here - City of Northfield

Transcription

6:30 PM – City Hall – View New Fire Truck Prior to Council Meeting
CITY COUNCIL MEETING & WORK SESSION
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2013
7:00 PM
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
CALL TO ORDER
____Graham ____DeLong ____Ludescher ____Nakasian ____Peterson White ____ Pownell ____Zweifel
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
PRESENTATIONS
REPORTS FROM THE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS
CONSENT AGENDA
Public Comments: Persons commenting on consent agenda items only may use this opportunity to speak. Speakers must
identify themselves by providing their name and address and completing a comment card. Comments are limited to two (2)
minutes. Agenda items below are approved by one motion unless a Council member requests separate action. All items
approved by majority vote unless noted.
1.
Motion – Review of City Disbursements
2.
Items Related to Ordinance No. 955:
a. Ordinance No. 955 - Second Reading of an Ordinance Amending Northfield Code, Chapter
34 – Land Development Code, Article 3. Development Standards
b. Motion – Approve Summary Publication of Ordinance No. 955
c. Motion – Direct Planning Commission & Staff to Develop Incentives Related to Dwelling
Units Per Acre
3.
Resolution 2013-133– Certification of Delinquent Accounts to 2014 Taxes
4.
Resolution 2013-134 - Accept Wellhead Protection Grant
5.
Motion – Approve Purchase of Equipment for Public Works Department
6.
Meadows Property Farmland Lease
a. Motion - Review and Approve Request For Proposals for Lease of Meadows Property
Tillable Acres
b. Motion - Review and Approve of Draft Farmland Lease Agreement
7.
Resolution 2013-135 - Approve Purchase Agreement for 512 Ninth Street
8.
Resolution 2013-136 – Accept Feasibility Report and Call for Improvement Hearing Sixth Street
Reconstruction Project
9.
Resolution 2013-137 – Accept Feasibility Report and Call for Improvement Hearing Sixth Street
Reconstruction Project
OPEN PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons may take one opportunity to address the council for three (3) minutes on a topic not on the agenda. No notification of the
mayor is required. However, speakers are asked to complete a comment card. Persons wanting a response to a question must
submit the question in writing to the recording secretary. Questions must include name, address and phone number.
REGULAR AGENDA
Please submit name and address to the recording secretary before the meeting or prior to the start of the regular agenda. The Mayor will ask you
to speak after the staff report on the item. Please be respectful of the public’s and the council’s time. Members of the public wishing to speak
may be asked to:

Speak only once for no more than two (2) minutes on the topic unless the speaker is addressed by the council;

To identify your relationship to the topic (interested citizens included);

