- moderate income household in ,
accordance with the Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program Anti -
displacement and Relocation Assistance Policy pursuant to Section
104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as
amended, and the provisions in 24 CFR 570.606. '
[ ] Property Management
The standards described in 24 CFR Part 570.505 Subpart J shall apply '
to all real property which was acquired or improved in whole or in
part using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000. These standards apply '
for a period of five (5) years after the termination of this
agreement.
[ J Land Disposition Agreement '
This agreement, executed between Hennepin County and the
subrecipient community, contains the terms under which the community
can acquire and hold land for a specified use and time period.
[ ] Other Requirements I
YEAR XX /1994 ,
11
SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT
URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into by and between the COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA, hereinafter referred to as "RECIPIENT," A -2400 Government Center,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55487, and the cities executing this Master Agreement, each
hereinafter respectively referred to as "SUBRECIPIENT," said parties to this Agreement each
being governmental units of the State of Minnesota, and is made pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 471.59:
' WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Recipient has received a $3,688,000 Federal Fiscal Year 1994 Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) entitlement allocation under Title I of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, to carry out various community develop-
ment activities in cooperation with Subrecipient, according to the implementing regulations
at 24 CFR Part 570; and
WHEREAS, Federal Fiscal Year 1994 CDBG funds and any resulting program income
have been approved by Recipient for use by Subrecipient for the implementation of eligible and
fundable community development activity /ies as included in and a part of the 1994 Statement
of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, Urban Hennepin County Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program and as set forth in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Subrecipient agrees to assume certain responsibilities for the
' implementation of the approved activities described in Exhibit 1, said responsibilities being
specified in part in the Joint Cooperation Agreement effective October 1, 1993, executed
between Recipient and Subrecipient on June 20, 1993 and in the 1994 Statement of
Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, Urban Hennepin County CDBG Program and the
Certifications contained therein.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties hereunto do hereby agree as follows:
1. SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. The Subrecipient shall expend all or any part of its CDBG allocation only on those
activities identified in Exhibit 1, subject to the requirements of this Agreement and
the stipulations and requirements set forth in Exhibit 1 to this Agreement.
B. The Subrecipient shall take all necessary actions, not only to comply with the
stipulations as set out in Exhibit 1, but to comply with any requests by the
Recipient in that connection; it being understood that the Recipient is responsible
to the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for ensuring
compliance with such requirements. The Subrecipient also will promptly notify
the Recipient of any changes in the scope or character of the activity /ies which
it is implementing.
2.
3
4.
TERM OF AGREEMENT I
The effective date of this Agreement is July 1, 1994. The termination date of this
Agreement is December 31, 1995, or at such time as the activity /ies constituting part ,
of this Agreement are satisfactorily completed prior thereto. Upon expiration, the
Subrecipient shall relinquish to the Recipient all program funds unexpended or
uncommitted and all accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds for the
activities described in Exhibit 1, as may be amended.
THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS I
The Subrecipient may subcontract this Agreement and /or the services to be performed
hereunder, whether in whole or in part, only with the prior consent of the Recipient and ,
only through a written Third Party Agreement acceptable to the Recipient. The
Subrecipient shall not otherwise assign, transfer, or pledge this Agreement and /or the
services to be performed hereunder, whether in whole or in part, without the prior
consent of the Recipient.
AMENDMENTS TO AGREEMENT
Any material alterations, variations, modifications or waivers of provisions of this ,
Agreement shall only be valid when reduced to writing as an Amendment to this
Agreement signed, approved and properly executed by the authorized representatives '
of the parties. An exception to this process will be in amending Exhibit 1 to this
Agreement.
Exhibit 1, shall be deemed amended to conform to any amendments to the Final
Statement of Community Development Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, as such
amendments occur. ,
Any amendments to the Statement of Objectives and Projected Use of Funds, which
constitute substantial changes, must be accompanied by documentation that a local '
public hearing was conducted and by an authorizing resolution. Amendments which do
not constitute substantial changes may be handled administratively. Hennepin County
Office of Planning and Development staff may approve administrative amendments '
provided they are eligible, fundable and satisfy the Urban Hennepin County Statement
of Objectives.
Substantial change is defined as a change in (1) beneficiary; (2) project location; (3) '
purpose; or (4) scope, (more than a 50% increase or decrease in the original budget or
$ 10,000, whichever is greater), in any authorized activity. The total budget of multi- '
community activities will be used in determining substantial change.
J
5. PAYMENT OF CDBG FUNDS
The Recipient agrees to provide the Subrecipient with CDBG funds not to exceed the
' Hennepin County authorized budget to enable the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG -
eligible activity /ies as described in Exhibit 1. It is understood that the Recipient shall be
held accountable to HUD for the lawful expenditure of CDBG funds under this
' Agreement. The Recipient shall therefore make no payment of CDBG funds to the
Subrecipient and draw no funds from HUD /U.S. Treasury on behalf of a Subrecipient
activity /ies, prior to having received a proper Hennepin County Warrant Request form
from the Subrecipient for the expenses incurred, as well as copies of all documents and
records needed to ensure that the Subrecipient has complied with the appropriate
regulations and requirements.
6. INDEMNITY AND INSURANCE
' A. The Subrecipient does hereby agree to release, indemnify, and hold harmless the
Recipient from and against all costs, expenses, claims, suits or judgments arising
from or growing out of any injuries, loss or damage sustained by any person or
corporation, including employees of Subrecipient and property of Subrecipient,
which are caused by or sustained in connection with the tasks carried out by the
Subrecipient under this Agreement.
' B. The Subrecipient does further agree that in order to protect itself as well as the
Recipient under the indemnity agreement provisions hereinabove set forth it will
at all times during the term of this Agreement and any renewal thereof, have and
' keep in force: a single limit or combined limit or excess umbrella commercial and
general liability insurance policy of an amount of not less than $1 million for
property damage arising from one occurrence, $1 million for damages arising from
death and /or total bodily injuries arising from one occurrence, and $1 million for
total personal injuries arising from one occurrence. Such policy shall also include
contractual liability coverage protecting the Recipient, its officers, agents and
employees by a certificate acknowledging this Agreement between the
Subrecipient and the Recipient.
I C. The Subrecipient's liability, however, shall be governed by the provisions of
Minnesota Statutes Chapter 466.
' 7. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
A. In the procurement of supplies, equipment, construction, and services by the
Subrecipient, the conflict of interest provisions in 24 CFR 85.36 and OMB Circular
A -1 10 shall apply.
B. In all other cases, the provisions of 24 CFR 570.611 shall apply.
3
L
EI
E
10
DATA PRIVACY I
The Subrecipient agrees to abide by the provisions of the Minnesota Government Data
Practices Act and all other applicable state and federal laws, rules, and regulations ,
relating to data privacy or confidentiality, and as any of the same may be amended.
The Subrecipient agrees to defend and hold the Recipient, its officers, agents, and
employees harmless from any claims resulting from the Subrecipient's unlawful '
disclosure and /or use of such protected data.
SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION '
A. If the Subrecipient materially fails to comply with any term of this Agreement or
so fails to administer the work as to endanger the performance of this Agreement, '
this shall constitute noncompliance and a default. Unless the Subrecipient's
default is excused by the Recipient, the Recipient may take one or more of the
actions prescribed in 24 CFR 85.43, including the option of immediately cancelling '
this Agreement in its entirety.
B. The Recipient's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision or to '
exercise any right under this Agreement shall not be deemed a relinquishment or
waiver of the same. Such consent shall not constitute a general waiver or
relinquishment throughout the entire term of the Agreement. '
C. This Agreement may be cancelled with or without cause by either party upon
thirty (30) days' written notice according to the provisions in 24 CFR 85.44. '
D. CDBG funds allocated to the Subrecipient under this Agreement may not be
obligated or expended by the Subrecipient following such date of termination. '
Any funds allocated to the Subrecipient under this Agreement which remain
unobligated or unspent following such date of termination shall automatically
revert to the Recipient.
REVERSION OF ASSETS '
Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, the Subrecipient shall transfer to the '
Recipient any CDBG funds on hand or in the accounts receivable attributable to the use
of CDBG funds, including CDBG funds provided to the Subrecipient_ in the form of a
loan. Any real property under the control of the Subrecipient that was acquired or '
improved, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds in excess of $25,000 shall either be:
A. Used to meet one of the national objectives in 24 CFR 570.208 and not used for I
the general conduct of government until:
(1) For units of general local government, five years from the date that the unit ,
of general local government is no longer considered by HUD to be a part of
Urban Hennepin County; or
(2) For any other Subrecipient, five years after expiration of this Agreement. ,
Or,
4
B. Not used in accordance with A. above, in which event the Subrecipient shall pay
to the Recipient an amount equal to the current market value of the property less
any portion of the value attributable to expenditures of non -CDBG funds for
' acquisition of, or improvement to, the property. The payment is program income
to the Recipient. No payment is required after the period of time specified in A.
above.
11. PROCUREMENT
The Subrecipient shall be responsible for procurement of all supplies, equipment,
services, and construction necessary for implementation of its activity /ies. Procurement
shall be carried out in accordance with the "Common Rule" Administrative Requirements
' in 24 CFR 85 and all provisions of the CDBG' Regulations in 24 CFR 570 (the most
restrictive of which will take precedence). The Subrecipient shall prepare, or cause to
be prepared, all advertisements, negotiations, notices, and documents; enter into all
' contracts; and conduct all meetings, conferences, and interviews as necessary to ensure
compliance with the above described procurement requirements. The Recipient shall
provide advice and staff assistance to the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG- funded
' activity /ies.
12. ACQUISITION, RELOCATION, AND DISPLACEMENT
' A. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for carrying out all acquisitions of real
property necessary for implementation of the activity /ies. The Subrecipient shall
conduct all such acquisitions in its name, or in the name of any of its public,
' governmental, nonprofit agencies as authorized by its governing body, which shall
hold title to all real property purchased. The Subrecipient shall be responsible for
preparation of all notices, appraisals, and documentation required in conducting
acquisition under the latest applicable regulations of the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Act of 1970 and of the CDBG Program.
The Subrecipient shall also be responsible for providing all relocation notices,
' counseling, and services required by said regulations. The Recipient shall provide
advice and staff assistance to the Subrecipient to carry out its CDBG- funded
activity /ies.
B. The Subrecipient shall comply with the acquisition and relocation requirements of
the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of
1970 as required under 24 CFR 570.606(a) and HUD implementing regulations at
24 CFR 42; the requirements in 24 CFR 570.606(b) governing the residential
antidisplacement and relocation assistance plan under section 104(d) of the
Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 (the Act); the relocation
requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(c) governing displacement subject to section
104(k) of the Act; and the requirements of 24 CFR 570.606(d) governing optional
relocation assistance under section 105(a)(1 1) of the Act.
t
13
14.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW I
The Recipient shall determine the level of environmental review required under 24 CFR
Part 58 and maintain the environmental review record on all activities. The Subrecipient ,
shall be responsible for providing necessary information, relevant documents, and public
notices to the Recipient to accomplish this task.
