Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
05/14/2019
LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA 7:30 P.M. TUESDAY, MAY 14, 2019 LAUDERDALE CITY HALL, 1891 WALNUT STREET The City Council is meeting as a legislative body to conduct the business of the City according to Robert's Rules of Order and the Standing Rules of Order and Business of the City Council. Unless so ordered by the Mayor, citizen participation is limited to the times indicated and always within the prescribed rules of conduct for public input at meetings. 1. CALL TO ORDER THE LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING 2. ROLL CALL 3. APPROVALS a. Agenda b. Minutes of the April 23, 2019 City Council Meeting c. Claims Totaling $101,951.16 4. CONSENT a. First Quarter Investment Report b. Performance Agreement with Dawn Tanner and Adam Granger 5. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS/RECOGNITIONS/PROCLAMATIONS 6. INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATIONS / REPORTS a. City Council Updates 7. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public hearings are conducted so that the public affected by a proposal may have input into the decision. During hearings all affected residents will be given an opportunity to speak pursuant to the Robert's Rules of Order and the standing rules of order and business of the City Council. a. Real Estate Equities Planned Unit Development Application 8. DISCUSSION / ACTION ITEM a. Resolution No. 051419A Providing for the Sale of $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds for the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project b. Resolution No. 051419B Restricting Parking during the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project c. Petition and Waiver Agreements for the Installation of Sanitary Sewer Service Lines and Water Service Lines during the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project d. Resolution No. 051419C Accepting Donations for Improvements to the Lauderdale Dog Park 9. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA 10. ADDITIONAL ITEMS 11. SET AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING a. Annual Recycling Program Update by Eureka! Recycling b. Post Issuance Compliance Policy Update 12. WORK SESSION a. Opportunity for the Public to Address the City Council Any member of the public may speak at this time on any item not on the agenda. In consideration for the public attending the meeting, this portion of the meeting will be limited to fifteen (15) minutes. Individuals are requested to limit their comments to four (4) minutes or less. If the majority of the Council determines that additional time on a specific issue is warranted, then discussion on that issue shall be continued at the end of the agenda. Before addressing the City Council, members of the public are asked to step up to the microphone, give their name, address, and state the subject to be discussed. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a whole and not to any member thereof. No person other than members of the Council and the person having the floor shall be permitted to enter any discussion without permission of the presiding officer. Your participation, as prescribed by the Robert's Rules of Order and the standing rules of order and business of the City Council, is welcomed and your cooperation is greatly appreciated. b. Community Event Planning c. Community Development Update 13. ADJOURNMENT LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Lauderdale City Hall 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Page 1 of 4 April 23, 2019 Call to Order Mayor Pro Tem Dains called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Councilors present: Roxanne Grove, Andi Moffatt, and Mayor Pro Tem Jeff Dains. Councilors absent: Kelly Dolphin, and Mayor Mary Gaasch. Staff present: Heather Butkowski, City Administrator; Jim Bownik, Assistant to the City Administrator; and Miles Cline, Deputy City Clerk. Approvals Mayor Pro Tem Dains asked if there were any additions to the meeting agenda. There being none, Councilor Moffatt moved and seconded by Councilor Grove to approve the agenda. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem Dains asked if there were any corrections to the meeting minutes. There being none, Councilor Grove moved and seconded by Councilor Moffatt to approve the minutes of the April 9, 2019, city council meeting. Motion carried unanimously. Mayor Pro Tem Dains asked if there were any questions on the claims. There being none, Councilor Moffatt moved and seconded by Councilor Grove to approve the claims totaling $61,225.65. Motion carried unanimously. Consent Councilor Grove moved and seconded by Councilor Moffatt to approve the Consent Agenda thereby acknowledging the March Financial Report and approving the Joint Powers Agreement for Recycling Funding with Ramsey County. Informational Presentations/Reports A. City Council Updates Councilor Moffatt stated that she attended a Suburban Rate Authority meeting. Moffatt shared that one of the main discussion topics was disagreement between cities and cell providers on new regulations of small wireless facilities. Discussion/Action Items A. Conversation with Patrick Ostrom about Community Meeting Comments Regarding Real Estate Equities Proposed Senior Project at 1795 Eustis Street Per the Council's request, staff invited Patrick Ostrom from Real Estate Equities to the meeting to go over the comments received from the community. Ostrom walked through some of the concerns related to the construction process and answered questions from the Council. LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Lauderdale City Hall 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Page 2 of 4 April 23, 2019 Mayor Pro Tem Dains opened the floor to anyone in attendance that wanted to ask Ostrom questions related to the project. Monika Davis, 1791 Malvern Street, wanted to know if this was strictly a senior housing project or if age restrictions could be altered. Butkowski responded that the length of time the project would be age restricted would be in the development agreement. Crystal Wisen, 1765 Carl Street, asked if there would be different levels of care in the facility based on the needs of the residents. Ostrom said the project would be for senior, independent living and not include additional care services. B. Consideration of Preliminary Bond Inducement Resolution for Real Estate Equities — Resolution No. 042319A Julie Eddington, the City's bond counsel at Kennedy and Graven, approached the Council. She explained that Real Estate Equities (REE) planned to use tax-exempt bonds to finance the construction of the senior housing project. In order to apply to the state for these bonds, they need a resolution of support from the City Council. The resolution is non-binding in that it neither creates a financial obligation for the City nor conveys land use rights. She then explained the process in greater detail including application process that REE will go through to qualify for these bonds and milestones for the City going through the process. Councilor Moffatt made a motion to adopt Resolution 042319A — A Resolution Providing Preliminary Approval to the Issuance of Revenue Obligations under Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462C and 474A, as Amended, and Taking Other Actions in Connection therewith. This was seconded by Councilor Grove and carried unanimously. Butkowski asked Eddington to speak to the bond issue proposed to pay for a portion of the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project. She did and answered questions from Council and staff C. Purchase Agreement with Schumacher Holdings, LLC for the Sale of 1821, 1825, and 1831 Eustis Street Butkowski noted that during the two previous meetings, the Council discussed offers for 1821- 1831 Eustis Street. The City received offers from four entities and determined the offer from Schumacher Holdings, LLC was in their best financial interest and the homes to be built met the criteria established for things such as minimum size, amenities, and resale price. Butkowski explained a few tweaks were made to the purchase agreement since the packet went out on Friday. Those revisions were sent to the Council in advance of the meeting. Councilor Moffatt made a motion to enter into an agreement for the sale of 1821, 1825, and 1831 LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Lauderdale City Hall 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Page 3 of 4 April 23, 2019 Eustis Street to Schumacher Holdings, LLC per the terms of the purchase agreement and directed the city administrator to execute documents as needed to facilitate the closing. This was seconded by Councilor Grove and carried unanimously. D. Resolution Requesting Comprehensive Road and Transit Funding — Resolution No. 042319B The League of Minnesota Cities urged city councils to adopt a resolution calling for the Legislature to pass and Governor Tim Walz to sign a permanent increase in dedicated funding for state and local road, bridge, and transit systems in greater Minnesota and the metropolitan area. The resolution presented supports funding for all parts of the state's transportation system, but specifically requests additional dedicated state funding for city streets including cities under populations of 5,000 that do not receive Municipal State Aid. Upon adoption, staff will send to the Governor, our local legislators, and the League of Minnesota Cities. Councilor Grove made a motion to adopt Resolution 042319B—A Resolution Requesting Comprehensive Road and Transit Funding. This was seconded by Councilor Moffatt and carried unanimously. Set Agenda for Next Meeting Administrator Butkowski stated that the May 14 council meeting may include the Real Estate Equities planned unit development application public hearing, the post issuance compliance policy update, the first quarter investment report, and the annual recycling program update by Eureka! Recycling. Work Session A. Opportunity for the Public to Address the City Council Mayor Pro Tem Dains opened the floor to anyone in attendance that wanted to address the Council. There being no interested parties to speak, Mayor Pro Tem Dains closed the floor. B. Community Event Brainstorming Ideas Mayor Gaasch requested a discussion to consider changing the date of Day in the Park. Assistant to the City Administrator Bownik approached the Council to give some suggestions about alternative dates and working with vendors of the event about a potential change. After discussion amongst the Council, they decided to keep the date and time of the event the same for this year with staff directed to discuss options with the planning committee and survey attendees on preferred alternatives. LAUDERDALE CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Lauderdale City Hall 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Page 4 of 4 April 23, 2019 C. Community Development Update Butkowski mentioned that the Comprehensive Plan is being reworked for submittal to the Metropolitan Council. She also mentioned that she and Jennifer Haskamp met with REE before the meeting to discuss their PUD application. Adj ournment Councilor Moffatt moved and seconded by Councilor Grove to adjourn the meeting at 9:00 p.m. Motion carried unanimously. Respectfully submitted, Miles Cline Deputy City Clerk CITY OF LAUDERDALE LAUDERDALE CITY HALL 189 1 WALNUT STREET LAUDERDALE, MN 55113 651-792-7650 651-631-2066 FAX Request for Council Action To: Mayor and City Council From: City Administrator Meeting Date: May 14, 2019 Subject: List of Claims The claims totaling $101,951.16 are provided for City Council review and approval that includes check numbers 26382 to 26413. Accounts Payable Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date User: Printed: heather.butkowski 5/10/2019 1:26 PM Check No Vendor No Invoice No Vendor Name Description Check Date Reference Check Amount ACH 43 ACH 44 ACH 45 ACH 46 26382 13 6815 26383 52 052019 26384 184 4020896625 4020896625 26385 33 052019 26386 36 Public Employees Retirement Association PR Batch 50900.05.2019 PERA Coordinated PR Batch 50900.05.2019 PERA Coordinated 05/03/2019 PR Batch 50900.05.2019 PER PR Batch 50900.05.2019 PER Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 43: Minnesota Department of Revenue PR Batch 50900.05.2019 State Income Tax 05/03/2019 PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Stag Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 44: ICMA Retirement Corporation PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Deferred Comp PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Deferred Comp 05/03/2019 PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Def( PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Def Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 45: Internal Revenue Service PR Batch 50900.05.2019 FICA Employer Portio PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Federal Income Tax PR Batch 50900.05.2019 FICA Employee Portio PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Medicare Employee Pc PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Medicare Employer Po 05/03/2019 PR Batch 50900.05.2019 FIC. PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Fed( PR Batch 50900.05.2019 FIC. PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Mee PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Mee Total for this ACH Check for Vendor 46: Total for 5/3/2019: 8th Day Landscaping LLC 05/14/2019 April 2019 Snow Removal Total for Check Number 26382: Bluechip Tree Company Inc Diseased Ash at 2367 