To have a spokesperson or two for your group to present your comments.
10.
Motion –Approve Granicus for Electronic Agenda Management Process
11.
Motion- Approve Convention & Visitors Bureau Budget for 2014
12.
Information - TIF District #4 update
13.
Resolution 2013-138 – Approve Presidential Commons Interfund Loan
14.
Items related to Tiger Trail
a. Resolution 2013-139 – Accept Bids and Award Contract for Tiger Trail
b. Resolution 2013-140- Approve the Amended Tiger Trail Grant Agreement
15.
Motion – Fire Services
16.
Information - Update on Police Project
ADJOURN TO WORK SESSION
17.
Charter Commission – Ethics
18.
LMC Rules of Conduct
Note: The City Council may take a five minute break during the meeting.
ADMINISTRATORS UPDATE
ADJOURN
NOTE: All regular City Council meetings end at 10:00 pm unless a 5/7 majority of the City Council vote to extend the time.
If you require special services to attend or participate in a public meeting, please call the City's Administration
Office at (507) 645-3001 or e-mail Deb Little, City Clerk, at deb.little@ci.northfield.mn.us. TDD users can call (507) 645-3030.
Please call 24 hours before the meeting, if possible.
SPECIAL NEEDS:
Meeting: Special City Council Meeting
Date: November 12, 2013
Members present:
Location: Council Chambers
Start Time: 7:00 p.m.
Adjourn Time: 10:14 p.m.
Mayor Dana Graham, Council Members David DeLong, David Ludescher, Suzie Nakasian, Jessica
Peterson White, Rhonda Pownell, and Erica Zweifel
Members Absent: None
Others present: Helen Medin, Don McGee, Lee Runzheimer, Victor Summa, Dale Gehring, Gerry Franek, Jeff Machacek,
Tom Nelson, Interim Finance Director Melanie Schlomann, Public Works Director/City Engineer Joe Stapf, Community
Planning & Development Director Chris Heineman, City Attorney Chris Hood, City Clerk Deb Little, City Administrator Tim
Madigan, Northfield News and other interested citizens.
Item
Discussion/Conclusions
Call to Order
At 7:00 p.m. Mayor Graham called the meeting to order.
Approval of Agenda
The agenda was amended by moving items 1 & 4 from the
consent agenda to the regular agenda.
Approval of Minutes
Action
A roll call was taken of members present
and a quorum was declared.
A motion was made by C. Nakasian and
seconded by C. Peterson White to approve
the agenda as amended for November 12,
2013. All in favor. Motion carried.
seconded by C. Pownell to approve the
Special City Council meeting minutes for
October 29, 2013. All in favor. Motion
carried.
Presentation
None.
Reports From
Council Members
C. Nakasian – Attended the Minnesota Transportation
Futures Conference. Reported on the Transit Initiative
Meeting today. Will provide a written summary of the
meeting.
C. Peterson White – None
C. DeLong – None
C. Zweifel – Reported on the Transit Initiative meeting.
Noted positive transportation improvements that are
taking place.
C. Ludescher – None
C. Pownell – None
Mayor Graham – Reported on the recent business visit to
Neuger Communications.
Consent Agenda
Approval of Consent
Agenda
City Administrator Madigan introduced the items on the
consent agenda.
Resolution 2013-129
Approve the Canvass of Votes Cast at the November 5,
A motion was made by C. Pownell and
seconded by C. Peterson White to
APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA.
All in favor. Motion carried.
Page 1 – November 12, 2013 City Council Minutes
Item
Canvass Votes
2013 Special Election for Ward 4
Resolution 2013-130
2014 Fees & Charges
Ordinance No. 954
Approve 2014 Fees and Charges
Action
Approve First Reading Of Ordinance No. 954 - Amending
Northfield Code, Chapter 66 - Special Assessments,
Article III. Determination Of Benefit And Assessment
Rates, Section 66-25. Determination Of Benefit
Public Comments
Open Public
Comments
Don McGee, 710 Highland Ave., spoke regarding the
Tiger Trail bids that were opened last week. Provided
written questions to the Council regarding the project.
Victor Summa, 812 St. Olaf Ave., asked the Council why
they haven’t asked questions of the nature that Mr. McGee
posed regarding the Tiger Trail. Spoke regarding the trail
design and questions that citizens have. Noted an October
23 article regarding the tunnel under Highway #3 in
Rosemount.
Regular Agenda
Motion M2013-116
Disbursements
City Administrator Madigan introduced this item and
answered questions posed by the Council. Interim
Finance Director Schlomann answered questions posed by
the Council.
Resolution 2013-131
2014 Utility Rates
Interim Finance Director Schlomann introduced this item
and answered questions posed by the Council.
Ordinance No. 955
LDC Amendments
Community Planning & Development Director Heineman
introduced this item and answered questions posed by the
Council.
Richard Schulte, Planning Commission Chair, spoke
regarding the Planning Commission’s lengthy discussion
of lot widths and complex calculation used by developers.
Noted that the number that was used is arbitrary rather
than a mathematical satisfying rule. Noted that the town
wants flexibility and market driven development and
noted that the Planning Commission was looking for a
way to respond to that.
Resolution 2013-132
Disapproval of E-mail
& Acceptance of
Apology
Councilor Pownell requested that staff provide a motion
on the next regular agenda that directs staff to bring back
to the Council options to incentivize a density goal of 4-6
units per acre.
Council Member DeLong introduced this item.
Victor Summa, 812 St. Olaf Ave., spoke regarding the
importance of the situation. Challenged the Council to set
a higher bar for conduct.
A motion (M2013-116) was made by C.
Pownell and seconded by C. Peterson White
to APPROVE DISBURSEMENTS
TOTALING $1,548,392.07. All in favor.
Motion carried.
A motion was made by C. DeLong and
seconded by C. Ludescher to ADOPT
UTILITY FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2014.
Yes votes: C. Ludescher, C. Nakasian, C.
Peterson White, C. Pownell, C. Zweifel, and
Mayor Graham. No votes: C. DeLong.
Vote is 6-1. Motion carried.
seconded by C. Pownell to approve FIRST
READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 955 AMENDING NORTHFIELD CODE,
CHAPTER 34 – LAND DEVELOPMENT
CODE, ARTICLE 3. DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS. Yes votes: C. DeLong, C.
Ludescher, C. Nakasian, C. Peterson White,
C. Pownell and Mayor Graham. No vote:
C. Zweifel. Vote is 6-1. Motion carried.
seconded by C. Ludescher to APPROVE
RESOLUTION 2013-132 – EXPRESSING
DISAPPROVAL CONCERNING AN EMAIL AND FORMALLY ACCEPTING
APOLOGY.
Asked to discuss at retreat.
Item
Action
A motion was made by C. Ludescher and
seconded by C. Zweifel to AMEND
RESOLUTION 2013-132 TO DELETE
ALL WHEREAS STATEMENTS EXCEPT
FOR LAST WHEREAS IN THE
RESOLUTION. Yes votes: C. DeLong, C.
Ludescher, C. Nakasian and C. Zweifel. No
votes: C. Peterson White, C. Pownell and
Mayor Graham. Vote is 4-3. Motion
carried.
Recess
Adjourn to Work
Session
Department Budget
Reviews
Fire Services Process
The following Department Budget Reviews were
provided:
• Finance
• Liquor
• Motor Vehicle
City Administrator Madigan reviewed the options related
to the governance and operation of the Northfield Fire
Department.
Vote on Resolution 2013-132 as amended.
Yes votes: C. DeLong, C. Ludescher, C.
Zweifel and Mayor Graham. No votes: C.
Nakasian, C. Peterson White and C.
Pownell. Vote is 4-3. Motion carried.
Mayor Graham called for a five minute
recess at 8:44 p.m.
The City Council adjourned to a Work
Session.
None
Administrator’s
Update
 None
Adjourn
Adjourn the meeting
Submitted by:
The meeting adjourned at 10:14 p.m.
__________________________________
Deb Little, City Clerk
Attest: _________________________________
Dana Graham, Mayor
CONSENT
Date of City Council Meeting: November 19, 2013
To:
Mayor and City Council
City Administrator
From: Mary Grant, Accountant
Subject: Disbursements
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council approves disbursements totaling $405,988.21
Summary Report:
Disbursement Description
Date
11/08/13 AP Ck’s
11/08/13
Total
Public Safety Center portion of A/P is $2,525.00.
They are within the limitations of the approved budget and resources available.
Attachments:
1. Disbursement Lists
Amount
405,988.21
$405,988.21
CONSENT
To: Mayor and City Council
City Administrator
From: Chris Heineman, Community Planning and Development Director
Subject: Ordinance No. 955 – Second reading of an Ordinance Amending the Northfield Code,
Chapter 34 Land Development Code, Article 3. Development Standards, Approving Summary
Publication, and Directing the Planning Commission and Staff to Develop Density Incentives.
Action Requested:
a) The City Council approves the second reading of Ordinance No. 955 amending the text and
tables of the Land Development Code (LDC).
b) Motion – Approve Summary Publication of Ordinance No. 955
c) Motion – Direct Planning Commission and staff to develop incentives to achieve objective of
4 to 6 dwelling units per net acre in the N2-B zoning district.
Summary Report:
The City Council approved the first reading of Ordinance 955 amending the text and tables of the
LDC on November 12th, 2013. The amendments address a City Council recommendation from
April 16th directing the Planning Commission to review and bring back a recommendation for
additional amendments to the Land Development Code (LDC) as noted in the excerpt from the
minutes below:
M2013-035 - A motion (M2013-035) was made by C. Pownell and seconded by C. Zweifel to
DIRECT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO REVIEW AND BRING BACK FURTHER
RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE FOLLOWING ITEMS:
• 5’ SIDE YARD SETBACKS FOR R1-B;
• GARAGE PLACEMENT ON UNPLATTED LOTS;
• GARAGE MASSING (3) (ii) 80’ IN WIDTH OF PROPERTY IN ORDER TO HAVE A 3 CAR
GARAGE.
Yes votes: C. DeLong, C. Nakasian, C. Peterson White, C. Pownell, Mayor Graham. No votes: C.
Ludescher and C. Zweifel. Vote is 5-2. Motion carried.
The Planning Commission met nine times over the last five months in regular meetings and work
sessions to review these issues and consider additional amendments to the LDC. As these issues
were explored in further detail, several additional concerns related to LDC Development Standards
became evident. The LDC amendments recommended by the Planning Commission included in
proposed Ordinance 955, address these concerns and attempt to provide greater flexibility to the
existing code while maintaining the broad policy goals of the Northfield Comprehensive Plan.
The proposed amendments primarily focus on regulations for new residential development in the
N2-B (perimeter growth) zoning district and garage regulations for 1-3 unit residential buildings.
According to the Land Use (Chapter 4) section of the Comprehensive Plan, the goal for future
land use is to achieve “an efficient use of land resources that emphasizes strategic development,
redevelopment, and land intensification, preserves environmentally significant areas and
agricultural resources, preserves a strong and vibrant downtown, preserves a sense of place,
and promotes sustainable planning practices.” This goal was carefully considered as the
Planning Commission discussed the proposed changes to the LDC.
One of the recommended changes to the current regulations for the N2-B zoning district is
related to the maximum lot width. The existing code states that the maximum width of a singlefamily lot is 75 feet with the provision that 20 percent of the lots in a given subdivision could be
up to 100 feet wide. Members of the Planning Commission stated that the lot width regulation
was intended to prevent areas of large lot development and promote a variety of housing costs,
styles and demographics. The “smart growth” principals of higher density housing and compact
development also promote fiscal sustainability for the public sector.
The amended language includes an overall residential neighborhood density target of 4-6 units
per net acre rather than a specific maximum lot width. While infrastructure costs for utilities,
roads and sewers and ongoing service costs for police and fire are major budget items for the
City of Northfield, increased residential density, which lowers the cost of these services, can be
achieved by other means than regulating lot width.
Residential lot width regulations are rarely found outside of a Planned Unit Development (PUD).
When applied across an entire community, specific lot width regulations reduce the flexibility of
a developer to be able to make creative design choices and maximize the development potential
for a subdivision or Outlot. By establishing a neighborhood residential density target, developers
will have greater flexibility and achieve the same result in the N2-B zoning district.
Residential density targets are typically found in Comprehensive Plans as a broad policy goal
rather than in the Land Development Code. If the Northfield Comprehensive Plan were
amended to include this density target, it would better define the stated goal of achieving
efficient use of land resources. Through consistent application of the Comprehensive Plan and
enforcement of the Land Development Code, Northfield will continue to promote the following
beneficial characteristics:
 A contiguous development pattern and gradual return toward the design principles of
traditional Northfield
 A mixture of residential densities and housing types in the N2-B district including singlefamily, townhouses and apartments
 Narrower streets with sidewalks and trees, and a better visual connection between the
sidewalks and the house
 Continued commercial growth in locations served by existing roads and utilities
 Continued infill and redevelopment of existing neighborhoods and protection of the
traditional (R1-B) low density neighborhood
 Continued investment in the historic downtown (C1-B) zoning district
Side Yard Setbacks
Another recommended change that addresses the specific concerns listed in Motion 2013-035 is
regarding side-yard setbacks in the R1-B residential zoning district. The current language for
this area is based on average of adjacent property setbacks. All new development or expansion
of an existing building must meet the average side-yard setbacks of the two adjacent buildings on
either side of the property. In theory, this regulation protects the existing fabric of the traditional
neighborhood by basing the setback on the surrounding properties. In practice, however, the mix
of housing and lot sizes in the R1-B zoning district make this a very difficult code to enforce and
create random setbacks that unfairly limit certain property owners from improving their property.
The recommended language is to establish a minimum side-yard setback of 5 feet.
Garage Size
The remaining changes are related to garages in residential zoning districts. The regulations for
garages are currently found in Section 3.5 of the LDC. Staff is recommending that these sections
be deleted from Section 3.5 (Neighborhood Compatibility Standards) and a new table be created
in Section 3.2 (Site Development Standards). This change clarifies these regulations and places
them adjacent to other important residential development standards.
Many hours of discussion and staff time have been invested on these proposed amendments. The
Planning Commission has reviewed at least eight versions of a table of proposed amendments,
and the resulting recommended language is found on a new table (Table 3.2-3). The proposed
language includes greater flexibility for garage placement on smaller lots (less than 65 feet wide)
by allowing a garage to be placed up to 12 feet forward of the primary façade.
The proposed language also increases the maximum width of a garage to 32 feet and 50% of the
width of the entire building. The current LDC limits the width of a garage to 28 feet if it does
not exceed 50% of the width of the home and garage and the property is at least 80 feet in width.
This compromise will allow 3-stall garages to be developed if architectural treatments are
included that diminish the visual impact of the vehicle entrance door(s).
LDC Amendment Process
The process for a zoning text amendment follows the Type 4 Development Review Procedure,
which is outlined in Table 5.4.1 of the LDC. This process includes holding a public hearing at
the Planning Commission level, recommendation for approval by the Planning Commission, and
review and approval by Ordinance by the City Council.
The Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing on August 15th to receive public input on
the proposed amendments. Due to the public input received, the Planning Commission decided
to table the proposed amendments and take action on a recommendation to the City Council at a
future meeting.
Following the Public Hearing, staff met with a group of builders and developers to discuss the
amendments in further detail and reported their concerns with the draft language to the Planning
Commission at the regular meeting in September. The Planning Commission scheduled a work
session with local builders and developers on October 10th to discuss the details of the proposed
LDC amendments, and several key changes were recommended.
The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments once again on October 18th. The
Planning Commission grouped the amendments into five separate motions and voted on each of
the motions independently. Each of the amendments was approved unanimously. The Planning
Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the proposed amendments to the LDC.
Alternative Options: Take no action or amend the proposed language and approve as desired.
Financial Information: The proposed amendments will create no immediate financial impact
for the City of Northfield.
Timelines: If the City Council chooses to approve the first reading of Ordinance 955, a second
reading will be scheduled for Tuesday, November 19th. The amendments will take effect thirty
days after publication in the Northfield News.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance No. 955
2. Summary Publication of Ordinance No. 955
ORDINANCE NO. 955
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA, AMENDING
NORTHFIELD CODE, CHAPTER 34 – LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ARTICLE 3.
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTHFIELD DOES ORDAIN THAT (new
material is underlined; deleted material is lined out; sections which are not proposed to be
amended are omitted; sections which are only proposed to be re-numbered are only set forth below
as to their number and title):
SECTION 1. Northfield Code, Chapter 34 – Land Development Code, Article 3.
Development Standards, Section 3.2 Site Development Standards, Subsection 3.2.2 Residential
Site Development Standards, Paragraph (B) Table 3.2-1, is hereby amended to read as follows:
(B)
Table 3.2-1 establishes the sited development standards for the residential districts.
Table 3.2-1: Residential District Site Development Standards
R1-B
R2-B
R3-B
R4-B
N1-B[5]
Permitted Density
Permitted
Density
Controlled by Lot
8.1 to 15 units per 15.1 to 25 units per See Section
Width and Lot Depth
acre (Gross)
acre (Gross)
2.9.12(E)
Controlled by Lot
Width and Lot Depth
Build-to Line
Front Street
See Section 3.5.4
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not
Applicable
See Section 3.5.4
Side Street
See Section 3.5.4
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not
Applicable
15 Feet
Not
Applicable
30%
Building Area Ratio
Building Area
Ratio
25%
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Building Setbacks
Front
See Section 3.5.4
Average of adjacent
to within 5 feet
See Note [1]
Below
See Note [1]
Below
See Section 3.5.4
Side
See Section 3.5.4
5 feet
See Note [1]
Below
See Note [1]
Below
5 feet interior, 15 feet
corner Dev. Agr. or 5
feet
Corner Side
15 feet
See Note [1]
Below
See Note [1]
Below
Rear
30 Feet
See Note [1]
Below
See Note [1]
Below
30 Feet
Between
Buildings
Not Applicable
10 Feet
10 Feet
Not Applicable
See Section
2.9.12(E)
Dev. Agr. or 5 feet
Lot Depth
Max. Lot Depth
150 Feet
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
Not
Applicable
150 FeetNone
Minimum and Maximum Lot Width
Single-Family
Dwelling
50-75 Feet
Not Applicable [2]
Not Applicable [2]
60-85 Feet
Not Applicable [2]
Not Applicable [2]
Three-Family
Dwelling
75-105 Feet
Not Applicable [2]
Not Applicable [2]
Multi-Family
Dwellings
Not Applicable
Not Applicable [2]
Not Applicable [2]
As determined by the
planning commission Not Applicable [2]
in the CUP review
Not Applicable [2]
Two-Family
Dwelling
Other Forms
Min.: 50-75 Feet or
Dev. Agr.[3]
See Section
2.9.12(E)
Min.: 60-85 Feet or
Dev. Agr.
Min.: 80-105 Feet or
Dev. Agr.
Not
Applicable
Min.: 105 to 150 Feet
or Dev. Agr.
As determined by the
See Section
planning commission
2.9.12(E)
in the CUP review
Building Height
Maximum
Building Height
See Section 3.5.4
See Note [4],
below
See Note [4],
below
See Section
2.9.12(E)
30 Feet
Not
Applicable
Not Applicable
Parking Lot Setbacks
Parking Lot
Not Applicable
Setbacks
Ten feet along
Ten feet along
property lines and property lines and
public rights of way public rights of way
NOTES:
[1] Building placement requirements for one, two, and three unit residential structures are found in Section 3.5.4,
Standards for Development in R1-B, R2-B, R3-B, N1-B. Building setback requirements for four or more unit residential
structures are 30 feet from any property line.
[2] Minimum and maximum lot widths for lots zoned R2-B and R3-B shall be the lot widths as part of the official lot of
record.
[3] Lot widths of 40 feet shall be allowed on lots where access is provided by an alley as permitted in Section
3.11.3(B)(12), Alleys and Private Streets or for single family lots with shared driveways.
[4] Building height requirements for one, two, and three unit residential structures are found in Section 3.5.4, Standards
for Development in R1-B, R2-B, R3-B, N1-B. The building height requirement for four or more unit residential structures
is 30 feet, but buildings may exceed 30 feet in height if for each additional ten feet of height, the building is set back an
additional five feet from all adjacent buildings and lot lines.
[5] Setbacks for N1-B should follow the development agreement on file; if there is no official development agreement
on file, follow the setbacks as shown in the table above.
Table 3.2-2: Site Development Standards for N2-B District [1]
One, two, or
three
residential
units
Four to
Nine or
Neighboreight
more
hoodresidential residential
Live/Work
serving
Civic
units
units
Rowhouse Live/Work Rowhouse Commercial Uses [2]
Building Placement
Front
Street
Setback
20-25 Feet
on local
streets; 5
Feet on
15-25 Feet
25-30 20 Feet
arterial,
[5]
collector
streets and
alleys
5-15 Feet
on local
streets; 5
Feet on
arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
2
5-20 Feet
5-15 Feet
on local
streets; 5
Feet on
arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
5-7 Feet
25-30
Feet
Side,
Interior
(Minimum)
[3]
5 Feet
10 Feet
15-25 Feet
Not
Applicable
5 Feet
Not
Applicable
10 Feet
15 Feet
Rear
(Minimum)
[3]
30 Feet
20 Feet
20 Feet
20 Feet
30 Feet
30 Feet
20 Feet
30 Feet
10 Feet
15-20
Feet
Not
Not
Applicable
Applicable
Not
Not
Not
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Not
Applicable
60 Feet
Not
Applicable
Side,
Corner
20-25 Feet
20-25 15 Feet
on local
or equal to the streets; 5
front setback of Feet on
15-25 Feet
an adjacent
arterial,
house facing
collector
that side street streets and
alleys
5-15 Feet
5-15 Feet
on local
on local
streets; 5
streets; 5
Feet on
Feet on
10-15 Feet
arterial or
arterial or
collector
collector
streets, or
streets, or
alleys
alleys
Building Area Ratio
Building
Area Ratio
Not
Not
Applicable
Applicable
Not
Not
Not
30%
Applicable Applicable Applicable
Lot Depth
Max. Lot
Depth
Not
Not
Not
150 Feet
150 Feet
Applicable
Applicable
Applicable
Minimum and Maximum Lot Width
Minimum
Lot Width
1: 40 Feet
2: 60 Feet
3: 75 Feet
For
single-family
lots, see Note 4
below; 60-85
Feet for
two-family; and
75-105 Feet for
three family
Objective:
Minimum Achieve 4 to 6
and
dwelling units
Maximum per net acre in
Lot Width
the N2-B
District.
Net=total
minus
wetlands,
streams,
ponds, parks,
undevelopable
slopes and
arterial ROW
25 Feet
Not
Corner: 45 Applicable
Feet
25 Feet
minimum;
Not
45 Feet for
corner lots.
Applicable
Not
Applicable
Not
Applicable
Not
50 Feet
50-85 Feet
Not
Not
Applicable Applicable Applicable
3
60 Feet
Minimum;
100 Feet
Maximum
Not
Applicable
Building Height
Building
Height
40 Feet
30 Feet
40 Feet
40 Feet
30 Feet
40 Feet
(Maximum)
(Maximum) (Maximum)
(Maximum) (Maximum) (Maximum)
[5]
20 Feet
(Minimum)
30 Feet
(Maximum)
50 Feet
(Maximum)
Street Type
Driveway
Allowed
on which
street
type
Local or
collector
streets, or
alleys
Arterial,
collector,
local streets
or alleys
Arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
Local,
arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
Arterial,
collector
streets, or
alleys
Local,
arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
Arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
Arterial or
collector
streets, or
alleys
NOTES:
[1] Unless otherwise noted, building placement requirements are a minimum and maximum distance from a property
line.
[2] Civic uses are principal uses in Table 2.7-1, including cultural institutions, public and semipublic buildings, religious
institutions, and schools.
[3] Building placement requirements for side (interior) and rear yards are minimum requirements.
[4] Lot widths of 40 feet shall be allowed on any single family lot where access is provided by an alley as permitted in
Section 3.11.3(B)(11), Alleys and Private Streets or where single family lots have shared driveways. Where an alley is
not permitted, the minimum lot width for a single family home is 50 feet. , and the maximum lot width for a single family
home is as follows:
• At least 80% of lots within a subdivision shall be 50'-75' in width
• Up to 20% of lots within a subdivision may be between 75' and 100' in width
[5] A height of up to 50 feet is allowed for a building with nine or more residential units, but the impact of the building
shall be mitigated according to the standards of Section 2.9.14, Multi-Family Dwellings.
(C)
Garage Placement and Size in the Residential Districts. Table 3.2-3 presents the
dimensional regulations for garages in the residential districts.
(1)
(2)
Purpose and Intent. The intent of regulations on the setback, width and relative
proportion of attached or detached garages is:
(a)
To ensure that there is a physical and visual connection between the living
area of the home and the street;
(b)
To ensure that the location and amount of living space of the home, as
seen from the street, is more prominent than the garage;
(c)
To prevent garages from obscuring the main entrance from the street and
ensure that the main entrance for pedestrians, rather than automobiles, is
the prominent entrance;
(d)
To provide for a more pleasant pedestrian environment by preventing
garages from dominating the views of the neighborhood from the sidewalk;
and
(e)
To enhance public safety by preventing garages from blocking views of the
street from inside the house.
Dimensional Regulations. Dimensional regulations for attached and detached
garages for 1-, 2- and 3-family buildings are presented in Table 3.2-3.
4
Table 3.2-3: Garage Regulations for One-, Two- and Three-Unit Buildings
R1
N1
N2
Attached Garages
If the lot is less than 65 feet
wide:
 Garage may be forward 12
feet; and
 if 3 stalls wide:
o Third stall must be set
back an additional 2 feet
o Garage must include
one of the following:
 Windows in the
vehicle entrance
door(s)
 One or more windows
above the vehicle
entrance door(s)
 Other architectural
treatment that
diminishes the visual
impact of the vehicle
entrance door(s).
May be forward if on platted
lot and consistent with 50% of
others in the subdivision.
If 1 or 2 stalls wide:
 4 feet behind primary
façade
 Even with the primary
façade* if there is a covered
porch along at least 10 feet
of the front façade of the
house.
If three stalls wide, the third
stall must be set back an
additional 2 feet.
Front Setback
Exemptions:
See Note 1.
If 3 stalls wide, must include
one of the following:
 Windows in the vehicle
entrance door(s)
 One or more windows
above the vehicle entrance
door(s)
 Other architectural
treatment that diminishes
the visual impact of the
vehicle entrance door(s).
30 Feet
If the garage is turned or
angled, the garage may be
even with the primary façade
if the side facing the street
has windows or other features
that mimic the living portion of
the house. The garage may
be forward of the primary
façade if a variance is
granted.
5
If the lot is 65 feet or wider
and:
 If 1 or 2 stalls wide:
o 4 feet behind the primary
façade
o Even with the primary
façade if there is a
covered porch along at
least 10 feet of the front
façade of the house
 If 3 stalls wide, the third
stall must be set back an
additional 2 feet
 If 3 stalls wide, must
include one of the
following:
o Windows in the vehicle
entrance door(s)
o One or more windows
above the vehicle
entrance door(s)
o Other architectural
treatment that
diminishes the visual
impact of the vehicle
entrance door(s).
Regardless of lot width, if the
garage is turned or angled,
the garage may be set
forward if the side facing the
street has windows or other
features that mimic the living
portion of the house.
Interior Side
Setback
5 Feet
8 Feet
5 Feet
Corner Side
Setback
15 feet or the same as the
front setback of an adjacent
house facing that side street.
15 Feet
30 Feet
35 Feet
30 Feet
Rear Side
Setback
Width
Floor Area Max.
(sq. ft.)
Driveway Max.
Width at Curb
Line
Front Setback
Interior Side
Setback
Corner Side
Setback
Rear Side
Setback
Width
Floor Area Max.
(sq. ft.)
Maximum:
 32 feet and
 50% of the width of the
entire building.
Maximum:
 32 feet and
 50% of the width of the
entire building.
A storage area without a
vehicle entrance door but with
a façade that matches the
house will not be counted as
garage width.
A storage area without a
vehicle entrance door but with
a façade that matches the
house will not be counted as
garage width.
864
864
864
20 Feet
20 Feet
20 Feet
Detached Garages
Same as attached garages
30 Feet
Same as attached garages
5 Feet
8 Feet
5 Feet
15 Feet
5 Feet
5 Feet
5 Feet
32 Feet
32 Feet
864
864
864.
NOTES:
[1] Exemptions: Setbacks for N1 should follow the development agreement on file; if there is no official development
agreement on file; follow the setbacks as shown in the table above.
[2] Primary façade means the plane that runs through the most forward insulated wall facing the street, not counting
minor projections less than 8 feet wide.
Development Standards, Section 3.2 Site Development Standards: With the addition of a new
Table 3.2-3 in Section 1 of this ordinance, renumber existing Table 3.2-3 in Subsection 3.2.3 C1-B
District Site Development Standards, as Table 3.2-4, and renumber all subsequent tables and cross
references to tables in Section 3.2 accordingly.
6
Development Standards, Section 3.5 Neighborhood Compatibility Standards, Subsection 3.5.4
Standards for Residential Development, Paragraph (B) Design Standards for One, Two and Three
Family Dwellings in R1-B, R2-B and R3-B, Clause (2) Building Placement, is hereby amended to
read as follows:
(2)
Building Placement.
(a)
Front yard. For new development or expansion of an existing building, the
applicant shall demonstrate how the proposed building will meet the
average front yard building placement of the two adjacent buildings on
either side of the subject property, as shown in Figure 3-16, to within five
feet.
(b)
Side yard. All new development or expansion of an existing building shall
demonstrate that the construction meets the average side yard setbacks of
the two adjacent buildings on either side of the subject property as shown
in Figure 3-17, but in no instance shall the building be located less than five
feet from an interior side yard property lineThe minimum side yard setback
shall be 5 feet.
(c)
Rear yard. All new development or expansion of an existing building shall
comply with the rear yard setback requirements of the applicable district
The minimum rear yard setback shall be 30 feet.
(d)
Corner yard. For corner lots, all new development or expansion of an
existing building shall meet both the average front and corner yard building
placement of the two adjacent buildings on either side of the subject
property (see Figure 3-17), to within five feet.
Standards for Residential Development, Paragraph (C) Design Standards for One, Two and Three
Family Dwellings in N1-B., Clause (1) Building Placement, is hereby amended to read as follows:
(1)
Building Placement.
(a)
Front yard. Proposed new development or building expansion in the front
yard shall be placed within five feet of the setback established in the official
development agreement on file for that property, but in no case may be
closer than 15 feet to the front property line. If no development agreement
exists, the front setback shall be 25—35 feet.
(b)
Side Yard. Proposed new development or building expansion in the side
yard shall comply with the setback established in the official development
agreement on file for that property. If no development agreement exists,
7
the side yard setback shall be five feetIf no development agreement exists,
the minimum side yard setback shall be 5 feet.
(c)
Rear Yard. All new development or expansion of an existing building shall
comply with the rear yard setback established in the official development
agreement on file for that property. If no development agreement exists,
the rear yard setback shall be 30 feet.
(d)
Corner Yard. For corner lots, all new development or expansion of an
existing building shall comply with the setback established in the official
development agreement on file for that property. If no development
agreement exists, the corner side yard setback shall be 15 feet Proposed
new development or building expansion on a corner lot shall comply with
the setback established in the official development agreement on file for
that property. If no development agreement exists, the corner side yard
setback shall be 15 feet.
Standards for Residential Development, Paragraph (E) Design Standards for Attached Garages, is
hereby amended to read as follows:
(E)
Design Standards for Attached Garages.
(1)
Purpose and Intent. The purpose of design standards for attached garages is as
follows:
(i)
To ensure that there is a physical and visual connection between the living
area of the home and the street;
(ii)
To ensure that the location and amount of living space of the home, as
seen from the street, is more prominent than the garage;
(iii)
To prevent garages from obscuring the main entrance from the street and
ensure that the main entrance for pedestrians, rather than automobiles, is
the prominent entrance;
(iv)
Provide for a more pleasant pedestrian environment by preventing garages
from dominating the views of the neighborhood from the sidewalk; and
(v)
Enhance public safety by preventing garages from blocking views of the
street from inside the home.
(2)
Garage Placement. Attached garages must be set back at least six feet from the
primary façade of the principal structure with the following exceptions:
(i)
Side loaded attached garages provided that the side of the garage facing
the front street has windows or other architectural details that mimic the
features of the living portion of the home.
8
(ii)
(3)
An attached garage may be constructed to be in line with the primary
façade of the principal structure if a minimum eight-foot deep covered
porch is constructed in front of the primary home façade.
(iii)
The front of an attached garage on a proposed home may be located
forward of the primary home façade if the proposed home will be
constructed on a lot that has been approved as part of a final plat prior to
the effective date of this LDC and homes with forward located garages
have been constructed on more than 50 percent of the lots in the final plat.
Garage Massing. The width of an attached garage is limited to 24 feet, except:
(i)
If the garage has two separate front vehicle entrance openings, the width of
the garage may be extended to 28 feet; or
(ii)
A garage may be extended beyond 28 feet in width if the existing property
is at least 80 feet in width, and the garage does not exceed 50 percent of
the width of the façade of the home and garage.
SECTION 6: This Ordinance shall take effect thirty days after its publication.
Passed by the City Council of the City of Northfield, Minnesota, this 19th day of November, 2013.
ATTEST:
____________________________
City Clerk
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Published:
VOTE:
_____________________________
Mayor
11/12/13
______________
______________
___ GRAHAM ___ POWNELL ___ ZWEIFEL ___ PETERSON WHITE
___ NAKASIAN ___ LUDESCHER ___ DELONG
9
SUMMARY PUBLICATION OF CITY OF NORTHFIELD ORDINANCE NO. 955
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA, AMENDING
NORTHFIELD CODE, CHAPTER 34 – LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, ARTICLE 3,
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Summary: An ordinance amending Northfield Code, Chapter 34 – Land Development Code,
Article 3. – Development Standards by (1) amending Section 3.2 Site Development Standards,
Subsection 3.2.2 Residential Site Development Standards, Paragraph (B), Table 3.2-1:
Residential District Site Development Standards and Table 3.2.2: Site Development Standards
for N2-B District, and adding a new Paragraph (C), Garage Placement and Size in the
Residential Districts, and Table 3.2.3: Garage Regulations for One-, Two- and Three-Unit
Buildings; (2) renumbering all subsequent tables and cross-references in Section 3.2 accordingly;
(3) amending Section 3.5 Neighborhood Compatibility Standards, Subsection 3.5.4 Standards for
Residential Development, Paragraph (B) Design Standards for One, Two and Three Family
Dwellings in R1-B, R2-B and R3-B, Clause (2) Building Placement; (4) amending Section 3.5
Neighborhood Compatibility Standards, Subsection 3.5.4 Standards for Residential
Development, Paragraph (C) Design Standards for One, Two and Three Family Dwellings in
N1-B., Clause (1) Building Placement; and (5) deleting Section 3.5 Neighborhood Compatibility
Standards, Subsection 3.5.4 Standards for Residential Development, Paragraph (E) Design
Standards for Attached Garages.
The complete text of Ordinance No. 955 may be obtained at no charge at City Hall or from the
City’s website at www.ci.northfield.mn.us.
CONSENT
City Administrator
From: Melanie Schlomann, Interim Finance Director
Subject: Approval of Certification of Delinquent Accounts to 2014 Taxes
Resolution 2013-133
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council approves the attached resolution that certifies delinquent charges to
the 2014 tax bills.
Summary Report:
Each year staff determines delinquent utility and other charges as of October 1st. Any balances
outstanding for 90 days or more as of October 1st (June 30th balances) constitute the initial list of
charges subject to certification to the following year’s tax rolls. In early October letters (letter
template attached) are sent to property owners advising them of the certification process and that
payment was required by early November in order for certification to be avoided.
The table below summarizes the history of amounts certified to taxes for the last several years.
Certified
Year
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Amount
$208,158
$191,673
$195,956
$203,598
$168,126
Change from Prior
Year
- 8%
+2.2%
+3.9%
-17.4%
The totals shown above do not include additional fees charged for certification or any delinquent
special assessments. The total shown for 2013 is as of November 13th. Finance staff will
continue to work with customers up until the time the data is transmitted to the counties, which is
required by December 15th.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
Resolution 2013-133
Delinquent Account Listing – attachment to the resolution
Delinquent Account Letter template
CITY OF NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION #2013-133
CERTIFYING DELINQUENT CHARGES TO TAXES PAYABLE 2014
WHEREAS, pursuant to the proper notice duly given as required by law, the City Council has
met, heard and passed upon all objections to the proposed delinquent special
assessment charges for the improvements of sewer, water, storm sewer, curb, gutter
and surfacing; delinquent charges in the water, sewer, storm drainage, and garbage
funds; and delinquent weed mowing and other charges.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THAT:
1.
The assessment roll, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part
hereof, is hereby accepted and adopted shall constitute a special assessment
against the lands described, and each tract of land is hereby found to be
benefited in the amount of the assessment levied against it and such amount
is found to be reasonable under the City’s regulatory authority.
2.
Each assessment shall be payable in one single installment bearing interest at
the rate of ten percent per annum after the date of the adoption of this
assessment resolution.
3.
The Finance Director shall forthwith transmit a certified copy of said
assessment roll to the County of the county and such assessments shall be
collected and paid in the same manner as property taxes, if not paid prior to
the time for certification.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Northfield on this 19th day of November 2013.
ATTEST
_______________________
City Clerk
VOTE:
________________________
Mayor
___ GRAHAM ___ DELONG ___ LUDESCHER ___ NAKASIAN
___ PETERSON WHITE ___ POWNELL ___ ZWEIFEL
Account
1‐00301‐02
1‐00621‐02
1‐00731‐01
1‐01591‐01
1‐02591‐01
1‐03434‐02
1‐03444‐04
1‐04414‐03
1‐04434‐01
1‐04634‐01
1‐04764‐02
1‐05004‐02
1‐05154‐01
1‐06744‐03
1‐09297‐00
1‐09307‐00
1‐09311‐00
1‐09327‐00
1‐10861‐00
1‐44261‐00
1‐44601‐00
1‐44757‐00
1‐44821‐01
1‐45091‐00
2‐00291‐02
2‐00431‐00
2‐00451‐06
2‐00551‐07
2‐00661‐00
2‐01041‐00
2‐01241‐01
2‐01271‐06
2‐01372‐01
2‐01401‐01
2‐01521‐02
2‐01551‐00
2‐01891‐03
2‐02011‐01
2‐02231‐01
2‐02351‐01
2‐02401‐01
2‐02671‐03
2‐02681‐02
2‐02711‐01
2‐02801‐00
2‐02901‐03
2‐03081‐03
2‐03241‐03
2‐03331‐01
2‐03371‐00
2‐03431‐01
2‐03491‐01
2‐03861‐02
2‐03891‐01
2‐03941‐05
2‐04061‐03
2‐04071‐01
2‐04241‐02
2‐04571‐01
2‐04671‐02
2‐04871‐03
2‐05131‐03
2‐05181‐00
2‐05211‐02
2‐05261‐01
2‐05731‐06
2‐06151‐00
2‐06581‐01
2‐06871‐02
2‐06881‐00
2‐07561‐00
2‐07601‐01
2‐07651‐02
2‐07791‐05
2‐08061‐02
Name
PHILLIP M ZRIMSEK
MICHAEL VIOLA
DEAN PAXTON
VICTOR EBERT
TRICIA BROWN
BROGAN INDUSTRIES
MARK WESTBLADE
DAN HANSON
CENTRAL BLOCK BUILDING, LLC
STEPHEN G. MCKINSTRY
ALETON, LLC
BERNIE HOREJSI
STATE FARM INSURANCE
MARK & STEVE OLSON
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
(MAINT) HERITAGE SRC
MARK /BECKY NELSON
MICHAEL ERICKSON
MICHAEL J CARLISANO
SCOTT/SARA KOEHLER
MIKE&SHANNON HARREN
PETE LEE
WILLIAM FOSSUM
JPMC SPECIALTY MORTGAGE, LLC
CORRIE ERICKSON
EDWARD NOONAN
BRUCE THOMPSON
CHARLES REZAC
CLAUDIA JIMENEZ
LAURI OTTING
DAVID TREBELHORN
JASON SCHWARTZ
LEONARD MUCKEY
THOMAS TATE
ROBERT HRUZA
THOMAS MUKINA
TAL LAUSENG
ROBERT SHIMEK
DEAN & TAMMY MORKASSEL
US BANK NA
SCOTT MORRISON
GARY PETERSON
ERIC ANDRINGA
KATHERINE KES‐PICK
SAMANTHA ROBERTSON
PHILIP DANIEL
ROBERT M JOHNSON
SHAWN NUEBEL
BRENDA LONEY
RONALD LOVOLL
JONATHAN ODELL
MIKE KOPPENBERG
PETER J LEE
WADE J CANEDY
DAVID TSCHANN
MICHELLE L JOHNSON
BRUCE ERICKSON
ZACH HOLLANDER
DEBORAH E CLARK
DEANNA MAZUREK
MARCELLA FRAZIER
MICHAEL GARLITZ
KIRK WALKER
MRS PRITCHARD
WM & VICKI ROSSMAN
JOSEPH M DOKKEN
PATRICK D BULLARD
KATHRYN J DEGROOT
AARON CUSTARD
TWYLA KUHA
LEONARD HOREJSI
GARY MORSTAD
Service Address
619 5TH STREET E
411 OAK STREET
315 OAK STREET
504 4TH STREET E
410 UNION STREET
517 WATER STREET S
507 WATER STREET S
407 DIVISION STREET 1/2
401 DIVISION STREET S
111 4TH STREET E
107 3RD STREET W
1001 HWY 3 S
88 AC BK2 LT 3
43 AC BK 2 LT 1
2240 HWY #3 ‐BICKEL
6 AC OUTLOT B 2
2018 JEFFERSON ROAD
1607 GOLDENROD COURT
822 MAYFLOWER COURT
601 TURNBERRY COURT
1704 GOLDENROD CIRCLE
1804 CREEK LANE
315 8TH STREET W
410 8TH STREET W
419 8TH STREET W
410 9TH STREET W
908 POPLAR STREET S
1012 LINDEN STREET S
1015 LINDEN STREET S
309 WOODLEY STREET W
907 LINDEN STREET #2 S
311 9TH STREET W
809 SPRING STREET S
801 SPRING STREET S
1104 SPRING STREET S
1101 POPLAR STREET S
1016 WATER STREET S
201 LINDEN PLACE
301 LINDEN PLACE S
1002 DIVISION STREET
102 FREMONT STREET W
104 SUMNER STREET E
1012 WASHINGTON STREET
806 DIVISION STREET
102 9TH STREET E
116 WOODLEY STREET E
1107 UNION STREET
1106 COLLEGE STREET
315 FREMONT STREET E
908 COLLEGE STREET
910 COLLEGE STREET
910 WINONA STREET
800 COLLEGE STREET
405 8TH STREET E
706 UNION STREET
506 6TH STREET E
920 5TH STREET E
304 5TH STREET E
2 FAREWAY DRIVE
4 FAREWAY DRIVE
17 PARK DRIVE
9 PARK DRIVE
614 7TH STREET E
15 BUNDAY COURT
1003 COLLEGE STREET
Total to Certify
827.65
291.67
1,024.10
619.85
331.67
322.87
465.80
363.55
864.45
509.54
649.35
1,285.33
3.74
121.83
310.85
322.91
330.48
177.94
175.97
3,113.76
66.70
20.55
430.96
1,248.91
855.48
759.74
176.20
618.60
882.05
898.28
954.04
373.91
54.41
1,876.47
769.58
940.41
451.23
1,200.47
972.38
171.95
1,266.89
706.86
629.18
1,069.30
1,071.73
78.99
83.55
294.16
786.21
58.95
918.35
750.92
1,041.47
40.94
35.99
1,009.83
658.63
1,002.42
820.53
1,212.76
534.48
688.48
152.50
1,102.33
1,029.50
1,299.87
435.89
944.72
1,195.93
909.41
1,041.02
671.86
197.66
258.13
767.97
PID
2206126018
2206126036
2206126001
2206200027
2206225055
2201100017
2201100015
2206225033
2206225032
2206225013
2231350046
2206326032
2236475040
2201425002
2211154003
2211154002
2211154001
2211154004
2211176003
2205328001
2205253019
2205200004
2205275006
2205301019
2201175032
2201175007
2201151008
2201175045
2201151020
2201151027
2201401002
2201151034
2201175058
2201175055
2201175021
2201175019
2201403001
2201402003
2201400008
2201404012
2201403030
2206326033
2206326034
2201400001
2201400039
2206328003
2206326029
2206250058
2206250052
2206250069
2206250075
2206326023
2206326060
2206326067
2206326008
2206276052
2206276053
2206276063
2206250026
2206276045
2206276022
2206250031
2206250025
2206250011
2206225117
2206200096
2206125010
2206225062
2206151016
2206151017
2206151007
2206151011
2206277001
2206277015
2206302002
2‐08141‐01
2‐08191‐01
2‐08601‐03
2‐08771‐02
2‐09641‐01
2‐10131‐00
2‐10361‐01
2‐10691‐01
2‐10851‐01
2‐11781‐02
2‐11851‐01
2‐11971‐01
2‐12202‐09
2‐12301‐03
2‐14011‐00
2‐14021‐00
2‐14081‐03
2‐18391‐00
2‐18761‐00
2‐19021‐00
2‐19041‐00
2‐19892‐00
2‐20192‐01
2‐20342‐04
2‐20571‐02
2‐20731‐02
2‐21041‐00
2‐21811‐03
2‐22271‐01
2‐22281‐06
2‐22331‐02
2‐22351‐02
2‐22591‐07
2‐22651‐02
2‐23032‐01
2‐23112‐02
2‐25352‐00
2‐25532‐00
2‐25692‐00
2‐26531‐00
2‐28091‐03
2‐28201‐01
2‐30034‐98
2‐30277‐00
2‐30792‐00
2‐40382‐03
2‐40542‐02
2‐40572‐01
2‐40837‐00
2‐50061‐01
2‐50661‐07
2‐50881‐00
2‐50981‐00
2‐52321‐00
2‐52651‐00
2‐52691‐00
2‐60591‐03
2‐70244‐00
2‐80501‐01
2‐81161‐00
2‐81281‐03
2‐90131‐05
2‐91341‐00
2‐91351‐00
2‐91401‐05
2‐91471‐00
2‐91471‐00
2‐91511‐01
2‐91561‐04
2‐91621‐01
2‐92031‐01
2‐92331‐04
2‐92371‐01
2‐92421‐00
2‐92911‐01
2‐93361‐01
TODD G BABCOCK
KEVIN KEANE
PAUL NESS
LEROY SWARTS III
STUART KING
ROBERTA LOWTHROP
BECKY KRIPPNER
DAVID BOLSTAD‐CHAPMAN
JOHN/MARY LANGAN
ROBERT MCGOWAN
THOMAS DICKERSON
SONDRA BREILAND HODGSO
RUTHIE GILBERTSON
HARRY WILLIAMS
KIM KUIVINEN
DAN THRUN
JERAMIE GRUBER
DAN DUNPHY
JOE GASIOR
LORI JOHNSON
LINDA BRANDENBURG
CONNIE LARSEN
BETTE QUINNELL
ELIZABETH A STREEFLAND
PATRICK RODER
DUSTIN/CATHY PRODOEHL
JAMES ENFIELD
JAY FUTHEY
CHRIS & LISA LAW
JASON THIMSEN
NICOLE WEITZEL
GARY BICKEL
JENNIFER SIMPSON‐DAHL
JEFFERY IVERSON
TODD &MISHIA EDWARDS
JEROMY/JENNI LYMAN
DARLENE MELING
SCOTT MOE
GAREN/AMANDA VICKNEY
EVELYN COUGHLIN
BRENT HOLMES
LUIS SISON JR
GENE JASNOCH
HERITAGE RC
CHARLOTTE O. SWENSEN
DAMIEN J BUECKSLER
TIMOTHY ALMENDINGER
STEVEN HODGSON
JASNOCH CONSTRUCTION INC
KARL LEAR
DUSTIN B ALLEN
RUSSELL ZABEL
DAN HANSON
BRIAN CARSON
JEFFREY HALES
ROGER THOMPSON
EDWIN & SHELBY OSTER
SCHILLING BUSINESS PARK CONDO
SEAN & MARY STANCHINA
HUPPERT, N PAULSEN, MIKE
BENJAMIN STRIMPEL
JAMES HINDMAN
BONNIE THOMAS
JENNIFER WHITSON
BERNARD STREET
MIKE ATKINSON
JA GULLICKSON INC
MALLORY JERMELAND
WYATT E HALVERSON
SUSAN WARRING
BRIAN DWYER
KARIN LICHTSINN
TIM BABBINI
T & K PROPERTIES
TATE F RUNNING
TRICIA NELSON
1117 COLLEGE STREET
312 SUMNER STREET E
1200 ARCHIBALD COURT
1112 WINONA STREET
840 WOODLEY STREET E
1000 ELM STREET
703 SIBLEY DRIVE
706 SIBLEY DRIVE
728 BIRCH LANE
1250 PRAIRIE STREET
924 PROSPECT COURT
1209 LIA DRIVE
1106 LIA COURT
1021 FREMONT CIRCLE
1324 ARCHIBALD STREET
1708 EAST RIDGE COURT
809 ALDRICH DRIVE
810 ST LAWRENCE DRIVE
902 ST LAWRENCE DRIVE
2009 LAKE DRIVE
1828 COOLIDGE COURT
1704 HUMPHREY COURT
1513 EISENHOWER COURT
1605 MONROE COURT
1809 TRUMAN COURT
505 CARTER DRIVE
1700 MCKINLEY DRIVE
1801 ROOSEVELT DRIVE
1811 BUCHANAN COURT
1815 BUCHANAN COURT
1856 KENNEDY COURT
1844 KENNEDY COURT
1506 PHEASANTWOOD TR
1507 PHEASANTWOOD TR
1309 CONSTITUTIONAL DR
1412 PRESIDENTIAL DR
1515 PRESIDENTIAL DR
1808 JEFFERSON ROAD
2106 GRANT DRIVE
2019 GRANT DRIVE
2014 JEFFERSON ROAD ‐B
2010 JEFFERSON ROAD
2007 HIDDEN VALLEY RD
1204 HERITAGE DRIVE
1110 HERITAGE DRIVE
1104 HERITAGE DRIVE
1116 PETERSON DRIVE
1912 SIBLEY VIEW LANE
1901 SIBLEY VIEW LANE
2105 SIBLEY VIEW COURT
104 ANDERSON DRIVE
107 SUNNY VIEW DRIVE
2016 SUNNY VIEW LANE
1401 HERITAGE DRIVE
2309 VALLEY COURT
1320 HONEYLOCUST DRIVE
2417 PEPPER RIDGE CT
405 BUNKER DRIVE
409 BUNKER DRIVE
501 BUNKER DRIVE
609 BUNKER DRIVE
609 BUNKER DRIVE
625 BUNKER DRIVE
1905 WILCOX BLVD EAST
404 BUNKER DRIVE
2615 OAK LAWN DRIVE
2421 ELIANNA DRIVE
2405 ELIANNA DRIVE
2308 ELIANNA DRIVE
1009 ABBEY ROAD
623 BUNKER DRIVE
274.43
915.55
11.03
866.03
386.64
711.79
1,037.78
847.92
1,382.81
1,265.18
1,072.94
505.87
895.70
843.40
1,478.91
129.32
998.86
1,246.62
1,091.88
804.60
446.83
227.91
1,061.72
33.29
982.69
1,703.77
1,064.35
1,094.04
1,661.70
1,140.45
1,121.27
841.15
1,130.71
1,899.98
1,078.75
1,023.51
250.35
1,074.46
795.81
991.44
325.30
788.35
329.03
175.97
781.83
1,088.30
811.24
455.44
18.68
703.45
129.83
1,355.07
888.43
1,076.37
1,570.65
1,120.93
1,116.69
605.78
1,398.83
169.93
1,334.16
101.57
541.57
1,519.77
54.10
261.06
261.06
749.17
458.87
684.68
1,331.30
156.27
1,122.08
13.29
128.39
1,189.83
2206302009
2206332003
2206332009
2206302013
2206426055
2206426074
2206426144
2206426176
2206451015
2206426126
2206426119
2206426199
2206426029
2206426039
2206352002
2206352003
2206352009
2207126009
2207128017
2207101049
2207101051
2207151006
2212201024
2212202004
2212201148
2212201165
2212201198
2212201077
2212201117
2212201139
2212201136
2212201134
2212201240
2212201246
2201378056
2201378048
2201451009
2201451031
2201451060
2212227009
2212276021
2212276010
2211176003
2211176003
2212252012
2212253011
2212251039
2212251037
2212251011
2207226008
2207228021
2207228011
2207251005
2207252010
2207253012
2207253016
2207230008
2211179001
2212330005
2212328010
2212329021
2201475001
2207276019
2207276018
2207276012
2207276005
2207276005
2207277002
2207276030
2207276023
2211476048
2207426038
2207426034
2207426028
2207426007
2207277001
2‐95542‐01
2‐96042‐00
2‐96171‐01
3‐00551‐00
3‐00611‐01
3‐00771‐00
3‐01021‐04
3‐01051‐00
3‐01241‐01
3‐01361‐02
3‐01522‐08
3‐01533‐03
3‐02061‐02
3‐02291‐00
3‐02461‐01
3‐02841‐04
3‐03121‐00
3‐03221‐10
3‐03371‐04
3‐03421‐04
3‐04131‐06
3‐04701‐05
3‐05161‐04
3‐05381‐06
3‐05511‐01
3‐05701‐01
3‐06381‐02
3‐07251‐00
3‐07541‐02
3‐09371‐00
3‐10252‐04
3‐10292‐98
3‐11151‐01
3‐11841‐02
3‐12101‐04
3‐12341‐00
3‐12381‐00
3‐13291‐02
3‐25061‐06
3‐25181‐00
3‐25261‐00
3‐25682‐02
3‐25701‐01
3‐25722‐06
3‐25742‐02
3‐30205‐00
3‐90097‐01
6‐00095‐00
6‐00106‐00
6‐00114‐00
6‐00115‐00
6‐00123‐00
6‐00124‐00
6‐00130‐00
6‐00131‐00
6‐00138‐00
6‐00140‐00
6‐00149‐00
6‐00150‐00
6‐00159‐00
6‐00168‐00
6‐00174‐00
6‐00175‐00
6‐00181‐00
6‐00182‐00
6‐00196‐00
6‐00200‐00
6‐00212‐00
6‐00215‐00
7‐00071‐00
7‐00076‐00
7‐00096‐00
7‐00098‐00
7‐00099‐00
7‐00195‐00
7‐00227‐00
MICHAEL NITZ
ERICK MULLENMEISTER
JASON ALDORFER
EDWARD KUHLMAN
TK PROPERTIES OF NFLD, LLC
LAWRENCE GABLE
RICHARD OZMUN
ROBERT SEITZ, JR.
NELSON FINSTAD
MARK MADSON
TERESA SWENSON
TERESA SWENSON
KENT KRAMER
REBECCA WEBER
KATHY PESHECK
JOHN MCMENAMIN
ALLEN STORLIE
JORIE BEYER
CYNTHIA JONES
TIM & TONI FOSTER
LIESA IRWIN
MICHAEL SMITH
TEDD WEST
STEVEN GEGG
TERESA SWENSON
PETER HAMMER
WILLIAM ROSS
DEBRA GROENEWOLD
PHILLIP BOEHNE
JOHN PRICE
PAMELA HOFFMANN
ERHAN ONAL
ANNA CLIFT
BRIAN MARTIN
BRUCE & MARCINE KING
DAVE NORBERG
DIANE &BRYAN NEAD
MELISSA HEGG
JAY & ANITA CORWIN
DEAN HUSCHLE
PETER GILLISPIE
MARY HANSON
CHI & NGOC NGUYEN
GLENN JACKSON
BEV ZARTWELL
JASNOCH CONSTRUCTION, INC.
JON PAULSON
BRIARWOOD DEVELOPMENT LLC
EUGENE E & SHAR JASNOCH
LOCUST LIMITED PARTNERSHIP LLP
CHRISTINE HAGER TRUST
GREH INC
CMC HEARTLAND PARTNERS
528 SOUTHBRIDGE DRIVE
1924 RED MAPLE LANE
2126 ERIE DRIVE
1120 FOREST AVENUE
1100 FOREST AVENUE
701 3RD STREET W
312 PLUM STREET S
400 PLUM STREET S
207 POPLAR STREET S
410 POPLAR STREET S
419 3RD STREET W
417 3RD STREET W
324 LINDEN STREET N
413 1ST STREET W
104 PLUM STREET N
819 1ST STREET W
913 2ND STREET W
719 2ND STREET W
111 PLUM STREET S
504 2ND STREET W
205 ORCHARD STREET N
1012 ST OLAF AVENUE
115 MADISON STREET N
607 ST OLAF AVENUE
407 ST OLAF AVENUE
304 WATER STREET N
904 GREENVALE AVENUE
427 PLUM STREET N
317 SPRING STREET N
1212 GREENVALE ROAD
1146 HIGHLAND AVENUE
1138 HIGHLAND AVENUE
804 IVANHOE DRIVE
772 LATHROP DRIVE
929 JUNIPER AVENUE
800 JOANN COURT
808 JOANN COURT
947 SUMMERFIELD DRIVE
800 HEADLEY COURT
700 HEADLEY COURT
707 HEADLEY COURT
833 HEADLEY COURT
827 HEADLEY COURT
831 HEADLEY COURT
829 HEADLEY COURT
HYDRANT METER
TREE FARM
2835 OAK LAWN DR
2318 VALLEY DRIVE
2611 OAK LAWN DR
2304 VALLEY COURT
700 CARTER DR
2308 VALLEY COURT
2804 OAK LAWN DR
704 CARTER DR
0 OUTLOT E ‐ LOCUST DE
708 CARTER DR
712 CARTER DR
2413 PEPPER RIDGE COURT
2414 VALLEY DRIVE
2406 VALLEY DRIVE
2664 OAK LAWN DR
2402 VALLEY DRIVE
2660 OAK LAWN DR
2322 VALLEY DRIVE
2644 OAK LAWN DR
2640 OAK LAWN DR
2612 OAK LAWN DR
STORMWATER PARCEL
0 WOODLEY ST E‐STORM W
1925 RED MAPLE LN
STORMWATER PARCEL
SHILLING BUSINESS PK
STORMWATER PARCEL
STORMWATER PARCEL
1923 RED MAPLE LN
112.23
323.55
1,175.28
884.69
36.28
118.23
1,276.98
319.03
1,040.47
1,402.58
1,003.06
1,934.64
43.77
606.65
687.09
895.43
960.81
1,397.57
1,017.70
1,677.47
176.78
702.41
1,069.92
43.16
2,221.31
600.05
1,474.64
345.61
568.96
200.41
543.54
100.68
685.40
1,315.09
496.08
2,101.01
241.52
832.99
1,634.18
972.02
1,111.44
968.48
609.18
133.16
715.84
224.73
781.61
20.33
21.19
27.10
18.27
25.23
18.05
36.04
25.23
327.23
28.60
33.56
30.25
20.74
18.34
15.18
18.34
16.62
19.76
18.68
16.92
14.39
181.15
37.30
13.64
197.65
71.12
3.49
11.81
15.58
2207301041
2207130027
2207176053
2236351039
2236351045
2236451094
2201126015
2201126027
2236451067
2201126039
2236451115
2236451115
2236402005
2236451040
2236451024
2236378005
2236375025
2236451087
2236451047
2236451052
2236429012
2236300025
2236351018
2236452003
2236451013
2231325011
2236275004
2236427002
2236402017
2236250004
2236255009
2236255027
2236282002
2236276014
2236277008
2236277016
2236277018
2236201029
2236176005
2236176011
2236176016
2236176035
2236176032
2236176036
2236176021
2211176007
2236150010
2211476051
2212330020
2211476049
2212330017
2212276030
2212330016
2211476035
2212276029
2211476004
2212276028
2212276027
2212329020
2212329005
2212329003
2211476022
2212329002
2211476021
2212329001
2211476017
2211476016
2211476009
2211476005
2206426054
2207130016
2211154011
2211176008
2211176009
2201126043
2207130015
7‐00234‐00
7‐00235‐00
7‐00241‐00
7‐00250‐00
7‐00288‐00
7‐00292‐00
7‐00293‐00
7‐00294‐00
7‐00312‐00
7‐00314‐00
7‐00315‐00
7‐00320‐00
7‐00332‐00
7‐00333‐00
7‐00334‐00
7‐00344‐00
7‐00346‐00
7‐00347‐00
7‐00357‐00
7‐00358‐00
7‐00359‐00
7‐00365‐00
7‐00366‐00
7‐00370‐00
7‐00373‐01
7‐00398‐02
7‐00418‐00
7‐00419‐00
7‐00420‐00
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
GREH INC
KRISTEN Q. COE TRUST
Total Certifications to Rice County
STORMWATER PARCEL
STORMWATER PARCEL
2002 GRANT DRIVE
1927 RED MAPLE LN
1921 RED MAPLE LN
STORMWATER PARCEL
1403 HERITAGE DRIVE TB#1
STORMWATER PARCEL
1919 RED MAPLE LN
STORMWATER PARCEL
STORMWATER PARCEL
2003 GRANT DRIVE
1917 RED MAPLE LN
STORMWATER PARCEL
1405 HERITAGE DRIVE TB #2
MEADOWVIEW DRIVE
STORMWATER PARCEL
1403 HERITAGE DRIVE‐HOUSE
OUTLOT E MEADOWVIEW
1403 HERITAGE DRIVE TB #1
STORMWATER PARCEL
STORMWATER PARCEL
2007 GRANT DRIVE
STORMWATER PARCEL
DECLARATION ST
158 WATER ST N #1
2125 DECLARATION STREET
3‐14201‐01
3‐14282‐01
3‐14501‐03
3‐14572‐02
3‐20521‐00
3‐20781‐01
3‐23222‐01
ROBIN JONES
BRENT KIVELL
DAVID WEBB
CHRIS WILSON
MARION PHELPS
C. YALE PFOUTZ
APPLEMAN, D SCHMIT, JOHN
Total Certifications to Dakota County
512 NELSON COURT
600 GILL LANE
700 COVEY COURT
703 COVEY COURT
1229 WOODLAND TRAIL
1123 WOODLAND TRAIL
1216 HAWTHORNE COURT
Total 2013 Certification of Delinquent Utility Bills
123.82
63.15
23.88
15.58
15.58
415.43
21.10
13.67
13.64
301.18
2.85
21.70
15.93
2,511.64
62.47
50.61
379.30
2.51
35.99
21.10
1,272.78
1,313.19
20.52
919.95
991.16
6.49
51.23
46.02
244.76
$159,874.48
520.94
501.24
378.64
1,102.54
349.71
4,792.57
606.56
$8,252.20
$168,126.68
2211154010
2211176007
2212276015
2207130017
2207130014
2211154009
2211176909
2211179003
2207130013
2211154008
2211179002
2212276014
2207130012
2211154007
2211176006
2207130011
2211154006
2211176908
2207130010
2211176913
2211275002
2211200003
2212276013
2202450001
2211476067
2236480001
2211180002
2211180003
2211180004
435210021002
435210107002
435210006001
435210001201
431640026000
431640039000
432250011001
<Date>
<name>
<Address>
<City>, <State> <ZipCode>
Dear <Name>:
Re: Delinquent Utility Charges
Our records show that there are unpaid utility charges against your property as follows:
Account #:
Service Address:
Parcel #:
Amount Due:
The amount due must be received in the Finance Department at City Hall no later than 5:00 p.m. on
Tuesday, November 5, 2013. If unpaid after this date, the amount due plus an additional 10% penalty /
administrative fee will be certified to your property taxes payable in 2014. The due date for payment is
firm as the City is required to transmit the certification data the following week.
Please return this letter with your payment.
Sincerely,
City of Northfield
Finance Department
City Hall  801 Washington Street  Northfield, MN 55057-2598
507.645.3015  fax 507.645.3055  e-mail:lori.guggemos@ci.northfield.mn.us
CONSENT
To:
City Administrator
From:
Jasper J. Kruggel, GIS & Engineering Technician\Wellhead Protection Manager
Subject:
Acceptance of the Minnesota Department of Health Source Water Protection
Grant
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to approve the attached resolution accepting a $10,000
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Source Water Protection Grant.
Summary Report:
The City of Northfield was awarded a $10,000 grant from the MDH for the purpose of upgrading
technical aspects of our water delivery system and to locate and evaluate private wells located
within the City’s Drinking Water Supply Management Area (DWSMA). This was a competitive
grant that requires no City match of funds. One portion of the grant ($6,000) is to be used to
upgrade our drawdown system to incorporate transducers and the other portion ($4,000) is to be
used to locate and collect information about existing wells located within our DWSMA. This
data will then be added to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s Potential Contaminated
Source Inventory.
Attachments:
1. Resolution 2013-134
2. Source Water Protection Grant
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2013-134
ACCEPTING MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
SOURCE WATER PROTECTION GRANT
WHEREAS,
it is proposed that the Northfield City Council accept the $10,000 Source Water Protection Grant
offered by the Minnesota Department of Health; and,
WHEREAS,
it is proposed that the grant guidelines be followed through in the year of 2014.
NOW, THERFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THAT:
The proposed Source Water Protection Grant offered by the Minnesota Department of Health for the amount
of $10,000 which requires no City match is accepted by the Northfield City Council.
ATTEST
___________________________________
City Clerk
VOTE:
___________________________________
Mayor
CONSENT
To:
City Administrator
From: Joseph L. Stapf, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer
Brian Erickson P.E., Assistant Public Works Director/Assistant City Engineer
T.J. Heinricy, Streets and Parks Supervisor
Subject: Approve Purchase of Equipment for Public Works Department
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council approves the purchase of a 2013 Bobcat S650 Skid Steer Loader
from Matejcek Implement Company of Faribault, MN, for a net cost of $22,421.91 plus tax, to
be used by the Streets and Parks Division of the Public Works Department.
Summary Report:
The Council is being asked to authorize the purchase of a 2013 Bobcat Skid-Steer Loader. This
purchase is a replacement of a current skid steer loader that has reached its planned lifecycle.
The machine being replaced is a 2003 Bobcat S-250 Skid-Steer Loader. This existing piece of
equipment is of an age where the frequency and cost of repairs will begin to increase and the
trade-in value decreases. Replacement at this point provides cost efficiencies in the management
of the City’s equipment. The purchase of this piece of equipment is included in the 2013-2022
Capital Equipment Plan and was estimated at $35,000.
Staff requested quotes from Matejcek Implement and Titan Machinery, and the table below
shows a breakdown of those quotes. As part of the quote the vendors were asked to provide a
trade-in value for the loader and several attachments. Those attachments include the bucket,
pallet forks and a snow plow. It is important to note that while it first appears that the Matejcek
quote is only slightly lower in net price, Titan did NOT include in its quote new pallet forks or
the specified snow plow attachment. Titan has advised us they do not make or market a snow
plow attachment, and simply declined to bid on the pallet forks. While it would be possible to
purchase after-market pallet forks and/or snow plow that would most likely be considerable
additional cost if we accepted the Titan quote.
Lastly, the Street and Parks Department “demoed” both machines. The consensus of the
equipment operators was the Bobcat skid steer bid by Matejcek was the preferred unit because of
the control system design and comparative ease of operation.
A detailed breakdown is shown in the table below:
Matejcek
Titan
Quote
$ 39,441.91
$ 42,725.00
Trade-In
Total
$ (18,020.00) $ 21,421.91
$ (21,000.00) $ 21,725.00
Lights and Decals
$
1,000.00
Total Equipment Purchase (Matejcek)
$ 22,421.91
Funding per Capital Equipment Plan
$ 35,000.00
Below Budget
$ 12,578.09
The Matejcek quote most closely meets the specifications, and is the lower cost of the two
submitted. Staff therefore recommends award of purchase of the new skid steer loader for the
Streets and Parks Department to Matejcek Implement Company of Faribault, MN.
Alternative Options:
The purchase could always be postponed, and the current piece of equipment could be retained
for use for a few more years; however, the repair and maintenance costs associated with aging
equipment will begin to increase, and downtime will increase. This skid steer loader is very
useful during the snow removal season, and downtime is more problematic during that period
than any other. Trade-in value will also diminish with age.
Financial Impacts:
The 2013-2020 Capital Equipment Plan estimated $35,000 for the replacement of this skid steer
loader. The proposed purchase is well within the budgeted amount, even including the estimated
cost for other required items such as decals and beacons, which would be paid as part of the
overall equipment purchase.
Staff discussions have indicated at this time that the sales tax exemption for municipalities is
much narrower than initially indicated. The Minnesota Department of Revenue has issued
information indicating that only emergency vehicles are exempted from the sales tax. As result
there will be no sales tax savings in waiting to purchase this vehicle, and in fact, an increase in
cost is likely because delaying purchase would likely require the purchase of a 2014 model year
vehicle.
Attachments:
1. Quote from Titan Machinery
2. Quote from Matejcek Implement
CONSENT
To:
City Administrator
From:
Joseph L. Stapf, P.E., Public Works Director/City Engineer
Subject:
Farmland Lease for Meadows Property
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council approves the attached Request for Proposals (RFP) for leasing the tillable acreage
of the Meadows Property, and authorizes the release of the RFP, and its advertisement.
Summary Report:
At its October 1, 2013 meeting, the City Council adopted the task force report recommending a series of eight
measures to address the short to medium term stormwater management issues for the tax forfeiture-acquired
Meadows Property in the southeast corner of the City of Northfield. Number seven of those eight measures was
negotiating a one year lease of the tillable acreage of the property.
Toward that end, staff has prepared the attached Request for Proposals for soliciting from area farmers lease
proposals for the approximate 30 tillable acres within that property. This RFP includes as a condition of the
lease the establishment of a buffer strip a minimum of 30 feet in width along the northerly edge of the farmland
area, as well as establishing a grass-lined waterway from the box culvert under Hall Street and continuing westnorthwesterly across the property to the stormwater pond. The approximate location of these two features is
shown on the attached map. The RFP also is written around the expectation that either corn or soybeans will be
planted on the property, although there is no restriction in that regard.
Another key feature of the proposed lease of this property is that it provides for up to two one year lease
renewals.
The main reason to consider leasing this property is it will provide some modest revenue for the property tax
jurisdictions (Rice County, Northfield School District, and City of Northfield) as opposed to totally removing
the property from the tax rolls, and it reduces the City’s maintenance responsibility. The total tax liability for
this property last year was $7,450; of that amount, $2,906 was payment of the City of Northfield storm water
utility fee.
Without leasing the property, the City would most likely find it necessary to mow the acreage at least three, and
perhaps as many as four times, during the growing season. Doing so on a contract basis would cost the City at
least $15 to $20 per acre per mowing, or perhaps as much as $3,000 per year.
Response(s) to the RFP are due on December 2, 2013. If there is to be a special meeting on December 10, 2013,
the Lease Proposals would be presented to the City Council at that time. Failing that, the matter would have to
wait until the meeting of January 7, 2014.
Attached for future reference is the draft farmland lease agreement, which was prepared by the City Attorney. It
reflects the conditions contained in the RFP.
Alternatives:
The alternative would be the City Council could decide to NOT lease the property.
Financial Impacts:
The lease of this property, based on the 2013 lease agreement held by Rice County, could generate $300 per
acre or approximately $9,000 per year. However, that lease was established when the price of corn was around
$7.30 per bushel, and soy beans stood at about $16.50 per bushel. Currently, the price of corn is hovering
around $4.20 per bushel, and soybeans are at about $12.70. That decline in crop prices will very likely reduce
the amount of rent farmers are willing to pay for this property. While the potential gross rental income should
not be trivialized, neither should the cost avoidance associated with not having to mow the weeds that will
inevitably takeover the property if left unattended.
Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Request for Proposals for lease of the Meadows
farmland, and release of same.
Attachments:
1. Request For Proposals
2. Draft Lease Agreement
3. Eight Measures Status Summary
4. Map
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Meadows Property
Farmland Lease
Contents:
A. Purpose of Request
B. City of Northfield Contact
C. Submittal Requirements
D. Contract
E. Insurance
F. Subleasing
G. Payment
H. Attachments
Contact:
Joseph L. Stapf, P.E.
Public Works Director/City Engineer
City of Northfield
801 Washington Street
Northfield, Minnesota 55057
507-645-3020
joseph.stapf@ci.northfield.mn.us
1
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
(Farmland lease)
NORTHFIELD, MN
CITY OF NORTHFIELD PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
November 19, 2013
A. PURPOSE OF REQUEST
The City of Northfield seeks to enter into a minimum 1 year contract to lease the tillable acreage of Outlots
C & D, Fargaze Meadows. In addition to the one year lease, the City will entertain an option for two
additional one year lease extensions. The purpose of leasing the property is to effectively have it
maintained in a manner which will be at no cost to the City, while the City of Northfield is evaluating longterm options for this property.
In addition to the actual lease of the tillable acreage, Respondents shall include in their proposal the
necessary grading, tillage, and seeding to establish the grass lined waterway and buffer strips shown on the
attached map. The grass lined water way and buffer strip are intended to reduce runoff from the field into
the back yards along the south side of Ford Street, and to reduce sedimentation into the Fargaze Meadows
Upper Pond. These grass lined strips are to be established with the input of the Rice County Soil and
Water Conservation District.
At some point between the commencement of the lease period and the 2014 planting season, the City of
Northfield also expects to have graded into the area just south of and adjacent to the buffer strip a swale to
carry runoff from the field over to the area in the vicinity of Brogan Drive where it is stubbed south from Ford
Street. At that location there is a 48” diameter storm sewer that is dead-ended below grade to the south,
but which collects stormwater from four nearby catch basins and drains into the southwest corner of the
nearby pond. Presuming that swale is graded as described, it will most likely include some of the
anticipated buffer strip. It is the City’s intent to have the lessee seed this proposed swale along with the
buffer strip described above. The grading of the swale, however, will be performed by others under
separate contractual arrangements made by the City of Northfield. The lessee shall coordinate his or her
activities as necessary with that future grading contractor employed by the City of Northfield.
This work is all intended to enhance the ability of the City of Northfield to manage the stormwater runoff
from this area. The Respondents are expected to include consideration for all work as described herein in
their respective proposals.
B. CITY OF NORTHFIELD CONTACT
The City of Northfield Project Manager is Joseph L. Stapf, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer,
assisted by Brian Erickson, P.E. Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer. Day-to-day Contact shall
be through Streets & Parks Supervisor, T.J. Heinricy, at (507) 645-3032 (work), or (612) 282-7560 (cell).
The City’s Project Manager will provide direction to the Contact, as the need arises.
2
C. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
General Information
1. Submission of Proposal. The proposals shall be submitted in writing to Joseph L. Stapf, P.E., with a
copy to Deb Little, City Clerk, on or before 2:00 PM, local time, by Tuesday, December 12, 2013.
The address for submittal is:
Northfield City hall
Northfield, MN 55057
LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
2. Proposal Format. Proposals shall be prepared on 8-1/2” x 11” format, and if more than one page, all
pages shall be sequentially numbered throughout or by section (i.e., Page 1 of 3, 2 of 3, 3 of 3, etc.).
All text and exhibits should be succinct and relevant to the RFP requirements. The Respondents
shall provide some narrative detail explaining their respective proposals, and shall indicate the per
acre rental rate to be paid under the terms of their proposal.
The total ultimate rent payment(s) shall be based on the actual field measurement of the area being
tilled. Of the approximate 41 acres total in the two parcels, there has been previously determined to
have been 33 acres tillable. Evaluation of the respective proposals will be in part based upon a total
lease area of 33 acres. It is possible, however, that the future tillable area will be reduced due to
some grading related to storm water management measures that may be implemented in the future.
The actual measurement of net tillable acres will be applied to the approved rental rate established
by the Lease Agreement to determine the rent amount to be paid in any given lease year.
3. Examination of RFP. By submitting a proposal, the Respondent represents that he or she has
thoroughly examined and is thoroughly familiar with the terms of the RFP, and that they are fully
capable of complying with the terms of the Lease Agreement that will ultimately be executed
between the lessee, and the City of Northfield, as the lessor.
4. Addenda/Clarifications. The City will make any necessary changes to this RFP through a written
addendum. No verbal modification will be binding.
5. Exceptions and Deviations. Any exceptions to the requirements in this RPF must be in writing and
included in the proposal submitted by the Respondent. Any such exceptions shall be segregated as
a separate element of the proposal under the heading “Exceptions and Deviations.” The degree to
which a Respondent takes exception to any requirement may have bearing on the City’s award
decision.
7. Lease Award. Issuance of this RFP and receipt of proposals do not commit the City to the awarding
of the Lease Agreement. The City reserves the right to postpone opening for its own convenience, to
accept or reject any or all proposals received in response to this RFP, to negotiate with other than
the selected Respondent (should negotiations with the selected Respondent be terminated), to
negotiate with more than one Respondent simultaneously, or to cancel all or part of this RFP.
8. City Rights. The City may investigate the qualifications of any Respondent under consideration,
require confirmation of information furnished by the Respondent, and require additional evidence of
3
qualifications, to fulfill the lease terms under the Lease Agreement and as described in this RFP.
The City reserves the right to:
a. Reject any or all proposals if such action is deemed to be in the public interest;
b. Cancel the entire Request for Proposals;
c. Issue a subsequent Request for Proposals;
d. Remedy technical errors in a Request for Proposals process;
e. Appoint evaluation committees to review the proposals;
f. Establish a short list of Respondent eligible for interview after evaluation of proposals;
g. Negotiate with any, all, or none of the RFP Respondent; and
h. Reject and replace one or more Respondents.
9. Independent Price Determination. Respondents are held legally responsible for their information.
Respondents are not to collaborate for the purpose of restricting competition with other Respondents
or competitors in developing lease proposals.
10. Independent Contractor Status. The Respondents will be independent parties, and this RFP and
Lease do not constitute a joint venture or partnership between the lessor and lessee. Further,
nothing contained in any lease agreement awarded shall be construed to create the relationship of
employer and employee between City and the Respondent, or the Respondent’s employees. The
Respondent or their employees are not entitled to receive any of the benefits as City employees,
and are not eligible for workers’ or unemployment compensation benefits through the City of
Northfield.
11. Contract Type. The City of Northfield’s lease agreement will be executed between the City of
Northfield and the selected Respondent.
The Letter of Submittal shall include:
1. Name, address, phone number, and fax number of the Respondent;
2. Acknowledgement of receipt of RFP addenda, if any;
3. Name, title, address, telephone, fax numbers, and email address of contact person during the
period of evaluation;
4. A statement to the effect that the proposal shall remain valid for a period of not less than 60 days
from the date of submittal; and
5. Signature of a person authorized to bind the offering firm to the terms of the proposal.
Questions regarding this RFP and the project should be directed to Joseph L. Stapf, P.E. at
507-645-3020 (joseph.stapf@ci.northfield.mn.us).
D. CONTRACT
The term of the Lease Agreement to be awarded under this RFP will be from the date executed by all
parties, and will continue for one calendar year from the date of execution. A copy of the required Lease
Agreement is attached. The selected Respondent must be willing to sign the attached Lease Agreement.
E. INSURANCE
Proof of insurance shall be provided by the Respondents as part of their respective proposals. At the time of
execution of the Lease Agreement, the lessee shall provide Certificates of Insurance meeting the insurance
requirements contained in the attached Lease Agreement.
4
1. Lessee shall obtain insurance policies from insurance companies having an “AM BEST” rating of
A- (minus); Financial Size Category (FSC) VII or better, and authorized to do business in the
State of Minnesota
2. An Umbrella or Excess Liability insurance policy may be used to supplement the Lessee’s policy
limits to satisfy the full policy limits required by the Lease Agreement.
3. Lessee shall provide a certificate of insurance showing evidence of workers’ compensation
coverage or provide evidence of qualification as a self-insurer of workers’ compensation. If
Minnesota Statute 176.041 exempts Lessee from Workers’ Compensation insurance or if the
Lessee has no employees, Lessee must provide a written statement, signed by an authorized
representative, indicating the qualifying exemption that excludes Lessee from Minnesota
Worker’s Compensation requirements.
The Lessee’s insurance agent must forward a certificate of insurance to the City naming the City of
Northfield as an additional insured before any work begins under the terms of the Lease Agreement.
Notice of cancellation will be delivered in accordance with the insurance policy provisions.
See attached example certificate of insurance.
Please send all insurance related items to: Deb Little, City of Northfield, 801 Washington Street, Northfield,
MN 55057; e-mail: deb.little@ci.northfield.mn.us
F. Subleasing
Subleasing under this Lease Agreement WILL NOT BE ALLOWED.
G. Payment
The Respondent as Lessee shall submit lease payments bi-annually (twice per year). The first payment
shall be made on the date of execution of the Lease Agreement, and the second payment shall be made six
months thereafter.
H. ATTACHMENTS
Location Maps
Example of Certificate of insurance
Lease Agreement
5
AGRICULTURAL LAND LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT (the “Lease” or “Agreement”) dated this _____ day of
_________________, 20____, by and between the CITY OF NORTHFIELD, a Minnesota municipal
corporation,
(the “Landlord”), and __________________________________ (the “Tenant”),
(collectively the “Parties”).
In consideration of the terms and conditions of this Lease, Landlord and Tenant agree as follows:
ARTICLE ONE
Definitions and Terms
As used in this Lease, the following terms shall have the specific meanings set forth below:
1.1
“Landlord” means the City of Northfield, having as its address for notice purposes 801
Washington Street, Northfield, MN 55057-2565; Attention: City Administrator.
1.2
“Tenant” means ____________________, having as its address for notice purposes
_______________________ Minnesota, 55____________.
1.3
“Commencement Date” means ___________, 20____.
1.4
“Expiration Date” means ____________, 20____.
1.5
“Premises” means the real property owned by Landlord located at
____________________________________ in the City of Northfield, legally described as
_________________________________________________ and shown on Exhibit A attached hereto.
ARTICLE TWO
Demising Clause
2.1
Landlord leases to Tenant and Tenant leases from Landlord the Premises on the terms and
conditions contained in this Lease.
2.2
Tenant shall have the nonexclusive right to use the Premises for agricultural purposes as
provided herein.
ARTICLE THREE
Term and Possession
3.1
Term. This Lease shall be for a term one (1) year, beginning on the Commencement
Date and ending on the Expiration Date, unless terminated prior to the Expiration Date. Except as
otherwise provided in this Lease, termination of the Lease prior to the Expiration Date requires mutual
agreement by the Landlord and Tenant. Tenant shall be entitled to possession on the Commencement
Date and shall give up possession on the Expiration Date.
3.2
The Parties shall have the option of renewing the Lease for two additional one (1) year
periods. Renewal shall occur only upon Tenant’s delivery to Landlord by 60 days prior to the
Expiration Date, a written request to renew the Lease for the additional period. Upon said delivery,
Landlord shall have until 30 days to provide written notice of its acceptance or rejection of Tenant’s
renewal offer. If Tenant fails to deliver such renewal notice, the Lease shall terminate at the end of the
initial term; conversely, if Landlord fails to notify Tenant in writing of its decision, the Lease shall
automatically renew for the additional period.
ARTICLE FOUR
Rent
4.1
Tenant shall, for the entire Lease Term, pay to Landlord without demand, annual rent in
the amount of $________ per acre of land tilled (the “Rent”). The annual rent amount shall be paid in
two installments with the first payment due upon the Commencement Date of this Lease Agreement.
Tenant shall deliver payment of the second installment of rent by the first day of the month six months
following the Commencement Date at the address specified for Landlord herein. A late penalty of 5%
of the payment due will be assessed on all late payments. Tenant agrees and acknowledges that the
late penalty is necessary to compensate Landlord for lost interest, the opportunity cost of renting the
property, and any legal fees or expenses incurred in enforcing its rights pursuant to this Agreement.
4.2
Prior to taking possession of the Premises, Tenant shall deliver to Landlord a security
deposit of $5,000.00.
ARTICLE FIVE
Payment of Taxes
5.1
Landlord shall pay all taxes, assessments and governmental charges (collectively
referred to as "Taxes") that accrue against the Premises during the Lease Term with the exception of
those taxes that are directly attributable to agricultural or other production and sales based activities
being conducted by Tenant on the Premises.
5.2
Tenant shall be liable for all taxes levied or assessed against any personal property or
fixtures placed on the Premises, whether levied or assessed against Landlord or Tenant.
5.3
If Landlord accepts an offer for a renewal term, the annual rent for the renewal term
shall be adjusted using the CPI for the Minnesota region in the year of renewal as an index and the first
year of Lease as a base year (as set forth by the Government of the United States. The rent shall not
decrease during the renewal term, such that if the CPI is zero or negative, the rent shall remain the
same as the prior year.
ARTICLE SIX
Permitted Use
6.1
Tenant shall use the Premises for agricultural purposes only and all activities incidental
thereto, including:
2
a. To till all of the tillable land in a husband-like manner.
b. To grade as necessary, till, plant, establish and maintain the buffer strip and grass-lined
waterway, and future drainage swale shown on the attached map of the premises.
c. To work with the Rice County Soil and Water Conservation District to control soil
erosion and storm water runoff.
d. To harvest and remove all crops in due season.
e. To keep all ditches cleaned of weeds and debris.
f. To mow roadsides and fence rows.
g. To destroy all noxious weeds and grasses and nuisances in compliance with State Law.
6.2
Tenant shall not cause, maintain or permit any nuisance in, on or about the Premises.
More specifically, Tenant shall not use or store any noxious chemicals on the Premises. Tenant shall not
commit or allow to be committed any waste in or upon the Premises.
ARTICLE SEVEN
Utilities
7.1
Tenant agrees to pay in a timely manner any and all utilities for use of the Premises,
including, without limitation, electricity, fuel oil, gas services, telephone, trash collection, snow plowing,
lawn mowing, water, sewer service, cable or satellite television reception, internet connection fees, and
any other such services associated with the Tenant’s use or enjoyment of the Premises. Landlord shall not
be providing any services to the Premises other than specified herein.
ARTICLE EIGHT
Subletting and Assignment
8.1
Tenant shall not assign its interest in this Lease and shall not sublet any portion of the
Premises, or any right or privilege provided under the Lease or use of the Premises, or suffer any other
person to occupy or use any portion of the Premises.
ARTICLE NINE
Quiet Possession and Subordination
9.1
Landlord covenants that Tenant, upon paying the Rent and performing the covenants
under this Lease, shall peaceably and quietly have, hold and enjoy the leased Premises for the term of
the Lease.
9.2
This Lease is subject and subordinate to all present or future financial encumbrances on the
Premises, and is further subject to all present and future easements, conditions and encumbrances of
record, and to all applicable laws, ordinances and governmental rules and regulations. Such subordination
shall be self-executing without further act on the part of Landlord or Tenant; provided, however, that
Tenant shall at any time hereafter, at the request of Landlord or any lien holder, or any purchaser of the
Premises, execute any instruments that may be required, and Tenant hereby irrevocably authorizes
Landlord to execute and deliver in the name of Tenant any such instrument if Tenant fails to do so.
ARTICLE TEN
3
Landlord’s Reserved Rights
Landlord reserves the following rights: (a) to take any and all measures necessary or desirable for
the operation, safety, protection or preservation of the Premises, including repairs, alterations, decorations,
additions or improvements, whether structural or otherwise, in and about the Premises or any part thereof;
and (b) to enter to verify use of the Premises. Landlord may enter upon the Premises and may exercise
any or all of the foregoing rights without being deemed guilty of an eviction (actual or constructive) or
disturbance of Tenant’s use or possession and without being liable in any manner to Tenant and without
abatement of Rent or affecting Tenant’s obligations hereunder.
ARTICLE ELEVEN
Alterations and Improvements
11.1 Landlord has made no promise to alter, remodel, repair or improve the Premises and has
made no representation of the condition of the Premises or the suitability of the Premises for the purpose
stated herein other than what is contained in this Lease.
11.2 Tenant shall not make material alterations or improvements to the Premises without the
written consent of Landlord. Consent shall be obtained by submitting a written description to Landlord of
the proposed improvement, including its location, size, proposed use, and whether the improvement is to
be severed from the property at the termination of the Lease or is to be left on the property, and any other
information that may be required by the Landlord. Landlord may approve, disapprove, require more
information, or require certain modifications to the proposed improvement in its sole judgment and
discretion. Tenant’s final written proposal including a clear indication of Landlord’s assent and signed by
Landlord shall constitute written consent of Landlord. Unless otherwise agreed by both parties, approved
improvements shall be at the sole expense of Tenant.
11.3 Tenant shall allow no mechanic’s liens to be incurred or filed against the Premises.
Tenant shall promptly pay for all alterations and improvements, which it may make under this Lease
that are approved by Landlord, and shall save and hold harmless Landlord from any and all losses,
including attorneys' fees, incurred by reason of mechanic's liens or other claims for skill, labor or
material furnished or performed, or claimed to have been furnished or performed, on account of any
such alteration or improvement made by Tenant hereunder. Tenant may contest any such mechanic's
liens and prosecute all proceedings for the purpose of such contest pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 514.01, et
seq. Tenant shall indemnify Landlord against any loss or liability by reason of such contest.
11.3
Landlord.
Tenant shall not place or maintain any signs on the Premises, without authorization by
ARTICLE TWELVE
Repairs and Maintenance
12.1 Tenant, at its expense, shall keep the Premises in a safe and tenantable condition based on
the purpose of this Lease. If Tenant does not do so, Landlord may (but need not) restore the Premises to a
safe and tenantable condition, and Tenant shall pay the cost upon being billed by Landlord. This Article
shall not apply to damage or destruction otherwise provided for in this Lease.
4
12.2 Tenant shall be responsible for all major and minor maintenance, repairs, or replacement
of any and all alterations or improvements to the Premises made under Article 11. Improvements made
under Article 11 that are capable of severance may be removed by Tenant at any time or within 30 days
after termination of the Lease even though they may be fixtures, provided that Tenant leaves in good
condition that part of the Premises from which such improvements are removed.
12.3 Improvements not capable of severance shall become the property of Landlord at
termination of the Lease without compensation to the Tenant.
ARTICLE THIRTEEN
Destruction or Damage
13.1
Tenant agrees:
a. That it will obtain all necessary state and local permits for its operations as necessary.
b. That it will operate in accordance with all federal, state and local regulations.
c. That it will be solely responsible for security of the Premises, including crops and
equipment, and for any loss, damage, or destruction thereof.
d. That it will keep the Premises in such repair as at the commencement of the said term
or may be put in during continuance thereof, reasonable wear and tear and damage by
fire or extended peril coverage perils only excepted.
e. That it will not injure, overload or suffer to be injured or overloaded the Premises or
any part thereof.
f. That it will not make or suffer any unlawful, improper or offensive use of the Premises
or any use thereof contrary to any law of the State or any ordinance of the City now or
hereafter made, or which shall be injurious to any person or property or which shall be
liable to endanger or affect any insurance on the said Property.
ARTICLE FOURTEEN
Hold Harmless
14.1 Tenant shall defend, indemnify and hold Landlord harmless from any liability, loss, cost,
and obligations, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, arising out of the use of the Premises by Tenant,
Tenant’s employees, officers, agents, clients and invitees. Landlord shall defend, indemnify and hold
Tenant harmless from any liability, loss, cost, and obligations, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, arising
out of negligent or willful acts by Landlord, its employees, officers, agents, clients and invitees in meeting
Landlord’s obligations under this Lease.
14.2 Tenant knows, understands and acknowledges the risks and hazards associated with using
the Premises and hereby assumes any and all risks and hazards associated therewith. Tenant hereby
irrevocably waives any and all claims against the Landlord or any of its officials, employees or agents for
any bodily injury (including death), loss or property damage incurred by Lessee as a result of using the
Premises and hereby irrevocably releases and discharges the Landlord and any of its officials, employees
or agents from any and all claims of liability.
5
ARTICLE FIFTEEN
Holding Over
15.1 If Tenant without the consent of Landlord retains possession of the Premises or any part
thereof after termination of the Term, then Landlord can elect to recover possession of the Premises by
pursuing its rights under this Lease or at law. In such event Landlord shall further be able to recover in
damages for the period Tenant holds over an amount equal to one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the
Rent payable for the month immediately preceding the commencement of said holding over computed
on a daily basis until Landlord receives possession of the Premises and in addition thereto, Tenant shall
pay Landlord all direct damages sustained by reason of Tenant’s retention of possession.
Alternatively, Landlord can elect to retain Tenant on a month to month tenancy, terminable in
accordance with law, at a Rent equal to one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the rate payable
hereunder, commencing the month immediately preceding the commencement of said holding over
and computed on a per month basis for each month or part thereof that Tenant remains in possession.
15.2 Landlord shall exercise its election of one of the above described alternatives by
delivering a written notice thereof to Tenant within thirty (30) days after the first day of Tenant’s
retention of possession beyond the Term. In the event that Landlord fails to exercise its election as
provided above, then Landlord shall be conclusively presumed to have elected to retain Tenant on a
month to month tenancy, terminable in accordance with law at a Rent as provided in this Article.
ARTICLE SIXTEEN
Surrender of Possession
16.1 Upon the termination of the Lease Term, Tenant shall immediately surrender the Premises
(together with any alterations and improvements that are not severable) to Landlord in good order, repair
and condition, ordinary wear and fire or casualty losses for which Tenant is not responsible excepted, and
shall remove all equipment, trade fixtures and other items of Tenant’s property from the Premises. Tenant
shall pay Landlord upon demand the cost of repairing any damage to the Premises caused by such
removal. Tenant shall leave the Premises in its pre-Lease condition, reasonable wear and tear excepted. If
Tenant fails or refuses to remove Tenant’s property from the Premises, Tenant shall be presumed to have
abandoned the property and Landlord may dispose of the property without incurring liability, at Tenant’s
expense.
ARTICLE SEVENTEEN
Compliance with Laws, Ordinances and Regulations
17.1 Throughout the Term of this Lease, Tenant, at its sole cost and expense, shall promptly
comply with all present and future laws, ordinances, orders, rules, opinions, directives, regulations and
requirements of all federal, state, city and other local governments. Throughout the Term of this
Lease, Landlord shall comply with all local, state, and federal laws and regulations with respect to its
management and operation of the Premises.
6
17.2 Tenant shall likewise observe and comply with, or shall cause to be observed and
complied with, all the requirements of all policies of comprehensive general liability, fire and other
insurance at any time in force with respect to the Premises.
ARTICLE EIGHTEEN
Insurance
18.1 In addition to the following, Tenant shall maintain, at Tenant’s expense, insurance on
Tenant’s property located in and upon the Premises, and shall assume the risk of loss to such property on
the Premises.
18.2 Required Insurance. Tenant agrees to maintain, at Tenant’s expense, the following
insurance policies in the listed amounts:
Worker’s Compensation
Statutory Limits
Employer’s Liability
$500,000 each accident
$500,000 disease policy limit
$500,000 disease each employee
Comprehensive General
Liability
$2,000,000 property damage and bodily
injury per occurrence
$4,000,000 general aggregate
$2,000,000 Products – Completed
Operations Aggregate
$100,000 fire legal liability each
occurrence
$5,000 medical expense
Comprehensive Automobile
Liability
$1,000,000 combined single limit each
accident (shall include coverage for all
owned, hired and non-owed vehicles)
Umbrella or Excess Liability
$1,000,000
All policies listed above shall be written on an “occurrence” form (“claims made” and
“modified occurrence” forms are not acceptable).
With the exception of the Worker’s Compensation policies, all policies listed above
shall insure the defense and indemnity obligations assumed by Tenant under this Lease,
and shall name the Landlord as an additional insured under the policy.
All polices listed above shall contain a provision that coverages afforded thereunder
shall not be canceled or non-renewed, nor shall coverage limits be reduced by
endorsement, without thirty (30) days prior written notice to CITY.
7
ARTICLE NINETEEN
Default and Remedies
19.1 If Tenant shall default in the payment of any installment of the Rent or in the payment of
any other sum required to be paid by Tenant under this Lease and such default shall continue for fifteen
(15) days after written notice to Tenant, or if Tenant shall default in the observance or performance of any
of the other covenants or conditions in this Lease, which Tenant is required to observe or perform, and
such default shall continue for thirty (30) days after written notice to Tenant, or if a default involves a
hazardous condition and is not cured by Tenant immediately upon written notice to Tenant, or if the
interest of Tenant in this Lease shall be levied upon under execution or other legal process, or if any
voluntary petition in bankruptcy or for corporate reorganization or any similar relief shall be filed by
Tenant, or if any involuntary petition in bankruptcy shall be filed against Tenant under any federal or state
bankruptcy or insolvency act and shall not have been dismissed within thirty (30) days following the filing
thereof, or if a receiver shall be appointed for Tenant or any of the property of Tenant by any court and
such receiver shall not be dismissed within thirty (30) days from the date of appointment, or if Tenant
shall make an assignment for the benefit of creditors, or if Tenant shall abandon or vacate the Premises,
then Landlord may treat the occurrence of any one or more of the foregoing events as a breach of this
Lease and thereupon at its option may, without notice or demand of any kind to Tenant or any other
person, terminate this Lease and immediately repossess the Premises, in addition to all other rights and
remedies provided at law or in equity. The provisions of this section shall survive any termination of this
Lease.
19.2
In the event the Lease is terminated due to the default of Tenant:
a. All obligations of Landlord under this Agreement shall cease. Landlord shall take
reasonable measures to lease the Premises to another tenant for a comparable term
and rent.
b. Until Landlord enters into a new lease Tenant shall continue to pay the applicable
rent until the end of the Lease Term. Landlord may retain a portion of the security
deposit to cover its costs of re-letting the Premises.
c. Rental payments received by Landlord from a new tenant will reduce the amount for
which Tenant is liable to Landlord.
d. Upon termination, Tenant agrees to yield possession of the Premises within 90 days
of the date of notice of default, reserving the right to re-enter the Premises solely to
harvest any crops that are the personal property of Tenant and are growing at the
time of default.
19.3
In the event the Lease is terminated due to the default of Landlord:
a. All obligations undertaken by Tenant under this Agreement including the obligation
to pay rent shall cease.
8
b. Upon termination, Tenant shall yield possession of the Premises in a timely manner,
reserving the right to re-enter the Premises solely to harvest any crops that are the
personal property of Tenant and are growing at the time of default. Landlord shall
remit an amount equal to two times the Tenant’s security deposit as liquidated
damages and here agrees that such an amount is a reasonable approximation of the
costs incident to moving a farming operation.
ARTICLE TWENTY
Notices
20.1 All notices required under the terms of this Lease shall be deemed to have been
properly served or given three (3) days after their deposit in the United States mail if sent by registered
or certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid, or two (2) days after deposit in a nationally
recognized overnight courier service, addressed to Landlord or Tenant at the addresses identified in
Article One or to such other address within the continental limits of the United States and to the
attention of such party as the parties may from time to time designate by written notice to the other.
ARTICLE TWENTY-ONE
Miscellaneous
21.1 Voluntary and Knowing Action. The parties, by executing this Lease, state that they
have carefully read this Lease and understand fully the contents thereof; that in executing this Lease
they voluntarily accept all terms described in this Lease without duress, coercion, undue influence, or
otherwise, and that they intend to be legally bound thereby.
21.2 Authorized Signatories. The parties each represent and warrant to the other that (1)
the persons signing this Lease are authorized signatories for the entities represented, and (2) no further
approvals, actions or ratifications are needed for the full enforceability of this Lease against it; each
party indemnifies and holds the other harmless against any breach of the foregoing representation and
warranty.
21.3 No Partnership, Joint Venture, or Fiduciary Relationship. Nothing contained in this
Lease shall be interpreted as creating a partnership, joint venture, or relationship of principal and agent
between the parties, it being understood that the sole relationship created hereby is one of landlord and
tenant. No third party is entitled in any way to rely upon any provision in this Lease. This Lease is
intended solely for the benefit of Landlord and Tenant and no third party shall have any rights or
interest in any provision of this Lease, or as a result of any action or inaction of the Landlord in
connection therewith.
21.4 Records—Availability and Retention. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 5, the
Tenant agrees that the Landlord, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at
any time during normal business hours and as often as they may reasonably deem necessary, shall have
access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers,
records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the Tenant and involve
transactions relating to this Lease. The Tenant agrees to maintain these records for a period of six
years from the date of termination of this Lease.
9
21.5 Governing Law. This Lease shall be deemed to have been made and accepted in Rice
County, Minnesota, and the laws of the State of Minnesota shall govern any interpretations or
constructions of the Lease without regard to its choice of law or conflict of laws principles.
21.6 Data Practices. The parties acknowledge that this Lease is subject to the requirements
of Minnesota’s Government Data Practices Act, Minnesota Statutes, Section 13.01 et seq.
21.7 No Waiver. Any party’s failure in any one or more instances to insist upon strict
performance of any of the terms and conditions of this Lease or to exercise any right herein conferred
shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment of that right or of that party’s right to assert or rely
upon the terms and conditions of this Lease. Any express waiver of a term of this Lease shall not be
binding and effective unless made in writing and properly executed by the waiving party.
21.8 Severability. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this Lease shall not
affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision. Any invalid or unenforceable provision
shall be deemed severed from this Lease to the extent of its invalidity or unenforceability, and this
Lease shall be construed and enforced as if the Lease did not contain that particular provision to the
extent of its invalidity or unenforceability.
21.9 Headings and Captions. Headings and captions contained in this Lease are for
convenience only and are not intended to alter any of the provisions of this Lease and shall not be used
for the interpretation of the validity of the agreement or any provision hereof.
21.10 Survivability. All covenants, indemnities, guarantees, releases, representations and
warranties by any party or parties, and any undischarged obligations of Landlord and the Tenant
arising prior to the expiration of this Lease (whether by completion or earlier termination), shall
survive such expiration.
21.11 Exhibits. The exhibits attached to this Lease are considered an integral part of it as if
fully set forth within it.
21.12 Entire Agreement. All prior understandings, letters of intent, discussions and
agreements are merged in the governing terms of this Lease, which is a complete and final written
expression of the intent of the parties.
21.13 Modification/Amendment. Any alterations, variations, modifications, amendments or
waivers of the provisions of this Lease shall only be valid when they have been reduced to writing, and
signed by authorized representative of the Landlord and the Tenant.
10
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, as of the day and year first hereinabove written the parties
have executed this Lease.
LANDLORD:
CITY OF NORTHFIELD
BY:________________________________
Its Mayor
BY:_______________________________
Its City Clerk
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RICE
)
) ss.
)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________________,
20___, by ________________ and by __________________, respectively the Mayor and City Clerk of
the City of Northfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation and
pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council.
_________________________________
Notary Public
TENANT:
____________________________
BY:_________________________________
Its ______________________
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RICE
)
) ss.
)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of
_________________,
20____,
by
_____________________________,
the
______________________of _________________, a Minnesota ____________________, on behalf
of the corporation.
_______________________________
Notary Public
11
EXHIBIT A
Depiction of Premises
12
Eight Measures Status
Item
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Estimated
Cost
Status
(11/11/2013)
TBD
No cost
TBD
$ 15,000.00
$
3,850.00
75%
Complete
Description
Remove 3,000 cubic yards of material for fill at well field site
Remove 4,000 cubic yards for the repair of the Armstrong Road culvert
Remove the balance of the dirt pile 49,000 to 53,000 cubic yards
Excavate and grade the Interceptor Swale
Topographic survey
a. Fieldwork
b. Prepare drawing
Update Spring Creek Watershed Analysis
One year lease for farming purposes
Clean out excess vegetation from Spring Creek waterway
complete
50%
$
$
50,000.00
(7,700.00) RFP Drafted
TBD
ERIE DR
RD
BROGAN DR
Y
Fargaze Meadows Outlot D
2207426001
SPRING CREEK RD
HARBOR DR
ELIANNA DR
FORD ST E
Grassed Waterway
1.06 ACRES
Fargaze Meadows Outlot C
2207426073
HALL AVE
MAPLE ST S
BE
AB
30' Grassed Buffer
1.9 ACRES
FARGAZE MEADOWS
OUTLOTS C & D
GRASSED BUFFER AREA
(PROPOSED)
Fargaze Meadows Outlots C & D
Parcel Boundary
City of Northfield City Limits
Proposed Grass Buffer Areas (2.96 Acres)
400
200
0
Feet
400
CONSENT
To:
City Administrator
From:
Subject:
Proposed Acquisition of 512 Ninth Street from Northfield Area Veterans Memorial Fund
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to adopt the attached Resolution No. 2013-135
approving the attached Purchase Agreement with the Northfield Area Veterans Memorial Fund for the
City of Northfield’s acquisition of the property located at 512 Ninth Street.
Summary Report:
Over the past year there has been discussion with the Northfield Area Veterans
Memorial Fund concerning the city’s purchase from the Fund of the parcel addressed 512 Ninth Street.
This parcel is shown on the attached map. The Veterans Fund acquired this parcel several years ago, and
demolished a house that was located there at the time of acquisition.
Throughout those discussions the Veteran’s Fund (represented in those discussions by Wil Broz and
Larry Turner) has been seeking both payment in an acceptable amount, AND assurance that the Veterans
Fund will not be assessed for any street improvements for the parcel it owns on Poplar Street. That parcel
is also shown on the attached map.
Discussions this past week have resulted in a tentative agreement on a negotiated purchase price of
$30,000.00. The Northfield Veterans Memorial Fund also agrees to pay the future assessments associated
with 812 Poplar Street, a parcel owned by the Veterans. The 2014 Street Maintenance Project is expected
to result in estimated assessments levied against this parcel in the amount of $4,455.
Also reflected in the Purchase Agreement are two other minor requests, namely development of some
parking spaces along the street and two drive approaches into the Poplar Street parcel. Because of the
community use of Veterans Memorial Park, development of those parking spaces is not an issue, but
rather something we thought was warranted. The drive approaches can easily be installed as part of future
construction. Given the size of the parcel, two drive approaches also seem warranted.
There is always the Do Nothing alternative.
Financial Impacts:
The $30,000 cost to purchase would be spent from the Park Fund, as
recommended by the Park and Recreation Advisory Board. That recommendation was for payment of
$25,000. While there was discussion about the PRAB supporting the Veterans Fund request to reduce the
future assessment, that was not part of the motion made at the PRAB meeting.
Timelines:
The Veterans Fund would like to close on this acquisition by the City within 30 days.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Resolution 2013-135
Draft land Purchase Agreement
August 31, 2012 Letter from the Veterans Fund
City Council meeting minutes for January 15, 2013
Affidavit of Business Entity
Warranty Deed
Response from Veterans Fund Attorney
Veterans Park Area Map
A RESOLUTION BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA, APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY IN
NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA
WHEREAS, The City of Northfield (“City”) desires to acquire certain real property (PID
22.01.1.51.006) located at 512 Ninth Street in Northfield, Minnesota, legally
described as:
The South 66 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, in Hoskins’ Addition to the Town
(now City) of Northfield, Rice County, Minnesota, referred to herein
as the “Property”; and
WHEREAS, the owner/seller of the Property is willing to sell the Property to the City for
$30,000.00, including $3,000.00 earnest money; and,
WHEREAS, a draft purchase agreement has been prepared and is attached hereto as Exhibit A;
and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with the attached draft purchase agreement, the owner/seller and
City expressly understand and agree that the purchase of the Property is
contingent upon approval by the City Council of the City of Northfield; and,
WHEREAS, if any transaction approval as provided in the purchase agreement is not obtained
by the closing date stated in the purchase agreement, the purchase agreement shall
then be null and void, without further obligation by either party.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THAT:
The City Council hereby approves the attached purchase agreement and authorizes and directs
the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the purchase agreement substantially in the form hereby
approved and such other documents as are necessary to close on the purchase of the Property by
the City of Northfield and record the same in the Office of the Rice County Recorder.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THAT:
The funds shall come from Park Fund in the amount of $30,000.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Northfield on this 19th day of November, 2013.
ATTEST
______________________________
City Clerk
____________________________
Mayor
VOTE: ___ GRAHAM ___ POWNELL ___ ZWEIFEL ___ PETERSON WHITE
___ NAKASIAN ___ LUDESCHER ___ DELONG
1
Northfield City Council
MEETING MINUTES RECORD
Meeting: City Council Meeting & Work Session
Date: January 15, 2013
Members present:
Location: Council Chambers
Start Time: 7:00 p.m.
Adjourn Time: 11:09 p.m.
Mayor Dana Graham, Council Members David DeLong, David Ludescher, Suzie Nakasian, Rhonda
Pownell, Jessica Peterson White, Erica Zweifel
Members Absent: None
Others present: John Munnings, Jane McWilliams, Steve Rholl, Helen Medin, Wil Brosz, Tim Isom, Drew Weis, Mary Ann
Polley, Christian Hakala, Carmen Pomponio, Betsy Busa, Sherry Carter, Mary Witt, Alice Kivell, Dale Gehring, Victor
Summa, Don McGee, Jon Denison, George Kinney, Mike Clark, DLR Group, Library & Recreation Services Director Lynne
Young, Director of Community Planning & Development Chris Heineman, Community Development Coordinator Michele
Merxbauer, Finance Director Kathleen McBride, Public Works Director/City Engineer Joe Stapf, Assistant Public Works
Director/City Engineer Brian Erickson, Interim Police Chief Chuck Walerius, Sergeant Scott Johnson, Sergeant Monte Nelson,
Karen Mangold, City Clerk Deb Little, City Administrator Tim Madigan, City Attorney Chris Hood, Northfield News and
other interested citizens.
Item
Call to Order
Approval of Agenda
At 7:00 p.m. Mayor Graham called the meeting to
order.
Action
A roll call was taken of members present
and a quorum was declared.
seconded by C. DeLong to approve the
agenda for January 15, 2013. All in favor.
Motion carried.
A motion was made C. Ludescher and
seconded by C. DeLong to reconsider the
approval of the agenda by moving item #8
to after #10. Yes votes: C. Ludescher and
C. Nakasian. No votes: C. DeLong, C.
Peterson White, C. Pownell, C. Zweifel and
Mayor Graham. Vote is 2-5. Motion failed.
seconded by C. Ludescher to reconsider the
agenda to move item #5 to the regular
agenda. Yes votes: C. DeLong, C.
Ludescher, C. Nakasian C. Peterson White,
C. Pownell. No votes: C. Zweifel and
Mayor Graham. Vote is 5-2. Motion
carried.
Approval of Minutes
seconded by C. DeLong to move item #5 to
the regular agenda to become 6A. All in
favor. Motion carried.
seconded by C. Zweifel to approve the City
Council meeting minutes for January 8,
2013. All in favor. Motion carried.
Page 1 – January 15, 2013 City Council Minutes
Item
Action
Presentation
None
Reports From
Council Members
C. Pownell – Attended the Fire Relief Association
meeting. Noted that they reviewed open meeting law
requirements and fund balances and are currently
fully funded.
C. DeLong – None
C. Zweifel – Distributed copies of the objectives
from the Fire Services Task Force. Reminded
members of the Intergovernmental Meeting on
January 23. Noted that the group will be discussing
the Fire Services Task Force objectives and have
asked that participants come with prioritized
objectives. Requested that the Council discuss this at
the next work session.
C. Ludescher – None
C. Peterson White – None
C. Nakasian – Reported a positive response to the
website open houses and review of the website.
Noted that additional dates have been added
Mayor Graham – None
Consent Agenda
Approval of Consent
Agenda
City Administrator Madigan introduced the items on
the consent agenda and answered questions posed by
the Council.
M2013-006
Disbursements
M2013-007
NCRC Lease
Agreement
Approve disbursements totaling $301,241.24
Resolution 2013-005
Roofing Project Final
Acceptance
Resolution 2013-006
2013 Street Projects
Design Services
Public Comments
Open Public
Comments
seconded by C. Nakasian to approve the
consent agenda. All in favor. Motion
carried.
Approve the attached lease agreement with
Minnesota Workforce Development, Inc. for rental of
Room HS124 in the Northfield Community Resource
Center (NCRC)
Accept Public Improvement and Approve Final
Payment for Roof Replacement Project FACL2012M06
Approve Professional Services Agreement with
Bolton & Menk for Design Services on the 2013
Street Projects
Victor Summa, 812 St. Olaf Ave., spoke regarding
the short amount of time given for items including
the police station and the public needing time to
understand what the revisions are and buy into them.
Ray Cox, 500 Ivanhoe Avenue, noted that he sent a
letter to the Council regarding the police station and
asked the Council to consider using precast concrete
walls.
John Munnings, 919 Cannon Valley Drive West,
spoke regarding ownership and possession of
weapons. Noted that he is willing to present his ideas
to the City Council.
Item
Public Hearing &
Related Items
Public Hearing
Maple & Prairie Street
Improvements
Action
Public Works Director/City Engineer Stapf and
Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer
Erickson introduced this item and answered questions
posed by the Council.
Mayor Graham opened the public hearing at
7:25 p.m. A motion was made by C.
Pownell and seconded by C. Nakasian to
close the public hearing at 8:46 p.m. All in
Mary Ann Polley, 1012 Maple Street, read letter from
the Lockner’s at 1011 Maple Street. Spoke regarding
issue of trees and sidewalk on Maple. Referred to
article in Star Tribune regarding suburban landscape.
Tim Isom, 1021 Maple Street, spoke regarding timing
and reclamation. Spoke against the sidewalk and
suggested that the sidewalk be delayed until a full
reconstruct is done. Noted significant issues with
topography on the east side of the street that may
require retaining walls or significant landscaping to
maintain lots.
Drew Weis, 1117 Maple Street, noted that he was the
lone dissenter that didn’t sign the petition. Spoke in
favor of the sidewalk. Noted that he has kids that
have to walk in the street or cross the street with fast
moving traffic. Stated that the safest option is to
walk down the sidewalk to the crossing guards at the
school.
Christian Hakala, 1210 Maple Street, spoke against
narrowing the street. Spoke regarding the assessment
amount. Suggested fines for contractors that don’t
get work done and that this money goes to
homeowners.
Carmen Pomponio – 1115 Maple Street, spoke
regarding property valuation and the assessment.
Doesn’t believe there will be a benefit from the
project. Spoke in favor of minimum expenditures.
Spoke regarding safe routes to school and noted that
there are mostly senior citizens in the area.
Betsy Busa, 1201 Maple Street, asked about utility
poles and guide wires. Questioned whether stop
signs and speed bumps would help.
Sherry Carter, 1200 Prairie Street, stated that they
were not informed that a sidewalk is being
considered on Prairie Street. Asked how much this
will cost.
Resident, 1114 Maple Street, asked for clarification
on whether the sidewalk is for sure. Spoke against
spending money to narrow the street.
Alice Kivell, 1000 Maple Street, spoke against
Item
Action
installing a sidewalk on the east side. Stated that
most of the kids come from the north.
Mary Witt, 1106 Maple Street, asked if assessments
will be reduced if sidewalks aren’t installed. Noted
that there is a sidewalk on one side. Spoke regarding
shared bike lanes and kids and noted that she would
rather have them bike on sidewalks.
Regular Agenda
M2013-008
Board/Commission
Appointments
C. Nakasian spoke regarding EDA appointments.
Nakasian and seconded by C. Peterson
White that THE NORTHFIELD CITY
COUNCIL HEREBY APPROVES THE
FOLLOWING APPOINTMENTS:
 PHILIP SPENSLEY REAPPOINTED
TO THE ARTS & CULTURE
COMMISSION FOR A THREE-YEAR
TERM ENDING DECEMBER 31,
2015.
 DAPHNE MCCOY APPOINTED TO
THE ARTS & CULTURE
COMMISSION TO COMPLETE A
VACANT TWO-YEAR TERM
ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2014.
 DALE GEHRING APPOINTED TO
THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY FOR A SIX-YEAR
2018
 TODD BORNHAUSER APPOINTED
TO THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO
COMPLETE A VACANT ONE-YEAR
2013.
 DAVID LUDESCHER APPOINTED
TO THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TO
THE VACANT COUNCIL POSITION
FOR A FOUR-YEAR TERM ENDING
DECEMBER 31, 2016.
 RYAN REDETZKE APPOINTED TO
THE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
COMMISSION FOR A THREE-YEAR
2015
 SUSAN DEMALIGNON
REAPPOINTED TO THE HERITAGE
PRESERVATION COMMISSION
FOR A THREE-YEAR TERM
ENDING DECEMBER 31, 2015
 STEVE WILMOT REAPPOINTED
TO THE HERITAGE
PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Item
Action