LABOR STANDARDS, EMPLOYMENT, AND CONTRACTING ,
The Recipient shall be responsible for the preparation of all requests for HUD for wage '
rate .determinations on CDBG activities undertaken by the Subrecipient. The
Subrecipient shall notify the Recipient prior to initiating any activity, including
advertising for contractual services which will include costs likely to be subject to the ,
provisions on Federal Labor Standards and Equal Employment Opportunity and related
implementing regulations. The Recipient will provide technical assistance to the
15
Subrecipient to ensure compliance with these requirements. ,
PROGRAM INCOME
If the Subrecipient generated any program income as a result of the expenditure of
CDBG funds, the provisions of 24 CFR 570.504 shall apply, as well as the following
specific stipulations:
A. The Subrecipient will notify the Recipient of any program income within ten (10) ,
days of the date such program income is generated. When program income is
generated by an activity only partially assisted with CDBG funds, the income shall ,
be prorated to reflect the percentage of CDBG funds used.
B. That any such program income must be paid to the Recipient by the Subrecipient '
as soon as practicable after such program income is generated unless the
Subrecipient is permitted to retain program income.
C. Recipient will retain ten percent (10 %) of all program income paid to Recipient to
defray administration expenses. The remaining ninety percent (90 %) of the
program income paid to the Recipient shall be credited to the grant authority of '
Subrecipient whose project generated the program income and shall be used for
fundable and eligible CDBG activities consistent with this Agreement.
D. The Subrecipient further recognizes that the Recipient has the responsibility for '
monitoring and reporting to HUD on the use of any such program income. The
responsibility for appropriate recordkeeping by the Subrecipient and reporting to
the Recipient by the Subrecipient on the use of such program income is hereby
recognized by the Subrecipient. The Recipient agrees to provide technical
assistance to the Subrecipient in establishing an appropriate and proper '
recordkeeping and reporting system, as required by HUD.
e 1
E. That in the event of close -out or change in status of the Subrecipient, any
program income that is on hand or received subsequent to the close -out or change
in status shall be paid to Recipient as soon as practicable after the income is
' received. The Recipient agrees to notify the Subrecipient, should close -out or
change in status of the Subrecipient occur.
t 16. USE OF REAL PROPERTY
The following standards shall apply to real property under the control of the Subrecipient
' that was acquired or improved, in whole or in part, using CDBG funds:
A. The Subrecipient shall inform the Recipient at least thirty (30) days prior to any
' modification or change in the use of the real property from that planned at the
time of acquisition or improvements including disposition. The Subrecipient will
comply with the requirements of 24 CFR 570.505 to provide affected citizens the
' opportunity to comment on any proposed change and to consult with affected
citizens.
'
B. The Subrecipient shall reimburse the Recipient in an amount equal to the current
fair market value (less any portion thereof attributable to expenditures of non -
CDBG funds) of property acquired or improved with CDBG funds that is sold or
'
transferred for a use which does not qualify under the CDBG regulations. Said
reimbursement shall be provided to the Recipient at the time of sale or transfer of
the property referenced herein. Such reimbursement shall not be required if the
'
conditions of 24 CFR 570.503(b)(8)(i) are met and satisfied. Fair market value
shall be established by a current written appraisal by a qualified appraiser. The
Recipient will have the option of requiring a second appraisal after review of the
initial appraisal.
'
C. Any program income generated from the disposition or transfer of real property
prior to or subsequent to the close -out, change of status or termination of the
'
Joint Cooperation Agreement between the Recipient and the Subrecipient shall be
repaid to the Recipient at the time of disposition or transfer of the property.
17. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS
The uniform administrative requirements delineated in 24 CFR 570.502 and any and all
' administrative requirements or guidelines promulgated by the Recipient shall apply to all
activities undertaken by the Subrecipient provided for in this Agreement and to any
program income generated therefrom.
' 18. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY
' A. During the performance of this Agreement, the Subrecipient agrees to the
following: In accordance with the Hennepin County Affirmative Action Policy and
the County Commissioners' Policies Against Discrimination, no person shall be
excluded from full employment rights or participation in, or the benefits of, any
program, service or activity on the grounds of race, color, creed, religion, age,
7
sex, disability, marital status, affectional /sexual preference, public assistance
status, ex- offender status, or national origin; and no person who is protected by
applicable federal or state laws against discrimination shall be otherwise subjected
to discrimination. ,
B. The Subrecipient will furnish all information and reports required to comply with
the provisions of 24 CFR Part 570 and all applicable state and federal laws, rules,
and regulations pertaining to discrimination and equal opportunity.
19. NON - DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DISABILITY
'
A. The Subrecipient shall comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
as amended, to ensure that no otherwise qualified individual. with a handicap, as
defined in Section 504, shall, solely by reason of his or her handicap, be excluded
,
from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination
by the Subrecipient receiving assistance from the Recipient under Section 106
and /or Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as
'
amended.
B. When and where applicable, the Subrecipient shall comply with, and make best ,
efforts to have its third party providers comply with, Public Law 101 -336
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Title I "Employment," Title II "Public
Services" - Subtitle A, and Title III "Public Accommodations and Services '
Operated By Private Entities" and all ensuing federal regulations implementing said
Act.
20. LEAD -BASED PAINT ,
The Subrecipient shall comply with the Lead -Based Paint notification, inspection, testing '
and abatement procedures established in 24 CFR 570.608.
21. FAIR HOUSING '
The Subrecipient shall be prohibited from receiving CDBG funds for activity /ies subject
to this Agreement should it not affirmatively further fair housing within its own '
jurisdiction or impede action taken by Recipient to comply with the fair housing
certification.
22. LOBBYING '
A. No federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of '
the Subrecipient, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an
officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee
of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the
awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal Grant, the making ,
of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the
extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal
contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement.
8
� ,a
� ,s
1
1
1
1
B. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of
any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an
employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract,
grant, loan, or cooperative agreement Subrecipient will complete and submit
Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its
instructions.
USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
Subrecipient has adopted and is enforcing a policy prohibiting the use of excessive force
by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in
non - violent civil rights demonstrations; and a policy of enforcing applicable state and.
local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which
is the subject of such non - violent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction.
OTHER CDBG POLICIES
The Subrecipient shall comply with the applicable section of 24 CFR 570.200,
particularly sections (b) (Special Policies Governing Facilities); (c) (Special Assessments);
(f) (Means of Carrying Out Eligible Activities); and (j) (Constitutional prohibitions
Concerning Church /State Activities).
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
The Recipient agrees to provide technical assistance to the Subrecipient in the form of
oral and /or written guidance and on -site assistance regarding CDBG procedures and
project management. This assistance will be provided as requested by the Subrecipient,
and at other times at the initiative of the Recipient when new or updated information
concerning the CDBG Program is received by the Recipient and deemed necessary to be
provided to the Subrecipient.
RECORDKEEPING
The Subrecipient shall maintain records of the receipt and expenditure of all CDBG
funds, such records to be maintained in accordance with OMB Circulars A -87 and the
"Common Rule" Administrative Requirements in 24 CFR 85 and in accordance with
OMB Circular A -1 10 and A -122, as applicable. All records shall be made available upon
request of the Recipient for inspection /s and audit /s by the Recipient or its
representatives. If a financial audit /s determines that the Subrecipient has improperly
expended CDBG funds, resulting in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) disallowing such expenditures, the Recipient reserves the right to
recover from the Subrecipient such disallowed expenditures from non -CDBG sources.
Audit procedures are specified below in Section 22 of this Agreement.
0
,3
�
� ,a
� ,s
1
1
1
1
B. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid
to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of
any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an
employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract,
grant, loan, or cooperative agreement Subrecipient will complete and submit
Standard Form -LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its
instructions.
USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE BY LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
Subrecipient has adopted and is enforcing a policy prohibiting the use of excessive force
by law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in
non - violent civil rights demonstrations; and a policy of enforcing applicable state and.
local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which
is the subject of such non - violent civil rights demonstrations within its jurisdiction.
OTHER CDBG POLICIES
The Subrecipient shall comply with the applicable section of 24 CFR 570.200,
particularly sections (b) (Special Policies Governing Facilities); (c) (Special Assessments);
(f) (Means of Carrying Out Eligible Activities); and (j) (Constitutional prohibitions
Concerning Church /State Activities).
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
The Recipient agrees to provide technical assistance to the Subrecipient in the form of
oral and /or written guidance and on -site assistance regarding CDBG procedures and
project management. This assistance will be provided as requested by the Subrecipient,
and at other times at the initiative of the Recipient when new or updated information
concerning the CDBG Program is received by the Recipient and deemed necessary to be
provided to the Subrecipient.
RECORDKEEPING
The Subrecipient shall maintain records of the receipt and expenditure of all CDBG
funds, such records to be maintained in accordance with OMB Circulars A -87 and the
"Common Rule" Administrative Requirements in 24 CFR 85 and in accordance with
OMB Circular A -1 10 and A -122, as applicable. All records shall be made available upon
request of the Recipient for inspection /s and audit /s by the Recipient or its
representatives. If a financial audit /s determines that the Subrecipient has improperly
expended CDBG funds, resulting in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) disallowing such expenditures, the Recipient reserves the right to
recover from the Subrecipient such disallowed expenditures from non -CDBG sources.
Audit procedures are specified below in Section 22 of this Agreement.
0
I
27. ACCESS TO RECORDS
The Recipient shall have authority to review any and all procedures and all materials, '
notices, documents, etc., prepared by the Subrecipient in implementation of this
Agreement, and the Subrecipient agrees to provide all information required by any
person authorized by the Recipient to request such information from the Subrecipient '
for the purpose of reviewing the same.
28. AUDIT
The Subrecipient agrees to provide Recipient with an annual audit consistent with the
Single Audit Act of 1984, (U.S. Public Law 98 -502) and the implementing requirements
of OMB Circular A -128, Audits of State and Local Governments, and, as applicable,
,
OMB Circular A -110, Uniform Requirements for Grants to Universities, Hospitals and
Non - Profit Organizations.
A. The audit is to be provided to Recipient on July 1 of each year this Agreement is
in effect and any findings of noncompliance affecting the use of CDBG funds shall
be satisfied by Subrecipient within six (6) months of the provision date.
'
B. The audit is not required, however, in those instances where less than $25,000
in assistance is received from all Federal sources in any one fiscal year.
,
C. The cost of the audit is not reimbursable from CDBG funds.
D. The Recipient reserves the right to recover from the Subrecipient's non -CDBG
'
funds any CDBG expenses which are disallowed by an audit.
10 1
�i
RECIPIENT EXECUTION
The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners having duly approved this Agreement on
, 1994, and pursuant to such approval and the proper County officials having
signed this Agreement, the Recipient agrees to be bound by the provisions herein set forth.
APPROVED AS TO FORM
LEGALITY AND EXECUTION
Assistant County Attorney
Date:
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN,
STATE OF MINNESOTA
By:
Chairman of its County Board
Attest:
Deputy /Clerk of the County Board
11
SUBRECIPIENT EXECUTION
Subrecipient, having signed this Agreement, and the Subrecipient's governing body
having duly approved this Agreement on , 1994, and pursuant to such
approval and the proper city official having signed this Agreement, Subrecipient agrees to be
bound by the provisions of this Agreement.
. tV&SI;
By:
Its
And:
Its
Date:
CITY MUST CHECK ONE:
The City is organized pursuant to:
Plan A _ Plan B _ Charter
12
VISITOR'S PRESENTATION
CHANHASSEN CITY COUNCIL
AUGUST 8, 1994
JOSEPH G. SCOTT
r �°
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
' CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937 -1900
' DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
r
APPLICANT: MARCUS CORPORATION
TELEPHONE:
ADDRESS: 10001 Wayzata Blvd., Ste. 100 ADDRESS: 18780 West 78th Street
' 7. Sign Permits
11. Vacation of ROW /Easements
$400.00 112. Variance
8. — _ Sign Plan Review
9. _X Site Plan Review $250.00
30,000 + 10,000 = $400 $650.00
' 10. X Subdivision $150.00
13. Wetland Alteration Permit
14. Zoning Appeal
15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Notification Signs
X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost"
$100 CUP /SPR/VACNAR/WAP
$400 Minor SU /Metes & Bo
TOTAL FEE $ 1.200:00
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of thS boundaries of the property must
Included with the application.
' Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
8'N' X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet.
' NOTE - When multiple applications are processed,�fie appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
" Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
Chanhassen, MN 55317
OWNER: THE PRESS, INC.
Minnetonka, MN 55305
TELEPHONE (Daytime) ( 612) 593 -1177
1
1.
Comprehensive Plan Amendment
Use Permit
X
2.
Conditional
Grading /Excavation Permit
3.
Interim Use Permit
4.
Planned Unit Development
5.
6.
Rezoning
' 7. Sign Permits
11. Vacation of ROW /Easements
$400.00 112. Variance
8. — _ Sign Plan Review
9. _X Site Plan Review $250.00
30,000 + 10,000 = $400 $650.00
' 10. X Subdivision $150.00
13. Wetland Alteration Permit
14. Zoning Appeal
15. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Notification Signs
X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost"
$100 CUP /SPR/VACNAR/WAP
$400 Minor SU /Metes & Bo
TOTAL FEE $ 1.200:00
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of thS boundaries of the property must
Included with the application.
' Twenty -six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted.
8'N' X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet.
' NOTE - When multiple applications are processed,�fie appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
" Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract
Chanhassen, MN 55317
OWNER: THE PRESS, INC.
AOJECT NAME THE PRESS /KINDERCARE
LOCATION 180780 West 78th Street NW Ouad State Highway S and Dell Road
LEGAL DESCRIPTION 6. 0; A
PRESENT ZONING IOP
REQUESTED ZONING SAME
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION IOP r
REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION SAME
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST Replat ipr operty from two tn thre�- lots Constrixction of
expansion onto The Press. a
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all informatio
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. I
This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complyin
with all Cit requirements with regard to this request. This application s hould be processed in my name and I am the art
T whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof o
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or apt he
th
authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I furthel
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the bes�
of my knowledge.
I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded,
against the title to the property for which the approval /permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder'
Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records.
Signature of Applicant
Marcus Corporation
`Signature of Fee Owner
The Press, Inc.
Application Received on Fee Paid _
3/4/94
Date
3/419A
Date
Receipt No.
t
The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the'
meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address.
(9)
G
SITE PLAN REVIEW
FEE:
a. $250 + $10 per 1000 Square Feet of Building Area for Commercial and
Industrial Districts + $5 per Dwelling Unit in Residential Districts
'
b. Administrative Site Plan - $100
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1.
Completed application form. '
2.
Application fee.
Evidence of ownership or an interest in property.
3.
4.
Location map showing property within Ii mile of site and noting area within 500 feet of
subject property.
5.
List of property owners and addresses within 500 feet of property boundary. This list
may be obtained from Carver County Abstract and Title Company - 448 -5570 or
Universal Title at 448 -9920.
6.
Property adjacent to a lake or affects usage of a lake, a list of property owners and
addresses abutting the lake shall be-submitted.
SITE
PLAN REQUIREMENTS
Complete site plans, signed by a registered architect, civil engineer, landscape architect or other
appropriate design professional, to include the following:
1.
Name of Project.
2.
Name, address and telephone number of applicant, engineer and owner of record.
3.
Legal description (certificate of survey may be required).
4.
Date proposed, north arrow, engineering scale, number of sheets and name of drawer.
5.
Vicinity map showing relationship of the proposed development to surrounding streets,
rights -of -way, easements and natural features.
1
6. Description of intended use of the site,_ buildings and structures, including type of
occupancy and estimated occupancy load.
7: _ Tabulation box indicating:
a. Size of parcel in acres or square feet.
b. Gross floor area of each building.
C. Percent of site covered by impervious surface.
d. Projected number of employees.
e. Number of seats if intended use is a restaurant or place of assembly.
f. Number of parking spaces required.
g. Number of parking spaces provided including handicapped. a
h. Existing zoning and land use.
8. Property line dimensions, locatio of all existing and proposed structures with distance
from boundaries, distance between structures, building dimensions, and floor elevations
within proposed site plan boundary and to a distance of 150 feet beyond.
9. Topographic data within the property to be subdivided and one hundred (100) feet beyond
the property boundary, showing contours as follows: two -foot intervals where slope is
seven (7) percent or less; five foot intervals where slope is from seven (7) to fifteen (15)
percent; ten foot intervals where slope is greater than fifteen (15) percent. All areas of
the subdivision to be platted with a slope greater than twenty -five (25) percent must be
clearly indicated.
10. Grading, drainage and erosion control plan prepared by a registered professional
engineering showing the following:
a. Existing natural features (topography, wetlands, vegetation, etc.)
b. Proposed grade elevations in the form of two foot contours for all pervious and
impervious areas to a distance of 150 feet beyond property boundary.
C. Location and floor elevation of all existing and proposed buildings on the site.
d. Ordinary high water elevation and a meander line at an elevation of two feet
above the record high water elevation for all subdivisions or site plans bordering
or encompassing a lake, pond, stream or river.
11. Soils report prepared by a professional soils testing firm indicating soil conditions,
permeability and slopes.
12. Utility plans prepared by a registered professional engineer consisting of the following:
2
1
0
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS/INTERIM USE PERMITS
FEE: RSF USES -$75
ALL OTHERS -$400
1. Completed application form.
2. Application fee.
I. Evidence of ownership or an interest in property. i
4. Location map showing property within ' i mile of site and noting area within 500 feet of
subject property.
5. List of property owners and addresses within 500 feet of property boundary. This list
may be obtained from Carver .County Abstract and Title Company - 448 -5570 or
Universal Title - 448 -9920.
6. Property adjacent to a lake or affects usage of a lake, a list of property owners and
addresses abutting the lake shall be submitted.
7. Complete site plan submittal, if required.
8. Statement on compliance with specific issuance standards.
9. Statement on compliance with the following 12 general standards for conditional use
permits:
a. Will not be detrimental to or enhance the public health, safety, comfort,
convenience or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city.
b. Will be consistent with the objectives of the city's comprehensive plan and this
chapter.
C. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so to be compatible in
appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will
not change the essential character of that area.
d. Will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or planned neighboring uses.
e. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including
streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and
sewer systems and schools; or will be served adequately by such facilities and
services provided by the persons or agencies responsible for the establishment of
the proposed use.
11
i -
f. Will - not create excessive 'requirements for facilities and services and will
not be detrimental to the economic welfare of the community.
g. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions
of operation that will be detrimental to any persons, property or the general
welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare,
odors, rodents, or trash.
h. Will have vehicular approaches to the property which do not create traffic
congestion or interfei�e`with'fraffic of*surrouiidiiig public thoroughfares.__
i. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of solar access, natural, scenic
or historic features of major significance.
j. Will be aesthetically compatible with the area.
k. Will not depreciate surrounding property values.
1. Will meet standards prescribed for certain uses as provided in this article.
LANDSCAPING AND TREE REMOVAL
1. Plot plan locating and labeling by name and size all existing landscape material including
botanical name, common name, size and condition. Plan shall also include existing and
proposed topography, the area to be regraded and identification of the materials to be
removed and saved.
2. Plot plan indicating new landscape materials (including botanical name, common name,
installation size and quantities of new materials) existing landscape materials to be saved,
other physical improvements on the site, irrigation systems and methods for protecting
existing materials during construction.
1
1
t
3. Elevation and/or cross sections may be required. 1
4. Statement on how applicant will comply with tree removal regulations.
5. Statement on how plans meet the specific landscaping regulations for the following:
a. Perimeter landscaping.
b. Interior landscaping for vehicular use.
c. Landscaping for service structure.
d. Maintenance and installation.
a. Location, size and grades of all existing sanitary sewer, watermain, hydrants and
storm sewer on site or adjacent to for proposed connection.
b. Location of all existing gas mains, electric and phone cables, light poles, power
boxes, etc.
C. Location, size, grades and materials for all proposed public sanitary sewer,
watermain, hydrants and storm sewer.
d. Supplemental sizing calculations for trunk sanitary sewer and watermain.
e. Supplemental storm sewer computation sheet verifying capacity and velocities for
all pipe segments. Discharge calculations verifying the predeveloped and
developed 100 year, 24 hour storm run off and detention pond storage capacity for
the increase.
f. Existing and proposed drainage and utility easements.
13. Street plans prepared by a registered professional engineer showing the following:
a. All existing and proposed points of egress /ingress.
b. Widths at property lines.
C. Turning radii abutting right-:of-way.
d. Indicate center line, paving width, existing and proposed median and curb cuts and
intersection of streets and driveways.
e. Access alignment and grades.
14. Vehicular circulation system showing location and dimension for all driveways, parking
spaces, parking lot aisles, service roads, loading areas, fire lanes, emergency access (if
necessary), public and private streets, alleys, sidewalks, bike paths, direction of traffic
flow and traffic control devices.
15. Anticipated dates for submittal and approval of required agency permits such as PCA,
Health Department, Watershed District, State, County, DNR, etc.
16. Overview statement from design registered professional engineer describing each element
' of the project, sanitary sewer, watermain, storm sewer, services, grading and erosion
control identifying the design approach and any peculiarities of the design for each
element.
3
17. .. = Evaluation of any downstream utility systems or pump stations as to service areas,
existing capacity versus future and percentage of capacity used by proposed subdivision
or site plan.
18. Architectural elevations from all directions. Illustrate types of materials and dimensions.
19:.. Traffic impact studies may be required.
20. Landscaping plan in accordance with the City Code.
21. Location, access and screening detail of trash enclosures.
22. Location and screening detail of roof top equipment.
23. Location and detail of signage.
24. Lighting location, style and mounting and light distribution plan.
25. List of proposed hazardous materials, use and storage.
26. Project narrative.
LANDSCAPING AND TREE REMOVAL
1. Plot plan locating and labeling by name and size all existing landscape material including
botanical name, common name, size and condition. Plan shall also include existing and
proposed topography, the area to be regraded and identification of the materials to be
removed and saved.
2. Plot plan indicating new landscape materials (including botanical name, common name,
installation size and quantities of new materials) existing landscape materials to be saved,
other physical improvements on the site, irrigation systems and methods for protecting
existing materials during construction.
3. Elevation and/or cross sections may be required.
4. Statement on how applicant will comply with tree removal regulations.
5. Statement on how plans meet the specific landscaping regulations for the following:
a. Perimeter landscaping.
b. Interior landscaping for vehicular use.
C. Landscaping for service structure.
d. Maintenance and installation.
4
CAMPBELL, KNUTSON, SCOTT & FUC;HS, P.A.
Attorneys tit l:.iw
1C. +3:•t N - /:nuts +n Em (612) 02- 55it )
tali + +tt li. kn.•t.ch �
L- li?.dk th A. Lwurr w A,�� \
AmIrva M, I *X,%%-tA1 1'tx•hh•r Y `
April 21, 1994 �0 c�- % '
��S COON
A T � 1�
I X RANSMISSION c`
Mr. Don Ashworth- R -`�
Chanhassen City Hall
690 Coulter Drive, Box 147
Chanhassen, Minnesota 55317
- RR The Press/Kindercare Project
Dear Don:
You asked me if the City Council could take action on conditional use permits for The
Press /Kindercare Project. The Planning Commission tabled action on the Kindercare part of the
project and recommended approval of The Press part of the project.