Larpenteur Cintas March - April Uniforms March - April Uniforms City of Falcon Heights March Fire Calls City of Roseville 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26383: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26384: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26385: 05/14/2019 1,127.54 977.21 2,104.75 651.44 651.44 1,638.63 1,008.18 2,646.81 1,011.70 1,427.37 1,011.70 236.60 236.60 3,923.97 9,326.97 645.00 645.00 995.00 995.00 117.11 117.10 234.21 457.68 457.68 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/10/2019 1:26 PM) Page 1 Check No Vendor No Invoice No Vendor Name Description Check Date Reference Check Amount 0225968 0226002 0226046 0226080 26387 29 3799 26388 2 IN34462 26389 192 80781368 26390 25 EMCOM-007659 EMCOM-007673 EMCOM-007690 PRRRV-001137 26391 145 042019 26392 61 9040526 26393 31 148035 148035 April Phone Services April IT Services May Phone Services May IT Services City of St Anthony May Police Services City of St Paul Street Light Repair Comcast Holdings Corporation 4/19 Internet Service County of Ramsey April Fleet Support April 911 Dispatch Services April CAD Services Election Equipment Payment #4 Total for Check Number 26386: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26387: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26388: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26389: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26390: Mary Gaasch 05/14/2019 MG - MN Mayor's Conference Hotel, Mileage, 1 Gopher State One Call April 2019 Locates Kennedy & Graven Chartered TIF District 1-2 March Legal Services Total for Check Number 26391: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26392: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26393: 26394 185 Lauderdale Certified Auto Repair Inc 05/14/2019 042019 April Fuel 042019 April Fuel 042019 April Fuel 26395 30 293401 26396 1 052019 052019 League of Minnesota Cities 2019 Annual Conference - JD Lillie Suburban Newspapers Inc Publish Ordinance REE Notice of PUD Public Hearing Total for Check Number 26394: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26395: 05/14/2019 83.00 1,096.00 83.00 1,096.00 2,358.00 59,433.66 59,433.66 244.00 244.00 487.61 487.61 6.24 1,083.73 222.13 1,491.05 2,803.15 170.09 170.09 47.25 47.25 200.00 626.30 826.30 53.05 53.05 247.59 353.69 400.00 400.00 23.00 14.38 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/10/2019 1:26 PM) Page 2 Check No Vendor No Invoice No Vendor Name Description Check Date Reference Check Amount 26397 97 3092335 26398 24 0001096058 26399 94 2019 26400 79 Loffler Companies Inc Hewlett Packer Printer Toner Metropolitan Council June Waste Water Total for Check Number 26396: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26397: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26398: Minnesota Clerks & Finance Officers Assoc 05/14/2019 2019 Dues - HB, JB, MC Total for Check Number 26399: Minnesota Department of Labor & Industry 05/14/2019 MARCH1230252019 MARCH1230252019 26401 84 05012019 05012019 05012019 05012019 26402 11 2019-503 26403 10 0000747668 26404 47 26405 176 MPLWD 1234 26406 131 0134441 26407 81 052019 052019 052019 North Star Bank Cardmember Services Paper Towels JB GTS Training RC Managers Meeting Supplies Mail Construction Contracts Total for Check Number 26400: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26401: North Suburban Communications Commiss 05/14/2019 1Q19 Contribution Total for Check Number 26402: On Site Sanitation Inc 04/22/2019 - 05/17/2019 Park Portable Restroon Public Employees Insurance Program PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Health Insurance PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Dental Red Wing Shoes DH - Work Boots Safety Signs LLC Red -winged Blackbird Signs St Paul Regional Water Service 1891 Walnut St 1915 Walnut St 1885 Fulham St 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26403: 05/14/2019 PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Hea PR Batch 50900.05.2019 Den Total for Check Number 26404: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26405: 05/14/2019 Total for Check Number 26406: 05/14/2019 37.38 83.00 83.00 13,409.80 13,409.80 135.00 135.00 58.36 58.36 26.56 65.00 36.61 8.62 136.79 1,133.76 1,133.76 220.14 220.14 2,095.98 116.10 2,212.08 322.98 322.98 188.75 188.75 72.58 22.65 499.86 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/10/2019 1:26 PM) Page 3 Check No Vendor No Invoice No Vendor Name Description Check Date Reference Check Amount Total for Check Number 26407: 595.09 26408 71 Summit Fire Protection Inc 05/14/2019 1522181 2019 Fire Extingisher Inspection 272.00 Total for Check Number 26408: 272.00 26409 4 The Neighborhood Recycling Company Inc 05/14/2019 18233 April Recycling Service 3,197.90 26410 3 383857943 Total for Check Number 26409: 3,197.90 US National Equipment Finance Inc 05/14/2019 Copier Contract 176.00 26411 90 Verizon Wireless 9829207290 April Cell Phone 9829207290 April Cell Phone 9829207290 April Cell Phone 26412 7 8229263-0500-1 Total for Check Number 26410: 176.00 05/14/2019 16.05 32.09 16.05 Total for Check Number 26411: 64.19 Waste Management Inc 05/14/2019 5/19 PW Dumpster 398.82 26413 74 Xcel Energy 636331372 4/19 Larpenteur Bridge Lights 636333893 2430 Larpenteur Ave 636646725 4/19 Street Lighting 636702250 Larpenteur Ave Pedestrian Lights Total for Check Number 26412: 398.82 05/14/2019 30.55 18.92 434.12 42.92 Total for Check Number 26413: 526.51 Total for 5/14/2019: 92,624.19 Report Total (36 checks): 101,951.16 AP Checks by Date - Detail by Check Date (5/10/2019 1:26 PM) Page 4 LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent X Public Hearing Discussion Action Resolution Work Session Meeting Date May 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER STAFF INITIAL 1 Q 19 Investment Report APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Following is the First Quarter Investment Report. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: By approving the Consent Agenda, the Council acknowledges the investment report for Jan- uary—March 2019. COUNCIL ACTION: First Quarter 2019 Investment Report INVESTMENTS As of March 31, 2019, the City had the following amounts with official depositories: 30% 0% North Star Bank $ 154,707 4M Fund 1,543,481 RBC Dain Rauscher 1,100,000 Morgan Stanley 0 Northland Securities 1,207,917 TOTAL $ 4,006,105 28% 4% 38% 2 ❑ North Star Bank ■ 4M Fund ■ RBC Dain Rauscher ❑ Morgan Stanley ■ Northland Securities DEPOSITORIES AND INVESTMENT TYPES North Star Bank Checking Account 4M Fund Joint Powers Investment RBC Dain Rauscher Certificates of Deposit Northland Securities Money Market Account Certificates of Deposit $ 154,707 $ 1,543,481 $ 1,100,000 (9) $ 207,917 $ 1,000,000 (10) Morgan Stanley Money Market Account $ 0 Certificates of Deposit $ 0 The City's Investment Policy sets some perimeters for investments, such as no more than 60% of the investment portfolio, or $2,000,000 (whichever is less) shall be invested with any one investment company. No investments shall be made with a term over ten years unless with prior approval from the City Council. 3 INVESTMENT TERM Liquid assets are money market accounts. 1-5 Years are made up of certificate of deposit and US Government Instrumentality Securities. 6-10 Years are US Government Instrumentality Securities. 11-15 Years are US Government Instrumentality Securities. 15+ Years are US Government Instrumentality Securities and bonds. US Government Instrumentality Securities are financial intermediaries established by the federal government to fund loans to certain groups of borrowers, such as homeowners, farmers and students. Most active issuers are Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and Tennessee Valley Authority. Maturities range from three months to 30 years with fixed interest rates. 4 2018 Investment Portfolio 507 407 307 20 10 First Quarter 2019 Investment Portfolio 50y 457- 40Y 35y 30Y 25-7 20Y 15f 10-7 5Y 0 L • Liquid Accounts • 1 Year ❑ 2 Years ❑ 3 Years ❑ 4 Years ■ Liquid Accounts ■ 1 Year O 2 Years 03 Years 04 Years INVESTMENT TYPES Money Market $ 1,751,397 Bonds 0 Certificates of Deposit 2,100,000 US Government Securities 0 US Government Bonds Securities Certificates of Deposit Money Market Investment Schedule Maturity Date Type Interest Rate Investment Broker 5/30/2022 11/23/2021 11/21/2021 6/22/2021 3/29/2021 1/4/2021 9/28/2020 9/28/2020 5/28/2020 3/27/2020 12/30/2019 12/23/2019 10/28/2019 10/28/2019 9/30/2019 9/27/2019 9/23/2019 8/28/2019 4/15/2019 3/4/2019 2/26/2019 CD 3.00% RBC CD 3.25% RBC CD 3.25% Northland CD 3.00% Northland CD 2.95% RBC CD 2.00% Northland CD 1.95% Northland CD 2.00% RBC CD 2.85% Northland CD 1.85% Northland CD 1.70% RBC CD 2.50% Northland CD 2.00% RBC CD 2.00% RBC CD 1.70% RBC CD 1.70% Northland CD 2.45% RBC CD 2.35% Northland CD 1.20% Northland CD 1.20% Northland CD 1.25% Northland Amount Bank $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $200,000 $200,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $2,100,000 JP Morgan Chase Citibank NA USB Synchrony Townebank Medallion Bank Barclay Bank Webbank Compass Landmark Bank Wells Fargo Morgan Stanley Bank Capital One Glen Allen Capital One McLean Ally Bank Discover Ben Franklin Bank Planters Bank Ally Bank Key Bank BMW Bank There were two maturities in the first quarter of 2019 which are highlighted in red. Due to the need for liquid assets through the street reconstruction project no new investments were made and the payment from Ramsey County is being held in the 4M Fund. Staff doesn't anticipate purchasing new investments until the final payment on the street project is made. As noted in the last report, Morgan Stanley is no longer serve municipal clients in Minnesota and staff moved the remaining CDs invested in them to our other brokerage accounts. Those CDs are noted in green. Staff will remove references to Morgan Stanley in the next report. 7 INTEREST EARNINGS The following chart shows the interest earnings since 2005 with 2007 being our best year with earnings of $161,884. Recently, short term interest rates made significant jumps forward while long term rates have stayed flat. Investment interest through 2018 totaled $52,360.75. Investment interest earned in the first quarter of 2019 totaled $15,798.62. Interest returns will run high in 2019 due to the additional funds for the street project being invested before being paid out. 180,000 160,000 140,000 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 8 LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent X Public Hearing Discussion Action Resolution Work Session Meeting Date May 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER June Farmers Market STAFF INITIAL Jim APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Staff is asking the city council to consider approving the attached performance agreement with Dawn Tanner & Adam Granger for music at a cost of $200. Here's the promo. Farmers Market & Entertainment Third Thursdays 4-7 p.m. June 20: Dawn Tanner & Adam Granger Dawn Tanner and Adam Granger play original songs, folk covers, and instrumental tunes. Dawn plays with a range of bands in St. Paul and is working on her third CD. Adam is known for his solo work and years playing as part of the Prairie Home Companion crew. Dawn is also a guitar student of Adam's, and he is the source of the flashy guitar work on all three of her albums. OPTIONS: Approve by adopting the consent agenda or remove for discussion. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: By approving the consent agenda, the city council is approving the performance agreement with Dawn Tanner & Adam Granger. City of Lauderdale Performance Agreement Event: Farmers Market Date & Time: Thursday, June 20, 2019 from 4-7 p.m. Location: Lauderdale Community Park, 1885 Fulham Street Performance Time: 5:00-7:00 p.m. ARTIST or GROUP INFORMATION Artist or Group Name: Artist/Group Leader: Daytime Phone: Email Address: Website Address (if applicable): # Chairs Needed: PAYMENT INFORMATION Performance Fee: $200.00 Name & Address for Payment of Fee: Dawn Tanner and Adam Granger Dawn Tanner Cell Phone: 612-859-2925 tann0042@umn.edu; www.DawnTannerMusic.com 2 Dawn Tanner 2040 Como Ave, Unit 103 St Paul, MN 55108 PERFORMANCE PROVISIONS 1) The Artist or Group is considered an independent contractor and is responsible for all appropriate insurance, income taxes, and the licensed use of any or all copyright music performed. 2) The Artist or Group understands the City does not hold a public performance license, thus the artist agrees not to play music registered with ASCAP, BMI, SESAC, or any other licensing entity. 3) The Artist or Group will supply their own sound system and the following items as needed: music stands, stage etc. 4) The City will provide chairs, electricity and an extension cord. 5) Cancellation/Inclement Weather Policy: ® If the performance is cancelled by the City before Noon the day of the performance, the City will pay 50% of the agreed performance fee as compensation. ® If the performance is cancelled by the City after Noon the day of the performance, the City will pay 100% of the agreed performance fee as compensation. 