M2013-009
Veteran’s Park
Property
Library & Recreation Services Director Young
introduced this item and answered questions posed by
the Council.
Wil Brosz, 1100 Nevada Street representing the
Veteran’s Memorial group, spoke regarding the
investment in property and noted that the parcel
CHARLOTTE CARLSON
REAPPOINTED TO THE LIBRARY
BOARD FOR A THREE-YEAR
2015
 ADRIENNE FALCON APPOINTED
TO THE LIBRARY BOARD FOR A
THREE-YEAR TERM ENDING
DECEMBER 31, 2015
 DAVID HVISTENDAHL
REAPPOINTED TO THE PARK AND
RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD
 GRACE CLARK REAPPOINTED TO
THE PARK AND RECREATION
ADVISORY BOARD FOR A THREEYEAR TERM ENDING DECEMBER
31, 2015
 RICHARD SCHULTE
REAPPOINTED TO THE PLANNING
COMMISSION/ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS FOR A THREE-YEAR
2015
 JOE GASIOR APPOINTED TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION/ZONING
BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A
DECEMBER 31, 2015
 FRANK BALSTER APPOINTED TO
THE PLANNING
COMMISSION/ZONING BOARD OF
2015
 DON MCGEE REAPPOINTED TO
THE RENTAL HOUSING AND
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF
2015
 KENNETH MALECHA
REAPPOINTED TO THE RENTAL
HOUSING AND BUILDING CODE
BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A
DECEMBER 31, 2015
All in favor. Motion carried.
Peterson White and seconded by C. Pownell
to DIRECT STAFF TO DEVELOP A
PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR THE
LAND LOCATED AT 512 WEST NINTH
ST., ADJACENT TO THE VETERANS
MEMORIAL PARK.
Item
should be part of the park. Spoke regarding future
assessments and the desire to negotiate assessments
on their 9th & Poplar Street property. Thanked the
Park Board, City Council and staff for the support for
the Veteran’s Memorial.
Victor Summa, 812 St. Olaf, stated that he was
confused regarding amount and noted that the
Veterans are benefitting the community by what they
have done. Spoke in favor of the purchase.
Recess
Resolution 2013-007
Police Facility Plans
& Specifications
City Administrator Madigan introduced this item,
Interim Chief Walerius presented information
regarding the facility and needs, Mike Clark, DLR
Group, provided information on how the project
meets the needs of the Police Department, and
Finance Director McBride presented information
regarding the budget.
A motion was made by C. Ludescher and seconded
by C. DeLong that Mr. McGee be allowed to speak
up to 10 minutes. Mayor Graham noted that he had
already called for public comment and the motion
was out of order. Mayor Graham ruled the motion
out of order.
Action
seconded by C. DeLong to MAKE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION TO
PERMIT THE PARK & RECREATION
BOARD TO SPEND UP TO $30,000 FOR
THE PROPERTY. Yes votes: C. Ludescher
No votes: C. DeLong, C. Nakasian, C.
Peterson White, C. Pownell, C. Zweifel and
Mayor Graham. Vote is 1-6. Motion failed.
Vote on M2013-009 – All in favor. Motion
carried.
A five minute recess was taken at 9:09 p.m.
The meeting resumed at 9:16 p.m.
A motion was made by C. Zweifel and
seconded by C. Pownell to APPROVE
RESOLUTION 2013-007 AUTHORIZING
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR
THE POLICE FACILITY. Yes votes: C.
Nakasian, C. Peterson White, C. Pownell,
C. Zweifel and Mayor Graham. No votes:
C. Ludescher and C. DeLong. Vote is 5-2.
Motion carried.
Don McGee, 710 Highland Ave., challenged remarks
made at the last meeting regarding $5 million
amount. Asked what tax payers are getting for an
additional $2 million dollars.
Victor Summa, 812 St. Olaf Avenue, asked if we
need $7 million worth of building to meet the needs.
Stated that council has not been provided enough
information on what they are getting for the money.
Extend Meeting
Extend Meeting
Resolution 2013-008
Environmental Cleanup RFP for Q Block
City Administrator Madigan introduced this item and
answered questions posed by the Council.
At 10:00 pm a motion was made by C.
Pownell and seconded by C. Nakasian TO
EXTEND THE MEETING TO 10:30 PM.
Yes votes: C. Nakasian, C. Peterson White,
C. Pownell, C. Zweifel and Mayor Graham.
No votes: C. DeLong and C. Ludescher.
Vote is 5-2. Motion carried.
At 10:29 p.m. a motion was made by C.
DeLong and seconded by C. Ludescher TO
EXTEND THE MEETING ANOTHER 15
MINUTES. All in favor. Motion carried.
seconded by C. Nakasian to APPROVE
RESOLUTION 2013-008 –
AUTHROZING PREPRATION OF A
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RELATED
Item
Ordinance No. 943
Board/Commission
Term Limits
Action
City Clerk Little introduced this item and answered
questions posed by the Council.
Jon Denison, 1108 Highland avenue, spoke against
this item and how it came about. Noted that the
Library Board passed a motion to downsize the board
from 9 to 7 members. Asked about immediate need
of this ordinance.
Discussion
Skate Park Funding
Options
Finance Director McBride introduced this item and
answered questions posed by the Council.
Council members asked that staff bring back options
for funding including the Park Fun, TIF fund and
excess LGA.
Item was not discussed.
Discussion
CVB Structure
Discussion
Council Retreat
City Administrator Madigan introduced this item.
Council Members were asked to send any additional
items they want included. Council discussed the
format and completing a DISC assessment prior to
the retreat.
TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN-UP
OF THE CITY-OWNED PARCELS
LOCATED IN THE Q BLOCK. All in
seconded by C. DeLong to HAVE THE
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO.
943 – AMENDING VARIOUS SECTIONS
OF THE CITY CODE RELATING TO
TERM LIMITS FOR BOARDS AND
COMMISSIONS. Yes votes: C. Nakasian,
C. Peterson White, C. Pownell, C. Zweifel
and Mayor Graham. No votes: C.
Ludescher and C. DeLong. Vote is 5-2.
Motion carried.
No action. Discussion only.
Moved to January 22 work session.
No action. Discussion only.
Administrator’s
Update