Section 20 -231 of the City Code provides that the procedure for adopting amendments
to the zoning ordinance apply to the issuance of conditional use permits. Section 20A4 of the
City Code provides:
' Following conclusion of the public hearing held by the Planning Commission, the
Commission shall report its f ndings and recommendations on the proposed amendment
to this chapter, including the zoning map to the Council. If no report of recommendation
is transmitted by the Planning Commission within sixty (60) days following referral of the
amendment to the Commission, the Council may take action on the amendment without
awaiting such recommendation.
The City ouncil therefore cannot take a conditional u se p y o aI u pe t appltcatton away from
the Planning Commission before the Planning Commission acts on it, unless the Planning
Commission has held the application for at least sixty (60) days.
At first blush therefore the City Council would be ignoring the City Code provision if
it acts on Kindercare. The troubling aspect is that the Planning Commission divided a project
in two. No such piecemeal approach is authorized by the City Code. An argument could be
' made that since there is no authority to piecemeal a p roject since part of it has been sent on to
the City Council the Council can act on all of it. Imy conclusion, however, is that the Planning
Soho 317 • Fiig:and ale Of fice (.:ctvcr • 1380 Corporate ( "enter C urve * Eagan, 1`1N 55121
Mr. Don Ashworth
April 21, 1994
Page 2
Commission has rightly or wrongft not taken action on Kindercare and the Council would
-)K— violate City Code Section 20-44 if it acts at this time.
1 yours,
CAMPBEL KNUTSON, SCOTT
S, P.A.
N. Knutson
RNK: srn
I!
I
I ��
t
Following planning commission consideration of an amendment to this chapter including
the zoning map, or upon the expiration of its review period, the council may adopt the amend-
ment or any part thereof in such form as it deems advisable, reject the amendment, or refer it
to the planning commission for further consideration.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. III, § 3(3 -5 -5), 12- 15.86)
Secs. 20- 46- 20.55. Reserved.
Sec. 20 -56. Generally.
DIVISION 3. VARIANCES
A variance from this chapter may be requested only by the owner of the property or the
owner's approved representative to which the variance would apply. A variance may not be
granted which would allow the use of property in a manner not permitted within the appli-
cable zoning district. A variance may, however, be granted for the temporary use of a one -
family dwelling as a two - family dwelling. In granting any variance, conditions may be pre-
scribed to ensure substantial compliance with this chapter and to protect adjacent property.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. III, § 1(3- 1- 1(1)), 12- 15 -86; Ord. No. 131, § 4, 7 -9.90)
Sec. 20 -57. Violations of conditions imposed upon variance; termination for nonuse.
The violation of any written condition shall constitute a violation of this chapter. A
variance, except a variance approved in conjunction with platting, shall become void within
one (1) year following issuance unless substantial action has been taken by the petitioner in
reliance thereon.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. III, § 1(3- 1- 3(1)), 12- 15 -86; Ord. No. 196, § 1, 11- 22 -93)
Supp. No. 6 1162
§ 20 -43 CHANHASSEN CITY CODE (V
amended proceeding. Where appropriate, notice shall also be given to affected homeowner's
associations.
(b) If a development is proposed adjacent to a lake or will affect the usage of the lake, the
applicant shall provide the city with a list of property owners abutting the lake at the time of
application. The city shall provide mailed notice to the lake homeowners as in compliance with
the procedures above. The applicant is responsible for meeting with affected homeowners.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. III, § 3(3 -3 -3), 12- 15 -86)
Sec. 20 -44. Pl annin g commission action.
Following conclusion of the public hearing held by the planning commission, the commis-
sion shall report its findings and recommendations on the proposed amendment to this chapter.
including the zoning map to the council. If no report of recommendation is transmitted by the
planning commission within sixty (60) days following referral of the amendment to the com-
mission, the council may take action on the amendment without awaiting such recommenda-
tion.
(Ord. No. 80, Art. III, § 3(3 -3 -4), 12- 15 -86)
Sec. 20.45. Council action.
• ORDINANCE N0.83
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING AND ENACTING A NEW CODE FOR
THE CITY OF CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA; PROVIDING FOR THE RE.
PEAL OF CERTAIN ORDINANCES NOT INCLUDED THEREIN; PROVID-
ING A PENALTY FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF; PROVIDING FOR
THE MANNER OF AMENDING SUCH CODE; AND PROVIDING WHEN
SUCH CODE AND THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF CHANHASSEN ORDAINS:
Section 1. The Code entitled "Chanhassen City Code" published by
Municipal Code Corporation consisting of Chapter 1 through 20, each inclu-
sive, is adopted.
Section 2. All ordinances of a general and permanent nature enacted
on or before June 18, 1987, and not included in the Code or recognized and
continued in force by reference therein are repealed.
Section 3. The repeal provided for in section 2 hereof shall not be
construed to revive any ordinance or part thereof that has been repealed by a
subsequent ordinance that is repealed by this ordinance.
Section 4. Unless another penalty is expressly provided, every person ,
convicted of a violation of any provision of the Code or any ordinance, rule or
regulation adopted or issued in pursuance thereof, shall be a misdemeanor
punishable tp the maximum extent authorized in Minnesota Statute sect on
412.231. Each act of violation and each day upon which any such violation
shall occur shall constitute a separate offense. The penalty provided by this
section, unless another penalty is expressly provided shall apply to the amend -
ment of any Code section whether or not such penalty is re- enacted in the
amendatory ordinance. In addition to the penalty prescribed above, the city
may pursue other remedies such as abatement of nuisance, injunctive relief,
and revocation of licenses or permits.
Section 5. Additions or amendments to the Code, when passed in the
form as to indicate the intention of the city to make the same a part of the
Code, shall be deemed to be incorporated in the Code, so that reference to the
Code includes the additions and amendments.
Section 6. Ordinances adopted after June 18, 1987, that amend or refer '
to ordinances that have been codified in the Code, shall be construed as if they
amend or refer to like provisions of the Code.
Section 7. This ordinance shall become effective upon the date of ofI"i-
cial publication.
Passed and adopted by the Chanhassen City Council this 14th day of
March, 1988.
ATTEST:
/s/ /s/
Don Ashworth, City Manager Thomas L: Hamilton, Mayor
Published in the Carver County Herald on April 7, 1988.
Supp. No. 1
:`` 1 vii ry
412 .221 CITIES METR0P0LITAN AREAS
Note 75
' restrictions and obligations. Op.Atty.Gen., 76. Courts
.127 -B, Aug. 8, 1957. Village could have purchased such law books
A combination lockup to be built and main- for its municipal court as its governing body
tained by county and village was not autho- deemed advisable, and books which were pur.
chased became property of village. Op.Atty,
rized. Op.Atty.Gen., 127 -B, June 1, 1948. Gen., 1952, Ago. 21, p. 58.
412 .222. Public accountants in statutory cities
' The council of any city may employ public accountants on a monthly or
yearly basis for the purpose of auditing, examining, and reporting upon the
books and records of account of such city. For the purpose of this section .
public accountants are defined as any individuals who for a period of five
years prior to the date of such employment have been actively engaged
exclusively in the practice of public accounting. All expenditures for these '=
purposes shall be within the statutory limits upon tax levies in such cities.
Amended by Laws 1973, c. 123, art. 2, § 1. =_
Historical Note '
i
Derivation: St.Supp.1940, §§ 1186 -5 to 1186 -7.
Minn.St.1957, § 426.08. Laws 1937, c. 215, §§ 1 to 3.
Laws 1953, c. 535, § 1. ?�
: -GCE
Cross References
Accountants, see § 326.165 et seq.
Cooperation between state auditor and public accountants, see § 6.64.
:`
Notes of Decisions
1. Certification examining or reporting upon their books.
Under § 426.08 as amended b Laws 1953, c. records and accounts including those of m1r:j
53 (renumbered as this section, a village may nicipally operated liquor stores. Op.Atty.Gett kt.
employ public accountants even though they 353 -A -3, June 30, 1953.
may not be certified for purpose of auditing,
412.231 Penalties
The council shall have the power to declare that the violation of
ordinance shall be a penal offense and to prescribe penalties therefor..
such penalty shall exceed a fine of $700 or imprisonment in a city or cc
jail for a period of 90 days, or both, but in either case the costs of prosect
may be added.
Laws 1949, c. 119, § 30, eff. July 1, 1949. Amended by Laws 1969, c. 135, ;
1, 1969; Laws 1973, c. 123, art. 2, § 1; Laws 1977, c. 355, § 1, eff. Aug. 1, 1977;.
1984, c. 628, art. 3, § 11, eff. May 3, 1984.x,
Historical Dote mf
' The 1969 amendment increased the maxi- The 1984 amendment directed the .
mum . fine from $100 to $300 and authorized statutes to increase maximum crim:;
"both" imprisonment and fine. throughout Minnesota Statutes in kl
consistent with Minnesota Statutes, �
The 1977 amendment increased the maxi- and 609.0341. In this section, the >
mum fine from $300 to $500. fine was increased from $500 to $7a .
Cross References
Increase in penalty for misdemeanors and ordinance violations, see §§ 609.033, 60
198
STATUTORY CITIES
Construction and application
Construction with other laws
Expenses 5
Offenses 3
Selection of penalty 4
1. Construction and applicat
Laws 1969, Ch. 735 which all
ties to raise maximum penalti.
is not mandatory and the poli
must act affirmatively to ado,
penalties. Op.Atty.Gen., 605
1969.
2. Construction with other 1:
Provision of § 412.861 that
be given, if for village, for amt
that judgment shall direct th.
payment, defendant be comn
jail, does not conflict with p
section for fine or imprison
Gen., 477b -28, Sept. 20, 1957.
3. Offenses
Within meaning of § 609.
double punishment and seriali.
if person's conduct constitute;
offense, an "offense" include
ordinance violations which m
aaceration. State v. Krech,
461, 252 N.W.2d 269.
In the absence of a showini
health might be endangered I
use of a private water system
not compel the use of its i n
oXAtty.Gen., 469c -11, Nov. 3(
Pillage may regulate village:
aide corporate limits of villas:
'%lunicipal Corporations 0=8
Kq.
US• Municipal Corporatiot
Al2 Council to c
"The council shall hay.
t ad
all provide for 1
r` xiitin8 and settle
moneys. settlement
15'49 c. 119, § 31, of
f-t._
City Council Meeting - April 25. 199
Kate Aanenson: You like that? 'That's the Storm Water Management.
Councilman Senn: Just think how that would look on a bridge.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay with that, any other discussion? Hearing none, can I have a motion?
R Resolut ion #94.48: Councilman Mason moved, Mayor Cbmiel seconded to approve the buffer
esolu
mo
numentation fee of $20.00 with the sign specifications as presented. All voted in favor and the motion
carried unanimously.
PRELINITNARY AND FINAL PLAT TO REPEAT NE THIRD ADDITION - A SITE PLAN REVIEW
__ . �.,....,,,�, r,.rrn r .C1TS 1. 2 AND 3 LARK • _ _ __ -� ,,,,. -mac . wrn s KiN DERC ARE
I'7
IOP 17\UUJ 1 rCiHa, va ••.., - --
AND STATE HIGHWAY ARCUS DEVELOPMEN 5• M ou P robably remove
Mayor Chmiel: Maybe if we're going to be discussing this, my suggestion would be that y pr
yourself from up here and sit down with the rest of the people.