6) Sale of promotional merchandise is allowed at the concert site. 7) Payment Information: The City will make every effort to present payment to the Artist or Group the day of the performance, but may mail payment within 30 days after performance date. 8) Indemnification: The Artist or Group agrees to defend and indemnify the City, and its employees, officials, volunteers and agents from and against all claims, actions, damages, losses and expenses arising out of the Artist or Group's performance or failure to perform its duties under this Agreement. Signature of Artist/Group Leader: Da -u /a4 -11 -4A -Date: 5/8/19 Mayor Date City Administrator Date LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing X Discussion X Action Resolution Work Session Meeting Date May 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER REE PUD Public Hearing STAFF INITIAL APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Staff determined that Real Estate Equities' (REE) Development State Planned Unit Devel- opment (PUD) application was complete. Thereafter, notice of the public hearing was pub- lished in the Roseville Review and mailed to neighboring property owners. The purpose of tonight's meeting is to take feedback from the community on the proposal. The City's consulting planner, Jennifer Haskamp, from Swanson Haskamp Consulting, pre- pared a memo based on her review of the application. If the Council desires, she will be prepared to provide an overview of the request being made from a land use perspective. Representatives from REE also will be at the meeting to speak to their project and answer questions. After the public hearing, no action is required of the Council. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and City Council Date: May 10, 2019 Heather Butkowski, City Administrator CC: Daren Amundson, City Engineer, Stantec Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers From: Jennifer Haskamp Consulting City Planner Introduction RE: Application for PUD Development Stage Review —1795 Eustis Senior Apartment Housing and Public Hearing Real Estate Equities ("Applicant"), is requesting Development Stage PUD review of the proposed 1795 Eustis Senior Housing project ("Project") consistent with Chapter 7 Planned Unit Developments (PUD), section 10-7-8 of the City Code. The Development Stage review requires a duly noticed public hearing to be held for consideration of the proposed Project. The public hearing has been noticed for May 14, 2019 at 7:3o PM to allow for public testimony, comments and questions regarding the Project. Summary of Request The following summary of the Development Stage PUD is provided for your consideration. Because the application materials are complex, staff has included a summary of the items submitted to aid in your consideration of the request and discussion. Project Summary Applicant: Applicant's Representatives: Owner: Land Use: Real Estate Equities Alex Bisanz, Dir. of Acquisitions Patrick Ostrom, Ian Schwickert, Dave Morck, AIA, Kaas Wilson Petro Megits, AIA, Kaas Wilson PJ Disch, PE, Loucks Address/ ; 1795 Eustis Street PIDs: 172923330001 Site Size: Proposed Project Summary: 1.68 Acres 114 Senior Living Affordable Apartments Underground & Surface Parking City of Lauderdale Low Density Residential (2030) 1 Request: Development Stage Review of 1795 Eustis Senior development; Project requires re -zoning to PUD, alley iLU ii: The Applicant is proposing to redevelop the site with an age -restricted (senior) affordable apartment building. The units will be affordable at the aggregate of 65% of Area Median Income (AMI). The Plans are generally consistent with the Concept Plan, with slight modifications. The following summary of the proposed Project, as well as those items that have been updated, modified or added are provided in the following: • The proposed building ranges between three (3) and four (4) stories. The north elevation (Spring Street) and east elevation (Eustis Street) are predominantly four stories, with a step-down to three stories at the corners to provide visual interest. The west elevation (Malvern Street) is three stories. There is a proposed roof -top deck/community space on the northwest corner which is accessed from the fourth story. • The Unit Mix includes 89 one (1) bedroom/one (1) bathroom and 25 two (2) bedroom/two (2) bathroom units. Based on this unit mix, approximately 78% of the units are one -bedroom, and 22% are two bedrooms. • Gross rents range between $885/unit and $1,485/unit excluding parking and additional storage rates. Parking stalls can be rented at $75/stall, and additional storage at $15/space. • The unit sizes are between approximately 773 and 1,283 -square feet as indicated on sheet SD_000. • The proposed Project includes indoor community space including a fitness center, club room, hobby and conference rooms all located on the first floor. There are no formal outdoor amenities proposed, except for the roof -top deck on the roof of the third floor. • A full landscape plan has been submitted and includes proposed fence screening along the southern property lines and monument signage at the entrance from Eustis Street. • The Parking Schedule on sheet SD_000 indicates a total parking count of 98 underground stalls (94 standard, 4 handicap accessible), and 22 surface lot stalls (20 standard, 2 handicap accessible). Background The City acquired the property at 1795 Eustis Street at the end of 2017 with the intent of finding a developer that would be interested in redeveloping the site. After acquisition, the City's financial consultant -initiated contact with developers that construct/build senior housing consistent with the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Objectives in selecting finding a developer 2 High Density Residential (2040; to be adopted) vacation, development approvals (including CUP), and TIF. This review is for land use approvals only (TIF is separate, but related analysis) Zoning: R-1 (Suburban Residential) The Applicant is proposing to redevelop the site with an age -restricted (senior) affordable apartment building. The units will be affordable at the aggregate of 65% of Area Median Income (AMI). The Plans are generally consistent with the Concept Plan, with slight modifications. The following summary of the proposed Project, as well as those items that have been updated, modified or added are provided in the following: • The proposed building ranges between three (3) and four (4) stories. The north elevation (Spring Street) and east elevation (Eustis Street) are predominantly four stories, with a step-down to three stories at the corners to provide visual interest. The west elevation (Malvern Street) is three stories. There is a proposed roof -top deck/community space on the northwest corner which is accessed from the fourth story. • The Unit Mix includes 89 one (1) bedroom/one (1) bathroom and 25 two (2) bedroom/two (2) bathroom units. Based on this unit mix, approximately 78% of the units are one -bedroom, and 22% are two bedrooms. • Gross rents range between $885/unit and $1,485/unit excluding parking and additional storage rates. Parking stalls can be rented at $75/stall, and additional storage at $15/space. • The unit sizes are between approximately 773 and 1,283 -square feet as indicated on sheet SD_000. • The proposed Project includes indoor community space including a fitness center, club room, hobby and conference rooms all located on the first floor. There are no formal outdoor amenities proposed, except for the roof -top deck on the roof of the third floor. • A full landscape plan has been submitted and includes proposed fence screening along the southern property lines and monument signage at the entrance from Eustis Street. • The Parking Schedule on sheet SD_000 indicates a total parking count of 98 underground stalls (94 standard, 4 handicap accessible), and 22 surface lot stalls (20 standard, 2 handicap accessible). Background The City acquired the property at 1795 Eustis Street at the end of 2017 with the intent of finding a developer that would be interested in redeveloping the site. After acquisition, the City's financial consultant -initiated contact with developers that construct/build senior housing consistent with the City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan. Objectives in selecting finding a developer 2 ILU 117 included: 1) that if possible the project would make the City `whole' and that a financial loss would not be incurred; 2) if market conditions were favorable that the developer would build a senior project or there would be a senior component included in the redevelopment; 3) that the Project would maintain a level of affordability in the community; and 4) that the developer would be responsible for acquiring the necessary permit approvals and entitlements for the Proj ect. The process for this Project is more complex than a traditional application process because the City is the landowner, and Real Estate Equities is proposing to purchase the property and to redevelop the site with a specific development plan. As the owner of the property the City's role is more involved than a typical review process because the City will be a project partner, primarily from a financial perspective, if the proposed Project is ultimately approved and accepted. Concept Plan Process The first step in the City's PUD process is for the Applicant to make a formal application for Concept Plan review. Real Estate Equities submitted a full Concept Plan package in January of 2019 which initiated the review process. The City Council considered the proposed Project at its regular City Council meeting on February 26, 2019 and provided feedback regarding the Concept Plan. After the City Council meeting the Applicant held an Open House on March 19, 2019, and the public was invited to attend to review the proposed Project plans, provide feedback and ask questions. Several residents provided comments and questions regarding the proposed Project, and the most frequent questions/concerns expressed included the following: • Does the Project (building) have to be so dense? Why are there so many units? • Does the building have to be four stories? Three stories seem more reasonable. • Is there enough parking? What about traffic on Eustis and the alleyway? The Development Stage application materials are consistent with the Concept Plan materials with respect to these three issues — density (number of units), height and proposed parking. During a following up City Council meeting in April, the Applicant answered some of these questions. First, the Applicant indicated that they cannot reduce the number of units and make the financials of the project work. The number of units is directly correlated to the unit mix, which is discussed in subsequent sections of this report. To achieve the number of units, at marketable square footages, they need to have a portion of the building at four stories. To help mitigate the height they have proposed a flat roof — further discussion regarding how this architectural design impacts height is provided in subsequent sections of this report. Finally, the Applicant indicated that based on their experience residents will pay for parking, and that there is enough onsite to adequately support the residents. To address traffic, a Memo was prepared by a traffic engineer and it indicates that Eustis is adequate to support the increased traffic volume. Development Stage PUD Application, Conditional Use Permit and Public Hearing 3 The Applicant prepared its initial Development Stage PUD Application and submitted it for review on April 12, 2019. City Staff deemed the Application incomplete and prepared a letter consistent with Minnesota Statutes 15.99 to notify the Applicant of the incomplete items. After meeting with the Applicant to discuss the needed items, the Applicant prepared the additional materials and submitted them for the City's review on April 24, 2019, and City Staff determined the materials were complete for review and processing. A duly noticed public hearing was posted in the City's Official Newspaper and letters were mailed to property owners within 3oo-feet of the proposed Project. Per Section 10-7-8 of the City's Ordinances, the purpose of the Development Stage PUD Approval process is to consider and evaluate the proposed development plans. As such, the City's planning and engineering staff have prepared the following review for the consideration by City Council. Land Use and Zoning Consistency Section 10-7-8 of the City Code requires that all development stage PUD's are required to meet the standards as set forth in Section 10-3-5, and also must make the following additional findings: 1. The proposed development stage PUD is in conformance with the comprehensive plan; 2. The uses proposed will not have an undue or adverse impact on the reasonable enjoyment of neighboring property or will not be determinantal to potential surrounding uses; 3. Each phase of the proposed development, as it is proposed to be completed, is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a complete unit, and that provision and construction of dwelling units and common open space are balanced and coordinate; 4. The PUD will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets, and other public facilities and utilities, which serve or are proposed, to serve the area; and 5. The proposed development is designed in such a manner as to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. The following Land Use and Zoning analysis is provided to assist the City Council in its findings of the proposed Project. Comprehensive Plan Review Section 10-7-4 of the PUD ordinance states, "1) The planned unit development is consistent with the comprehensive plan of the city; and 2) The planned unit development is an effective and unified treatment of the development possibilities on the project site; 3) The development plan will not have a detrimental effect upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located; 4) The planned unit development provides transitions in land use in keeping with the character of adjacent land uses; 5) The proposal better adapts itself to the physical and aesthetic setting of the site and with the surrounding land uses than could be developed using strict standards and land uses allowed within the underlying zoning district..." 