None
Adjourn
Adjourn the meeting
Submitted by:
seconded by C. Ludescher to adjourn the
meeting at 11:09 p.m.
__________________________________
Deborah Little, City Clerk
Attest: _________________________________
Dana Graham, Mayor
(Top 3 inches reserved for recording data)
AFFIDAVIT REGARDING BUSINESS ENTITY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RICE
)
) ss.
)
Lawrence Turner, being first duly sworn on oath says that:
1. He is the President of the Northfield Area Veterans Memorial Fund, a non-profit corporation
under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Business Entity”), named as Seller in the document dated
May ___, 2013 and filed for record
(month/day/year)
as Document Number ____________,
in the office of the County Recorder of Rice County, Minnesota.
2. The Business Entity’s principal place of business is at 516 Division Street, Northfield,
Minnesota 55057, and the Business Entity’s principal place(s) of business during the last ten (10) years
has/have been at:
(identify addresses, if any)
3. There are no:
a. Bankruptcy or dissolution proceedings involving the Business Entity during the time
period in which the Business Entity has had any interest in the premises described in the above
document (“Premises”);
b. Unsatisfied judgments of record against the Business Entity nor any actions pending
in any courts, which affect the Premises;
c. Tax liens filed against Business Entity; except as herein stated:
(identify bankruptcies, judgments, or tax liens, if any)
4. Any bankruptcy dissolution proceedings of record against business entities with the same or
similar names during the time period in which the Business Entity had any interest in the Premises, are
not against the Business Entity.
5. Any judgments or tax liens of record against entities with the same or similar names are not
against the Business Entity.
6. There has been no labor or materials furnished to the Premises for which payment has not
been made.
7. There are no unrecorded contracts, leases, easements, or other agreements or interests
relating to the Premises except as stated herein:
(identify document, if any)
8. There are no persons in possession of any portion of the Premises other than pursuant to a
recorded document, except as stated herein:
(identify document, if any)
9. There are no encroachments or boundary line questions affected the Premises of which
Affiants have knowledge.
Affiants know the matters stated herein are true and make this Affidavit for the purpose of inducing the
passing of title to the Premises.
Affiant
Lawrence Turner, President
Signed and sworn to before me on May ___, 2012, by Lawrence Turner, as President of the Northfield
Area Veterans Memorial Fund, a non-profit corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, Seller.
(seal)
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
FLAHERTY & HOOD, P.A.
525 Park Street, Suite 470
St. Paul, MN 55103-2122
Voice: 651-225-8840
Fax:
651-225-9088
(Top 3 inches reserved for recording data)
WARRANTY DEED
Business Entity to Business Entity
DEED TAX DUE: $[_________]
DATE: May ____, 2013
FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the Northfield Area Veterans Memorial Fund, a nonprofit corporation under the laws of the State of
Minnesota (“Grantor”), hereby conveys and warrants to the City of Northfield, a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota
(“Grantee”), real property in Rice County, Minnesota, legally described as follows:
The South 66 feet of Lot 7, Block 3, in Hoskin’s Addition to the Town (now City) of Northfield, Rice County,
Minnesota
together with all hereditaments and appurtenances belonging thereto, subject to the following exceptions:
[_____________________]
Check applicable box:
The Seller certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells
on the described real property.
A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document or has
been electronically filed. (If electronically filed, insert WDC
number: [_______________].)
I am familiar with the property described in this instrument and
I certify that the status and number of wells on the described
real property have not changed since the last previously filed
well disclosure certificate.
ECB-1019
Grantor
NORTHFIELD AREA VETERANS MEMORIAL FUND
By:
Lawrence Turner
Its: President
Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF RICE
WARRANTY DEED
)
) ss.
)
This instrument was acknowledged before me on May ___, 2013, by Lawrence Turner as President and of the Northfield Area Veterans
Memorial Fund, Grantor.
(Seal, if any)
(signature of notarial officer)
Title (and Rank):
My commission expires:
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
FLAHERTY & HOOD, P.A.
525 Park Street, Suite 470
St. Paul, MN 55103-2122
Voice:
651-225-8840
Fax:
651-225-9088
(month/day/year)
TAX STATEMENTS FOR THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS
INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE SENT TO:
Finance Director
City of Northfield
Northfield, MN 55057-2565
Y
POPLAR ST S
H
W
3
3
S
HTH ST W
EIG
512 9TH ST W
2201151006
NINTH ST W
Veterans' Park Area
Parcel of Interest
60
30
0
Feet
60
3
HW
Y
3
S
EIGHTH ST W
PARCEL NUMBER
22.01.1.51.003
PARCEL NUMBER
22.01.1.51.006
POPLAR ST S
LINDEN ST S
NINTH ST W
246
WOODLEY ST W
Veterans' Park Area
O
PR
N
IO
S
S
FE
AL
DR
Parcel Boundary
140
70
0
Feet
140
CONSENT
To:
City Administrator
From:
Brian L. Erickson, P.E., Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer
Subject:
Accept Feasibility Report for Sixth Street and Call for Improvement Hearing
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to approve the attached resolution accepting the feasibility report and calling
for the improvement hearing for the Sixth Street Reconstruction Project (STRT2014-A16).
Summary Report:
The feasibility report has been completed and finds that the Sixth Street Reconstruction Project (STRT2014A16) is necessary, feasible and cost effective. See attachment 2 for the project location map. A link to the
Feasibility Report appears below:
http://www.ci.northfield.mn.us/index.aspx?NID=902
The next step in moving this project forward is for the City Council to receive the feasibility report and call for a
public hearing on the improvements.
On October 29, 2013 the City Council passed Council Resolution 2013-124 which ordered the preparation of a
feasibility report for this project. This report analyzed the potential for reconstruction on Sixth Street from
Washington Street to the eastern dead end as well as College Street between Fifth Street and Seventh Street;
Winona Street between Sixth Street and Seventh Street and Nevada Street between Fifth Street and Seventh
Street.
There has been one neighborhood meeting which was held on October 24, 2013. The purpose of this meeting
was informing the affected property owners of the improvements being considered and gathering input and
comments from the impacted residents.
Existing Conditions
The properties adjacent to the project area consist of single-family homes. The corridors are fully developed
and in many areas there are mature trees. Sidewalks exist in portions of the project, but are missing in several
areas.
All streets within the project area are classified as local roadways and experience low volumes of traffic. Along
with public utilities in the project area, other private utilities include overhead and underground power, gas,
telephone and cable television lines.
Streets
All the streets in the project area are bituminous with a majority of it having curb and gutter. The widths
vary from 33’ to 40’. All streets are aged and exhibit wear and distress to different degrees. The pavement
is generally in fair to poor condition with significant transverse and longitudinal cracking, alligator cracking,
potholes, and rutting. Some street segments have significant settlements, which allow water to pond,
infiltrate and weaken the subgrade. This has led to frost heaving, and additional transverse cracking during
freeze-thaw cycles.
Water
As-built information indicates that there is currently 4” watermain throughout most of the project corridor.
It should also be noted that Winona Street does not have watermain. The current city standards call for a
minimum of 8” watermain constructed of ductile iron pipe along each street. This new watermain—four
times larger in cross section—will substantially improve the flow of water through the piping network,
decreasing pressure fluctuation, and improving fire flows in the event that need occurs.
Sanitary Sewer
The sanitary sewer mains again exhibit a mixture of materials, sizes and ages. The sizes range from 6” to 8”
and are constructed of VCP (vitrified clay pipe) or limited amount of PVC (polyvinyl chloride). Current
city standards call for PVC piping of appropriate sizing. Televising of the system has been completed and
in some areas there is deterioration including cracks, leaking joints and offsets. Additionally, the televising
indicated the existence of non-standard and difficult to maintain service connections. VCP sewer mains are
prone to tree roots drawn to a source of water and nutrients, so replacement will reduce the likelihood of
blockages that are causes by roots.
Storm Sewer
Due to the elevation of the project corridor, with Sixth Street being the high point of the area, the existing
storm sewer is a very basic system. Storm sewer lines and structures exist on both Winona Street and
Nevada Street from Sixth Street to Seventh Street, and consist of 12” – 15” corrugated metal piping. The
structures in this area consist of block and brick structures that show significant signs of age and wear. A
main purpose in installing a basic storm sewer system in the area is to provide a means to serve the
perforated underdrain that is normally installed under and along new curb and gutter to assure good positive
subsurface drainage which preserves the life of the new street pavement.
Proposed Improvements
Based on the detailed review from the feasibility report the following recommendations are presented for Sixth
Street and the three intersecting streets.