Councilman Senn: I was planning to do that.
Thank you. I'm sure that, well. First of all Don, you have your comment on here. Maybe
Mayor Chmiel. Y
you'd like to just address that.
Don Ashworth: Yes Mr. Mayor. This item represented a unique procedural type of a question. The application
are alon8 with the expansion for the Press. As the item went
was submitted as a combined app lication. Kinderc se crated and actually took action on the Press rtion
to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission letter from the develo r asking
of a that the City Council
but tabled action on Kindercare. You have a coy roach the City Council in terms of
consider both items. As we discus earmer o ev ening, an all can d�,e Ci Council re nd to that request,
asking a question. The uestion I I asked the City Attorney to Pre are an opinion on that item
especially as it deals with Kindercare. Accordingly at this po int in time.
and I guess I would ask that he either read or paraphrase that
Roger Knutson: City Code, Section 20-44 provides, the Ci Council cannot take action on a conditional use
unit a lication until the Plannin Commission fives a recommendatio t ri C� my
lication for 60 days• Based upo
Planning Commission has had that app be
i o inion that this is still at the Planning Commission as far as Kindercare is concerned and it would
��(C° inappropriate for the Council to act on it. ,
I recommendation to what we're doing presently, we cannot
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. Being that from your
discuss the Kindercare but we could discuss the Press expansion-
Roger Knutson: You can discuss the Press expansion and act on it if you want to
I Mayor Chmiel: Because it was separated within the p lann i ng Commission by itself?
16
o 1 *1
n
k�
City Council Meeting - April 25, 1994
Roger Knutson: Correct. Although I would, it's unusual what the Planning Commission did and I would
suggest that if the applicant does not want you to act on this separately, that would be appropriate as well.
That's up to you and the Council and the applicant.
' Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Is the applicant here for the Press?
' John Dietrich: Yes. Your Honor and Council. John Dietrich, RLK Associates. It is our intent that this is a
joint application and the Press and Kindercare have entered into it jointly and it is the request that the process
move forward as a joint application.
' Mayor Chmiel: As a joint application? But you had heard what we discussed presently?
_ John Dietrich: Yes.
- Mayor Chmiel: We can either move ahead on the Press segment and discuss that here and if Council determines
the approval of that, that can also be done this evening. But we can't go through as a joint venture with this
because of the tabling that they had done because of the conditional use permit and there has to be a 60 day
period. According to what our requirements - are:
John Dietrich: We have no issue with the Press expansion as stated in the staff report and with the conditions of
approval.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. So then you'd like us to move and discuss that portion of it at this time? Okay.
t
Councilman Mason: I'll throw my two cents in right now. I think this was brought in as one package and what
I'm hearing is the action by Planning Commission is highly unusual and I know speed is important here and I
understand that but I know the comment I made to our City Manager today on the phone was, if we're not
squeaky clean on how we deal with things, I don't think we can ask anyone else to be squeaky clean either.
- - - And I think we are squeaky clean and I think by on large we demand that. I think some problems have occurred
in the process and I think those problems need to get worked out as soon as possible. And I don't think that this
item should be held hostage to that. So my preference here is that this gets dealt with immediately one way or
-- the other by the Planning Commission. Either approved or denied and the whole package.
Mayor Chmiel: As a complete package.
- - Councilman Mason: And that's what I'm hearing what they want and I would even maybe go so far as to say if
it means a special meeting, so be it. Now maybe I'm over stepping bounds here. If I am then.
,Mayor Chmiel: I think if a particular case were as such, this would go back to the Planning Commission a
_- __ week_ rom this coming Wednesday, is that correct?
Kate Aanenson: That's con-ect.
Mayor Chmiel: You already have that scheduled for. Okay. So that is already back to the Planning_
Commission at that particular time. But was that for the entirety of the project that you have it?
Kate Aanenson: We're going to give notice. I'm certain of what we have and we wanted to make sure that he
17
City Council Meeting - April 25, 1994
had a slot on, the applicant had a slot on the Planning Commission agenda so we went ahead and just noticed
the application. Just in case. We can always delete it.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Alright. Yes.
John Dietrich: Mayor and Council members. It would be our request to have the Council act on the approval of
the site plan as it is shown and we would be willing to come back and deal with the conditional use permit at a
later date.
Mayor Chmiel: You're asking us to approve the site plan for the Press in itself?
John Dietrich: For the.
Mayor Chmiel: And the Kindercare? You can't do that. I don't think. Roger.
John Dietrich: It was our opinion that your. that it was, the issue was the conditional use permit according to
your reading.
Roger Knutson: I didn't address.
John Dietrich: We can separate the site plan from the conditional use permit.
Roger Knutson: I didn't specifically address the site plan but they tabled the whole, they tabled Kindercare as I
understand their action.
Mayor Chmiel: Yes.
Roger Knutson: If you look at your site plan provision and your zoning ordinance, it doesn't even have a 60
day time limit for them to consider it. It says it goes to the Planning Commission for consideration. After they
make a recommendation it comes here.
Mayor Chmiel: Well then your position right now, and maybe it will be Council's decision to come back with
that. As to tabling this and having it back on the agenda for May 4th. Was that what you said Kate?
Kate Aanenson: Yes.
Don Ashworth: To the Planning Commission.
Mayor Chmiel: To the Planning Commission, right.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: And then we get it the following Monday? I mean usually it's 2 1/2 weeks.
Councilman Mason: Well it can get on.
Don Ashworth: The earliest would be May 9th and you'd have the same problem we had with this one. We'd
be pre- publishing it and trying to get out that portion of the Minutes dealing with this item but they have been
twice before the Planning Commission. I think that this is well over a month.
18
I City Cou n c il Meeting - May 9, 1994
But there's just one little item and I think Jerry mentioned it to me when we were out there for the ground
breaking. Is the mere fact that just between the studs of the walls that are going up, each of those are all
vaccumed out. No sawdust remains within. Only for the mere fact that any moisture that could get in there
could cause some other given problems and probably for those who have asthma or whatever, and that just
builds up a mold consequently and that mold no longer would exist within this specific home. And I think it's a
good idea just to probably have all builders start looking at that because many problems exist within our
community. Within our own personal lives and I too have a granddaughter who's a real severe asthmatic and
from that standpoint I know how clean things really have to be and I appreciate the fact that we have this within
our community, so thank you.
Councilman Wing: Can you make sure that Harold doesn't get a hold of that shovel.
Mayor Chmiel: It will go on the wall. Thanks again.
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLAT LOT 1, BLOCK 1 AND OUTLOT B, PARK ONE 2ND ADDITION
INTO LOTS 1, 2 AND 3, PARK ONE THIRD ADDITION; A SITE PLAN FOR 54,710 SO. FT.
WAREHOUSE EXPANSION FOR THE PRESS AND A 10,315 SO. FT. KINDERCARE FACILITY;
AND A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A LICENSED DAYCARE CENTER IN AN IOP,
INDUSTRIAL OFFICE PARK DISTRICT; LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF DELL
ROAD AND STATE HIGHWAY 5, MARCUS CORPORATION.
Mayor Chmiel: L I think that through much of what we have gone through, with this, there has been a request that
this item again be tabled. And if there's any discussion by Council; I would like that to start at this time.
Councilman Senn: I'd like to step down but I'd also like an opportunity to talk with you about it.
Mayor Chmiel: 'Thank you. I was hopeful that you'd say that and remove yourself at this time.
Mark Senn: Maybe to start with I'd like to just raise a few points of clarification. Last Council meeting one of
the Council people referred to me I think personally over half a dozen times as it relates to this project so I
figure I may as well at least get up and talk to you about it The application on this project was made by
Marcus Corporation, which is one of over half a dozen companies, I'll say small but modest companies that I
own and Marcus Corporation submitted that application on behalf of a 12 year client. Marcus Corporation, nor
myself, has never intended to have, nor will have any interest in this project, ownership or otherwise. It's
simply following through as it would with this plan on any other project anywhere really in the State of
Minnesota. Up front, real early on my only real involvement was to sit down with staff. I talked to Paul Krauss
and really asked him to just sit down and be overly critical of this project. The reason I asked that was because
I knew regardless of whether I was going to be directly involved or not, it was going to be perceived as
something that had something to do with me so I told Paul specifically that I wanted him and staff to be overly
critical of the project. We sat down and had a preliminary review on a concept basis and staff was very
positive. In fact Mr. Krauss was probably the most positive. Beyond that I have intentionally really stayed out
of this process all through it and as I've done before, and also tonight, I've removed myself from any votes as
was intention. I think I now no longer have any other choice I guess other than to sit in the background
and do nothing because I think it's really going to perform a disservice to the community if we do. Both of our
clients at this point have assumed that tonight would be basically a repeat of last Council meeting, which was
basically telling them that, given the identical action to tabling and it was basically an off deal so to speak. I
can't really blame them for their perception but again I think it would really be bad for our community if we
7
City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 r
did. What I'd like to do is just give you a little bit of history so you understand where this came from.
r
Kindercare, through Mr. Richard Nordlin, who is a client of ours, came to us and told us that basically they had
an intention to do some fairly substantial expansion here in the metropolitan area. In fact they talked about
potentially 10 additional sites. They also gave us a priority list of those sites. Quite frankly Chanhassen was
r
way down the list on that priority list of sites. I knew whatever, I'm going to say pressure I could convince
them to move it up to the top of the site because both through personal experience and from what I've heard
from a lot of other people, we have an acute shortage of daycare in Chanhassen. My efforts were successful and
we' then undertook the process of identifying a site and Kindercare, like most other, national companies like
r
itself, has site criteria and we evaluated those criteria and went through them to basically... sites. Kindercare
traditionally wants to be on sites that basically transition between residential and commercial or industrial areas.
It's basically a traffic pattern and they want to be part of this basically puts them in the position basically to
r
service the residential areas but also service the residential areas on the way in terms of work. We looked at a
lot of different sites in Chanhassen. There's one real problem also already occurring in Chanhassen as it relates
to daycare and that's land costs. As you all know from numerous other things, land costs in Chanhassen have
r
--- gone up quite rapidly. Daycare unfortunately is one of those things that cannot afford high land costs. In fact
traditionally you'll find land costs of less than $3.00 a square foot going into a daycare in terms of the land.
And that's one of the reasons why the site basically at Dell Road was identified because it was an industrially
zoned site. Industrially zoned property of course is considerably cheaper than commercially zoned property. By
r
the way, the Press at that time did not have it's property for sale. I know there's a sign out there and a lot of
think it is for sale but that property that's for sale happens to be a little parcel that's stuck way back in
V people
back. Behind the Press that Frank Beddor still owns. It has nothing to do with that corner parcel. That corner
r
parcel is basically extending all the way back to 79th is effectively not been for sale and has been held for
expansion by the Press. Also at that time the Press really had no intentions of expansion, or at least no
intentions that were very far along. They had contemplated that they had started to look at it but their expansion
r
needs basically were being met by storage needs being accommodated on the site in a number of semi trailers
that were basically just being put on site and counted as additional storage that was necessary. When I
originally talked to Paul about it, that was one of the reasons why I thought there was an ideal marriage here.