4 The City's 2040 Comprehensive Plan update has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for their review and eventual approval. The City has received formal comments from the Metropolitan Council and anticipates the final approval of the Plan within 6o -days. Given this timeline, the following review summary assumes that the 2040 Comprehensive Plan will be effective at the time the Final PUD development approvals including rezoning, would be granted for the Project. The 2040 Comprehensive Plan guides the subject site as High Density Residential (HDR) which permits 12.01 - 30 Dwelling Units Per Acre. The Project proposes 114 Units on 1.68 Acres which is approximately 67.8 Dwelling Units Per Acre. This exceeds the City's HDR land use designation when considering the land use designation on an individual site; however, the increased density can be accommodated within the overall land use designation if considered as a whole. Although the proposed density is higher than the guided designation, staff provides the following considerations and clarifications: • The City's Comprehensive Plan, and the process, regularly discussed and addressed the issue of senior housing and the desire to provide more options for not only the region, but the City's aging population. The proposed use is consistent with the City's stated policies and objectives. • Affordability within the housing stock, and particularly with respect to senior housing, was discussed as a priority and is identified in the Housing Chapter and the Land Use chapter. • The Project is a Senior building, which means the square -footage of individual units is smaller than if the building was not age -restricted. For example, if units were marketed to families, there would be a higher proportion of 2- and 3 -bedroom units which would bring the overall unit count within the density range contemplated by the City. Staff performed some research of similarly sized market rate apartments and found comparable multi -family buildings with 5o -6o units, consistent with the HDR density range. Most of the increased density can be attributed to the Senior use, which is consistent with the City's stated objectives, but requires flexibility from the stated density range. Zoning Consistency The site must be re -zoned as stated within Section l0 -7-4(A) to accommodate the proposed Project, and the following zoning related applicable standards are identified, "3) The development plan will not have a detrimental effect upon the neighborhood in which it is proposed to be located; 6)The proposal would benefit the area surround the project to a greater degree than development allowed within the underlying zoning district; 7) The proposal would achieve higher quality development than would otherwise occur in the underlying zoning district; and 8) The PUD will not create an excessive burden on parks, schools, streets, or other facilities and utilities that serve or are proposed to serve the PUD." Final re -zoning will be completed after Development Stage approval concurrent with Conditional Use and Final PUD approval. Staff offers the following considerations regarding zoning: 5 • The site is currently zoned R-1 Suburban Residential. The zoning permits Planned Unit Developments as a Conditional Use. The proposed re -zoning to PUD is consistent with the ordinance requirements. It should also be noted that once the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is adopted, that the R-1 zoning district will not longer be consistent with the land use designation and that the standards of the R-1 would likely no longer be applicable. • This Application includes Development Stage review and a public hearing to consider the Project. Final PUD approval will include a public hearing for vacation of the alleyway, and public hearing for the conditional use related to rezoning for PUD. • Although it is understood that flexibility from the strict requirements of the R-1 zoning district is requested for this Project, it is important to evaluate the extent to which the requested Project is inconsistent with the R-1 zoning dimensional requirements. The following Table Identifies the R-1 Lot and Yard Requirements compared to the proposed Project: Dimensional Requirement Proposed Project Lot Area (all other uses) Lot Width (ft) Front -Yard Setback Rear -Yard Setback Side -Yard Setback Maximum Coverage R-1 Zoning (or MF use) 10,000 SF 73,18o SF (1.68 AC) 238.5 (Eustis) 265.o (Spring) 10.9 (Eustis) 10.0 (Malvern) 11.8 (Spring) 55,5313 SF (75.8%)"- 53'1" 75.8%)*53'1" (est.) 3'6" and 6' 1.1 Parking space/dwelling unit 5'6„x10' monument sign; internally lit *Sheet C2-1 provides Impervious Calculation, which includes the parking areas and drive aisles. A separate Coverage calculation was not provided; but would be less than what is noted. • Nearly 8o% of the units are 1 -bedroom. This results in more units, but the number of people/cars/etc., is less than if the building included a higher mix of 2- and 3 -bedroom units. Therefore, the increased density will not negatively impact the character of the surrounding neighborhood. • The scale of the building, and height of the building exceeds the standards of the R-1, and likely exceeds the standards that will eventually be updated and created to support the HDR. Through the Concept Plan review City Staff and City Council requested that architectural considerations be included to mitigate the scale and height of those portions of the building exceeding three stories. Mitigation included step -back of the Maximum Height Maximum Fence Height Parking Requirements Signage 5 NA (28% if MF) 25' or 2 stories 8' 1.5 Parking Spaces/dwelling unit FY Setback 1', 8 SF (16 SF Total) 6 ILU 1r fourth story, additional vegetation, color pattern, and parapet details. Solar/shade study was also prepared to address how the proposed building will impact adjacent properties. • The proposed Project will require flexibility from parking and signage requirements. Staff would recommend placing conditions on any approvals regarding these two items include: 1) that if it is found after leasing that residents are not using the underground parking and that instead residents are overwhelmingly using the local streets that the parking plan be reevaluated and such plans coordinated with the City; and 2) that the monument signage shall be permitted back -lit lighting, but may not include internal lighting and any external light shall be down -cast and/or directed at monument signage. Site Plan and Dimensional Standards Review The proposed building is located on the north edge of the site and is a U -shape configuration. Generally, the orientation of the building is logical given the location of the existing road - network including the alleyways. As proposed, the main access into the site is from Eustis Street on the south end of the site. The secondary access is by the existing alley that runs between and parallel to Eustis Street and Malvern Street. Currently this alley includes an east -west alley connection to Malvern Street on the southwest edge of the site that will be closed and will be vacated as part of this Project. Most traffic is projected to exit the site at the main entrance onto Eustis Street rather than using the alleyway. The Project includes 122 -parking stalls provided in a combination of underground and surface parking lot areas. The trash and recycling areas are located in the underground parking lot area and are currently located near the elevators that will connect residents to the main lobby area, and ultimately the individual units. The height of the proposed structure alternates between 3 and 4 stories. The western facade is 3 stories (Malvern), the north and east facades are 4 stories, with the northeast corner stepped down to 3 -stories. The maximum height of the structure on the 4 -story facade is approximately 47' 3/4" from average grade to the edge of the parapet. The following comments and considerations regarding the site plan and dimensional requirements are provided for your review: Access Comments & Considerations • Staff requested the Applicant prepare a vehicle -turning analysis to demonstrate that garbage trucks and other large vehicles could safely turn and access the underground parking area. While a vehicle turning analysis was submitted, it does not reflect the requested verification. Staff would recommend that a condition an updated graphic must be submitted for review by the City Staff. • The main entrance onto Eustis Street includes the main drive aisles as well as an 11 -stall parking bay that appears tight. Staff requested an analysis be prepared to demonstrate the parking area does not conflict with the drive aisle. While a Vehicle Turning analysis graphic was submitted it does not provide adequate analysis regarding this area. This area should be modeled to demonstrate that there is adequate space for both the entrance drive aisle and the parking stalls. For example, if there is any stacking of 7 vehicles leaving the site that will occur in the southern `lane' of the exit which may block the vehicles in the parking spaces. This graphic should be submitted for review and analysis by the City Staff. • If the access/driveway locations are approved in the current configuration, the alley on the south edge of the site must be vacated as part of the PUD Final Stage approval process. A separate application to vacate the alley must be submitted with Final PUD application, and a public hearing to consider the vacation must be held. ® The City Engineer has also reviewed the Site Plan, and their comments are provided as Attached. Parking Comments & Considerations Several parking related items remain outstanding. Staff requests that the Applicant submit additional information for consideration, and they be prepared to address the following items during their presentation at the May 14th meeting. ® The Applicant should provide supporting data regarding how the parking ratio of 1.1 parking stalls per unit was derived. The City's ordinance requires 1.5 parking stalls per unit, which would result in an additional 47 parking stalls being needed. Staff is not suggesting that this is a requirement of the Project, but we do need additional information to ensure that there is adequate parking on-site. ® The Overview states that parking stalls will be available for an additional monthly rent. Staff requests additional information regarding how many residents (units) are anticipated to rent stalls, and how many are projected to have cars and not rent stalls. ® Snow removal should be described. Based on the surface parking areas, and general site plan, there is little to no space internal to the site for snow removal and storage. ® The it -stall parking bay near the main entrance drive should be verified for accessibility as described in previous sections. Additionally, since this edge shares a property line with a single-family structure directly south of the parking stalls fencing detail must be provided to demonstrate how issues such as headlights will be mitigated on this edge. This is also referenced in the landscape section notes. Height Comments & Considerations During the Comprehensive Plan process there was significant discussion regarding appropriate height of a structure on the subject site. Generally, the neighborhood and policy -makers concluded that 3 -stories would be acceptable and compatible to adjacent single-family users which is consistent with the re -guiding of the property to HDR in the 2040 Plan. The current zoning is R-1 which limits the maximum height of a building to 25 -feet; however, that zoning is inconsistent with the new HDR designation so additional consideration should be given. The following considerations are provided regarding height: ® Sheet SD 16o provides a section demonstrating the difference of the proposed structure compared to the existing school building on the site. As shown, the maximum difference is approximately 24 -feet on the elevation with the four (4) stories. However, as previously noted, to help mitigate this difference, the Applicant has proposed to step - back the fourth story to reduce the scale and massing of the building at the street level. 