Sixth Street Full depth reconstruction is planned with replacement of all underground utilities.
Narrowing the street width to 32’ from Union Street to the dead end while keeping the 40’ width from
Washington to Union due to the proximity of downtown is also recommended. The construction of a
cul-de-sac at the east end of Sixth Street is recommended to allow for an easier turn around at the end of
Sixth Street. Reconstruction of existing sidewalks on both sides of the street is recommended.
Installation of new watermain will allow for looping the water mains and improved reliability.
Replacement of the storm sewer system will provide a more effective, efficient and reliable method for
managing the storm water. Finally, replacement of the sanitary sewer system will bring this area up to
the current city standards.
Cross Streets Full depth reconstruction is planned with replacement of all underground utilities.
Narrowing the street width 32’ is recommended. Installation of water main will allow for looping the
water mains and improved reliability as well as correcting some non-standard services. Construction of
curb and gutter in this area will improve the storm water management. Finally replacement of the
sanitary sewer system will bring this area up to the current city standards.
Sidewalks Reconstruction of existing sidewalks as well as construction of new sidewalks on both sides
of the street will complete the sidewalk system in this area, in keeping with City Policy indicating the
City shall install sidewalks on both sides of residential streets during reconstruction when sidewalk
exists on both sides of the streets. This policy could be subject to some interpretation, however, as
sidewalk does not exist on both sides of every street at every location. However, there are scattered
pieces of sidewalk throughout the area on both sides of the streets in the general neighborhood. This
policy was established by the City Council’s approval of Resolution 202-329 on November 18, 2002,
and was reviewed at a City Council Work session on December 10, 2007. The City of Northfield’s
Comprehensive Transportation Plan Update, dated November 17, 2008 also speaks to the importance of
sidewalks, and the Safe Routes To School Plan also identifies certain areas where sidewalk is important.
As a result of the anticipated construction activities and based on the forthcoming forester’s report it is
anticipated that there may be some tree removals are recommended. Additionally, staff anticipates that there
will be some recommended pruning performed due to the size of the construction equipment that will be used
and the excessive tree damage that could be caused. As in the past, the design will make efforts to keep the tree
impacts to a minimum.
The proposed narrowing of the streets, besides reducing the impervious area, will also better able preserving
trees worthy of saving, and will also better accommodation of new sidewalk in those areas where it is currently
lacking.
Project Cost
The estimated construction costs for the 2014 6th Street Reconstruction Project are detailed below:
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
6th Street
Cross Streets
Direct Construction
Street
Storm Sewer
Sanitary Sewer
Watermain
Private Services (as needed)
Subtotal
Construction Contingency (10%)
Total Construction
Overhead (20%)
Total Cost Estimate
$ 863,022
$
68,548
$ 140,240
$ 226,125
$
80,000
$ 1,377,935
$ 137,793
$ 1,515,728
$ 303,146
$ 1,818,874
$ 505,143
$
34,255
$
71,271
$ 137,065
$
72,000
$ 819,734
$
81,973
$ 901,707
$ 180,341
$ 1,082,048
TOTAL
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,368,164
102,803
211,511
363,190
152,000
2,197,668
219,767
2,417,435
483,487
2,900,922
These estimates are based on detailed planning estimates and costs from recent reconstruction projects that have
been completed in the City of Northfield. Actual costs of the project could vary significantly depending on the
project scope, site conditions, project elements selected in the final design.
Project Funding
This project would be funded through a variety of sources including assessments, enterprise funds, and other
City sources such as bonding. At the City Council meeting of October 29, 2013 staff proposed using the
adopted 2013 assessment rates and for planning purposes staff has used those 2013 adopted assessment rates.
Additionally, the special assessment estimate includes the replacement of private services to each
residence/property.
In the project funding table below, the special assessments were based on the following calculations:
 Reconstruction (Residential) – Estimated at $75 per front foot of reconstruction plus an estimated
$2,000 per residence to account for private water and wastewater services.
PROJECT FUNDING
Special
Stormwater Sewer Fund Water Fund
Assessments
Fund
Reconstruction 6th Street
Reconstruction Cross Streets
TOTAL
Bonding /
Other
TOTAL
$
300,173
$ 90,483
$ 185,117
$
298,485
$
944,616
$ 1,818,874
$
260,220
$ 45,217
$ 94,078
$
180,926
$
501,608
$ 1,082,048
$
560,393
$ 135,700
$ 279,195
$
479,411
$ 1,446,224
$ 2,900,922
Project Process
Attachment 3 details the project process for the Reconstruction Project. This process has been developed and
refined over the course of the last several years. It accounts for all the required actions by City Council to insure
that Minnesota Statute Chapter 429 procedures are followed so that assessments for local improvements may be
levied to abutting benefiting properties.
Attachments:
2. Project Process
3. Project Location Maps
SIXTH STREET RECONSTRUCTION PROJECT
PROJECT NUMBER STRT2014-A16
ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS,
pursuant to Council Resolution 2013-124 adopted October 29, 2013, a report has been prepared
by the City Engineer with reference to the Sixth Street Reconstruction Project STRT2014-A16;
and,
WHEREAS,
it is proposed to improve Sixth Street between Washington Street and the eastern dead end;
College Street between Fifth Street and Seventh Street; Winona Street between Sixth Street and
Seventh Street and Nevada Street between Fifth Street and Seventh Street as part of the 2014
Street Reconstruction Project STRT2014-A16; and,
WHEREAS,
the report provides information regarding whether the proposed improvement is necessary, costeffective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as a proposed or in connection with some
other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended; and a description of
the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels.
1. The City Council will consider such improvements, in accordance with the report and the assessment
of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of $2,900,922.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 3rd day of December, 2013 in
the Council Chambers at City Hall, at 7:10 p.m., and the City Clerk shall give mailed and published
notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law.
ATTEST
___________________________________
City Clerk
___________________________________
Mayor
VOTE: ___ GRAHAM
___ DELONG
___ LUDESCHER ___ NAKASIAN
___ PETERSON WHITE ___ POWNELL
___ ZWEIFEL
Sixth Street Reconstruction Project Process (STRT2014-A16)
The following actions detail the required 429 process track for local improvements.
Date1
Project Step
Purpose of Step
October 24, 2013
Hold Neighborhood Meeting
The intent of this meeting is to inform the neighborhood of the upcoming project and seek input on
the improvements, which will be summarized for City Council.
October 2013
Arborist Report
A trained forester or arborist will evaluate the trees along the project corridor and make
recommendations for project consideration.
October 29, 2013
Order preparation of Feasibility Report
Ordering the Feasibility Report is a required step in the 429 process.
November 19, 2013
Accept Feasibility Report and call
for Improvement Hearing
December 3, 2013
Improvement Hearing
The engineer will present the Feasibility Report, the proposed project, an initial cost
estimate and potential assessments. As part of the meeting the City Council will also set
the date and time for the Improvement Hearing as required by the 429 process.
The purpose of this hearing is for the City Council to discuss a specific local improvement before
ordering it done. The Council considers all the information in the Feasibility Report and any other
information necessary for Council deliberation.
At the Improvement Hearing interested persons may voice their concerns, whether or not they are
in the proposed assessment area. A reasonable estimate of the total amount to be assessed and
a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels
must be available at the hearing. If the Council rejects the project, it may not reconsider that same
project unless another hearing is held following the required notice.
The project may be ordered any time within 6 months after the Improvement Hearing. It is not
advisable to change project parameters after ordering the improvement. Upon ordering the
improvement construction drawings and specifications are prepared. Any changes to the project
scope after this point will require redesign effort with additional cost and staff time as a result. This
also has the potential to delay the project.
January 7, 2014
Order Improvement and Preparation of
Plans and Specifications
January 22, 2014
Neighborhood Meeting
This meeting will provide an update to the neighborhood on the design direction provided by City
Council as well as an update on the project process and assessments.
February 18, 2014
Approve Plans and Order
Advertisement for Bids
This step is a requirement of the 429 process.
February 26, March
5 & 12, 2014
Publish Ad for Bid in Northfield News
A step in the bidding process. The project will also be advertised on the MnDOT e-Advert website.
February 26, 2014
Present the final detailed plans and specifications to the neighborhood. Also hold a more detailed
discussion on what will happen during construction as well as a tentative timeline for events.
March 17, 2014
Bid Opening – 10:00 A.M.
April 1, 2014
Accept Bids and Award Contract
Final step in the bidding process. Bids are opened by staff and tabulated. From here staff will
make a recommendation to the City Council for award.
This step is a requirement of the 429 process and allows for the project to move forward with
beginning the actual construction process.
Council
Action2
Staff Action3
Mail notice:
October 14, 2013
Field Work
Planned for
November 12,
2013
Resolution 2013124
Resolution
Mail notice:
November 22 ,
2013.
Public Hearing
Ad in paper:
November 23 &
27, 2013.
Resolution
Mail notice:
January 10,
2014.
Resolution
Mail notice:
February 17,
2014.
Resolution
November 14, 2013
1 – Dates in grey text indicate actions that have taken place. Dates in bold text indicate the next planned step. Dates in italics denote tentatively scheduled future actions.
2 – Motions will be used for those items that are not necessary for the 429 process. Resolutions are required for those steps that are part of the 429 process.
3 – Staff actions to insure that proper timelines are followed in the 429 process.
May 2014
Neighborhood Tour
May – November
2014
Construction
July 2015
Accept Improvements and Authorize
Final Payment
Prior to the start of construction a walking tour of the project corridor will be taken. Individual
meetings with property owners will be scheduled to go over the details of construction and
document existing conditions.
Once the project is awarded staff manages the day-to-day contract execution. Typically a
Resident Project Representative is on-site to make sure the project is constructed in accordance
to the plans and specifications. Communications between the contractor and city is primarily
through the City Engineer, Project Manager and Resident Project Representative.
Significant changes will be brought to the City Council for approval prior to the work being
executed. Minor changes and field directives are authorized by the City Engineer in advance to
maintain the project schedule. All contract changes must be approved by the City Council.
Adjustments to estimated quantities occur during the final acceptance of the improvements.
The City Engineer recommends to City Council when the final payment should be made to the
Contractor. The City Council may accept the work by resolution; however, if the city fails to pay
the amount due within 30 days of a monthly estimate, or 90 days after the final estimate, the city
must pay interest on the past due amount as prescribed by law.
The following actions detail the required 429 process track to assess benefitting property owners for local improvements.
Date1
Project Step
Purpose of Step
The City Council will set the date and time for the Assessment Hearing as required by the
March 18, 2014
Call for Assessment Hearing
429 process.
April 15, 2014
May 6, 2014
Assessment Hearing
The purpose of this hearing is to give property owners an opportunity to express concerns about
the actual special assessment. At the Assessment Hearing the City Council shall hear and
consider all objections to the proposed assessment, whether presented orally or in writing.
Adopt Assessments
The City Council has some flexibility before it adopts the assessment roll and may
change, or amend, the proposed assessment as to any parcel. City Council must, by
resolution, adopt the same as the special assessment against the lands named in the
assessment roll. Once the assessment roll is adopted the assessments are set and
become liens against the properties listed.
Resolution
Council Action2
Staff Action3
Resolution
Public Hearing
Resolution
Mail notice:
March 28, 2014.
Ad in paper:
March 29, 2014.
Mail notice of
adoption on
May 7, 2014.
November 14, 2013
Sixth Street Reconstruction
FOURTH ST E
NEVADA ST S
WINONA ST S
SIXTH ST E
COLLEGE ST S
WASHINGTON ST S
UNION ST S
FIFTH ST E
SEVENTH ST E
EIGHTH ST E
2014 CITY OF NORTHFIELD
ROAD CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS
Legend
Reconstruction
0
0.05
0
250
0.1
500
0.15
Miles
750
Feet
CONSENT
To:
City Administrator
From:
Brian L. Erickson, P.E., Assistant Public Works Director/City Engineer
Subject:
Accept Feasibility Report 2014 Street Reclamation Project and Call for Improvement
Hearing
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to approve the attached resolution accepting the feasibility report and
calling for the improvement hearing for the 2014 Street Reclamation Project (STRT2014-A19).
Summary Report:
The feasibility report has been completed and finds that the 2014 Street Reclamation Project
(STRT2014-A19) is necessary, feasible and cost effective. See attachment 2 for the project location
maps. A link to the Feasibility Report appears below:
The next step in moving this project forward is for the City Council to receive the feasibility report and
call for a public hearing on the improvements.
On October 29, 2103 the City Council passed Council Resolution 2012-125 which ordered the
preparation of a feasibility report for this project. This report analyzed the potential for reclamation on
the following streets:
 Winona Street between Woodley Street and Ames Street
 Nevada Street between Fremont Street and Ames Street
 Fremont Street between Winona Street and Maple Street
 Ames Street between the western cul-de-sac and Maple Street
 Festler Court between Ames Street and the cul-de-sac
 Sheldahl Road between Fremouw Avenue and the northern dead end
 Schjelmile Lane between MN Trunk Highway 3 and the eastern dead end
 Poplar Street between Eighth Street and Woodley Street
 Eighth Street between Poplar Street and Linden Street
 Ninth Street between the western dead end and Linden Street
There has been one neighborhood meeting which was held on October 24, 2013. The purpose of this
meeting was informing the affected property owners of the improvements being considered and
gathering input and comments from the impacted residents. In addition, the property owners (largely
industrialists have been notified of the proposed reclamation projects for Sheldal Road and Schjelmile
Lane, and were advised of an open invitation to come into the office at a time of their convenience to
learn about the projects. So far, we have had contact with Multek.
Existing Conditions
The properties adjacent to the project areas consist of single-family homes in the South Woodley and
Veteran’s Park areas and industrial parcels on the Multek (northern) section. The corridors are nearly
fully developed and in many areas there are mature trees. All the streets are of bituminous
construction, and sidewalks exist in portions of the project, but are missing in several key areas
identified in the 2009 Safe Routes to School Study (SRTS Study).