The ideal marriage was to possibly give the Press the basis to proceed earlier with their expansion and not
r
function on that type of a basis, which they're allowed to do. And secondly, to create a daycare that would
basically help meet some of those daycare needs in Chanhassen. From there we've gone through you know a
very long process. We've been at this basically since about February. The process itself has become in effect
r
quite arduous and ai this point you know we really need to I guess get it back in line or go on with other things
and I guess that's what I'm here to request that you do tonight. Essentially the proposals here are not able or
you're unable to separate this proposals. It took a lot of convincing to convince the Press to sell off this piece of
r
; ._property and their Board authorized it only on the basis that the parcel be sold to Kindercare and basically that
income be used in effect to tarn around and fund the expansion. Or to help fund the expansion. So basically
one can't go ahead without the other. Kindercare on the other hand is on a time line which basically is
something that affects ... so you know we've reached basically the point of no return because if we can't get this
r
thing authorized basically we're past that point and after we pass that point, there will be no daycare like this in
Chanhassen until, I guess that would put it into say approximately late 1995. A little over a year from now.
Well over a year. A year and a half. The facility was designed and the plans were made up very carefully. My
r
instructions to my people as well as our consultants were that it meet every city requirement as well as a number
of city requirements that technically didn't even exist. But a lot of them were in draft form. And basically as I
understood it, and as I also understood it from staff in their review, the plans did precisely that. Beyond that I'm
r
not quite sure where the process has gone awry except bsica ought the Council made a fairly strong
statement last time sending it back to the Planning Commission that it should act on it one way or the other, and
just
that's what was requested. But once again it was tabled which basically holds it in limbo. Unfortunately
s �
r
' City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994
that limbo period now puts it past the point of no return in terms of any action at all. And I really hate to see
that happen. And the reason again I really hate to see that happen is, I'd really like to see something like the
Press be able to expand in Chanhassen. They've been here a long time and I think we all know they're very
responsible corporate citizens. I also want to see them be able to create new jobs which is good for us and pay
more taxes, which is good for us. I also want to see Kindercare come in because we badly need daycare. My
understanding, from some information I got from the county last week is, I think there's something like, I think I
heard a number like 190 people who's daycare needs are not being met right now in Chanhassen. It's simply A
not available to them and most of that's infants. And Kindercare by the way, is one of the few providers
offers that service so. I guess given where this all sits right now, where it's at and I guess Roger ve to
speak to the legalities of it one way or another but I would simply implore the C uncil to act on it and ush it
forward because if it feels the can't do so toni h m fear is basically just that It's basically a dead deal and I
don't think that is productive to the City of Chanhassen or beneficial to it. If I could see something in here that
I felt was really detrimental, I think I would feel differently but I really don't see anything in here that I feel is
detrimental and I think that is supported very strongly in staffs recommendations. Because there was, all the
way through this project, never one single negative recommendation from staff on this project. And again, it met
or exceeded all the criteria. It gets real frustrating when you go through a process and you meet or exceed the
criteria but every time you go to a meeting, there's new criteria. But that's really kind of water over the dam at
this uoint So I'd iust like to ask the Council to take the bull by the horns so to sneak and take an action on it
[one way or another. ( Again, there's no benefit to me one way or the other. I think it will help the clients but it
will also help Chanhassen and I would really like to see it go forward and I'd like to see it go forward.. thank
you.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. Thanks Mark. One of the problems that we have, or at least I have right now. The
Minutes of that meeting are still not available at this time for us and it has been recommended back by Planning
Commission to make that recommendation to table this. Maybe we have a couple of members from Planning
Commission here this evening. Maybe you'd like to address some of those things at this particular time. The
Minutes to me are sort of essential to know exactly what was done and what was said.
Nancy Mancino: You didn't get them with your report?
Mayor Chmiel: No we don't.
Matt Ledvina: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. Matt Ledvina with the Planning Commission. One of the
most important things that we had difficulty, as far as the application was concerned, was the change in the
access for the site plan and we did not have any opinion from the city staff as to whether that access would be
acceptable to the turning movements in and out of the facility so there were also some other items associated
with the application that were not changed based on previous comments and requests. Based on that, we felt at
that time we couldn't act on the materials in front of us so.
Nancy Mancino: And I'd like to add to that and that is that we did feel from the very beginning that the Press
and the expansion that they asked for we wanted to let go ahead because we wanted in the interest of developers
to.make sure that they could go ahead with ... and we gave them a very firm recommendation and ... The
Kindercare we still had some questions about circulation and—to the developer and to the city saying that the
access into Kindercare off of Dell Road needed to be changed, needed to be moved further north and that Dave
Hempel of city staff had not had enough time to review that and make a recommendation to the Planning
Commission. So it is now outside with a consultant being looked at as far as the circulation problems dial we
saw. They had to do with the entire Kindercare site. We didn't feel it was right to go ahead without that
9
City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994
information. We also received the night of the Planning Commission information on electrical power lines and
what kind of, what they give off and whether it's healthier or unhealthy and we felt that we also wanted to read
that information and have that background... so that's why we decided to again table that once again. We are
also, according to the lawyer, within the legal time line for a conditional use permit. We have 60 days, and I'm
sure the developer knows that, in which to act so we felt we were within the legal time to look at all the
information in which to give you a motion on the conditional permit. Make a recommendation to accompany
that. Any questions of us?
Mayor Chmiel:. Council have any questions? Roger, give us a reiteration of legal ramifications that, and how
we proceed with it.
Roger Knutson: What the ordinance provides is that the Planning Commission has 60 days to act on a
conditional use permit... If it does not act upon the application for a conditional use permit within 60 days after
it's been referred to it, the City Council can act without the recommendation of the Planning Commission. More
or less take it away from them. 60 days.
. -Mayor Chmiel:. After the 60 days, okay.
1
F1
Roger Knutson: Exactly. Which I believe, I'm not sure, is June 1.
Nancy Mancino: June 3rd.
Roger Knutson: This says June 1st.
Nancy Mancino: Oh okay.
Mayor Chmiel: Yeah. To fall on June 1, 1994. Okay, thank you.
Mark Senn: Don, I'd like to show the Council one thing if I could please.
Mayor Chmiel: Sure.
Mark Senn: Basically what the Planning Commission, there were several issues that were raised germaine to this
project. I'm going to say technical elements of it. In the fast meeting we met with Planning Commission I
think they raised about 10 different points. Most every which point which we went back and basically complied
with, included kind of a parkway, walkway you know over between the Press and the Kindercare providing a
direct connection. A whole bunch of numerous other things like that including additional landscaping way over
and above the standard which we had already been way over and above. And a number of other things. One of
the concerns that the Planning Commission had all along is basically, and when you do get the Minutes you will
see this very clearly. One of the reasons Planning Commission was still negative on this was hard surface
coverage. Basically that relates to the Press parcel and this was basically identified I believe through a legal
opinion that Roger issued is that this site basically is in effect bettering the hard surface coverage condition that
exists there now. And by doing so it's becoming further into compliance, which is what it is supposed to do.
The way the ordinance reads, I believe, is it can't get any worst. And we're going from basically about 79%
hard surface coverage down to about 75% -76%. with this expansion. And you say well how does that happen?
Well it happens because we're basically putting the building where the parking lot is now, or on the existing
parking lot. So it's hard surface to hard surface basically. And we're supplying additional green space on. the
c
10
City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994
site that wasn't there before. Another issue that basically became the latest Planning Commission issue. Or I
shouldn't say, not the latest one. The one that was, we were still at odds on and maybe the Planning
Commission wanted to do something through here to basically stop traffic from basically going from here
through here to come out to Dell Road. This is a right- in/right -out only on Dell Road. Okay. We put in some
landscaped islands, all that son of thing. You know narrow entrances. We've done that from the beginning to
discourage that. We also talked to Press' management and Press' management agreed to basically issue to all
employees telling them not to use that as an exit. It's only to be used by those people going over to the daycare.
You know we thought that was fairly strong coming from your employer. But we also were going make a
commitment, we told staff this up front, that if it is a problem, we'll be happy to put in speed bumps or
whatever to help curtail them more. Well 48 hours before the last Planning Commission meeting, all of a
' sudden staff called my people and basically told us that, what they told us was wrong and that MnDot wouldn't
approve this right - in/right -out where it is at and that in the construction of this intersection ... going back so far
from that intersection, which this fell within that area This basically, an oversight up front but was something
they had a right to do. Well, what we did on basically very short notice, which was less than 48 hours, was go
to an alternate that quite frankly we showed staff way, way up front back in March. Which was to move the
driveway here to the north so it's to the side of the building. We basically just moved the building over a hair,
' not violating any setbacks and putting this ... Well at the time that the staff came back with less than 48 hours
notice to let us know that, we thought well geez. I guess that should really make everybody happy because all
of a sudden that's a pretty big deterrent for traffic going straight through from the Press to Dell Road. At the
same time—moving the driveway 50 feet to the nosh in any way, shape or form, would have any major traffic
ramifications that didn't exist there before when it was 50 feet to the south. I mean I guess that defies
imagination that it would. So you know quite frankly, you know I don't think those are real hard issues to deal
with. I guess I'would say, I wish we would have known that more than 48 hours ahead of time after already
1 being in this process and back to the Planning Commission twice. But again you know, I can't help that... But
we did react with a viable alternative and.. and maybe it's a question for Charles or for Dave or for Dave or
whoever but again, I can't imagine that a 50 foot difference in that location, if anything it will help the stacking
' distance going out to the intersection, making a right- in/right -out. The only other part that relates to that traffic
movement, and continually got challenged from the Planning Commission, basically was the ability of the driver
to go down to the end basically there at 77th and make a U turn and come back to Dell Road and come in that
rather than making movement in through here on the main driveway. Well you know, quite frankly that's
outside of our control but it can be very easily solved by the City putting up a No U Turn sign at that
intersection, as we pointed out from the very beginning. It's not a condition we're trying to create one way or
the other and stuff so I really don't think the issues here are all that terribly complex and I don't think they're
really all that complicated. There is one other issue that I think is complex and maybe complicated and that
Planning Commission brought up and that was basically one of should this use be at the "gateway" to the city.
The other one they brought up was power lines, and quite frankly I don't know of any reason that I can
technically, nor I believe anybody in the city technically can evaluate that. In the first place I don't think it's
anything our ordinance would allow us to evaluate but I can assure you that both the clients have evaluated it
because it's very important to them. In fact Kindercare has an environmental team that before a site even makes
it to the second phase, comes in and totally does a "environmental study" on the site. Including what's around
it. They actually go out there with meters and take a readings as to how many mega whatever they are and
again, I'm not competent in these things. All I can know is that the professionals that are are happy with it and
the two landowners, they're all happy with it and the two that have liability for it are happy with it and again, I
' don't think that's anything that we're really in a position to evaluate. Or that the city's in a position to evaluate.