8 ▪ Since the Comprehensive Plan process indicated a 3 -story building would be acceptable, the Applicant has prepared a height comparison of a three-story building versus a four- story building. Sheet SD 161 demonstrates that a 3 -story multi -family building with a pitched/sloped roof is of comparable height to a 4 -story multi -family building with a flat roof. Interestingly on the Eustis side, the 3 story with a pitched roof (to the peak) is taller than the 4 -story flat roof by a little more than 2 -feet. ▪ Both structures would `feel' similar in scale and bulk, provided architectural considerations and details are included (see subsequent sections of this report). • The Spring Street elevation (north) has the greatest height and will `feel' approximately 53 -feet high at Spring Street due to the sloping topography. Because of the height, particularly along Spring Street, Staff requested a shade study be completed so that the impact of the Project could be demonstrated on adjacent parcels (Sheet SD 1o5). Staff provides the following comments regarding the shade study: ▪ The winter solstice demonstrates a large/extreme shade over the properties directly north of the site through the duration of the day. Staff is concerned about this impact, particularly because the property on the northwest corner of Spring Street and Eustis Street has a solar panel installation on the detached garage. However, moving to a 3 - story on the north elevation does not accomplish much improvement. To determine actual loss of productivity of the solar panels, a full analysis would need to be completed. ▪ Staff does acknowledge that the Applicant responded to our request to address the north and eastern facades, and that has attempted to mitigate the scale on Spring Street and Eustis Street by stepping down the `bump' out areas to 3 -stories which gives the appearance of the fourth story stepping back. While this architectural change does improve the massing and scale, it does not improve the impact of the building on the adjacent northerly parcels. Landscape Plan A full landscape plan has been provided and is shown on sheet L1-1. The Plan is a significant improvement from the Concept Plan stage and more detail is provided. The following comments and updates are summarized in the following: • Edge treatment at southern property line includes a proposed 6 -foot vinyl privacy fence and vegetative screen. While this accomplishes the objective of screening, staff questions the usage of vinyl and would look for input from adjacent property owners regarding the material choice. During the meeting with adjacent neighbors, staff believes there was discussion regarding a natural material such as cedar fencing. ▪ Landscape treatment wrapping the northeast corner of the building has been identified and is shown in the perspective drawing. An appropriate landscape guarantee should be included as a condition of approval and addressed within the Development Agreement. 9 Al 1r • Maintenance of all on-site hardscape improvements including the fence, retaining walls, and paths should be the responsibility of the owner/operator and will be included in the Development Agreement. • While the retaining wall is denoted, staff would request detail be provided regarding proposed materials, colors, etc., and that all hardscape details be provided (walkways, etc.) Architectural Plan The architectural plans have been updated, and • The added balconies on the north, east and west elevations help add dimension and texture to the facade. The balcony pattern on the west elevation has been updated to reflect City Staffs recommendations. • Parapet details have been addressed, including the reduction of parapet heights on the north and east elevations. • The differentiation in material is nice and adds visual interest. The exterior materials proposed are now accurately reflected on the plans. Staff would request the Applicant bring a material sample board to the public hearing denoting the proposed materials. • The color pattern is improved, and staff appreciates the attention to a more horizontal color pattern to help reduce the scale. • A photometric plan addressing exterior parking lot lighting was provided and demonstrates compliance with the City's ordinances. o Light fixture detail on the building were not identified but should be incorporated at the entrance. Fixtures should be down -lit and fixture type verified as part of the full construction plans. This condition should be incorporated into the Development Agreement. • Monument Sign: Details regarding the sign structure were provided, but materials for the sign -type area were not included. The size and scale exceed the permitted standards in the R -i zoning district and require flexibility from the City's ordinance. Staff would provide the following additional considerations regarding potential conditions: o The "sign" portion, or that which lettering would be affixed, should not be fully illuminated. Back -lit letters, or direct ground lighting may be acceptable. o The materials of the base on the monument should be consistent with the retaining wall materials, or other stone details present on the site. Engineering Review The City Engineer has completed a review of the Development Stage application materials and has provided a memo which is provided in Attachment X. Staff would recommend including a condition of approval that the Final Development plans should incorporate and address all of the City Engineer's recommendations. This should also be incorporated in the Development Agreement. Requested Additional Information for Consideration 10 In addition to any items requested by the City Council at the May 14± meeting, and in response to the public hearing, staff has identified the following additional information necessary to complete the review: • Parking Details as denoted, including turning movement verification • Additional detail addressing parking stall anticipated usage • Plan for snow removal • Hardscape details, including retaining walls • Clarity regarding proposed sign area and lettering/lighting treatment Action requested Staff is not requesting formal action on May 14, 2019 but is requesting direction to: • Prepare a resolution of Development Stage PUD approval with appropriate conditions provided supplemental materials have been submitted for review. • Prepare a resolution of Development Stage PUD denial, to be brought forward at the next meeting, with appropriate findings. Attachments Applicant's Overview Site Plan ALTA Survey Architectural Plans Perspective Drawings Landscape Plan Traffic Memo City Engineer's Review 11 It REAL ESTATE EQUITIES Planned Unit Development Application Lauderdale, MN Description of Partnership Real Estate Equities is a full-service real estate firm based in the Twin Cities with a primary focus on multifamily real estate investments. The company was founded by Terry Troy and Bob Bisanz in 1972 with a vision of providing quality rental housing and ownership opportunities that improve communities and provide strong economic returns for their investors. We have been the developer and managing partner in more than 70 projects in excess of 10,000 housing units with projects spanning from Minnesota, Wisconsin, Ohio, Missouri, South Dakota as well as Indiana. Today, our real estate portfolio consists of approximately 3,600 housing units that range from artist lofts, luxury apartments, traditional apartments, affordable apartments, senior (affordable) apartments, as well as our luxury home portfolio that spans globally. Currently we have a regional portfolio with properties located in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Indiana. Real Estate Equities funds their investments with their own equity as well as numerous relationships with institutional and individual investors. Real Estate Equities Management, LLC has experience in all facets of property management including: Marketing and Lease -up of new and renovated product; Financial Reporting and Controls including exceptional Compliance Administration and Reporting; Resident Relations and Communication programs; Plant Operations including maintenance, housekeeping and repairs; Safety, Security and Emergency Planning; Management of Major Capital Improvement Projects and Restoration of property after fire/water/wind damage; and, management of small scale Commercial Space. Narrative of Project The site in Lauderdale is located at 1795 Eustis Street. The parcel is a 1.69 acre site that is well positioned for multifamily with its visibility to downtown Minneapolis, as well as, easy access to two major arteries in the state of Minnesota, such as Highway 94 & Highway 280. The proposed project will consist of 114 senior affordable housing units consisting of both one and two-bedroom units. Within the City of Lauderdale, Dougherty Mortgage projects a demand of 1,414 affordable housing units needed in the area by 2019. With this pent-up demand and a vacancy rate of 4.8% Dougherty Mortgage reports that the City of Lauderdale and surrounding Saint Paul areas have notable shortfalls of affordable senior housing units. The proposed use of the project is senior housing, in which the target market will be hard working senior citizens residing within and outside of the city of Lauderdale. Escalating rent levels throughout the Twin Cities continues to force hard working Minnesotan seniors into less desirable and lower quality housing options which in turn pushes the demand for this housing need in the City of Lauderdale. The proposed project will offer housing units at 50-60% of the area median income which will provide a 20-30% savings to tenants in comparison to other new market rate properties in the Lauderdale area. Additionally, the tenants will have access to several high-quality amenities that include a community room with outdoor patio, fire pit, fitness center, and underground parking. With these savings, amenities, and new landscaping providing connections to the surrounding community this housing project is a $25,000,000 investment that the City of Lauderdale and its residents can be proud of. These apartments will be affordable to persons at or below 60% of the area median income (AMI), through income averaging (i.e. some affordable at 50% of AMI and below, majority at 60% of AMI and below and some at 70% of AMI and below). In addition, the rent that can be charged for the units is restricted as well. Below are the 2018 income and rent limits (2019 data not yet available): Income Limit By Household Size Income/Rent Limit 1 Person 2 Person 50% AMI 60% AMI 70% AMI $33,050 $39,660 $46,270 $37,750 $45,300 $52,850 Rent Limit by Unit Size Studio Rent 1Bdrm Rent 2Bdrm Rent $826 $991 $1,156 $885 $1,062 $1,239 $1,061 $1,273 $1,485 Application Overview Real Estate Equities is submitting the Planned Unit Development (PUD) or Planned Unit Development Conservation application to apply for the rezoning of the property 1795 Eustis Street, Lauderdale, MN. In the later parts of this process Real Estate Equities will apply for CUP, the vacation of the alley exiting to Malvern Street, and final PUD approval. City staff will provide residents with the appropriate schedule for public hearings that will be held for both the consideration of the vacation of the alley ROW, as well as, the consideration of the PUD Development Stage Application. Rent Structure: Unit Type Set Aside SF Gross Rent Utility Allowance Net Rent 1 Bed/1 Bath 70% 779 $1,239 $78 $1,161 1 Bed/1 Bath 50% 779 $885 $78 $807 1 Bed/1 Bath 60% 779 $1,062 $78 $984 2 Bed/2 Bath 50% 900 $1,061 $95 $966 2 Bed/2 Bath 70% 1,238 $1,485 $95 $1,390 • Residents can also pay $75 for parking stalls as well as an additional $15 for storage. Project Summary: • Completed survey/title review. Continued meetings with staff to identify overall project timelines. • Updated project design/renderings • Discussing terms with lenders and investors and ready to execute with them once we get approval on TIF to move forward with term sheets. • Have met with City Engineer to discuss road construction and timeline. • Traffic Study completed; shows no traffic or parking issues with development. Project Highlights/Amenities: Unit Finishes/Amenities: In Unit washer/dryer, solid surface countertops, 9 ft ceilings, full stainless-steel appliance package, low -flow fixtures/LED lighting, High Efficiency HVAC. Building Amenities: Full on-site management team, secure entrance with Luxor package storage system, community room, rooftop patio, fitness center, office/conference room, underground parking. Exterior Materials: Masonry, Energy Star Windows, Concrete Fibor Board, Wood Look CFB, Metal Panel Accents. Project Demand: • Marquette Advisors Report projects 1,414 additional affordable housing units needed by 2020 in Minneapolis/St. Paul submarket. • Vacancy rate in Lauderdale is 4.8%. • Market research indicates that Lauderdale and surrounding Saint Paul areas have notable production shortfalls of affordable senior housing units. Parking Data: • West Saint Paul Development (The Winslow) o Price: $65.00 • Dominium Senior Property (The Legends at Silver Lake) o Price: $80.00 • Dominium Senior Property (The Legends of Columbia Heights) o Price: $75.00 Project Investment: • TIF Request $1,480,870 • First Mortgage: $12,868,985 • Tax Credit Equity $8,882,866 • Total Development Cost $25,640,249 Development Team Officers/Shareholders/Partners n William Bisanz J Terry Troy al Bob Bisanz 4j Alex Bisanz Patrick Ostrom Project Contact Information Developer: Patrick Ostrom Real Estate Equities 579 Selby Ave Saint Paul, MN 55102 (651) 389-3866 postrom@reeliving.com Borrower's Legal Counsel: Jeffrey Drennan Winthrop & Weinstine, P.A. 225 South Sixth Street Capella Tower, Ste 3500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 604-6730 jdrennan@winthrop.com Bond Underwriter: Craig Theis Dougherty & Company LLC 90 South 7th Street, Suite 4300 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 376-4135 Craig.theis@doughertymarkets.com Tax Credit Bridge Loan Lender: Craig Theis Dougherty & Company LLC 90 South 7th Street, Suite 4300 Minneapolis, MN 55402 (612) 376-4135 Craig.theis@doughertymarkets.com Architect: Petro N. Megits Kaas Wilson Architects 1301 American Blvd. E, Suite 100 Bloomington, MN 55425 (612) 223-7957 petrom@kaaswilson.com Accountant: Mahoney Ulbrich Christiansen Russ P.A. Craig A. Mulcahy 10 River Park Plaza, Suite 800 Saint Paul, MN 55107 (651) 281-1852 cmulcahv@mucr.com Development Plan The table below identifies the key milestones dates and duration associated with each key stage of the development plan. laT,1 1 1 C;uiiic 1 Sciiioi �Ql�.