South Woodley Neighborhood The streets in this area range between 32’ and 36’ in width and
the entire section has curb and gutter which is generally in good condition. All streets are aged
and exhibit wear and distress to different degrees. The pavement is generally in fair to poor
condition with significant transverse and longitudinal cracking, alligator cracking, potholes,
and rutting. Some street segments have significant settlements, which allow water to pond,
infiltrate and weaken the subgrade. This has led to frost heaving, and additional transverse
cracking during freeze-thaw cycles. Currently, there is only sidewalk along the south side of
Ames Street from the Sibley School entrance west to Archibald Street.
Multek Area Sheldahl Road is 24’ in width with 8’ gravel shoulders. Schjelmile Lane is 44’ in
width and has curb and gutter. The street pavement shows clear signs of age and distress.
Overall the pavement is in fair condition and there is some transverse and longitudinal
cracking, some alligator cracking, potholes and areas with minor settlement. The curb and
gutter is in good condition overall; however there are some locations with minor settlement.
There is currently no existing sidewalk on Sheldahl Road, and there is a portion of sidewalk
along the north side of Schjelmile Road. This walk is in fair to poor condition
Veteran’s Park Neighborhood All the streets in this area have a rural section and exhibit signs
of significant distress. Overall the streets are in poor condition with transverse and longitudinal
cracking, alligator cracking, potholes and areas of settlement. Due to the condition of these
streets maintenance effort has significantly increased in recent years.
Proposed Improvements
Based on the detailed review in the feasibility report the following recommendations are presented for
each section.


South Woodley Neighborhood Full depth reclamation is planned for the streets in the South
Woodley Neighborhood. No change in horizontal alignment is planned and the curb and gutter,
which will have as needed sport repairs, will remain in place. It is also proposed to construct
sidewalk along the west side of both Winona and Nevada Streets from Sumner Street to Ames
Street. Additional sidewalk is also recommended along the south side of Sumner Street from
College Street to Nevada Street based on the SRTS Study. The actual final location of the
sidewalk will be based on final survey data and an effort will be made to avoid impacting the
trees in the area.
Multek Area A full depth reclamation would be performed for the streets in this area. No
additional curb and gutter would be installed; however, existing curb and gutter would receive
as needed spot repairs. Existing sidewalk would receive spot repairs, but no additional
sidewalk would be installed with this project.

Veteran’s Park Neighborhood This section will have a modified reclamation performed along
with a base and wear course of bituminous pavement constructed. No construction of curb and
gutter or sidewalk is proposed on this section of the project.
Project Cost
The estimated project cost for the 2014 Street Reclamation Project are detailed below:
ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
South
Veteran's
Woodley
Multek Area
Park
Neighborhood
Neighborhood
Section
Construction
Construction Contingency
Total Construction
Overhead
Total Cost Estimate
$
$
$
$
$
511,280
51,128
562,408
112,482
674,890
$
$
$
$
$
184,000
18,400
202,400
40,480
242,880
$
$
$
$
$
208,244
20,824
229,068
45,814
274,882
TOTAL
$
903,524
$
90,352
$ 993,876
$ 198,775
$ 1,192,651
These estimates are based on detailed planning estimates and costs from recent reconstruction projects
that have been completed in the City of Northfield. Actual costs of the project could vary significantly
depending on the project scope, site conditions, project elements selected in the final design.
Project Funding
This project would be funded through a variety of sources including assessments, municipal state aid
and other city sources such as bonding. At the City Council meeting of October 29, 2013 staff
proposed using the adopted 2013 assessment rates and for planning purposes staff has used those 2013
adopted assessment rates.
In the project funding table below the special assessments were based on the following calculations:
 Reclaim – 2013 adopted assessment rate = $53 per front foot of project length.
 Modified Reclaim –20132 adopted assessment rate = $43 per front foot of project length.
South Woodley
Multek Area
Veteran's Park
Total
Funding
PROJECT FUNDING
Special
Capital Project
MSA
Assessments
Fund
$320,019
$354,870
$0
$106,000
$136,880
$0
$133,090
$91,792
$50,000
$559,109
$583,542
$50,000
TOTAL
$674,889
$242,880
$274,882
$1,192,651
Considering the nature of both Schjelmile Lane and Sheldal Road being dead end roadways this may
be an instance whereby one of the alternate methods of assessment should be considered—that being
dividing the assessable portion by the number of abutting parcels, rather than following the front
footage assessment method. More information in that regard will be provided at the City Council
meeting during our presentation.
Project Process
Attachment 3 details the project process for the Maintenance Project. This process has been developed
and refined over the course of the last several years. It accounts for all the required actions by City
Council to insure that Minnesota Statute Chapter 429 procedures are followed so that assessments for
local improvements may be levied to abutting benefiting properties.
Attachments:
2. Project Process
3. Project Location Maps
2014 STREET RECLAMATION PROJECT
PROJECT NUMBER STRT2014-A19
ACCEPTING FEASIBILITY REPORT AND
CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
WHEREAS,
pursuant to Council Resolution 2013-125 adopted October 29, 2013, a report has been prepared
by the City Engineer with reference to the 2014 Street Reclamation Project STRT2014-A19; and,
WHEREAS,
it is proposed to improve the following streets:
 Winona Street between Woodley Street and Ames Street
 Nevada Street between Fremont Street and Ames Street
 Fremont Street between Winona Street and Maple Street
 Ames Street between the western cul-de-sac and Maple Street
 Festler Court between Ames Street and the cul-de-sac
 Sheldahl Road between Fremouw Avenue and the northern dead end
 Schjelmile Lane between MN Trunk Highway 3 and the eastern dead end
 Poplar Street between Eighth Street and Woodley Street
 Eighth Street between Poplar Street and Linden Street
 Ninth Street between the western dead end and Linden Street; and,
WHEREAS,
the report provides information regarding whether the proposed improvement is necessary, costeffective, and feasible; whether it should best be made as a proposed or in connection with some
other improvement; the estimated cost of the improvement as recommended; and a description of
the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels.
1. The City Council will consider such improvements, in accordance with the report and the assessment
of abutting property for all or a portion of the cost of the improvement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes
Chapter 429 at an estimated total cost of $1,192,651.
2. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvement on the 3rd day of December, 2013 in
the Council Chambers at City Hall, at 7:10 p.m., and the City Clerk shall give mailed and published
notice of such hearing and improvement as required by law.
ATTEST
___________________________________
City Clerk
___________________________________
Mayor
VOTE: ___ GRAHAM
___ DELONG
___ LUDESCHER ___ NAKASIAN
___ PETERSON WHITE ___ POWNELL
___ ZWEIFEL
2014 Street Reclamation Project Process (STRT2014-A19)
The following actions detail the required 429 process track for local improvements.
Date1
Project Step
Purpose of Step
October 23, 2012
Hold Neighborhood Meeting
The intent of this meeting is to inform the neighborhood of the upcoming project and seek input on
the improvements, which will be summarized for City Council.
October 29, 2013
Order preparation of Feasibility Report
Ordering the Feasibility Report is a required step in the 429 process.
November 19, 2013
Accept Feasibility Report and call
for Improvement Hearing
December 3, 2013
Improvement Hearing
The engineer will present the Feasibility Report, the proposed project, an initial cost
estimate and potential assessments. As part of the meeting the City Council will also set
the date and time for the Improvement Hearing as required by the 429 process.
The purpose of this hearing is for the City Council to discuss a specific local improvement before
ordering it done. The Council considers all the information in the Feasibility Report and any other
information necessary for Council deliberation.
At the Improvement Hearing interested persons may voice their concerns, whether or not they are
in the proposed assessment area. A reasonable estimate of the total amount to be assessed and
a description of the methodology used to calculate individual assessments for affected parcels
must be available at the hearing. If the Council rejects the project, it may not reconsider that same
project unless another hearing is held following the required notice.
The project may be ordered any time within 6 months after the Improvement Hearing. It is not
advisable to change project parameters after ordering the improvement. Upon ordering the
improvement construction drawings and specifications are prepared. Any changes to the project
scope after this point will require redesign effort with additional cost and staff time as a result. This
also has the potential to delay the project.
January 7, 2014
Order Improvement and Preparation of
Plans and Specifications
January 22, 2014
February 18, 2014
Approve Plans and Order
Advertisement for Bids
This step is a requirement of the 429 process.
February 26, March
5 & 12, 2014
Publish Ad for Bid in Northfield News
A step in the bidding process. The project will also be advertised on the MnDOT e-Advert website.
February 26, 2014
March 17, 2014
Bid Opening – 10:00 A.M.
April 1, 2014
Accept Bids and Award Contract
May 2014
Neighborhood Tour
Final step in the bidding process. Bids are opened by staff and tabulated. From here staff will
make a recommendation to the City Council for award.
This step is a requirement of the 429 process and allows for the project to move forward with
beginning the actual construction process.
Prior to the start of construction a walking tour of the project corridor will be taken. Individual
meetings with property owners will be scheduled to go over the details of construction and
document existing conditions.
Council
Action2
Staff Action3
Mail notice:
October 14, 2013
Resolution 2013125
Resolution
Mail notice:
November 22,
2013.
Public Hearing
Ad in paper:
November 23 &
27, 2013.
Resolution
Mail notice:
January 10,
2014.
Resolution
Mail notice:
February 17,
2014.
Resolution
November 14, 2013
Once the project is awarded staff manages the day-to-day contract execution. Typically a
Resident Project Representative is on-site to make sure the project is constructed in accordance
to the plans and specifications. Communications between the contractor and city is primarily
through the City Engineer, Project Manager and Resident Project Representative.
May – November
2014
Construction
July 2015
Accept Improvements and Authorize
Final Payment
Significant changes will be brought to the City Council for approval prior to the work being
executed. Minor changes and field directives are authorized by the City Engineer in advance to
maintain the project schedule. All contract changes must be approved by the City Council.
Adjustments to estimated quantities occur during the final acceptance of the improvements.
The City Engineer recommends to City Council when the final payment should be made to the
Contractor. The City Council may accept the work by resolution; however, if the city fails to pay
the amount due within 30 days of a monthly estimate, or 90 days after the final estimate, the city
must pay interest on the past due amount as prescribed by law.
The following actions detail the required 429 process track to assess benefitting property owners for local improvements.
Date1
Project Step
Purpose of Step
January 2013
Benefit Appraisal Report
Based on the City of Northfield assessment policy, a benefit appraisal report will be completed to
determine the assessment rates.
March 18, 2014
Call for Assessment Hearing
The City Council will set the date and time for the Assessment Hearing as required by the
429 process.
Assessment Hearing
The purpose of this hearing is to give property owners an opportunity to express concerns about
the actual special assessment. At the Assessment Hearing the City Council shall hear and
consider all objections to the proposed assessment, whether presented orally or in writing.
Adopt Assessments
The City Council has some flexibility before it adopts the assessment roll and may
change, or amend, the proposed assessment as to any parcel. City Council must, by
resolution, adopt the same as the special assessment against the lands named in the
assessment roll. Once the assessment roll is adopted the assessments are set and
become liens against the properties listed.
April 15, 2014
May 6, 2014
Resolution
Council Action2
Staff Action3
Contact
Appraiser
Resolution
Public Hearing
Resolution
Mail notice:
March 28, 2014.
Ad in paper:
March 29, 2014.
Mail notice of
adoption on
May 7, 2014.
November 14, 2013
3
Y
3
S
EIGHTH ST W
HW
HW
Y
3
S
Vets' Park Reclamation
3
POPLAR ST S
LINDEN ST S
NINTH ST W
PROFESSIONAL
DR
246
WOODLEY ST W
Legend
Modified Reclaim
0
0
0.04
200
0.08
400
0.12
Miles
600
Feet
SHELD
A
Sheldahl Rd/Schjelmile Ln Reclamation
VIKING T
E
RD
HL
M
O
NTESSORI
CT
3
FR EMO
UW A
VE
H
W
HW Y
Y
AVE
N
3 3N
DRESDE
N
VIKING T
ER
VI KIN
R
G TER
VIKING
TER
VIKING TER
VIKING TER
SCHJELMILE LN
Legend
Reclamation
0
0
0.06
250
0.12
500
0.18
Miles
750
Feet
Ames St/Winona St/Fremont St/Winona St
Reclamation
WINONA ST S
NINTH ST E
WOODLEY ST E
COLLEGE ST S
28
UNION ST S
NINTH ST E
FREMONT ST E
MAPLE ST S
NEVADA ST S
SUMNER ST E
WINONA ST S
WASHINGTON ST S
FREMONT ST E
ARCHIBALD ST
AMES ST
SIBLEY DR
Legend
Reclamation
New Sidewalk
0
0
0.06
250
0.12
500
0.18
Miles
750
Feet
REGULAR
To:
City Administrator
From: Deb Little, City Clerk
Loren Lovehaug, IT Strategist
Subject: Proposal for Electronic Agenda Management Process
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council hereby approves Granicus to provide the electronic and agenda
management solutions and authorizes staff to enter into a contract.
Summary Report:
Per the City Council’s input at their August 6, 2013 meeting, staff has proceeded with selecting
electronic and agenda management solutions. Staff recommends Granicus as the proposed
solution to provide an integrated process for the City’s agenda management and online media
delivery needs. This solution will address the City’s initiatives by:
 Creating and managing agenda workflow electronically
 Streaming live and on‐demand content
 Providing a solution that all committees and departments can work within
 Providing a paperless agenda
Granicus provides a comprehensive managed services package through a hosted infrastructure
with unlimited bandwidth, storage and the highest security standards through a cloud-based
platform. Granicus has over 35 years of government-focused experience, with over 1,000 clients
in all 50 states at every level of government, including 59 in Minnesota. Granicus offers
unlimited content storage and distribution, open architecture, archived video editing & indexing,
citizen web portal, live and on-demand streaming to mobile devices and creates a paperless
agenda environment.
As part of the IT Roadmap and City Council goals, staff has been working on finding a solution
for the agenda management software/paperless agenda process. The goals and objectives for this
project include:
 Legal compliance and efficient and convenient archival storage and retrieval for official
use.
 Cost and labor savings related to the assembly and distribution of agenda and packet
information (reduced paper consumption, copier costs, labor).




Improved use of staff time and efficiencies.
Integration with current systems (document management system) and processes
Transparency and ease of access for citizens and elected officials. Sophisticated and
searchable, yet easy to use, interface to allow the public to access public meeting
information (agendas and minutes) as well as linkage to associated audio/video content.
Support for easy electronic reference and annotation by council members and other
meeting participants using computers and mobile devices.
The next steps in the process include:
 Technical review process to ensure that all the correct components and solution elements
are in place (networking environment, audio/video equipment, existing internet
connections, workflow processes and existing formats).
 Creating an implementation plan and project timeline
 Installation
 Training
 Testing
 Go Live!
One of the options is to do nothing and continue with the current processes. There may be less
expensive electronic software options on the market, but none of them provide the
comprehensive time saving, fully integrated with existing electronic document management
systems or unlimited storage solutions that are provided by Granicus.
Financial Information:
Funding for this project will come from the IT Fund, which will include the costs for hardware,
software, licensing and web streaming.
A breakdown of the proposed costs is as follows:
One-time Upfront Costs
Item
Web Streaming Hardware & Software
Agenda Management System with Laserfiche
Integration
Total
Annual Costs (2014)
Item
Web Streaming Service / Support / Storage
Agenda Management Service / Support / Storage
Total
Cost
$4,475
$19,250
$23,725
Cost
$8,100
$3,984
$12,084
Note: There is a current promotion for a 50% discount on the annual costs for the first six
months of service (excluding web streaming) as reflected above in the 2014 annual costs. The
annual costs for service, system support, storage and web streaming for 2015 and beyond would
be: $16,068
Potential additional one-time costs for devices for Council (if needed) could be up to an
additional $4,200. Staff will work with Council to determine the right device solutions in a
separate discussion during the implementation phase.
Timelines:
A timeline will be created as part of the implementation plan as noted in the next steps above. A
60-90 day implementation timeframe will be needed.
Attachments:
 Return on Investment Information
Granicus Legislative Management Suite
Yes/No
Yes
Return On Investment
No
For the City of:
Prepared by:
The City of Northfield, MN
Michelle Cooper
Thinking about your typical Council agenda process…
Answers
What is the average number of pages for each Council Agenda (Including attachments)?
100
Do you have a review/ approval process?
Yes
If Yes, How many items are reviewed for each meeting/agenda?
12
1400
3
How many approvers are usually involved?
Yes
Do they require their own printed copies for review?
180
How many Council members do you have?
2
7
How many Council members get a paper copy of the agenda w/attachments?
7
If you print extra agenda copies for a meeting, how many?
6
600
If you print revisions, what is the avg # of revision pages?
10
130
How many person-days does it take to prepare an agenda?
5
How many staff hours to distribute packets each meeting (including hand-delivery to council members)?
4
How many Council meetings per month?
10
How many public or internal information requests do you get per month?
20
1
What is the average number of staff hours spent per request (inc printing)?
Yes
Do you ever work late to get an agenda prepared on time?
So, based on your answers, here is a picture of what your current costs are for a basic agenda
workflow for just the City Council, and what you might save.
Monthly
0
###
Annually
The estimated number of pages that are printed for the agenda, multiple copies, and
printing associated with the review and approval process.
2,330
27,960
Total trees saved. Based on a study by conservatree.org, it requires the equivelent of
.6 trees to produce 1 carton (10 reams) of copier paper.
0.28
3.36
Based on a 2011 study by the Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance
(www.moea.state.mn.us) analyzing paper handling, printing and reprinting, the average
cost to print a sheet of paper is 31 cents.
$722
$8,668
104
1,248
$3,640
$43,680
The total number of staff-hours your office spends each month on redundant clerical
work tasks and paper handling associated with just the City Council agenda workflow
process.
Average hourly staff pay rate (incl insurance, benefits, vacation/sick time,
etc)
$35
Total avoidable preparation and packet production costs per month / year:
Proposed Legislative Management System 1st year up-front cost:
Proposed System MMS:
First year cost:
First year return on investment (ROI):
Subsequent Year return on investment (ROI):
System will pay for itself in approximately:
$4,466.30
$53,595.60
$23,725
$1,007
$17,786.60
$41,511.60
8.0
$23,725
$12,084
$35,809
In Savings!
In Savings!
Months! *
* The configured Granicus Legislative Management System will pay for itself in less than one year !
…and the value of not having to work late preparing an agenda the night before… Priceless !!
All information and calculated results are estimates only based on averaged assumptions and minimal
information that may be available. No guarantees are made or implied of any exact cost savings or return on
Investment (ROI) that may be realized.
REGULAR
Date of City Council Meeting: 11/19/2013
City Administrator
From: Michele Merxbauer, Community Development Coordinator
Tami Ford and Brad Ness, Convention and Visitor’s Bureau
Subject: Annual CVB Budget Report
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council approves the 2014 budget for the Convention and Visitor’s Bureau
(CVB).
Summary Report:
Tami Ford, CVB staff person and Brad Ness, CVB Chairperson, will be presenting the highlights
of the 2013 marketing efforts, as well as reviewing the 2014 CVB budget. As per the 2013-2015
CVB Consultant Services Contract, the CVB is required to submit an annual operating budget to
the Council for the next calendar year, detailing how anticipated lodging tax proceeds for the
subsequent year are intended to be used in meeting the Scope of Services to be performed by the
CVB under this Contract.
Alternative Options and Financial Information:
According to the signed contract, the submitted budget shall be subject to review, modification
and approval by the City Council and no proceeds of the lodging tax for the subsequent calendar
year shall be distributed to the CVB until the budget for that year has been approved by the City
Council. Delay in payments to the CVB may result in a gap of services.
Timelines:
It is preferable to approve the CVB budget prior to the end of 2013 in order to avoid gaps in
service from the CVB staff.
Attachments:
1. 2013/2014 CVB Budget
2. 2013 CVB Work-plan
3. Scope of Services
2014 CVB budget created by CVB board
2014 CVB
board
2013 budget approved
RESERVE FUNDS (CDs)*
INCOME
Lodging Tax 95%
Interest
$85,000.00
$300.00
$0.00
$78,500.00
$100.00
$4,000.00
$0.00
$89,300.00
$82,600.00
$300.00
$10,000.00
$300.00
$5,000.00
$19,550.00
$19,550.00
$4,000.00
Grants
Miscellaneous
Promotional Items
Advertising/Sponsorships
Music City MN Festival
TOTAL RESERVE/INCOME
EXPENSES
Staffing
Workers Comp Insurance
Professional/Contract Serv
(accounting, social media, photography, graphic design, copy writing)
Tourism traffic staff
(phones, walk-ins, brochure requests: one 3/4-time person; includes )
Tourism traffic staff non-statutory benefits
Tourism manager
$0.00
$6,700.00
$6,700.00
(website, press releases/media, group travel, bookkeeping, manage traffic staff: one 20%-time person)
Tourism manager staff non-statutory benefits
Program director
$0.00
$13,300.00
$13,300.00
(coordinate vendors & partners, buy/place media, budgets & financial, manage board & tourism staff)
Program director staff non-statutory benefits (one 25%-time person)
$0.00
$39,550.00
$500.00
$500.00
$350.00
$350.00
$400.00
$0.00
$12,000.00
$0.00
$2,800.00
$5,000.00
$400.00
$0.00
$12,000.00
$3,300.00
$2,800.00
$0.00
$7,000.00
$2,000.00
Business owners insurance
$7,000.00
$2,000.00
$1,650.00
Telephone/Fax
$1,700.00
$1,700.00
$500.00
$500.00
$900.00
$1,400.00
$1,300.00
$100.00
$1,700.00
$150.00
$900.00
$1,400.00
$1,300.00
$100.00
$1,700.00
$150.00
$89,300.00
$82,600.00
Meetings/Travel Shows
Mileage, travel exps
Dues and Subscriptions
Marketing
PR
Advertising
Visitors Guide/brochures
Website
Funding requests
Rent (CVB occupies 2/3 of 1700 sq ft)
Property tax (CVB occupies 2/3 of 1700 sq ft)
Xcel gas & electric (CVB occupies 2/3 of 1700 sq feet)
Internet Service
Postage
Supplies
Miscellaneous
Office Equipment
Postage machine
TOTAL EXPENSES
NET RESERVE/LOSS
Reserve balance per 12/31/2012 balance sheet (checking, savings, CDs)
Above lodging tax revenues based on historical projections.
If lodging tax collected does not meet projections, board will consider
use of reserve funds to make up revenue deficit.
2013 reserve funds earmarked for multi-year campaign to be created by
$0.00
$174,920.81
$1,650.00
contracted public relations firm. Estimate investment similar to
2012 New Ulm campaign "Germans have more fun" of $50,000.
Northfield Convention and Visitors Bureau
Notes and Plan for Northfield City Council
November, 2013
The Northfield Convention and Visitors Bureau’s purpose is to promote tourism to Northfield. The
goal is to provide efficient marketing of the Northfield community. Funds from lodging tax dollars
are used to encourage overnight stays and repeat visits to Northfield. The intent is to continue and
expand work with tourism partners and stakeholders to raise awareness of Northfield as a travel
destination.
Marketing and Promotion







Activities to use the ‘This is Northfield’ campaign imagery to brand Northfield. The
advertising will be strategic in order to draw more visitors to Northfield and encourage
overnight stays.
Visitors guides and brochures being created for 2014 (including electronic versions); being
redesigned to match new campaign
The following is free media earned in 2013. We will continue to contact media outlets and
work on Northfield features.
o Star Tribune, Best Small Town for a
Weekend
o Midwest Living (Article Highlighting
Northfield in Spring 2014 Issue)
o Better Homes & Gardens (Northfield in the
School Spirit Article, October 2014)
o Wall Street Journal (Minnesota Historic
River and College Town Ready for a Closer
Look - This Is Northfield!)
o WCCO (Noon News Story and Feature)
o Kare11 (Kare11 @4 Interview with Pat Evans)
Print advertising being placed for 2014
o Minnesota Meetings + Events
o Midwest Living, Best of the Midwest
o Group Tour Magazine
o Minnesota Monthly – Ultimate Guide to Summer Travel, Southern Minnesota Fall
Drives Issues
o Explore MN – Group & Packaged Guide (distributed outside of Minnesota)
Coordinating with partners and providing financial support to events by funding and/or
sharing cooperative advertising where appropriate and likely to increase lodging
Ongoing use of social media for drawing attention to events, points of interest and activities
2014 redesign of website to match new campaign; create portal for tourism partners to
submit information on events
 Through August 16, consider the following year-over-year statistics:
 Site visits are up 39%, unique visits are up 38%
 Pageviews are up 111%






Visits from Google are up 23%, Bing is up 22% and Yahoo is up 13%
Direct visits are up 222%
You received 22,075 visits from Google or 52% of your total visits. Roughly 60%
of your visits come from search.
- Mobile use was up 113% and tablet use up 133%. 29% of your total traffic now comes from
these devices.
- The site is #1 in Google for searches related to Northfield and Hotel, Motel, Lodging, Vacation,
Visit and many others. It is #2 or #3 for general Northfield Mn, Minnesota and Minn searches.
o
2014 creation of email newsletter to capture interest of people already familiar with
Northfield and encourage visit or return visit

Group Sales – Solicit group tour operators to choose Northfield as a destination for group
itineraries.