As far as the gateway to the city. One of the reasons this was suggested in the first place, you know I thought it
really presented a nice gateway to the city. Far better than expansion of an industrial building would and maybe
' another thing that needs to be understood here is, really any future expansion on the Press' pan is not going to
• 11
City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 ,
be additional office space. I mean it's going to be additional production space. It's going to be high ceiling
warehouse space. And basically with this type of an approach, that type of development effectively is going to
be moved back. We've often times talked about perspectives and stuff ...came in with this and this is basically a
perspective and it's not playing with any, basically with any sizes one way or the other. If you can visualize
yourself as that person standing out there on the trail, that's you. That's how big you are and that's what you
see. Also if you were sitting out here on Highway 5 in your car, this is precisely what you would see. To me if
that's not a nice gateway to the city, I guess I don't know what is. We've also made it real clear to staff that we '
were perfectly willing, for whatever reason the city wanted anywhere between this parking lot and wherever, to
do whatever it wanted to with entry monumentations at a future date. But we haven't even addressed that. The
city hasn't addressed that yet. But when it does, it may want to do something special in that area Kindercare
has stated right along that they have no problems with that and they're willing to put an easement in place to
deal with that. You know again, all these answers were there. All these issues were there. I think all the
resolutions were there. Again, I hate to see it die because there's nothing there that really is critical in terms of
ongoing study. And if Charles can jump in on that whether he wants to or not but I mean the key things in '
terms of anything on resulting traffic and ... it became kind of silly—because again, 50 foot here, 50 foot there for
a driveway and again, they thought they were being real nice by going back and altering very quickly to do
something that in effect was accomplished at least in earlier plans, that direct...So that's some of the specifics of ,
it and that's a lot of what will come through and show you in the Minutes in terms of the issues.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thanks. Does Council have any questions?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I don't have any questions but, Council has not had the opportunity to speak at all '
about this issue and a lot has been said and done and I just, I'd move to table it but I would like to have some
comments. It's unfortunate that Planning Commission tabled it. However, I do understand their reasoning. I'd
really like to see this project continue. That doesn't mean I'm going to vote for it without some modifications to ,
it but I think everything is surmountable so I would hate to see the applicant wait for a year. On the other hand,
I don't want to be put to their time table and right now our hands our tied Legally we have to let it go back to
the Planning Commission and hopefully those issues can be resolved and whether they recommend it or deny it, ,
and we can get on with it. And I'd just like to add that I've never seen this as a personal issue. It's always
been a site plan and just got mucked up.
Mayor Chmiel: I think you're right in what you're saying. It's not a personal issue. Although in my own ,
judgments I have my own opinions as well where Council people should be but that's beside the point and
people are elected to office. That's people's perogative to do so. But I do have a bit of a concern and I can
address that later but I think the item is right before us now. Whether to table this action or if there's any real
strong feelings to move forward with it_ I think I'm fully in agreement to the comments that Colleen has made
and I don't have, and I do want the Press to know, that I think they're a fine company. They do a great job.
They provide much employment within the city and has nothing to do with the Press either. It's just that two
things got tied into one item of which presents a problem. And the problem being is that the clarifications and
some of the concerns that people have on the Planning Commission are really not addressed and all the facts
basically are not before us. Until I think I see those facts as well, that's at least where I'm coming from. '
Richard.
Councilman Wing: I guess I'd concur with Colleen. I just have a couple comments. I'd like to see it go back
to Planning Commission too to clarify it before it comes back to us. I'm not looking for resolution but at least '
recommendations.
Mayor Chmiel: Michael. '
12 '
J
I. .
City Council Meeting - May 9. 1994
Councilman Mason: I think it's all been said. Like it or not, I think we need, that's how we need to go. I
would like Kindercare to hear that if in fact there area, and I believe that there are, 190 people or 190 homes
looking for daycare, knowing the position that I'm in as a teacher, I understand their concern about being ready
' by the time the school year opens. However, I see the ads that come through the schools and what not for
constant requests for daycare during the school year. I would hope that, I understand they're concerned about
opening in the fall, if this projects gets approved. On the other hand, I also know how quickly daycare is filling
up any time of the year. And I would certainly hope they would take that into consideration. If in fact it goes
through. I don't think we have, like it or not, I don't think we have much choice but to second the motion that
Councilwoman Dockendorf has made.
' Mayor Chmiel: Was that a motion at that time Colleen?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: Yes it was.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. And you seconded that?
' Councilman Mason: That's correct.
Mayor Chmiel: Any other discussion?
Councilman Wing: I had some comments when it's appropriate. Just some issues.
Mayor Chmiel: The time and it's appropriate.
' Councilman Wing: Would you like to lead off? You made the motion.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Go ahead.
Councilman Wing: This isn't an issue and I wanted to just throw it out because of a leadership issue and I think
that the Highway 5 corridor study has been a passionate issue to me. I'm not going to deny that, and an
emotional issue but I certainly talk from the heart and I'm certainly talking for the true concern for the city. So
when we get a proposal on the west end and we really, as a unified group said, go away and leave us alone until
this is complete and staff said it's going to be done any day so it isn't a problem. And then the east end comes
' in and this Highway 5 corridor study is not binding on them whatsoever. It's not a document that exists so
they're not bound by this thing and whether they comply or not, it's almost not up for discussion but my concern
was at that time, to get onto these other facts quickly here. Was that were we being fair and were we as a
Council being consistent and were we showing leadership by saying no to the group out west and go away and
' leave us along but then coming in and be willing to take the time and the effort to talk to this development on
the east end. So that did concern me. It seemed to be inconsistent and slightly unfair. And I'll leave that sit
where it is. I think it's a moot point right now. The fact is if we don't get that done, the whole corridor's going
to come in because it's still ... and this is the year things come in. There's at least 5 things with Planning right
now or with staff that are going to be on Highway 5 but I'm convinced we're going to get going on that. I
guess we're talking about that later. Both for Mark, I think it's fair to talk to you directly Mark, representing the
' development and then for planning. I want to make sure these items get back. Issues that I would like, that I'm
concerned about that I would either like to see come back resolved or just recommendations if nothing else. Or
denials. Whatever. But I don't want these thrown in our lap because then we're going to have to hassle with
' them so number one. Number one, there's just been a lot of talk and argument and the people on Planning seem
13
City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994 ,
to understand parking lots. Especially Diane coming from where she does, with parking. The access. The flow,
r
The circulation and the concern that all the entry comes through the parking lot and that's their entry and exit.
Kind of was the parking lot through the Press as I saw it early on. So I'd like this parking thing resolved before
it gets back to us and I think the city consultant, or whoever's been hired to do this study, that should be back
,
and you should have that information by then and make some clarifications. Number two. Mark commented on
impervious surface and I think it's true. They are dropping it. Our ordinance says 70%. It doesn't apply to the
expansion. I don't think it applies to the Kindercare. But I think it is worthy of discussion. I think to be
paving a lot of area over with asphalt, if it's not necessary, and the number I remember was, there was excess
parking spots. I don't even have the numbers but 10 or 12 or 15 parking spots more than was required and that
was a Planning Commission issue so if that impervious surface is there, maybe we can trade off those parking
lots that aren't required, parking spaces and get down to the impervious surface. But again, I'm not going to
'
question that because I don't think they're in compliance with it. We have a parking lot ordinance that requires
interior landscaping and there's a revision coming out to clarify that with sketches that requires interior parking
lot landscaping. I want to make sure that that ordinance is being met regarding interior landscaping of large
'
asphalt areas. I don't know if the size dictates this or not. The health hazards we've discussed. I don't have
any knowledge on that but I certainly want to make sure that that's been discussed and clarified. That there
either is or isn't information and we're not putting these infants and young children underneath these wires and a
hazard that may or may not exist today or in the future. I think if there's a place to err, it would be on the
'
conservative side here but I know less than anybody else on that. The Press expansion. Landscaping. I'd like
to make sure that that expansion has a landscape design coming to the Council that's been recommended,
approved, improved or denied. But whatever is required on those big blank walls, let's have that up front and
'
defined before it gets to Council so we don't have to debate whether we should put in two more trees or some
simple. Let's have that done before it gets here. And then I guess the one that I'm perhaps most concerned
about, and again this is having looked at the Kindercare and I haven't seen the Marcus proposal. I don't know
'
what it's going to look like other than the brick in the brief picture we saw. But all the rooflines I looked at and
the 4 K.indercars I looked at, were very linear. Very flat. Didn't have what I saw as good quality roofing
material and I can't define that. I think Mark brought up that there's a special shingle that looks like, whatever
that is. I'd like to see that but there was a lot of pipes. Vents. Miscellaneous roofing stuff on these very linear,
'
flat roof surfaces that I didn't think looked good at all. So the only issue I have with the project maybe itself, is
the roof line. I'd like Planning to look carefully, look at the roofline. The linear roof line and do we need to
break it up. Do we have to meet some quality or some architectural standards to the roof line on these buildings
,
because they're, again. I hope I'm not using the wrong words because I don't want to offend Marcus
Development but it's kind of a cookie cutter building in that it's kind of standard Kindercare building, as I see it.
And a basic square building without a lot of architectural standards and designs and shadowing and angles and
,
that's fine. That's certainly, it's maybe irrelevent because it meets the standards but the roof line. If I can just
put in one personal comment it would be could we look at the roof line and make sure we break up that linear
effect, if it's not appropriate. And if you haven't looked at the Kindercares that exist, I think you should
because the roofs are not necessarily attractive. On the other hand, the proposal coming in may address that
issue and may be different and of higher quality than the ones that exist and I don't have that information but I'd
like to before it gets back to us. Thank you.
'
Mayor Chmiel: Your welcome ... with those additional clarifications. Any other discussion? Hearing none, we
have a motion on the floor with a second. To table. Bring this back to the Planning Commission. All the
comments that Councilman Wing has provided as well and to have it at least come back to Council with
'
recommendations, approval or denial before they get in the project.
Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Mason seconded to table action on the Preliminary Plat '
14 '
City Council Meeting - May 9, 1994
and Conditional Use Permit for the Press and Kindercare until the Planning Commission forwards their
recommendations. All voted in favor, except Councilman Senn who did not vote, and the motion carried.
APPOINTMENT TO THE HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, MAYOR CHNQEL.
Mayor Chmiel: I have had some discussion with Mr. Bohn, with Jim Bohn just this past week. I've had one
discussion with one of the Councilmembers. But as yet I have not had any other discussions only because it
curtails the ability for me to talk to any more than one person at one given time on a given Council agenda
project. And so I thought what I wanted to do is to sort of get the feel from Council. One of the things that I
look at strongly too is what I have seen is to have 3 members of the citizens on the HRA with 2 of the Council
members overlooking. The proposal I've never really thought about it being a complete responsibility of the
Council to have the HRA as well. I think we need the outside input for some of these things and some of these
other people are well qualified within areas that we may or may not be. But some of the thoughts that I had and
' one of the things I mentioned to Mr. Bohn also, is that I would get back to him and inform him prior to any
decisions being made. In my mind I do not have a decision and my suggestion would be to table it but I would
like some discussion on it_
Councilman Wing: I move tabling so you can get your act together. It's your decision and I think you can
show whatever leadership you want to. Whatever...
' Mayor Chmiel: Well I guess I wanted some additional input. There's been some discussions that the Council
would like to probably take over or control the HRA. I don't have that feeling. I think at one time or another,
if we have two people on there, that's the way I would like to see it go. I don't think we want to railroad things
through, as most people could look at it is as., And I just think there should be some, I'd like to get some
additional feeling's. And you're right, I will act on it until I get some back feed from some of the people sitting
here.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf. I do have some comments. My frustration has been the left hand not knowing
what the right hand is doing and I think, which really presents to me two options. Either the Council is the
HRA or we set up some procedure for informing each other. I think moving 3 people to the HRA, 3 Council
members to the HRA is a waste of time. I know I wouldn't want to sit on the HRA unless the HRA was the
Council, or vica versa. So for me I don't know whether we need to, I'm not speaking coherently am I?
I Councilman Wing: Better than I can do.
Councilwoman Dockendorf: It's two options. Either the Council becomes the HRA or we open the lines of
communication a little better and provide for every Council meeting to have one of the members,
' Councilmembers on the HRA update the rest of the Council.