�ll1{; I IIl1C Ill(' Milestone City Council Worksession Submit TIF Application Review Set to City Planner Ehlers / REE Underwrite TIF Neighborhood Meeting Entitlement Submittal Prelimianary Bond Inducement Resolution Approval PUD Development Stage Review Public Hearing in Consideration of PUD Development Stage Application Design Development Completed PUD Final Approval Public Hearing to consider Alley ROW Vacation Approval of Rezoning Approval of Development Agreement TIF & Purchase Agreement Approval Construction Documents Completed Building Permit Application Finalize Underwriting Close Construction Start Date Complete 11/27/2018 12/18/2018 1/9/2019 1/10/2019 3/19/2019 4/12/2019 4/23/2019 5/14/2019 5/14/2019 7/16/2019 8/13/2019 8/13/2019 8/13/2019 8/13/2019 8/13/2019 8/30/2019 9/15/2019 10/29/2019 11/13/2019 12/1/2019 Comparable Senior Properties Property Type Rate Parking Occupancy Stalls Surface Units Ratio # of 1BR # of 2BRI The Legends at Silver Lake Underground $ 80.00 88% 110 85 169 1.15 111 58 The Legends of Columbia Heights Underground $ 75.00 90% 136 85 192 1.15 The Cavanagh Underground $ 80.00 82% 90 80 130 1.31 85 40 Cambric Underground $ 75.00 92% 82 45 113 1.12 80 33 The Legends of Champlin Underground $ 75.00 N/A 130 100 184 1.25 The Legends of Cottage Grove Underground $ 75.00 88% 129 83 185 1.15 70 78 The Legends of Spring Lake Park Underground $ 80.00 27% 125 194 0.64 ak Real Estate Equities 3 0 1 1.1 3 3 3 2 18-09C -Total Gross Area 3 3 3 1 18-09C -Parking Schedule 3 3 1 1 a 3 ff assusn3 '1SHH3AM1 Enna MIWAWSRZEI AWIMMEMMI 1.4✓ 4,-YAb: ti+ a,W,3W111 gP.9-33tlraW9N.0lW8AJI $3� quyWq Ad MSmown ..lMSnfilWd 3I . 115an 11^11 -^95^ .4W 3 3333 3333! F31T �ttt ttr t i ¢` q-,-. �7T$ 98 ay U. ti iii '15th 131.1 11 z -22332 3;; » 1 ^ 2233 3111;; RR 22222 ;;;;; 22 2R W'' 3;; 3 18-09C -Total Gross Area 3 3 3 1 18-09C -Parking Schedule 3 3 1 1 a 3 ff assusn3 '1SHH3AM1 Enna MIWAWSRZEI AWIMMEMMI 1.4✓ 4,-YAb: ti+ a,W,3W111 gP.9-33tlraW9N.0lW8AJI $3� quyWq Ad MSmown ..lMSnfilWd 3I L = o w =t CO3 Real Estate Equities L ,P>nwnoa1.0.1.,11,e,113 I wdo1zsi 60)*Zroj iasE:uiuwmoa� Real Estate Equities is H1sn3 r 0 WWF uP 9A(: 'H 5 3Seill. el33tl Jfi)9tWa1i.th 3I pa:WM IY39l 75 16447,"MI u^lMI4.+.4,0I N = IA W 1 a) 3 Real Estate Equities a c 4rc..P>A6.v.H.-eS 395[li+•frBH3iF0-U181Wo7 NTM3I Wd 6L 25 l6l0iN/p 1 ,4 6�'J,°0 i^REftM MIW�11 4 a Real Estate Equities s 00 . J - a 13❑■❑❑❑ L. L fl W0.13iAZ: 1/+..5.M3S6B14 4.1-33lYJW9l6Pm1 Nae113I 9&)4 U 3 Wd 'ZS Ifi WOO', uo4MsteN IV`✓l�]I �� k0 E,Ed gl'•cd LC) O co 0 .4 �I 0 co U) Vr4�P9A�!�Ni+�!BS a9�3ES/ 1iW 193N0 -601l1/ T1Kdt3 4 ndL6bl6tK/R/r1 uu4MsnY1W.�0* �I C k 1Lirrrrrlr.1 4 WX �P >AEi9 WEBS g1.356LIVP.P.M3e3-03140.143A , L A1 rid rem alaxn, msmuw, , q ►71 Real Estate Equities WY��4 fAst! Yi»?aS .703ffiLlR+ 133tJW9t1F0iwrA3I `ety a' P. 0) 0 N 0 0 U tiN vnA '41'�� caPPN &4o Nd 6CSt MYNA u^AMsRMIW0>]I \I ep Real Estate Equities m 8°rdp P.P.i /A YI x!s5 3 S611iVpI41+e1,334-3-E1l9VIECallgA0I AAP to w= e q 1.� wo�arMpM++1 sw :== t L lo J O Nd84E4161RA7/v 54 uqM reeMFk...'J • /) Real Estate Equities | ) ax wa vcr W ,__m_,_ 0.5.9_31 5 14 ©©117.101,I-tI PAGE 1 OF 1 SENIOR HOUSING Revisions GO E It Dabs Comments .-- • CPULSE never ordinoy LAUDERDALE, MN 19 • o SF� 319lp'pE�� hp, Sii 2141i9911 t,388� 33;iF@1g a�i E1�3l3ax��� e000: 4..,r1.iO f1 99!!1 8 aFFJ19Uek 1 (,i ri in__ [_l ' 4b_al _ lit( `I( li'"""l , i?; 11 —0-iI 4 rz i„111.J Mill— N t`'' I fila h �IB�d S i i s rz ;e,a •Ut £ 1 • • os _ az 425{ e P 8 €s ` �SEi ° 5 f e s 11 8 3 3s eW'o 9 i i 6,2 j NS 5 i£ sn Er! Y3• 3 41I!1i a F EE_ `yay ii 2h229223 1.i! ssgsE 8 3 `_ s € or� ua� 33 3 3 E s 3 I 1 I I I I I I 1 L k 88 NO1 1:7:7V 7 7110SOH 8 9 � 9 3 4 - 8 2 -E 9 (IooAs N °O ow) AI N1 1 1 8 m h I r▪ $♦f' I Ni }\ — ♦ i a go atom norma imn on wro. un or Lou. 111 Is. ill 1 ♦ 1 ♦- J IS N • ‘ 1N ✓ , .11 J�IS 2 �MBW I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II1 1 r 1y—I aN r SnLrtw-- 5 L —1 1I I 1 I Fa 57 70;.. _........ „1 ..... 1015 1 113 ...........:::ii 1 \: . Eustis Street & Spring Street, Lauderdale MN .-r.al- MME=r= 4 oo L e ijg40o 044 sugn.i I I 1 I treat <TO 11 0 1 „ ; \ 1.1 \ 1!1 , sa, .we ,•rr ...., °I 11_1XollY- ”" -, 1 /1 ---.__...1,11._:-• -.3i.:_aM __e__-•',._-_.'1-_- • / i , k'.• I, I ------ I I I I ‘‘‘ I 1 ‘ („) Pilwo RA 1_' _J1 (it 1 I I I N - -- — -- Mil- 0.4.04— —3 --- ‘ )004S I 1 1 1 4 L .0 0,0 'i, JEMWS Ofi9/74. ' N 0 0......,..m....,..1<rontl , '"' .., \%,,,.. -..;•••y s s.s• s) 1 .", . 1 1 itijAainti- ___ • ....,,-„_•) PallPorA,-1 L r L 4G-11111.11'll{}1{111i 4 L IIIMI111,11i1Ah (1"s 4°0 os) pO�4 s epen3 tam) are 3.1r.mos ;it AblIV frv°,1 J004,9 Weilien 0----tate One Call 4°111111En 4 0 L 4,9 Z Z5 I a aopherState One Call (si V) 0 9 (,§ ! ;! ! , , 4 ! § ( , ; a= .------"" ! §$ I\ (§ !\ ] ] r ! 92 )| ( ;( 5 SITE VICINITY MAP \ 9 3 /§ / � .s� {G m e e U ;11 § ( § WIMCO ROAD DRAIN, OR APPROVED EOUAL ( TEMPORARY ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE § § § Samuel Trebesch .0)491a••xl•.. 111111ifillilll It1H 1{11.1 6 4 1111111flilf i 1,, ' L 4.0 n) )994s ellen31 N.N.NSW Ir. NIV 17.• •••••., s• „„ NS NS. "g2. 41. 7,eg XellY 4094.9 '62 E 5 0 5 6, 11 6'6 3 • RU Vill ill. "El -1 11N1i.v 'Ng NM s = , I 1 I I P ME NM tr- a UIllk mail II 111—V ' 5 is -.L.... ,.. N. A 5..- •-• +•5*it''' I 1 ' 11_1_1_1 ' ........ •i' ` ' ...5 II r4 E o . ,, -.L.... ir 5..- •-• +•5*it''' I 1 ' 11_1_1_1 ' ........ 9 6 5 5 _ J L (lams o ov) 1004S glign,3 II a& Ass, Aat, MN an, VIffrAillikaNt WAS WEIMSWENINi I st Whift C,•=41° 10101111201211131111111111 rat. 00'0'4 *IV , OVVArs 4"/Maltiatete. w W INT 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10049 we. - r L ij L 6 ' 4 NE? 1 11111111111111 I 1 11111111111111111111 ---' ' I 101111111111011111 2111511111111111111 _ J L (lams o ov) 1004S glign,3 II a& Ass, Aat, MN an, VIffrAillikaNt WAS WEIMSWENINi I st Whift C,•=41° 10101111201211131111111111 rat. 00'0'4 *IV , OVVArs 4"/Maltiatete. w W INT 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10049 we. - r L ij L 6 ' 4 02p) 4 :! 16004.9 waNWV =r; LJ o 1 LOUCKS Stormwater Management Plan Lauderdale Senior Housing Lauderdale, MN Prepared by Loucks February 15, 2019 Loucks Project No. 18644.00 PLANNING 1 CIVIL ENGINEERING 1 LAND SURVEYING 1 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL www.loucksinc.com 1 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300, Maple Grove, MN 55369 1 763.424.5505 Lauderdale Senior Housing Lauderdale, Minnesota Stormwater Management Plan Table of Contents Page Number Introduction 1 Methodology 1 Existing Conditions 1 Proposed Conditions 2 Best Management Practices 3 Conclusion 3 Appendices HydroCAD Report - Existing Appendix A HydroCAD Report - Proposed Appendix B Figures Existing Drainage Exhibit Figure 1 Proposed Drainage Exhibit Figure 2 Existing MIDS Data Figure 3 Proposed MIDS Data Figure 4 Stormwater Management Plan February 15, 2019 Lauderdale Senior Housing Lauderdale Senior Housing Lauderdale, Minnesota Stormwater Management Plan Introduction This stormwater management plan was created for the Lauderdale Senior Housing project located at 1795 Eustis Street in Lauderdale, MN. The project site encompasses roughly 1.69 acres. The project generally consists of constructing a new apartment building, parking lot, and associated utilities. Included in this plan are calculations for the existing and proposed discharge of storm water from the site. Methodology City of Lauderdale and Rice Creek Watershed District Requirements 1 Rate Control a. Peak rates shall not increase from existing conditions for the 2 -yr, 10 -yr, and 100 -yr storm events. 2. Water Quality a. No net increase from existing discharge of total suspended solids (TSS) b. No net increase from existing discharge of total phosphorus (TP). 3. Volume Reduction a. Provide for the abstraction onsite of 1.1 inches of runoff from impervious surfaces. Methodology The stormwater calculations were made utilizing the stormwater-modeling program HydroCAD 10.00. Calculations were performed for Atlas -14 2 -year, 10 -year, and 100 -year rainfall events of 2.81 inches, 4.19 inches, and 7.36 inches respectively. Existing Conditions The existing 1.69 -acre site is developed. consists of an existing building, surface pavements, and green spaces. The existing project area is broken into one drainage area. There is currently no stormwater features on-site. Stormwater Management Plan February 15, 2019 Lauderdale Senior Housing Page 1 Proposed Conditions The proposed site consists of constructing an apartment building with underground parking, surface pavements and associated utilities. The proposed plan is to drain the site to the underground 36" infiltration vault in the center of the site. The underground vault is sized to treat the 1.1" storm event. The proposed site is 75.23% impervious. Rate Control The rate control requirements are that peak rates shall not exceed existing rates for the 2, 10, and 100 -year events. Tables 1.1 below lists the existing areas and runoff rates Tables 1.2 below lists the proposed areas and runoff rates Table 1.1 - Existing Peak Runoff Rates Existing Conditions 2 -YR Event 10 -YR Event 100 -YR Event Subcatchment Area (SF) Impervious Area (SF) Rate (cfs) Rate (cfs) Rate (cfs) DA -1E 73,125 44,531 4.36 7.43 14.43 Table 1.2 — Proposed Peak Runoff Rates Proposed Conditions 2 -YR Event 10 -YR Event 100 -YR Event Subcatchment Area (SF) Impervious Area (SF) Rate (cfs) Rate (cfs) Rate (cfs) 36" VAULT 73,125 55,013 0.67 2.63 5.98 Volume Control The City of Lauderdale and Rice Creek Watershed rules state that the project shall provide for the abstraction onsite of 1.1 inches of runoff from impervious surfaces on the parcel with a maximum drawdown time of 48 hours. The calculations for the required volume are shown below: Required Volume (ft^3) = Impervious Surfaces (SF) * 1.1 (in) * TP Removal Factor * 1/12 (ft/in) Required Volume (ft^3) = 55,013 (SF) * 1.1 (in) * 1 * 1/12 (ft/in) = 5,043 CF The proposed water quality volumes below the outlet for the tank is 36" Tank below 959.45 = 5,059 CF These volumes will drawdown in less than 48 hours. The calculations for the drawdown time are shown below: Stormwater Management Plan February 15, 2019 Lauderdale Senior Housing Page 2 Allowable Depth for 48 Hour Drawdown = Infiltration Rate (in/hr) * 1/12 (ft/in) * 48 hr Allowable Depth for 48 Hour Drawdown = 0.2 (in/hr) * 1/12 (ft/in) * 48 hr = 0.8ft Water Quality The City of Lauderdale and Rice Creek Watershed require no net increase from existing discharges of total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP). Table 1.3 below summarizes the existing and proposed conditions, showing no increase in TSS or TP discharging from the site. Table 1.3 — Annual Load Summary Load Type Existing Discharge (lbs) Proposed Discharge (lbs) TSS 393.0 45.0 TP (Particulate) 1.190 0.136 TP (Dissolved) 0.974 0.111 Best Management Practices Best management practices (BMP's) will be implemented during construction per the project Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (C3-2 & C3-3). During construction, erosion control measures will include dust control, silt fencing, bio logs, inlet protection, and a temporary rock construction entrance. Permanent BMP's will include stormwater management systems, surface pavements, and turf establishment (vegetation) of disturbed areas. Conclusion The proposed Stormwater Management Plan for the Landings at Lauderdale project provides a solution for the conveyance of stormwater from the site. The underground infiltration tank captures the runoff and outlets to city storm sewer. It will provide rate control for the development and meet water quality requirements through the proposed infiltration. Stormwater Management Plan February 15, 2019 Lauderdale Senior Housing Page 3 Appendix A Existing HydroCAD Report 4ubca> Reach EXISITNG SITE <DA1E> EXISTING SITE Routing Diagram for Lauderdale Prepared by {enter your company name here}, Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 1 -Year Rainfall=2.45" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1E: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.41" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=3.58 cfs 0.197 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.197 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.41" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 1 -Year Rainfall=2.45" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Pace 3 Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE Runoff = 3.58 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.197 af, Depth= 1.41" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 1 -Year Rainfall=2.45" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81 " Prepared by {enter your company name here) Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1E: EXISTING SITE RunoffArea=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.73" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=4.36 cfs 0.242 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.242 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.73" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81 " Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Runoff Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE = 4.36 cfs @ 12.18 hrs, Volume= 0.242 af, Depth= 1.73" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 5 -Year Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1E: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=2.36" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=5.90 cfs 0.330 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.330 af Average Runoff Depth = 2.36" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 5 -Year Rainfall=3.50" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Runoff Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE 5.90 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.330 af, Depth= 2.36" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 5 -Year Rainfall=3.50" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1E: EXISTING SITE RunoffArea=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.00" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=7.43 cfs 0.420 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.420 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.00" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Runoff Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE = 7.43 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.420 af, Depth= 3.00" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 25 -Year Rainfall=5.29" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1 E: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=4.05' Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=9.87 cfs 0.567 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.567 af Average Runoff Depth = 4.05" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 25 -Year Rainfall=5.29" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 11 Runoff Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE 9.87 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.567 af, Depth= 4.05" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 25 -Year Rainfall=5.29" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 50 -Year Rainfall=6.27" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 12 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1 E: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=5.00" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=12.03 cfs 0.699 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.699 af Average Runoff Depth = 5.00" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 50 -Year Rainfall=6. 27" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 13 Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE Runoff = 12.03 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.699 af, Depth= 5.00" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 50 -Year Rainfall=6.27" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 14 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method Subcatchment DA -1 E: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 60.90% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.06" Tc=10.0 min CN=89 Runoff=14.43 cfs 0.848 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.848 af Average Runoff Depth = 6.06" 39.10% Pervious = 0.656 ac 60.90% Impervious = 1.022 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 15 Summary for Subcatchment DA -1E: EXISTING SITE Runoff = 14.43 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.848 af, Depth= 6.06" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Area (sf) CN Description 44,531 98 Paved parking, HSG C 28,594 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 89 Weighted Average 28,594 39.10% Pervious Area 44,531 60.90% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Appendix B Proposed HydroCAD Report 4ubca> Reach PROPOSED SITE <DA1P> EXISTING SITE 36" STORM VAULT Routing Diagram for Lauderdale Prepared by {enter your company name here), Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81 " Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 2 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1P: EXISTING SITE RunoffArea=73,125 sf 75.23% Impervious Runoff Depth=1.98" Tc=10.0 min CN=92 Runoff=4.92 cfs 0.277 af Pond VAULT: 36" STORM VAULT Peak Elev=959.93' Storage=7,072 cf Inflow=4.92 cfs 0.277 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.141 af Primary=0.67 cfs 0.124 af Outflow=0.70 cfs 0.265 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.277 af Average Runoff Depth = 1.98" 24.77% Pervious = 0.416 ac 75.23% Impervious = 1.263 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 3 Runoff Summary for Subcatchment DA -1P: EXISTING SITE 4.92 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.277 af, Depth= 1.98" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81" Area (sf) CN Description 55,013 98 Paved parking, HSG C 18,112 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 92 Weighted Average 18,112 24.77% Pervious Area 55,013 75.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Pond VAULT: 36" STORM VAULT Inflow Area = 1.679 ac, 75.23% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 1.98" for 2 -Year event Inflow = 4.92 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.277 af Outflow = 0.70 cfs @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 0.265 af, Atten= 86%, Lag= 28.7 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 9.95 hrs, Volume= 0.141 af Primary = 0.67 cfs @ 12.65 hrs, Volume= 0.124 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 959.93' @ 12.65 hrs Surf.Area= 5,842 sf Storage= 7,072 cf Plug -Flow detention time= 934.9 min calculated for 0.265 af (96% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 913.8 min ( 1,703.5 - 789.7 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 957.50' #2A 959.00' 8,121 cf 63.50'W x 92.00'L x 5.00'H Field A 29,210 cf Overall - 8,906 cf Embedded = 20,304 cf x 40.0% Voids 8,906 cf CMP Round 36 x 70 Inside #1 Effective Size= 36.0"W x 36.0"H => 7.07 sf x 20.00'L = 141.4 cf Overall Size= 36.0"W x 36.0"H x 20.00'L Row Length Adjustment= -10.00' x 7.07 sf x 14 rows 17,028 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 957.50' 0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #2 Primary 959.45' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 8.0' RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 959.45' / 959.37' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012 Corrugated PP, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 2 -Year Rainfall=2.81 " Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 4 Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 9.95 hrs HW=957.55' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=0.67 cfs @ 12.65 hrs HW=959.93' (Free Discharge) L2=Culvert (Barrel Controls 0.67 cfs @ 2.67 fps) Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 5 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1P: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 75.23% Impervious Runoff Depth=3.30" Tc=10.0 min CN=92 Runoff=7.98 cfs 0.462 af Pond VAULT: 36" STORM VAULT Peak Elev=960.57' Storage=10,004 cf Inflow=7.98 cfs 0.462 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.145 af Primary=2.63 cfs 0.303 af Outflow=2.65 cfs 0.448 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.462 af Average Runoff Depth = 3.30" 24.77% Pervious = 0.416 ac 75.23% Impervious = 1.263 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 6 Runoff Summary for Subcatchment DA --IP: EXISTING SITE = 7.98 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.462 af, Depth= 3.30" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Area (sf) CN Description 55,013 98 Paved parking, HSG C 18,112 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 92 Weighted Average 18,112 24.77% Pervious Area 55,013 75.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Pond VAULT: 36" STORM VAULT Inflow Area = 1.679 ac, 75.23% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 3.30" for 10 -Year event Inflow = 7.98 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.462 af Outflow = 2.65 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 0.448 af, Atten= 67%, Lag= 13.9 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 8.45 hrs, Volume= 0.145 af Primary = 2.63 cfs @ 12.40 hrs, Volume= 0.303 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 960.57' @ 12.40 hrs Surf.Area= 5,842 sf Storage= 10,004 cf Plug -Flow detention time= 576.1 min calculated for 0.448 af (97% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 559.6 min ( 1,339.2 - 779.6 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 957.50' #2A 959.00' 8,121 cf 63.50'W x 92.00'L x 5.00'H Field A 29,210 cf Overall - 8,906 cf Embedded = 20,304 cf x 40.0% Voids 8,906 cf CMP Round 36 x 70 Inside #1 Effective Size= 36.0"W x 36.0"H => 7.07 sf x 20.00'L = 141.4 cf Overall Size= 36.0"W x 36.0"H x 20.00'L Row Length Adjustment= -10.00' x 7.07 sf x 14 rows 17,028 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 957.50' 0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #2 Primary 959.45' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 8.0' RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 959.45' / 959.37' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012 Corrugated PP, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 10 -Year Rainfall=4.19" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 7 Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 8.45 hrs HW=957.55' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=2.63 cfs @ 12.40 hrs HW=960.57' (Free Discharge) L2=Culvert (Barrel Controls 2.63 cfs @ 3.73 fps) Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 8 Time span=0.00-72.00 hrs, dt=0.05 hrs, 1441 points Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN Reach routing by Stor-Ind+Trans method - Pond routing by Stor-Ind method SubcatchmentDA-1P: EXISTING SITE Runoff Area=73,125 sf 75.23% Impervious Runoff Depth=6.41" Tc=10.0 min CN=92 Runoff=14.89 cfs 0.897 of Pond VAULT: 36" STORM VAULT Peak EIev=962.45' Storage=16,903 cf Inflow=14.89 cfs 0.897 af Discarded=0.03 cfs 0.149 af Primary=5.98 cfs 0.732 af Outflow=6.00 cfs 0.881 af Total Runoff Area = 1.679 ac Runoff Volume = 0.897 af Average Runoff Depth = 6.41" 24.77% Pervious = 0.416 ac 75.23% Impervious = 1.263 ac Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCADO 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 9 Summary for Subcatchment DA -1P: EXISTING SITE Runoff = 14.89 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.897 af, Depth= 6.41" Runoff by SCS TR -20 method, UH=SCS, Weighted -CN, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Area (sf) CN Description 55,013 98 Paved parking, HSG C 18,112 74 >75% Grass cover, Good, HSG C 73,125 92 Weighted Average 18,112 24.77% Pervious Area 55,013 75.23% Impervious Area Tc Length Slope Velocity Capacity Description (min) (feet) (ft/ft) (ft/sec) (cfs) 10.0 Direct Entry, Summary for Pond VAULT: 36" STORM VAULT Inflow Area = 1.679 ac, 75.23% Impervious, Inflow Depth = 6.41" for 100 -Year event Inflow = 14.89 cfs @ 12.17 hrs, Volume= 0.897 af Outflow = 6.00 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 0.881 af, Atten= 60%, Lag= 11.3 min Discarded = 0.03 cfs @ 6.00 hrs, Volume= 0.149 af Primary = 5.98 cfs @ 12.36 hrs, Volume= 0.732 af Routing by Stor-Ind method, Time Span= 0.00-72.00 hrs, dt= 0.05 hrs Peak Elev= 962.45' @ 12.36 hrs Surf.Area= 5,842 sf Storage= 16,903 cf Plug -Flow detention time= 318.8 min calculated for 0.880 af (98% of inflow) Center -of -Mass det. time= 310.3 min ( 1,077.3 - 767.0 ) Volume Invert Avail.Storage Storage Description #1A 957.50' #2A 959.00' 8,121 cf 63.50'W x 92.00'L x 5.00'H Field A 29,210 cf Overall - 8,906 cf Embedded = 20,304 cf x 40.0% Voids 8,906 cf CMP Round 36 x 70 Inside #1 Effective Size= 36.0"W x 36.0"H => 7.07 sf x 20.00'L = 141.4 cf Overall Size= 36.0"W x 36.0"H x 20.00'L Row Length Adjustment= -10.00' x 7.07 sf x 14 rows 17,028 cf Total Available Storage Storage Group A created with Chamber Wizard Device Routing Invert Outlet Devices #1 Discarded 957.50' 0.200 in/hr Exfiltration over Surface area #2 Primary 959.45' 12.0" Round Culvert L= 8.0' RCP, square edge headwall, Ke= 0.500 Inlet / Outlet Invert= 959.45' / 959.37' S= 0.0100 '/' Cc= 0.900 n= 0.012 Corrugated PP, smooth interior, Flow Area= 0.79 sf Lauderdale MSE 24 -hr 3 100 -Year Rainfall=7.36" Prepared by {enter your company name here} Printed 2/15/2019 HydroCAD® 10.00-21 s/n 02676 © 2018 HydroCAD Software Solutions LLC Page 10 Qiscarded OutFlow Max=0.03 cfs @ 6.00 hrs HW=957.55' (Free Discharge) 1=Exfiltration (Exfiltration Controls 0.03 cfs) Primary OutFlow Max=5.96 cfs @ 12.36 hrs HW=962.44' (Free Discharge) Z2=Culvert (Inlet Controls 5.96 cfs @ 7.59 fps) Figures Existing Drainage Exhibit Proposed Drainage Exhibit Existing MIDS Results Proposed MIDS Results A / A A EXISTING DRAINAGE MAP Spring 1 Street attady Dvieltdov Ofembasi Itoodnx) st?' • • 4— IINCE IS !NAM Owner: PALL 0 HALLO, & ANNA Al KONALEINC7 KILLEN h Eartrni Pr DanHo 6.307- a CF PROP. (126.84] 4,7/7 /741\ Inge" -1 iff OF PROP Lea sti# aos / Owner IIENAEL & JADE NAOREINR? t Don,: SAND01 R HANSON Ome, ANNA MOM & VICTOR CRUZ the 0'1a 6 —VW= I gAti VIA — A .f1 A SIM R114011.43 1#1,00.111 N L1 k11150110.251 111,1121.51 105.4.10 S „00 A ;Z. ,a5 PROPOSED DRAINAGE MAP Spring Street 0.1964 1689918 6i9198008 Rooetray) • 66 P-.,cms/MVA 963.40 00 00 965 966 965.4 Fir -966.80 tmaillgffmtill'''''.1.400:e.MOINORMEWM" BSI my9,86.51 1 1 V=964. 0 QV -964. 0 965.00 4965.00 L r 966.00 ---- 965 964 967 GW=965.22 969.50 00- 969.50 ROff8SED BULDING F.F.E. 969.5 G.F.E. 958.83 969.50 1401111111FINZINN11111111Marit, rom ......1013.968.8.0.,7 ,..,.. 61 awn 1 1 MIKA IR 1111itg IIIiiiiiPiiiiti MAME MEM 1116;16Q\ihk: 1111MM ri...........;)• Ijallt 964 64.31 4 °,4 *4010211•00110 / hnsko 1.65 9 A h. . - .., 99/4 '"7" % 969.50 966.50 00 968.65 r 1 .51 II A 18 966.00 9(78)66.9000 GW=963.50 969.50 969.50 967.71 966.47 TV=965.90 GW=963A3 138.39 =a Is IV. I 968.74 968.63 568,80 96 97 9 Lhe Or 9. 6A '968.60 087 87, --H'- -1505a 515544 OF Ffl.. G19=959.40 `11 111,965.00 966 111 11.0.s CV!. 965.50 965.77 60. 4 397 -5 473 1 5.5-5 8933401Y ar f I 2 6 • 8 4 / -KO 115. 