Coordinate with regional partners to increase length of stays.
o Cannon Valley Winery
o Faribault
o Lakeville/South Metro
o Nerstrand Big Woods
2014 greater coordination with regional advertising and promotion for tours
o Minnesota Association of Convention and Visitors Bureau
o Southern Minnesota Tourism Association
2014 CVB will take lead on group travel coordination in Northfield to ensure group tours
have positive experiences and maximize Northfield opportunities


Meetings – Promote Northfield as a meeting destination for businesses and organizations.
 2014 will continue to promote Northfield’s conference/dining/hotel spaces for
meetings
 2014 Northfield article to run in Midwest Meetings (free publicity)
 2014 will continue to identify and coordinate potential meeting/conference sites
Visitor’s Center Operations
 Direct walk-in traffic to restaurants, lodging, activities and shopping.
 Answer phones, online and e-mail visitor requests for information; mail or electronically
send information as requested
 Respond to travel inquiries from Explore MN, paid-advertising leads, and websites requests.
 Continue to work with colleges/events to get most current information available for
visitors’/students’ use.
Education
 Create learning materials and share with stakeholders and partners how to best use new
campaign in their promotions, thereby leveraging campaign impact




Educate stakeholders and partners how to best use redesigned website, links, and social
media opportunities
Work with tourism stakeholders to market Northfield as a destination with cooperative
advertising opportunities, free publicity and social media
Work with organizations interested in hosting new events in Northfield. Collect venue
information, follow-up with inquiries, provide them with contacts to make their event
successful.
Partner with community groups to market existing events and support creation of new events.
Oversight
Oversight of the CVB is provided by an Advisory Board
Current composition:
1. City of Northfield – (Staff) Michelle Merxbauer
2. City of Northfield (Council) – Jessica Peterson White
3. Northfield Area Chamber of Commerce Board – Beth Ayotte-Naumann
4. Hotel – Paul McGuire, AmericInn
5. Art/History/Festival – Brad Ness, DJJD
6. Colleges – Michelle Egeness, St. Olaf
Under consideration (applications received and to be reviewed at next meeting):
7. At Large – Ruthie Gilbertson, Professional Pride Realty
8. Retail – Cynthia Gilbertson, Northfield Yarn
9. Restaurant - soliciting
10. Outdoor/Sport – Tom Bisel, Fit To Be Tried
11. Art/History/Festival – soliciting
Performance Measures
Marketing Benchmarks
 Group Sales and Events
 Coverage in local, regional and national media
 Northfield Visitors Center
o Walk in visitors
o Phone and web visitor requests count
o Reply to reader response inquiries from advertising and Explore Minnesota



Quantity and reach of brand marketing campaigns
Quantity, frequency and reach of niche marketing programs
Anecdotal attendance figures when available from partners and stakeholders
Social Media Benchmarks
Email Newsletters
 Open rate and click-through for articles and advertisements
Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest
 Fan counts/Followers
 Level of engagement of posts
TIMELINE for non-routine activities
November 2013
Southern Minnesota Tourism Association Meeting (November 14, Pipestone)
Begin rebranding of website
December 2013
Work with changes to website
Redesign and creation of annual visitor guide
January
Publish 2014 visitor guide in print and on website; distribute to travel centers and local outlets
Finish website rebranding/functions
Work with other Northfield guides, maps and brochures to get ThisIsNorthfield campaign promoted
February
Promote launch of new website
Attend Explore MN Tourism Conference (February 4-5 in Duluth)
March
Work with events partners (DJJD, Riverwalk Market Fair, colleges, etc.) to get summer promotions set
Begin educating tourism stakeholders/partners on how to use new campaign, website and social media
opportunities
April
Work with events partners on funding requests and cooperative advertising
Begin email newsletter promotion
May, June, July, August
(Heaviest tourism traffic)
Coordinate tour groups on site
September
Follow-ups with tourism partners/stakeholders on events, tourism and use of campaign/social
media/website
October
Begin planning for 2015 advertising, visitor guides
Budget Notes: changes from 2013 budget to 2014 budget
Reduction of lodging tax revenue projected – conservative projected revenue is based on
estimates from City Finance Department.
Reduction of $5000 in Professional Contract Services – The reduction in the Professional Contract
Services is $5000. Several of the previously-contracted services are now being performed by the
Marketing and Tourism Coordinator.
Increase in Visitors Guides/Brochures of $3300 – Visitor guide will need significant revisions to
rebrand it to the “This Is Northfield” campaign.
Reduction of $5000 in Funding Requests – funding support for activities/events will be used from
the fund balance instead of the general budget.
Exhibit 1
Northfield Convention and Visitors Bureau
Scope of Services
Attached to Consultant Service Contract
Dated August 8, 2013
Between the City of Northfield
And
The Northfield Area Chamber of Commerce
The Northfield Area Chamber of Commerce (“Chamber”) shall perform the following services pursuant
to a Contract between the Chamber and the City of Northfield (“City”). These services are provided
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 469.190 and Chapter 74, Article II of Northfield City Code, copies of which are
attached to this Exhibit 1. The scope below is based on the 2013 Strategic Plan created by the CVB
board.
1. Create brand awareness for visiting Northfield
Utilizing the expertise of a public relations firm, the CVB will initiate and manage a campaign to
promote the City as a tourist destination and convention site. The public relations firm and the CVB will
obtain information from stakeholders to ensure that the campaign speaks to the different activities,
festivals, areas of interest and businesses involved in tourism and conventions.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
Will carry out branding through new and existing websites (www.thisisnorthfield.com and
www.visitingnorthfield.com ), social media, advertising (web, print and radio) to create a
cohesive, and consistent message and brand.
Will use the campaign to continue outreach to potential visitors, public relations and media to
maximizing branding investment for several years.
Will market branding through creative efforts meant to capture attention of individuals and
local, regional, and national media.
Will market branding through visual goods, such as t-shirts, posters, postcards, bumper stickers,
buttons.
Will work with partners to make the visual goods available.
Will provide outreach at different events to make campaign known to the general public and
visitors.
Will educate and encourage tourism partners to engage, interact with and utilize branding to
maximize visual and message impact and to encourage cooperative advertising and promotion
spending, thereby stretching advertising monies. Education will take place with one-on-one
meetings and a tourism-partner training session. Stakeholders will be encouraged to adapt and
make the branding “their own” so it can be cross-promoted in many ways.
2. Increase visitor spending
Encourage visitors (tourists, college students, parents of students, recreational visitors) to stay longer
and spend more money while in our community.
o
Will create sample itineraries to outline activities and interests visitors could use. Will share
itineraries via web site, social media and through targeted print advertising.
o
Will work with seasonal or one-time activities to encourage people to try Northfield for a short
visit, then offer opportunities for other activities they may enjoy. Suggestions will be made with
call-in and walk-in traffic as well as through social media.
o
Will promote Star Tribune’s award of “Best Small Town for a Weekend Visit” to encourage
Minnesotans (and those within recognition reach of Star Tribune) to visit for a weekend or
longer, or to visit again.
o
Will target visitors who enjoy history, recreational activities, performing and visual arts,
festivals, boutique shopping, dining, and colleges. Will target demographics (age, geographical
location, interests) through:
o

social media posts, contests and ads

placed advertising online, in print, and on radio

information distribution; making information accessible and in formats each group is
most likely to use

Groups targeted include: current and potential college students, parents of students,
college and high school alumni, day-trippers, young families, “girlfriend” outings,
romantic get-aways, tour groups.