Mayor Chmiel: 1 think that's where it should really come from is some additional communication. It should be
brought back and I think not only that but other areas that if some of the Council members sit on any respective
other commissions.
Councilwoman Dockendorf. Absolutely. Absolutely. I agree with you. My other comment would be, and I
have the same frustration with the Board of Adjustments. Is that we're seeing the same people tern after term
after term.
15
7
3 i �1
ro R12° °
m co
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING o
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Wednesday, JUNE 1 1994
7:30 P.M. P
a W
City Hall Council Chambers
690 Coulter Drive
2
Project: The Press Expansion and 76TH ST
Kindercare Facility
Developer: Marcus Corporation ' S-
HANHASS N
Location: Northwest quadrant of Dell ESTATES J o P
Road and State Highway 5.
Notice You are invited to attend a public hearing about a development proposed in
your area. Marcus Corporation is proposing preliminary and final plat to replat Lot 1,
Block 1, and Outlot B, Park One 2nd Addition into Lots 1, 2, and 3, Park One Third
Addition, a Site Plan Review for a 54,720 square foot warehouse expansion for the Press and
a 10,315 square foot Kindercare facility and a Conditional Use Permit for a Licensed Day
Care Center in an IOP, Industrial Office- Park, located at the northwest quadrant of Dell Road
and State Highway 5.
What Happens at the Meeting The purpose of this public hearing is to inform
you about the developer's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this
project. During the meeting, the Planning Commission Chair will lead the public hearing
through the following steps:
1. Staff will give an over view of the proposed project.
2. The Developer will present plans on the project.
3. Comments are received from the public.
4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses project. The
Commission will then make a recommendation to the City Council.
Questions or Comments If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please
stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you
wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Sharmin at 937 -1900, ext. 120. If
you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the Planning
Department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission.
Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on March 24,
1994.
' City Council Meeting - July 11, 1994
Mayor Chmiel: Okay. I guess I don't have any comments either. Sometimes from what one reads to what
someone else reads may be just a tad bit different in the interpretation and that's why we have attorneys in this
world and I appreciate your concerns. Is there anyone else wishing to address this issue at this time? If not, is
there a motion on the floor?
Councilwoman Dockendorf: I would move the amendment to City Code creating the Highway 5 Overlay
District.
Councilman Wing: Second that.
' Councilwoman Dockendorf moved, Councilman Wing seconded to approve the final reading of the
amendment to City Code creating the Highway 5 Overlay District which establishes Development and
Design standards for the Highway 5 Corridor. All voted in favor and the motion carried unanimously.
' 20_ ACCEPT STREET IMPROVEMENTS IN CHANHASSEN BUSINESS CENTER PROJECT 93 -I.
Charles Folch: Mr. Mayor, members of the Council. As of this morning we received notification from one of
the ... companies on this project indicating that they had discovered some failed concrete strength tests for some of
the sidewalks that were put in. As such we haven't had a chance yet to work through the situations with the
'
developer ... and as such we would, it would be staffs recommendation to proceed with the recommendation of
accepting the street improvements with the condition that the sidewalk repairs be corrected at staffs direction.
Mayor Chmiel: Okay, thank you Charles. Any questions? Okay, if there are no questions. I'll call the question.
With the motion that Charles has put on the floor, would someone make that motion?
Councilman Wing: So moved.
Councilman Mason: Second.
' Resolution #94 -68: Councilman Wing moved, Councilman Mason seconded to accept Street Improvements
in Chanhassen Business Center, Project 93 -1 as amended by Charles Folch, City Engineer. All voted in
favor and the motion carried unanimously.
1�
U.k
2(K). FINAL PLAT APPROVAL, LOTS 1 -3, PARK ONE THIRD ADDITION, MARCUS
CORPORATION.
Mayor Chmiel: We did pull this at this time and I think I've had some discussions with our City Manager. I've
asked him to go through a process. I think that we've gone through, or at least I feel that we, we as myself and
the Council, have credibility within the city. I want to continue with this credibility and I'm going to make sure
that everyone is well aware as to what's happenin . This is where we have one of our Council people who still
has their name on the proposed project, which is the Marcus Corporation. And prior to doing something of this
nature, I would like to see our Council person sign a form ' pdicating that there are no interests on this project
and ha ve tt e draft this form for him to sign. And if he signs that, then I would say that we would
approve this final plat approval of Lot 1 -3, Paric One Third Addition, Marcus Corporation. Any discussion?
Councilman Wing: Well Mr. Mayor, the last meeting I made maybe, I hope it wasn't a passionate comment but
it was passionately felt that if the Council was voting on a fire truck and I sit here as a fireman, I would step
4
4
City Council Meeting - July 11, 1994
down. And I really feel that the editor of the Villager hit it on the head. That something was wrong here and
whether it's right or wrong, there was an appearance of impropriety or an appearance of conflict of interest.
And whether it is or isn't, that appearance to me justifies a gentlemanly departure from the Council. I mean
there was nothing to be lost or gained, one way or the other except it looked better. I also want to point out to
the Council, and also have in the Minutes, on page 51 and 50. Actually 50. 51, and 52 from the July 6th
Planning Commission meetings where they discussed this very issue and they show a lot of concern. They're a
little angry this was passed and they really felt it did not look good and they were in concurrence with the
editorial in the paper. So here we have the leadership in the community really questioning this, up until the last
Planning Commission meeting and I think that their comments are pertinent on this issue also and I want to
make sure you've seen them and realize that you have additional support on this issue.
Mayor Chmiel: Good, thank you.
Don Ashworth: Mr. Mayor?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes Don. '
Don Ashworth: Just a clarification for staffs standpoint. What I hear you saying then is that the City
Attorney's office is to draft a no financial interest or other conflict of interest form to be signed by Councilman
Senn. That if that is signed, the plat can go ahead and be filed. Failure to sign that would cause this item to
reappear on the July 25th City Council agenda.
Mayor Chmiel: Correct. '
Councilman Wing: Mr. Mayor, the city offered a challenge of our rules. Where do we stand on a decision on '
what we're going to do in the future on issues such as this? Roger was going to come forth with some other
city rules that we might look at. I'm just wondering, where do you stand on that? Do we want to pursue that?
Mayor Chmiel: Yes. Yes, I think we should. I think it's in the best interest of the city for us to pursue that '
and at least for each of us to do the same in signing off and indicating that we do not have interest within the
city other than our own homes and piece of property that they're located on. I just sometimes feel that
sometimes the improprieties happen and I don't want to have it happen and I probably do understand where ,
Mark is coming from. But I just don't, I just don't feel as comfortable with it as I should and I guess I don't
want any way in any mean or any form of this pointing directly back to the city and winding up with a black
eye. I took this job with no interest behind it and I know each of you have as well and I just want to make sure '
that we do pursue this and that we do come up with another form for us which Roger is in prepatory of. That
we can be signed and make sure that there's no interest in anything that we do within the city. So with that,
with that as a motion as with clarification as to what Don has indicated and said regarding the plat, I would so
move this item (k). ,
Councilman Mason: Second.
Mayor Chmiel: Moved and seconded. Any other discussion?
fl
1
I City Council Meeting - July 11. 1994
Mayor Chmiel moved, Councilman Mason seconded to approval the final plat for Lots 1 -3, Park One
Third Addition, Marcus Corporation with the condition that Councilman Senn sign a form prepared by
the City Attorney claiming no financial or personal interest in the project. All voted in favor, except
Councilwoman Dockendorf abstained, and the motion carried.
Mayor Chmiel: Would you like to give your mason for abstaining?
Councilwoman Dockendorf. I just haven't thought it through.
Mayor Chmiel: Alright. I guess I probably would not have brought this up either if the name is still on the
final approval. If it were removed, I would have no question. Thank you.
VISITOR PRESENTATIONS: None.
PUBLIC HEARING: LYMAN BOULEVARD AND LAKE RILEY AREA TRUNK UTILITY PROJECT
NO 93 -32; AUTHORIZE PREPARATION OF PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS (CONTINUED FR
JUNE 13, 1994).
Public Present:
Name Address
Kevin Finger
9151 Great Plains Blvd.
Bernard Reich
4776 Karen Place, White Bear Lake, MN
Steve Liefschultz
3D25 Harbor Lane, #1315. Plymouth
Jeff Brauchle
Plaza VII Building, Minneapolis
Dick Putnam
Tandem Properties
Jim Ostenson
Tandem Properties
Don Jensen
Rottlund Homes
Scott Wirth
361 Deerfoot Trail
John Dobbs
361 Deerfoot Trail
Terry Forbord
Lundgren Bros.
Bruce Malkerson
3200 Piper Jaffrey
Jim Dolejsi
9260 Kiowa Trail
Jerry & Rosie Luebke
8526 Great Plains Blvd.
Al Klingelhutz
8600 Great Plains Blvd.
Dan Frederick
540 Lyman Blvd.
V.G. Prewitt
420 Lyman Blvd.
Russ & Orletta Frederick
540 Lyman Blvd.
Bailey & Mary Lou Janssen
500 Lyman Blvd..
R.H. Peterson
9101 Lake Riley Blvd.
Barbara BonGiovanni
4502 West 36th Street, St. Louis Park
Kristine Uppman
532 Lyman Blvd.
Diane & Rick Riegert
520 Lyman Blvd.
Charles Folch: Thank you Mr. Mayor, members of Council. At the previous public hearing a detailed
presentation of this project, including it's primary elements, costs and financing was made. Following the
2 .
1
CITY OF O 1
CHANHAOSSN
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN. MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937 -1900 • FAX •(612) 937 -5739
July 21, 1994
Mr. Mark Senn
Marcus Corporation
10001 Wayzata Blvd., Suite 100
Minnetonka, MN 55305
Dear Mark:
This letter is to formally notify you that on July 11, 1994, the City Council approved the final
plat to replat Lot 1, Block 1, and Outlot B, Park One 2nd Addition into Lots 1, 2, and 3, Park
One Third Addition conditioned upon the following:
1. Park and trail dedication fees to be collected per city ordinance.
2. Provide the following easements:
a. A standard 5 -foot wide ` drainage and utility' easement shall be dedicated along
the common lot line between Lots 1, and 2 3, Block 1.
b. Dedication of.public right -of -way.
v,
C. A 1546ot wide drainage and .utility easement shall be dedicated on the final
plat along the- westprgperty, dine =nf Lots 2 -3, Block. 1 to facilitate the
extension of the sewer service. r
3. Enter into a site plan development agreement acceptable`to the `city.
4. A driveway or cross - access easement for ; use of the access of off 77th Street West.
The easement shall be dedicated in faVDD'of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1. The easement
agreement shall be drafted and filed concurrently with a private maintenance
agreement acceptable to the City.
5. The developer shall obtain and comply with all necessary permits from the watershed
district, health department, etc.
kz
1
1
1
1
1
6. Erosion control measures (silt fence - Type I) shall be shown on the grading plan. Silt
fence shall be placed along the north property line where the parking lot for The Press
is being relocated."
7. That Councilman Senn sign a form prepared by the City Attorney claiming no
financial or personal interest in the project.
Sincerely,
sk 6�e —
Sharmin Al -Jaff
Planner II
SA;/
I
v
I have 'no financial or ownership interest in the plat or development of PARK ONB
THIRD A'MMON, I was not paid nor will I be paid in the future for processing the
Plat or development.
;AV IeA�L
MARK SENN