Targeting will include encouraging overnight visitors when lodging establishments
typically have vacancies.
Will create play-and-stay packages for different interest groups, coordinating with hotels,
restaurants, activities, and retail opportunities. Will promote packages on web site and through
social media and other appropriate outlets.
3. Market Northfield as a recreation destination
Will market to potential visitors who are not currently utilizing our recreational amenities (biking, crosscountry skiing, kayaking, sports facilities, hiking) by promoting outdoor activities and venues on websites
and in promotions.
o
Will create awareness of recreational opportunities by promoting events, outdoor amenities
and business resources that may be useful to recreational enthusiasts.
o
Marketing will take place on web sites, social media, ads and with printed materials such as
hiking/biking guides, waterway information and maps.
o
Will coordinate tourism opportunities with organized sporting event organizers (such as
tournaments) to encourage visitors to explore other areas of community and take part in other
events or sites, during the sporting event or in the future.
4. Move from traditional media to contemporary outreach approaches
Utilize more internet, social media and media influencers to attract and interact with current and future
visitors
o
Will optimize facebook, twitter, and pinterest sites with regular and relevant posting. Will
interact and respond to interested parties through social media to answer questions and
provide more information, filling requests and providing additional options. Will collaborate
with stakeholders to provide their information via posts and links.
o
Will create marketing materials that are easily sent via email or downloadable from website,
reducing costs of traditional print and advertising.
o
Will seek free publicity through social media, guerilla events (created by public relations firm),
magazines, video, and television writers/producers.
o
Will work with Explore Minnesota online opportunities to feature Northfield events, attractions
and businesses as well as promote branding and connections to other websites/social media.
o
Will enhance and maintain online calendar of events, seeking out upcoming events and
attractions to feature. Will promote linkages to events, festivals, and tourism stakeholder sites.
5. Increase group travel
The CVB will attract more travel groups (organized and organic) to explore and re-visit our area. A grant
from Explore Minnesota was received to aid in this effort in 2013.
o
Create marketable itineraries, encouraging travel groups to take in an array of activities, dining
and shopping. Will market itineraries through group travel publications and on websites.
o
Provide information and support to tour operators, including parking options, dining and lodging
contact information, ideas for activities inside and around Northfield, and ideas for special areas
of interest. Will promote capabilities from leads generated by group travel publications, online
contact form, and from interested parties who’ve contacted our tourism partners.
o
Educate and coordinate with other regional tourism partners to inform their contact circles
about Northfield tour opportunities. Will enhance itineraries with day-trips to other interesting
venues while encouraging tour groups to lodge in Northfield.
Services performed day-to-day:
1. The CVB shall provide informational services to potential, current and future visitors to
Northfield by
a. Answering inquiries from phone, walk-in traffic, email and social media requests;
sending out information verbally, via email, web links or post.
b. Fulfilling information requests from lead-generating agencies such as Explore
Minnesota and Explore Southern Minnesota.
c. Providing information about current and upcoming activities on the web site, through
social media and through public relations efforts.
d. Gathering and providing information about attractions, festivals and events.
e. Creating and distributing marketing materials featuring annual events, maps and
target-interest publications. Collecting materials created by tourism partners and
networks to give to on-site and potential visitors.
f. Seeking out and distributing places for marketing materials, including travel centers,
lodging establishments and high-traffic tourism sites.
2. Meet with tourism partners to understand upcoming events
a. Seek updates and timely information to provide to potential visitors through website,
social media and distribution of printed materials.
b. Collaborate with tourism stakeholders on cooperative advertising opportunities to
promote/brand Northfield as a whole as well as special events or attractions.
c. Become aware of advertising/promotions being placed by tourism partners so to
support but not duplicate efforts.
3. Seek, solicit and provide materials (press releases and updates) for earned media (publicity)
and informational news coverage through online and direct contact.
4. Create advertising and promotions with appropriate outlets.
5. Seek new and update information with Explore Minnesota (state website/organization). Utilize
grant received from Explore Minnesota to promote group travel.
6. Work with partners locally and regionally to maximize cooperative advertising and promotional
efforts.
7. Plan itineraries for group travel and longer-stay guests. Create and update stay-and-play
packages on website and social media.
8. Participate in tourism organizations to promote Northfield to other communities’
representatives and to learn and employ best practices in tourism industry (Southern MN
Tourism Association, Minnesota Association of Convention and Visitors Bureaus).
9. Work with conference planners to find meeting spaces, lodging, dining and free-time activities
for attendees.
REGULAR
To:
City Administrator
From:
Subject:
TIF District No. 4
Mayor’s Streetscape Task Force Project List
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to review and discuss the updated recommended
Mayor’s Streetscape Task Force Project list.
Summary Report:
This past Tuesday morning (November 12, 2013) the Mayor’s Streetscape Task
Force met and discussed the status of the recommended Project List, (or Project Matrix as some call it),
and the status of the TIF District No. 4 funds.
Also in attendance at the meeting was Interim Finance Director Melanie Schlomann, who updated the
group on the available funds. Ms. Schlomann also reviewed with the group what needs to be done in
order to retain those funds for their intended purpose beyond the expiration date of the TIF District. To
continue to have those funds available for the many various identified and recommended projects, the TIF
District plan narrative needs to be updated to specifically reflect each of the various projects, and that
revised plan needs to be approved by the City Council by December 31, 2013. The Mayor’s Streetscape
Task Force list of recommended projects should be in agreement with the TIF District Plan narrative, and
vice versa. Ms. Schlomann indicated that the City’s Attorney for TIF matters (Ms. Jenny Boulton) is
preparing that revised plan to be presented to the City Council at its December 10th meeting.
After hearing from Ms. Schlomann, the Task Force began its discussion, and came to the consensus that
while there are some significant anticipated projects (such as the two separate sums identified for
“Parking Improvements”—$500,000 and $144,000, respectively) on the list, all of those items should
remain because those are still seen as high priorities for the possible use of the TIF District fund.
However, the Task Force also recognized the obstacles to those projects have delayed any real
expectation of near term implementation, and the possibility in the end those projects (or at least some of
them) may turn out to be unrealistic. The thought was that additional projects should be added to the list
to make them eligible for TIF District funding—essentially that the available funding should be “overobligated”—because some of the projects will probably eventually drop out.
Projects from the list that are currently underway, or will soon include the Master Planning for Bridge
Square, the Division Street Streetscape update and Lighting Analysis, and the TH 3 Decorative Street
Light Replacement.
Two examples of such additions would be to add streetscaping elements for the upcoming (2016)
reconstruction of Division Street from Sixth to Eighth and Seventh from Washington to Water. Another
possibility is to reimburse the Project fund for appropriate portions of the the cost for this year’s Sixth
Street Improvements. TIF District 4 funds were not included in this project financing because we thought
at the time the fund was already overcommitted, and no funds were really available. That Sixth Street
contract is still open, and a number of streetscape elements have now been completed—some just this
past week. All of these type items have been funded with TIF funds elsewhere in the downtown area
since the TIF District was formed.
The existing Project List is attached. Task Force member Dan Bergeson (The Keeper of the List) is
preparing an updated version
Leave Plan as is, and return substantial funds to the various taxing jurisdictions.
Financial Impacts:
The expectation is that the amended plan for the TIF District will assure ultimate
and lawful expenditure of all of the TIF District Funds on projects for which it was intended.
Timelines:
The amended TIF District Plan must be finalized and adopted by the City Council by
December 31, 2013.
Attachments:
1. Current Project List
2. Proposed Project List
Mayor's Streetscape Task Force
Project Name
Project Description
Northfield, MN
Recommended Projects For Master Development Fund updated 4/19/2013
Project Lead
MSTF Status
Council
Status
East River Trail Paving
Paving of the east side Cannon River trail between Northfield
and Dundas that will be constructed in 2011 with DNR and
Staff
rotary grant funding.
Recommended
Funds
Allocated
Transit Hub Local Share
Local share of potential transit hub funded by Federal Transit
Staff
dollars
Recommended
Tiger Grant cost share
Bike/Ped bridge over railroad at Greenvale Ave. and traiil to
Water St. crossing; additional trail along the Cannon River
from St. Olaf Ave. to 2nd St.
Staff
Design of dumpster enclosure.
Planning 2011Construction 2012
12
Planning
2012-13
Construction 2013
Estimated Unit
Cost
Number of
Units
Units
Total Project
Cost
X
Lump Sum
$50,000
Funds
allocated
X
Lump Sum
$69,000
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
MSTF
Discussed
Proceed with
planning
Discussion and agreement with users for cost sharing on
project.
Staff
Discussed
Work with Historical Society on installation of historical
plaque design and installation for Lyceum Building.
MSTF
Recommended
Develop project parameters for additional historical markers
and information areas.
MSTF
discussed
Establish location and design of newspaper box corrals and
amend ordinance language; develop possible permitting
process.
Staff
Discussed
Construct decorative surface mounted railing similar railing
used in downtown area.
Staff
Discussed
Parking Improvements
Purchase of property and site development of same to
address inadequate parking supply in the Downtown District
MSTF
Recommended
Bench additions
Locate and install benches in the downtown, gaining property MSTF and
owner support
Staff
Additional wayfinding signage in downtown area for both
walkers and drivers. City maps in simple vandal resistant
frames that are easily accessible for map revisions.
Enhance wayfinding signage at archways to Riverwalk
including the addition of “ To River Walk”.
Garbage Dumpster
Corrals
Historical Places
Signage
Newspaper Vending
Corrals
Additional Wayfinding
Signage
`
FUNDS HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED
PLANNING HAS BEEN
AUTHORIZED
X
$2,000
X
X
X
Proceed with
planning
X
This is matching money to a DNR grant which will fund a
part of this project. Project partially completed in 2011.
Further progress depends on approval by Army Corps of
Engineers.
Staff is exploring optons for the location and
construction of a transit hub. More information will be
presentedwhen it becomes available.
$250,000
Tiger Grant project share
Lump Sum
1
$2,000
Design to be used at multiple sites.
Staff Hours
40
$10,000
Cost sharing. Priority projects 4th & Washington/3rd &
Washington.*
$350
Per Sign
1
$350
Prototype is being researched
$350
Per Sign
4
$1,400
$5,000
Lump Sum
1
$5,000
Design is being researched
X
Proceed with
planning
Comments and Next Steps
X
X
$200
LF
70
$14,000
Assumed 5 corrals holding 5 vending units at 14 feet per
corral
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$500,000
Lump Sum
1
$500,000
City Council has established a parking subcommittee
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$1,800
Per Bench
Installed
5
$9,000
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$3,000
Per Pedestrian
2
Style Sign
$6,000
Assumed 2 signs for this evaluation
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$3,000
Per existing
Archway
$6,000
One at each existing archway
$
369,000
$
553,750
2
11/14/2013
Project Name
Project Description
Project Lead
MSTF Status
Council
Approval
Planning 2011Construction 2012
12
Planning
2012-13
Construction 2013
X
Gateway Corridor
Construction of infrastructure and landscaping suggested in MSTF and
Enhancements Planning
the 2012 Gateway Corridor Enhancements master plan
Staff
and Implementation
Recommended
X
Phase 1 - Design of trail and identification of trail easement at MSTF and
on the west side of the River south of the 2nd St. bridge
Staff
Recommended
X
Addition of linking trail
nd
from 2 Street to River
Walk, west side of
Cannon
Northfield, MN
Phase 2 - Purchase of Easement and Trail Construction (Grant
Staff
Dependent)
X
Estimated Unit
Cost
Units
Number of
Units
Total Project
Cost
Comments
$190,000
Recommend implementing project 5A in the Gateway
Corridor Improvement Plan: Improve the intersection of
HWY 3 at 3rd St. with updated signilization and signage
$35,000
Priority for discussion as a tie-in to the Tiger Grant
project
$30,000
Bridge Square Master Plan and Preliminary Design
MSTF
Recommended
X
$20,000
Several Northfield organizations currently discussing
future possibilities; the timing is right for this study
Division Street Enhancements Master Plan and Design
Standards
MSTF
Recommended
X
$20,000
Includes street-lighting study and design on Division St.
between 2nd and 8th Streets
Discussed
X
X
$29,200
solicit a partnership with Econofoods
X
X
$106,000
X
X
$144,000
City Council has committed $500,000 to parking
expansion. This is the remainder of the funds in the
original parking expansion estimate.
$10,000
This is a council-initiated suggestion.
Downtown Enhancement
Projects Planning
Private/Public Urban
Edge Enhancements
Cost sharing program for subsidizing additional cost to use
the City’s streetscape elements along the edges of private
properties to create a cohesive look within the district.
MSTF and
Develop template of elements that qualify for program and
Staff
define process for approval. Funds in this area would also be
availabel for cost sharing of additional trash enclosures
City/Business partnership.
Replace light poles of
Decorative TH3 Street
Lights
The street lights lining TH3 between Greenvale and 5th St. are
defective and pose a public safety threat. 12 have failed and
Staff
fallen over to date. They should be replaced before anyone
gets injured.
Recommended
Purchase of property and site development of same to
address inadequate parking supply in the northern portion of MSTF
the Downtown District
Recommended
3rd St. Bridge
Enhancements
Purchase a tent for use by community groups on 3rd St.
Staff
Bridge and install lighting on the bridge railings and supports
Discussed
TOTAL ESTIMATED
PROJECT COSTS
Must be dispersed or encumbered by
contract by December 31, 2013
NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION
Discussed
$1,506,950
$
All costs are estimated at the planning level. Actual costs
will be determined upon initiation and development of
individual projects.
584,200
11/14/2013
Project Name
Northfield MN
Project Description
Project Lead
MSTF Status
Council Status
Planning
2013-14
Construction 2014
Total Project Cost
East River Trail Paving
Paving of the east side Cannon River trail between Northfield and Dundas
Staff
that will be constructed with DNR and rotary grant funding.
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
$50,000
Q Block Transit Hub/Depot Site
Development
Local share of transit hub funded by Federal Transit dollars and
assistance for site development to accommodate the Depot reolocation to Staff
the Q Block
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
$115,000
Tiger Grant cost share
Bike/Ped bridge over railroad at Greenvale Ave. and traiil to Water St.
crossing
Staff
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
$250,000
Fink Water Street Property
Purchase of the bulding at 219 S. Water Street and site expenses for
future development option.
Staff
Downtown Enhancement Projects
Planning
Bridge Square Master Plan and Preliminary Design
MSTF
Downtown Enhancement Projects
Planning
Division Street Enhancements Master Plan and Design Standards
MSTF
The street lights lining TH3 between Greenvale and 5th St. are defective
Replace faulty light poles of decorative
and pose a public safety threat. 12 have failed and fallen over to date. They Staff
TH3 Street Lights
should be replaced before anyone gets injured.
Project partially completed in 2011. Extend existing trail
from Village School south to Dundas
Tiger Grant project share
Funds
allocated
X
$80,000
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
$20,000
Several Northfield organizations currently discussing
future possibilities; the timing is right for this study
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
$15,000
Includes street-lighting study and design on Division St.
between 2nd and 8th Streets
Recommended
Funds
allocated
X
X
$106,000
Purchase of property and site development of same to address inadequate
MSTF
parking supply in the Downtown District
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$650,000
City Council parking subcommittee has recommended 3
possible sites:Washington St between 2nd and 3rd,
corner of Hwy 3 and 2nd, Premier Bank corner
Garbage Dumpster Corrals
Design a dumpster enclosure for replication at multiple sites. Provide
matching funds for interested businesses.
MSTF
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$15,000
Priority projects are parking lots at 4th &
Washington/3rd & Washington
Historical Places Signage
Work with Historical Society on historical plaque design and installation
for 5 locations in historic district
MSTF
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$2,000
Newspaper Vending Corrals
Design and build 5 vending corrals with a 5 box capacity
Staff
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$20,000
Bench additions
Locate and install benches in the downtown, gaining property owner
support
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$10,000
Additional Wayfinding Signage
Additional wayfinding signage in downtown area for both walkers and
drivers. City maps in simple vandal resistant frames that are easily
accessible for map revisions.
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$6,000
Assumed 2 signs for this evaluation
Additional Wayfinding Signage
Enhance wayfinding signage at Division St. archways btween 3rd and 4th MSTF and
to Riverwalk including the addition of " River Walk”.
Staff
Recommended
Proceed with
planning
X
X
$6,000
One at each existing archway
FUNDS HAVE BEEN ALLOCATED
PLANNING HAS BEEN AUTHORIZED
$
$
636,000
709,000
Establish location and design of newspaper box corrals
and amend ordinance language; develop possible
permitting process.
11/14/2013
Project Name
Gateway Corridor Enhancements
Planning and Implementation
Northfield MN
Project Description
Project Lead
MSTF Status
Council Status
Planning
2013-14
Construction 2014
Total Project Cost
Construction of infrastructure and landscaping suggested in the 2012
Gateway Corridor Enhancements master plan
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
X
X
$190,000
Recommend implementing project 5A in the Gateway
Corridor Improvement Plan: Improve the intersection of
HWY 3 at 3rd St. with updated signilization and signage
Design of trail and identification of trail easement on the west side of the
River south of the 2nd St. bridge
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
X
X
$35,000
Priority for discussion as a tie-in to the Tiger Grant
project
MSTF and
Staff
Recommended
X
X
$40,000
Original part of the Crossing development
X
$25,000
West Riverwalk access to 2nd St.
Trail linking 2nd St. with St. Olaf Ave.
on west side of Cannon
Install bituminous trail between the Crossing and the Cannon River
Division St./Historic District Lighting
Enhancement
Initial construction phase following adoption of Division St. Master Plan
MSTF and
Staff
Discussed
Private/Public Urban Edge
Enhancements
Cost sharing program for businesses to use the City’s streetscape
elements along the edges of private properties to create a cohesive look
within the district.
MSTF and
Staff
Discussed
X
X
$145,000
Enhancements of downtown links to
Bridge Square in support of traffic
generating public events
Install lighting and pavement anchors for securing moveable structures
MSTF and
Staff
Discussed
X
X
$10,000
3rd St. Bridge Enhancements
Purchase a tent for use by community groups on 3rd St. Bridge and install
Staff
lighting on the bridge railings and supports
Discussed
X
X
$10,000
TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS
Must be dispersed or encumbered by contract by
December 31, 2013
NEEDS FURTHER DISCUSSION
$1,800,000
$
Possible partners: Econofoods; Forget-Me-Not Florist;
Witt Bros. Also encompasses 6th St. and S. Water St.
modifications
This is a council-initiated suggestion.
All costs are estimated at the planning level. Actual costs
will be determined upon initiation and development of
individual projects.
455,000
11/14/2013
Updated Financial Projection ‐ Municipal District #4
Date:
Revenues & Expenditures
11/13/2013
2010
Actual
2011
Actual
2012
Actual
2013
Actual & Projected
2014
Projected
2015
Projected
Taxes
Intergovernmental
Interest on Investments
Interest on Loans
Miscellaneous Revenue
Loan Payments Received
Transfers In
550,247
3,870
21,490
3,004
850
8,619
86,099
551,260
5,578
42,297
‐
‐
‐
‐
552,086
‐
13,659
‐
‐
‐
‐
548,507
‐
10,503
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
‐
3,500
7,500
‐
‐
‐
Total Revenues
674,179
599,135
565,745
559,010 11,000
Other Professional Services:
Administration‐related
2,242
5,029
Known or anticipated expenditures:
Projected Expense
15,000 15,000
47,194 7,526
Development Loans Issued:
11,808
84,000
14,000
Projects:
Water Street
Downtown Enhancement projects
Transit Hub East River Trail paving
Light Poles
Other Improvements
‐
11,635
368,284
8,346
Transfer Out (debt service)
for 2001B TIF Refunding Bond (final)
for 2008B TIF G.O. Bonds (5th & Water Sts.)
for Tiger Trail
Additional Transfer
Subtotal
160,327
202,674
REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
10,728
3,500
7,500
11,000
56,000 24,000
35,000
115,000
50,000
106,000
709,000
62,000
148,000 141,721
Net
250,000
11,500
395,422
250,000
461,526 486,721
170,323
97,484
724,000
Revenue over (under) Expenditures
131,518
287,451
170,323
97,484 (475,721) (713,000)
Fund Balance ‐ Jan 1
Fund Balance ‐ Dec 31
833,438
964,956
964,956
1,252,407
1,252,407
1,422,730
1,422,730 1,520,214
1,520,214 1,044,493
1,044,493
331,493
REGULAR
City Administrator
From: Melanie Schlomann, Interim Finance Director
Subject: Interfund TIF Loan for Presidential Commons
Action Requested: Requesting that the Council pass resolution 2013-138, allowing TIF District
#4 to loan money to Presidential Commons TIF district.
Summary Report: Presidential Commons is a TIF district established in 1999 between the
HRA for the City of Northfield, and Northfield WNS Inc. The district was used to finance a
townhome development. Due to market conditions over the past few years, revenue has fallen
below what was originally anticipated when the agreement was made. This has caused less
revenue coming in, than expenditures going out for bond payments. Presidential Commons will
have a negative fund balance at the end of 2013. We anticipate this will resolve itself as the
market value continues to rise and the housing market continues to recover over the next several
years. There is also a “shortfall guarantee” in the original contract with the developer that is
being looked at. In the meantime, it would appear a shortfall of approximately $40,000 a year
will be incurred. We would like a resolution allowing up to $250,000 to be loaned from TIF
District #4, to be able to keep the fund balance positive over the next few years, while market
conditions work themselves out. It is expected Presidential Commons will pay TIF district #4
back the original loan amount, plus 3% interest.
Alternative Options: Loan Presidential Commons money from the General Fund.
Financial Information: A copy of the 2012 balance sheet and 2013 income statement for the
Presidential Commons fund is attached.
Timelines: If we wish to loan Presidential Commons money from another TIF District, we must
pass a resolution before the negative cash balance occurs. Once a negative cash balance is
reported, we lose the ability to reimburse the negative amount from tax increment.
Attachments:
Resolution 2013-138
Presidential Commons Financial Information
CITY OF NORTHFIELD, MN
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE OF CERTAIN
COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO 1-1
WHEREAS, the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Northfield, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1.
Background.
1.01. The City has heretofore approved the establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1-1,
Presidential Commons (the "TIF District") within the Housing and Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"),
and has adopted a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain
improvements within the Project.
1.02. The City has determined to pay for certain costs identified in the TIF Plan consisting of
land/building acquisition, site improvements/preparation, public utilities, streets and sidewalks, other housing
improvements, bond and loan principal and interest and administrative costs (collectively, the "Qualified Costs"),
which costs may be financed on a temporary basis from City funds available for such purposes.
1.03. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the City is authorized to advance or loan
money from the City's general fund or any other fund from which such advances may be legally authorized, in
order to finance the Qualified Costs.
1.04. The City intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax increments derived from the
TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which terms are referred to collectively as the
"Interfund Loan").
Section 2.
Terms of Interfund Loan.
2.01. The City hereby authorizes the advance of up to $250,000.00 from the municipal #4 TIF fund or
so much thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs. The City shall reimburse itself for such advances together
with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the principal amount from the date of each advance.
The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged is limited to the greater of the rates specified under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 as of the date the loan or advance is authorized, unless
the written agreement states that the maximum interest rate will fluctuate as the interest rates specified under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 are from time to time adjusted. The interest rate shall be
3% and will not fluctuate.
2.02. Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on each
August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on which the
Authority has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined by the City
Administrator, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from the TIF District.
2.03. Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment," which shall
mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been paid, or as determined by
the City Administrator, generated in the preceding six (6) months with respect to the property within the TIF
District and remitted to the City by Rice County, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to
469.1799, all inclusive, as amended. Payments on this Interfund Loan may be subordinated to any outstanding
or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment, and are on parity
with any other outstanding or future interfund loans secured in whole or in part with Available Tax Increment.
2.04. The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre-payable in
whole or in part at any time by the City without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment shall affect the
amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made under this Interfund Loan.
2.05. This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the City in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from Available Tax
Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund Loan and the interest hereon shall
not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof,
including, without limitation, the City. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall
be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto except out of
Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or
any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan
or other costs incident hereto. The City shall have no obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund
Loan or accrued interest thereon, which may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date.
2.06. The City may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the City
Council, including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to the extent
permissible under law.
Section 3.
Effective Date. This resolution is effective upon the date of its approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
The City hereby authorizes the advance of up to $250,000.00 from the Municipal #4 TIF Fund or so much
thereof as may be paid as Qualified Costs. The interest rate shall be 3% and will not fluctuate.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Northfield on this 19th day of November, 2013.
ATTEST
______________________________
City Clerk
VOTE:
____________________________
Mayor
11-13-2013 04:28 PM
CITY
OF
NORTHFIELD
PAGE:
1
BALANCE SHEET
AS OF:
DECEMBER 31ST, 2012
379-PRESIDENTIAL COMMONS TIF
ACCOUNT #
ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION
BALANCE
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
ASSETS
======
379-1010 Cash -Presidential Commons TIF
41,441.78
379-1030 Funds Held By Bond Trustee
0.09
379-1050 Taxes ReceivableCurrent
433.06
379-1154 Misc Interest Receivable
0.43
41,875.36
TOTAL ASSETS
41,875.36
==============
LIABILITIES
===========
379-2000 Accounts Payable-Presidential
431.26
TOTAL LIABILITIES
431.26
EQUITY
======
379-2920 Unreserved Fund Balance
81,769.63
TOTAL BEGINNING EQUITY
81,769.63
TOTAL REVENUE
66,912.19
TOTAL EXPENSES
TOTAL REVENUE OVER/(UNDER) EXPENSES
107,237.72
(
40,325.53)
TOTAL EQUITY & REV. OVER/(UNDER) EXP.
TOTAL LIABILITIES, EQUITY & REV.OVER/(UNDER) EXP.
41,444.10
41,875.36
==============
11-13-2013 04:29 PM
CITY
OF
NORTHFIELD
PAGE:
1
REVENUE & EXPENSE REPORT (UNAUDITED)
AS OF:
SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2013
379-PRESIDENTIAL COMMONS TIF
FINANCIAL SUMMARY
% OF YEAR COMPLETED:
75.00
CURRENT
CURRENT
YEAR TO DATE
TOTAL
BUDGET
% YTD
BUDGET
PERIOD
ACTUAL
ENCUMBERED
BALANCE
BUDGET
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
REVENUE SUMMARY
Taxes
Intergovernmental
Other Revenue
Other Financing Sources
TOTAL REVENUES
76,000
0.00
33,059.53
0.00
42,940.47
43.50
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
800
0.00
0.00
0.00
800.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
76,800
0.00
33,059.53
0.00
43,740.47
43.05
850
12.00
717.33
0.00
132.67
107,316
0.00
107,316.25
EXPENDITURE SUMMARY
Debt Service
CHARGES FOR SERVICES
DEBT SERVICE
TRANSFERS
TOTAL Debt Service
0.00 (
0.25)
84.39
100.00
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
108,166
12.00
108,033.58
0.00
132.42
99.88
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
REVENUE OVER/(UNDER) EXPENDITURES
108,166
(
31,366)(
12.00
12.00)(
108,033.58
74,974.05)
0.00
132.42
99.88
0.00
43,608.05
239.03
REGULAR
To:
City Administrator
From:
Subject:
SP 149-010-009; Northfield Modal Integration Project;
(TIGER Trail Bids)
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to review the bids for the TIGER Trail Project, and to consider options related
to award of contract.
Summary Report:
On November 7, 2013, bids for the TIGER Trail Project were received, and opened. The detailed bid tabulation
is available at the following link:
and is summarized in the table below:
Bidder
1 Engineers Estimate
2 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc.
3 Global Security Contractors, Inc.
4 Duininck, Inc.
5 Minnowa Construction, Inc.
Amount
$ 1,918,537.37
$ 2,707,002.57
$ 3,121,507.90
$ 3,160,913.40
$ 3,495,235.85
The table below summarizes the current Project Budget, as amended, at the City Council meeting of September
17, 2013:
Amended Budget, as of 09/17/2013
Original Federal Grant
Original Local Contribution
Capital Improvement Fund
TIF District #4
Subtotal, Original Local Contribution
Supplemental Federal Funds thru MnDOT
Supplemental Local Budget Amendment
20% Match of Supplemental Fed Funds
Balance of Shortfall (as of 9/17/2013)
Contingency, 5% of est. Const cost
Subtotal, Budget Amendment, 09/17/2013
Total Project Budget, 09/17/2013, as amended
$1,066,000.00
$250,000.00
$250,000.00
$500,000.00
$596,452.52
$119,290.50
$58,399.35
$95,926.87
$273,616.72
$2,436,069.24
S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc., is a reputable contractor fully capable of completing this project. Using that low bid
of S.M. Hentges, the total estimated project cost calculation compared to that estimated for the City Council
meeting of September 17, 2013 appears below:
Based On
Estimate
1,918,537.37
195,000.00
60,605.00
41,000.00
125,000.00
Total Construction Cost
Design Engineering Costs
Right of Way Costs
Union Pacific RR Inspection Agreement
Anticipated Construction Engineering Costs
$
$
$
$
$
Subtotal
$ 2,340,142.37
$ 3,168,607.57
5% Contingency
$
$
Total Budget required
$ 2,436,069.24
95,926.87
$
$
$
$
$
Based On
Bid
2,747,002.57
195,000.00
60,605.00
41,000.00
125,000.00
137,350.13
$ 3,305,957.70
Ignoring the need for a project contingency (not recommended by staff), the proposed project cost is
$828,465.20 higher than had been estimated at the meeting of September 17, 2013. Factoring in a contingency
that is 5% of the proposed Construction Contract amount (recommended) requires a total budget amendment of
$869,888.46.
An in-depth analysis identifying the areas of the greatest differences between the estimate and the low bid is
presented below:
TIGER Trail Bid Analysis
Mobilization
Drainage Items (total)
Trail, Fencing, & Landscape
Subtotal, above items
Structural Walls and Bridge
Prefabricated Bridge
Structural Concrete
Reinforcement
Structural Excavation
Architectural Surface Treatment
Temporary Sheet Pile
Modular Block Wall
Subtotal; Struct., Walls, & Bridge
Engineer's
Bid
Estimate
Amount
Difference
$ 50,000.00 $ 244,135.00 $ 194,135.00
$ 78,950.00 $ 90,688.35 $ 11,738.35
(Numerous Items)
$ 53,136.00
$ 259,009.35
$ 190,000.00
$ 380,750.00
$ 86,266.00
$ 42,740.00
$ 53,472.00
$ 55,000.00
$ 52,670.00
TOTAL
"Big Three" Items*
* Retaining Walls, Bridge, & Mobilization
$ 205,500.00
$ 678,650.00
$ 107,041.00
$ 70,800.00
$ 104,354.00
$ 184,730.00
$ 107,297.00
$ 15,500.00
$ 297,900.00
$ 20,775.00
$ 28,060.00
$ 50,882.00
$ 129,730.00
$ 54,627.00
$ 597,474.00
$ 856,483.35
$ 791,609.00
Following discussion with officials of MnDOT’s Office of State Aid in the Rochester District 6 Office, I have
submitted an email to those various and appropriate officials to determine whether any additional funding
assistance is available for this project. If any additional funding does become available, it is probable the City
of Northfield will be required to provide matching funds in some amount—perhaps twenty percent of whatever
additional amount is identified, if any. In that same email, I asked if some lessor portion of the Project could be
still constructed (depicted on the attached map), and lastly, if the City Council ultimately decides to forego the
project, what must we do to shut down the project.
Also attached is a draft Amended Grant Agreement with the Federal Highway Administration, which must be
approved if this project is to move forward. This document amends (where appropriate and necessary) the Grant
Agreement that was approved by the City Council at its meeting of December 4, 2012.
Regarding the possible reduced scope project, as this is written, we have not yet completed an analysis of the
potential cost reduction, as we have not yet received word if this will even be considered. It is possible we will
have this information available for the City council meeting.
Alternatives: The City Council could delay a decision on awarding the project contract until we hear from
MnDOT if they will allow a reduction in project scope, or fund the extra $870,000 needed for the project.
Financial Impacts: The financial impact of awarding this contract and approving the amendment to the grant
agreement will result in the expenditure of $1,662,007.57 more than what was originally contemplated when the
original TIGER Grant application was considered. To date, approximately $300,000 of local funds have been
spent on this project.
Recommendation: I cannot recommend building this project at the cost reflected in the low bidder’s bid
proposal. The project cost is 36%, or about $870,000 over the most recent overall project estimate.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Resolution 2013-139
Resolution 2013-140
Proposed Amended Grant Agreement
Map of Alternate TIGER Project
NORTHFIELD MODAL INTEGRATION PROJECT
SP No. 149-010-009 (TIGER Trail)
ACCEPTING BIDS AND AWARDING THE CONTRACT
WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids for SP No. 149-010-009, Northfield Modal
Integration Project, bids were received, opened, and tabulated according to the
law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement:
Bidder
1 S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc.
2 Global Security Contractors, Inc.
3 Duininck, Inc.
4 Minnowa Construction, Inc.
Amount
$ 2,707,002.57
$ 3,121,507.90
$ 3,160,913.40
$ 3,495,235.85
AND WHEREAS, it appears that S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. of Jordan, Minnesota is the lowest
responsible bidder.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF
NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA:
1.
The bid of S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. of Jordan, Minnesota, in the amount of
$2,747,002.57 for the construction of said improvements in accordance with the plans
and specifications and advertisement for bids is the lowest responsible bid and shall be
and hereby is accepted, contingent upon approval by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation, and the Federal Highway Administration.
2.
The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract
with S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. of Jordan, Minnesota in the name of the City of
Northfield for the construction of NORTHFIELD MODAL INTEGRATION PROJECT,
SP No. 149-010-009 (TIGER Trail), according to the plans and specifications therefore
approved by the city council and on file in the office of the City Clerk.
3.
The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the
deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder and the
next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed.
PASSED by the Mayor and City Council of the City of Northfield this 19th day of November
2013.
ATTEST
_____________________________
City Clerk
VOTE:
______________________________
Mayor
NORTHFIELD MULTIMODAL INTEGRATION PROJECT
WHEREAS,
the City of Northfield in the fall of 2011 was awarded a grant in the amount of $1,060,000 by the
Federal Highway Administration for the construction of a non-motorized trail connecting the
north and westerly portions of the City to that which is east and south of Trunk Highway No. 3
and the Cannon River; and,
WHEREAS,
at its meeting of February 6, 2012, the Northfield City Council approved Resolution 2012-009
approving the Project Term Sheets the purpose of which was to form the basis for the preparation
of the formal Grant Agreement between the Federal Highway Administration, the Minnesota
Department of Transportation and the City of Northfield; and,
WHEREAS,
this Agreement entitled GRANT AGREEMENT UNDER THE CONSOLIDATED AND
FURTHER CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2012 (Pub. L. 112-055, NOV. 18, 2011),
FOR THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS DISCRETIONARY GRANT
PROGRAM (FY 2012 TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANTS) was approved by the Northfield
City Council at its meeting of December 4, 2012; and,
WHEREAS
this agreement must now be amended to reflect changes in funding and scheduling.
The proposed GRANT AGREEMENT UNDER THE FULL-YEAR CONTINUING
APPROPRIATIONS, 2011, (DIVISION B OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FULL-YEAR
CONTINUING APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2011 (PUB. L. 112–10, APR. 15, 2011)), FOR THE
NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENTS DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM (FY
2011 TIGER DISCRETIONARY GRANTS), CITY OF NORTHFIELD, MINNESOTA, NORTHFIELD
MULTIMODAL INTEGRATION PROJECT; FHWA FY 2011 TIGER Grant No. 19
Amendment #1 is hereby approved
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL THAT: the Mayor, City
Administrator and City Clerk are hereby authorized to execute any minor revisions to said agreement
which may be forthcoming after further review of the Agreement by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation and/or Federal Highway Administration.
ATTEST
_____________________________
City Clerk
VOTE:
______________________________
Mayor
GREENVALE AVE
HW Y 3
NV
AL
E
PL
HWY 3
N
EE
N
GR
WATER ST N
SPRING ST N
3
FIRST ST W
LINDEN ST N
New Sidewalk
New Multimodal
New Bike Lane
WATER ST N
TIGER TRAIL CORRIDOR
ALTERNATIVE 01
WATER ST N
SPRIN G ST N
ST OLAF AVE
150 75
0
WATER ST S
Potential Future Expansion
WATER ST S
Existing Sidewalk
SPRIN G ST S
Crosswalk
Feet
150
SECOND ST W
ATTACHMENT C
ESTIMATED PROJECT BUDGET
Cost
P = Planned
A = Actual
Activity
Project
Development
Engineering
Multi-Use
Trail
Retaining Wall
Pedestrian
Bridge
Sidewalk 6ft
RR Xing
Improvements
Chain Link
Fence
TOTAL
Percentag
e of Total
Project
Cost
FY 2011
TIGER
Funds
Other
Federal
Funds
$500,000
P
22%
$0
$
1,144,233.9
$844,016.59
$529,721.26
P
35%
$131,512
P
P
26%
17%
$44,207.48
$99,280.96
P
P
$48,570.16
$
3,210,030.35
City of Northfield
Funds
$500,000.00
$22,366.93
$494,496
$348,400
$1,012,721.
9
$289,875.44
$145,534.17
1%
4%
$13,192
$55,740
$19,086.45
$34,594.19
$11,929.030
$8,946.770
P
3%
$16,660
$21,472.25
$10,437.900
P
100%
$1,060,000
$596,451.52
$649112.88
$59,645.15
$35,787.09
The costs on this page do not add up because the bids exceed the estimate, and staff is uncertain
at this time (November 14, 2013) what, if any, additional funding (federal, state, or local) may
become available, or if the contract is going to be awarded.
REGULAR
From: Tim Madigan, City Administrator
Subject: Fire Services Agreement Options
Action Requested:
The Northfield City Council act to choose which option for the management of the Fire
Department should be pursued in negotiations with the City of Dundas and surrounding
townships and authorize the process for negotiations.
Summary Report:
The City Council in work sessions on October 22 and November 12 reviewed the three main
options for development of an agreement for management of Fire Services serving the Northfield
area. The three options are:
1. Contract with the City of Northfield by the townships and Dundas for Fire
Services, with or without an advisory committee made up of representatives
from the funding units. This option allows Northfield to manage the Fire
Services and charge the other entities based on an agreed upon formula.
If an advisory committee is used, the other local entities would have a voice
in the policy issues related to the fire services, but not day to day operations
or personnel matters.
2. A joint powers agreement (JPA) that would set up an independent authority
to manage and operate the fire services. The governance board would have
full operational and policy decision making authority over the Fire
Department.
3. A taxing district with a governing board would be a separate legal authority
authorized by the State Legislature to manage and operate fire services. The
governance board would have full operational and policy decision making
authority.
Negotiations for an agreement – now that the Fire Task Force has presented their final
report to the local units of government involved and completed their work; there is a need
for the City Council to decide how it should negotiate a new arrangement for the Fire
Service, assuming there is a desire to do so. This is a process that requires both policy
direction and technical expertise on legal, financial and management topics.
o I suggested at the October 22 Council meeting a two-step process:
 The Council provides general policy direction on some of the major issues
related to an agreement on Fire Services.
 That the mayors of Northfield and Dundas form a work group with Glen
Castore representing the townships to work with staff and legal counsel in
drafting an agreement.
 The work group should touch base on a regular basis through the process
with the governing bodies involved.
City Council action on the options and process will allow the next phase of the Fire Service
transition to move forward.
REGULAR
From: Chuck Walerius, Interim Police Chief
Melanie Schlomann, Interim Finance Director
Subject: Update on the New Police Building
Action Requested: The City Council to review the progress on the new police building. No
action is needed.
Summary Report: Attached is a spreadsheet showing the dollar amount of the draw requests
from our bond agent for payment of invoices related to the safety center construction project.
We have requested Reimbursement of $1,535,186.90 to date. This is approximately 24% of the
amount bonded for.
Currently the facility is approximately 30-40% completed, and is still on schedule for a late
spring, early summer completion date in 2014. Also, keep in mind that the owner is commonly
billed for materials that have been ordered and received by the contractor or sub-contractor, but
have not yet been installed in the construction process.
The process established for billing approval has been scheduled on a monthly basis during the
construction process. The individual invoices are first approved and sent from Met-Con to the
architect DLR Group, where they are accumulated and billed on a monthly basis. DLR Group
examines the invoices to make sure they are correct and in-line with the construction process,
and approves them before sending them to the owner (City of Northfield). The monthly billing
includes a complete itemized breakdown of all expenses including materials and labor as they are
consumed in the construction process. They are then sent to (Interim) Chief of Police and
project manager Chuck Walerius who also examines them for accuracy and relevance to the
project. The billing is then sent to City Administrator Tim Madigan who also approves them for
payment. They are then forwarded on to (Interim) Finance Director Melanie Schlomann who
also approves them and processes them for payment. Essentially, the monthly billings are
approved by five different sources before payment is authorized. A master file of all
construction documents are kept by project manager Chuck Walerius, and are available for
review at any time.
During this process, project manager Chuck Walerius has numerous conversations with both the
contractor and the architect as the construction takes place. Chuck Walerius also has contact
with the contractor, sub-contractors, and the architect at bi-weekly on-site construction meetings
who are also attended by Assistant City Engineer Brian Erickson and Bernie Shakal from Public
Works. Chuck Walerius also makes daily site visits to document the construction process and
meet with the project superintendent as well.
Currently we have also approved approximately $46,000 in change orders that have been needed
to keep the project on schedule. Most of the change orders have been necessary due to
unforeseen changes made by Xcell Energy in bringing electrical and gas supplies into the
building. All change orders $10,000 or more are brought to city engineering staff and City
Administrator Tim Madigan for explanation and approval before being receiving final approval
by project manager Chuck Walerius.
The facility is still well within budget and is expected to come in well under as earlier
anticipated. The Council will continue to be informed as to project status when requested or at
any intervals specifically requested by the council.
An update on the City Hall project will be provided at a future Council meeting.
Attachments:
1. Sheet showing total bond issue minus YTD draw requests
2. Change Order Log
Safety Center Reimbursement Requests
Certificates of Participation Series 2012B
$6,280,000.00
Draw #1
3/15/2013
66,159.89
Draw #2
10/25/2013
790,478.17
Draw #3
10/25/2013
678,548.90
Balance
$4,744,813.04
CHANGE ORDER LOG
Project
Contractor
Architect
Northfield Police Facility
Project No.
Met-Con
Contract No.
Base Contract Amount
DLR Group
CO
Class
Approval
#
#
Date
1
4.2
8/9/13
2
4.2
9/5/13
3
4.4
9/30/13
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
4.3
4.3
10/15/13
11/7/13
Description
Add additional curb and gutter at the request of city engineering in
order to mitigate drainage issues and erosion control.
Add Rip-Rap to end of culvert at the request of city engineering
for erosion control of storm water and drainage issues.
Various plumbing and electrical changes and/or additions to
garage and Sallie-Port area
Variation to electrical service to the building as required by Excel
Energy
Gas Meter relocation as required by Excel Energy
Date of Last Entry: 11/14/2013, 3:15 PM
$4,775,000.00
Time Ext.
CO $
Cum CO
(# Days)
Amount
$ Amount
Change Class:
4.0 Error
1
$14,218.82
$14,218.00
4.1 Omission
0
$7,210.89
$21,428.89
4.2 Unforeseen Site Conditions
1
$7,088.88
$28,517.00
4.3 Regulatory Requirements
0
0
$10,180.12
$7,651.41
$38,697.89
$46,349.30
4.4 Owner Requested Changes
4.5 Materials or Equipment Unavailable
Page 1 of 1
(Utility)
Construction Mgmt.
703.04L - 10/06
WORK SESSION
From: Tim Madigan, City Administrator
Subject: Visit with the Charter Commission
Action Requested:
The City Charter Commission has asked for the opportunity to visit with the City Council in
work session to discuss their initiative for an amendment to the City Charter related to ethics.
WORK SESSION
To:
City Administrator
From: Council Member Rhonda Pownell
Subject: Statement of Values & Code of Conduct
Action Requested:
The City Council is being asked to discuss the attached LMC Model Code of Conduct and
Statement of Values and provide direction on whether to adopt one or both.
Summary Report:
The League of Minnesota Cities Ethics Advisory Panel created the attached LMC Model Code of
Conduct and Statement of Values. I requested that they be put on a November agenda for
Council discussion/direction on whether to modify and adopt one or both of them.
Attachments:
 LMC Model of Statement of Values
 LMC Template Code of Conduct
Model Statement of Values
Preamble
The proper operation of democratic government requires that decision-makers be independent,
impartial, and accountable to the people they serve. The City of _____ has adopted this Statement
of Values to promote and maintain the highest standards of personal and professional conduct in
the City's government. All (select: elected and appointed officials, City employees, and volunteers)
are required to subscribe to this statement, understand how it applies to their specific
responsibilities, and practice its (number) core values in their work. Because we seek public
confidence in the City's services and public trust of its decision-makers, our decisions and our
work must meet the most demanding ethical standards and demonstrate the highest levels of
achievement in following this statement.
The Values
As a Representative of the City of _____,
1. I serve the public interest.
2. I fulfill the duties and responsibilities of holding public office.
3. I am ethical.
4. I am professional.
5. I am fiscally responsible.
6. I am conscientious.
7. I communicate effectively.
8. I am collaborative.
9. I am forward thinking.
10. I am ____________.
Value examples/expressions
1. I serve the public interest. In practice this value means that:
a. I provide courteous, equitable, and prompt service to everyone.
b. I am attuned to, and care about, the needs and issues of citizens, public officials, and city
workers.
c. I am interested, engaged, and responsive in my interactions with constituents.
d. I recognize and support the public’s right to know the public’s business.
2. I fulfill the duties and responsibilities of holding public office. In practice this value
means that:
a. I observe the highest standards of integrity in my official acts and undertake my
responsibilities for the benefit of the greater public good.
b. I faithfully discharge the duties of my office regardless of my personal considerations,
recognizing that the public interest is my primary concern.
c. I uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of
Minnesota and carry out impartially the laws of the nation, state, and municipality and thus
foster respect for all government.
Created by the League of Minnesota Cities Ethics Advisory Panel
October 2009
d. I comply with both the letter and the spirit of the laws and policies affecting operations of
the City.
e. I recognize my obligation to implement the adopted goals and objectives of the City in
good faith, regardless of my personal views.
f. I conduct myself in both my official and personal actions in a manner that is above
reproach.
g. I do not use my position to secure for myself or others special privileges or exemptions that
are different from those available to the general public.
h. I understand and abide by the respective roles and responsibilities of elected and appointed
officials and city staff and will not undermine them in their work.
i. I am independent, impartial, and fair in my judgment and actions.
3. I am ethical. In practice this value means that:
a. I am trustworthy, acting with the utmost integrity and moral courage.
b. I am truthful, do what I say I will do, and am reliable.
c. I am accountable for my actions and behavior and accept responsibility for my decisions.
d. I make impartial decisions, free of influence from unlawful gifts, narrow political interests,
and financial and other personal interests that impair my independence of judgment or
action.
e. I am fair, distributing benefits and burdens according to consistent and equitable criteria.
f. I oppose all forms of harassment and unlawful discrimination.
g. I extend equal opportunities and due process to all parties in matters under consideration.
h. I show respect for confidences and confidential information.
i. I avoid giving the appearance of impropriety and of using my position for personal gain.
4. I am professional. In practice this value means that:
a. I apply my knowledge and expertise to my assigned activities and to the interpersonal
relationships that are part of my job in a consistent, confident, competent, and productive
manner.
b. I approach my job and work-related relationships with a positive attitude, contributing to a
supportive, respectful, and non-threatening work environment.
c. I keep my professional knowledge and skills current and growing.
d. I am respectful of all city staff, officials, volunteers, and others who participate in the
City’s government.
5. I am fiscally responsible. In practice this value means that:
a. I make decisions after prudent consideration of their financial impact, taking into account
the long-term financial needs of the City, especially its financial stability.
b. I demonstrate concern for the proper use of City assets (e.g., personnel, time, property,
equipment, funds), follow established procedures, and do not use public resources for
personal gain.
c. I make decisions that seek to preserve the financial capacity of the City to provide
programs and services for City residents.
d. I provide full disclosure of any potential financial or other private conflict of interest. I
abstain from participating in the discussion and vote on these matters.
October 2009
e. I prevent misuse of public funds by establishing, maintaining, and following strong fiscal
and management controls.
f. I report any misuse of public funds of which I am aware.
6. I am conscientious. In practice this value means that:
a. I act in an efficient manner, making decisions and recommendations based upon research
and facts, taking into consideration short and long term goals.
b. I follow through in a responsible way, keeping others informed, and responding in a timely
fashion.
c. I am respectful of established City processes and guidelines.
d. I prioritize my duties so that the work of the City may move forward.
e. I prepare for all meetings by reviewing any materials provided ahead of time. When I have
materials to contribute, I make sure all others involved have ample time to review these
materials prior to the meeting.
7. I communicative effectively. In practice this value means that:
a. I convey the City's care for and commitment to its citizens.
b. I communicate in various ways that I am approachable, open-minded, and willing to
participate in dialog.
c. I engage in effective two-way communication by listening carefully, asking questions, and
responding appropriately which adds value to conversations.
d. I do not interfere with the orderly conduct of meetings by interrupting others or making
personal comments not germane to the business at hand.
e. I follow up on inquiries in a timely manner.
f. I encourage and facilitate citizen involvement in policy decision-making.
g. I am respectful in disagreements and contribute constructively to discussions on the issue.
8. I am collaborative. In practice this value means that:
a. I act in a cooperative manner with groups and other individuals, working together in a spirit
of tolerance and understanding to accomplish common goals.
b. I share information with others in a timely manner so that, together, we can make informed
decisions.
c. I work towards consensus building and gain value from diverse opinions.
d. I accomplish the goals and responsibilities of my individual position, while respecting my
role as a member of a team.
9. I am forward thinking. In practice this value means that:
a. I promote intelligent, proactive, and thoughtful innovation in order to advance the City's
policy agenda and provide City services while considering the broader regional, state-wide,
national, and international implications of the City's decisions and issues.
b. I maintain consistent standards, but am also sensitive to the need for compromise, creative
problem solving, and making improvements when appropriate.
c. I am open to new ideas and processes, adopting them as they conserve resources and
provide efficient and effective service.
d. I consider the potential long-term consequences and implications of my actions and
inactions.
October 2009
Template Code of Conduct
___.01. Purpose.
The city council of the City of _____determines that a code of conduct for its members, as well as
the members of the various boards and commissions of the City of _____, is essential for the
public affairs of the city. By eliminating conflicts of interest and providing standards for conduct
in city matters, the city council hopes to promote the faith and confidence of the citizens of
_____in their government and to encourage its citizens to serve on its council and commissions.
___.02. Standards of Conduct.
Subd. 1. No member of the city council or a city board or commission may knowingly:
a. Violate the open meeting law.
b. Participate in a matter that affects the person’s financial interests or those of a business
with which the person is associated, unless the effect on the person or business is no greater
than on other members of the same business classification, profession, or occupation.
c. Use the person’s public position to secure special privileges or exemptions for the person
or for others.
d. Use the person’s public position to solicit personal gifts or favors.
e. Use the person’s public position for personal gain.
f. Except as specifically permitted pursuant to Minn. Stat. 471.895, accept or receive any gift
of substance, whether in the form of money, services, loan, travel, entertainment,
hospitality, promise, or any other form, under circumstances in which it could be
reasonably expected to influence the person, the person’s performance of official action, or
be intended as a reward for the person’s official action.
g. Disclose to the public, or use for the person’s or another person’s personal gain,
information that was gained by reason of the person’s public position if the information
was not public data or was discussed at a closed session of the city council.
h. Disclose information that was received, discussed, or decided in conference with the city’s
legal counsel that is protected by the attorney-client privilege unless a majority of the city
council has authorized the disclosure.
i. Represent private interests before the city council or any city committee, board,
commission or agency. (optional)
Subd. 2. Except as prohibited by the provisions of Minn. Stat Sec. 471.87, there is no violation of
subdivision 1 b. of this section for a matter that comes before the council, board, or commission if
the member of the council, board, or commission publicly discloses the circumstances that would
violate these standards and refrains from participating in the discussion and vote on the matter.
Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit a contract with a member of the city council under
the circumstances described under Minn. Stat. Sec. 471.88, if proper statutory procedures are
followed.
October 2009
___.03. Complaint, Hearing.
Any person may file a written complaint with the city clerk alleging a violation of the standards of
conduct in section
.02. The complaint must contain supporting facts for the allegation. The city
council may hold a hearing after receiving the written complaint or upon the council's own
volition. A hearing must be held only if the city council determines (1) upon advice of the city
attorney, designee, or other attorney appointed by the council, that the factual allegations state a
sufficient claim of a violation of these standards or rise to the level of a legally-recognized conflict
of interest, and (2) that the complaint has been lodged in good faith and not for impermissible
purposes such as delay. The city council’s determination must be made within 30 days of the filing
of the allegation with the city clerk. If the council determines that there is an adequate justification
for holding a hearing, the hearing must be held within 30 days of the city council’s determination.
At the hearing, the person accused must have the opportunity to be heard. If after the hearing, the
council finds that a violation of a standard has occurred or does exist, the council may censure the
person, refer the matter for criminal prosecution, request an official not to participate in a decision,
or remove an appointed member of an advisory board or commission from office.
October 2009

here - City of Northfield

Transcription

Similar documents

M. Franzese postcard

Yateem Legacy Shopping Center

Potter County Sales - Potter

2011 Newsletter - St. Olaf College

a request by AD ART. INC. for design approval of a s~~ orggram fnr

Sibley Star-December 2012

qdoba mexican grill - LMS Commercial Real Estate

6 little britain - Robert Irving Burns

Gidewon et al Order on Defedants` Motion for Summary Judgment

CRISNetMLS Matrix is getting a MAKEOVER Updates