999900.100 sr a a tg Orn. 7.414 0 MUER ee ANNA 90841E16C7 HALLER 054.5 14084a JADL- RAGMEN& 0.2,5 S057951 R 986000/ 0.99 ANNA fRBYCH VICT'09 afacZ 1/) rcedsc5-51._ ,U= Project Information Calculator Version: Project Name: User Name / Company Name: Date: Project Description: Construction Permit?: Site Information Retention Requirement (inches): Site's Zip Code: Annual Rainfall (inches): Phosphorus EMC (mg/I): TSS EMC (mg/I): Total Site Area Version 3: January 2017 Lauderdale Apartments - Existing 02/15/19 No 1.1 55113 31.7 0.3 54.5 Land Cover Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Total (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 0 0.656 0.656 Impervious Area (acres) 1.022 Total Area (acres) 1.678 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Total (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 0 0.656 0.656 Impervious Area (acres) 1.022 Total Area (acres) 1.678 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement: 4081 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal: ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 2.6514 acre -ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs: 0 acre -ft Percent annual runoff volume removed: 0 Post development annual particulate P load: 1.19 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs: 0 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load: 0.974 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs: 0 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed: 0 % Post development annual TSS load: Annual TSS removed by BMPs: Percent annual TSS removed: BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary 393 lbs 0 lbs 0 % BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) 1 - Other (User Defined Reductions) 0 4081 0 4081 0 Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre ft) Volume From Upstream BMPs (acre -ft) Volume Retained (acre -ft) Volume outflow (acre -ft) Percent Retained (%) 1 - Other (User Defined Reductions) 2.6514 0 0 2.6514 0 Particulate Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) 1 - Other (User Defined Reductions) 1.19 0 0 1.19 0 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (Ibs) Load From Upstream BMPs (Ibs) Load Retained (Ibs) Outflow Load (Ibs) Percent Retained (%) 1 - Other (User Defined Reductions) 0.9736 0 0 0.9736 0 TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (Ibs) Load From Upstream BMPs (Ibs) Load Retained (Ibs) Outflow Load (Ibs) Percent Retained (%) 1 - Other (User Defined Reductions) 393.05 0 0 393.05 0 BMP Schematic Project Information Calculator Version: Project Name: User Name / Company Name: Date: Project Description: Construction Permit?: Site Information Retention Requirement (inches): Site's Zip Code: Annual Rainfall (inches): Phosphorus EMC (mg/I): TSS EMC (mg/I): Total Site Area Version 3: January 2017 Lauderdale Apartments - Proposed 02/15/19 No 1.1 55113 31.7 0.3 54.5 Land Cover Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Total (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 0 .415 0.415 Impervious Area (acres) 1.263 Total Area (acres) 1.678 Site Areas Routed to BMPs Land Cover Forest/Open Space - Undisturbed, protected forest/open space or reforested land Managed Turf - disturbed, graded for yards or other turf to be mowed/managed A Soils B Soils C Soils D Soils Total (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) (acres) 0 0.415 0.415 Impervious Area (acres) 1.263 Total Area (acres) 1.678 Summary Information Performance Goal Requirement Performance goal volume retention requirement: 5043 ft3 Volume removed by BMPs towards performance goal: 5043 ft3 Percent volume removed towards performance goal 100 % Annual Volume and Pollutant Load Reductions Post development annual runoff volume 3.0697 acre -ft Annual runoff volume removed by BMPs: 2.7665 acre -ft Percent annual runoff volume removed: 90 % Post development annual particulate P load: 1.378 lbs Annual particulate P removed by BMPs: 1.242 lbs Post development annual dissolved P load: 1.127 lbs Annual dissolved P removed by BMPs: 1.016 lbs Percent annual total phosphorus removed: 90 Post development annual TSS load: Annual TSS removed by BMPs: Percent annual TSS removed: BMP Summary Performance Goal Summary 455 lbs 410.1 lbs 90 BMP Name BMP Volume Capacity (ft3) Volume Recieved (ft3) Volume Retained (ft3) Volume Outflow (ft3) Percent Retained (%) Underground Tank 5059 5043 5043 0 100 Annual Volume Summary BMP Name Volume From Direct Watershed (acre -ft) Volume From Upstream P BMPs (acre ft) Volume Retained (acre -ft) Volume outflow (acre -ft) Percent Retained (%) Underground Tank 3.0697 0 2.7665 0.3032 90 Particulate Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Tank 1.3777 0 1.2416 0.1361 90 Dissolved Phosphorus Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Tank 1.1272 0 1.0159 0.1113 90 TSS Summary BMP Name Load From Direct Watershed (lbs) Load From Upstream BMPs (lbs) Load Retained (lbs) Outflow Load (lbs) Percent Retained (%) Underground Tank 455.05 0 410.1 44.95 90 BMP Schematic Underground Tank CONSULTING ENGINEERING TRAFFIC FORWARD Technical Memorandum To: Ian Schwickert, Real Estate Equities From: Max Moreland, PE Date: April 24, 2019 Re: Traffic Assessment—Senior Residential Development in Lauderdale A residential building with 114 affordable senior living units is proposed in Lauderdale, Minnesota. This development will be at 1795 Eustis Street on the southwest corner of the Eustis Street/Spring Street intersection. This technical memorandum presents a high-level traffic analysis of the proposed development. The primary purpose is to determine the impact of this development on surrounding roadways. A site plan dated February 18, 2019 is attached for reference. Study Area Table 1 shows the primary characteristics of the key roadway corridors around this site that traffic from this development would be anticipated to utilize. Table 1— Study Corridor Characteristics 1 i Daily Speed Name Designation Classification Traffic Limit Volume3 Fixed Lanes Route Transit Bike/Ped Facilities Eustis Street— Larpenteur to Roselawn Ramsey CR 1274 Major Collector 1,200 30 mph 2 undivided None None Larpenteur Avenue — East of Eustis Street Ramsey CSAH 30 A Minor Arterial 14,300 30 mph 4-5 undivided 1 Bus Route Sidewalks Both Sides Larpenteur Avenue — West of Eustis Street Ramsey CSAH 52 A Minor Arterial 15,100 30 mph 4-5 divided 2 Bus Routes Sidewalks Both Sides Roselawn Avenue CSAHs264 Major Collector 1,800 30 mph 2 undivided None None 1CR = County Road, CSAH = County State Aid Highway z Source: Lauderdale Comprehensive Plan 3 Source: MnDOT's Traffic Mapping Application 4 Eustis Street and Roselawn Avenue are in the process of changing to be under City of Lauderdale jurisdiction. Estimated Traffic Generation Trip generation for the proposed development was established using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10`h Edition. Spack Consulting also has local data compiled through various studies across the Twin Cities. Table 2 shows the resulting new trips based on ITE and local data, respectively. 1 SE Main Street, #204, Minneapolis, MN 55414 • 888.232.5512 • www.SpackConsulting.com Spack Consulting 2 of 4 Lauderdale Senior Residential Traffic Assessment Table 2 — Trip Generation — New Trips on a Weekday Land Use (size) Data Source In Daily Out Total AM Peak Hour In Out Total PM Peak Hour In Out Total Senior Adult Housing— Attached (114 Units) ITE 211 211 422 8 15 23 16 13 29 Senior Living Center (114 Units) Local 193 193 386 13 8 21 12 15 27 As shown in Table 2, the trip generation based on local data is similar to the trip generation forecasts based on the national ITE dataset. Since the ITE data is higher, to present a conservative analysis those are the volumes used in the analysis in this memorandum. Daily Volume Analysis While many factors contribute to a road feeling congested, the two biggest factors are volume, how many vehicles are using the road, and capacity, how many vehicles the road can accommodate per day. Transportation professionals use these pieces of information to create a ratio of volume to capacity. For example, a road with a volume to capacity ratio of 1.0, where the traffic demand is nearly equal to the traffic supply, will feel congested to motorists. Below is a rough guide of the daily traffic volumes different types of roads can accommodate based on Exhibit 16-16 of the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. If the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volume on a roadway is below the threshold, then it is considered un -congested. If the daily volume falls inside the range, the road is almost congested. If the daily volume is over the threshold, the road is congested. • 2 -Lane (one in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), undivided street, are considered congested with a volume between 8,900 to 18,300 vehicles per day. • 4 -Lane (two in each direction with left turn lanes at busy intersections and coordinated signals), — 18,600 to 36,800 vehicles per day. To provide an initial planning level screening, Chart 1 provides volume to capacity ratios of the study corridors to determine if either of the roadway corridors is nearing the planning -level capacity. The Existing and Build scenarios are looked at. To analyze the Build scenario, total daily volumes from Table 2 were added to the existing roadway volumes per the following distribution pattern: • 60% to/from the west on Larpenteur Avenue • 20% to/from the east on Larpenteur Avenue • 20% to/from the east on Roselawn Avenue Spack Consulting 3 of 4 Lauderdale Senior Residential Traffic Assessment 1.2 1 cro 0.6 0 4-, E 0 0.4 0 0.2 0 Chart 1— Study Corridor Volume to Capacity =I 1 Eustis St Congested: volume/capacity of 1.0 MD Larpenteur Ave - West of Larpenteur Ave - East of Roselawn Ave Eustis Eustis ■ Existing 111 Build As shown in Chart 1, the surrounding roadways are forecast to be able to accommodate the increase in roadway traffic from this proposed development. Traffic Assessment The forecast traffic generated from the development is not anticipated to cause significant impacts on any of the surrounding intersections or roadways in such a way that mitigation would be required. The Institute of Transportation Engineers' Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development report recommends completing a detailed traffic impact study when a proposed development's expected trip generation is 100 or more new trips in a peak hour. MnDOT uses a slightly different threshold of 2,500 daily trips or 250 peak hour trips. These thresholds represent the level where new traffic on the surrounding roadways may impact operations. Under those thresholds, the traffic generation is not significant and not expected to meaningfully alter or change the current operations. Based on this and the daily volume capacity analysis in Chart 1, a full traffic impact study is not necessary for this proposed development. Parking Analysis The underground parking level is proposed to include 98 parking spaces. The surface parking level will accommodate 24 parking spaces. That totals to 122 parking spaces on site. The Lauderdale City Code lists a minimum off-street parking requirement of 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit for multiple family dwellings. For a 114 -unit building that would equate to 171 off-street parking spaces. Per the City Code, this development falls short of the parking requirement. However, since this is going to Spack Consulting 4 of 4 Lauderdale Senior Residential Traffic Assessment be a senior residential development, the parking demand is different than at a standard apartment building. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) has put together a document, ITE Parking Generation, Stn Edition, that compiled parking demand data from different land uses. From that document, the average peak period parking demand at senior adult housing developments is 0.61 parking spaces per unit. For a 114 -unit building that leads to a peak parking demand of 70 parking spaces. The 122 parking spaces this development is proposing to include on site well exceeds the anticipated parking demand for the site. That means all parking for this site is anticipated to be able to be accomodated off-street and without the need to use any on -street spaces. Site Accesses & Circulation Vehicular access to the development will be via one site access on Eustis Street. The current site has two accesses on Spring Street and one access on Malvern Street that will be removed resulting in a net decrease in accesses to this site. The alley directly south of this site currently has an outlet on to Malvern Street. That outlet will be removed and the alley will lead into the site parking area allowing for alley access via the one access to the site. It is not anticipated that any traffic going to/from the site will use the alley as it will be a faster route to utilize Eustis Street. Two-way traffic operations will be able to be accomodated within the site's parking area. A loop around the surface parking area is provided to allow for drop-off/pick-up operations at the main doors. Based on the parking layout, it is anticipated most site traffic will utilize the undreground parking area. Vehicles accessing the underground parking area do not need to go by the main door leading to the lobby meaning drop-off/pick-up operations will be able to occur with little conflicts. Sidewalks are provided adjacent to the building throughout the parking area allowing for access to all building doors. No sidewalks currently exist on the streets surrounding the site so the sidewalks around the building will be for internal use only. Conclusions The proposed development is expected to generate approximately 400 new daily trips and about 40 peak hour trips on a typical weekday. This level of traffic is below the ITE and MnDOT thresholds generally cited for when a more detailed traffic impact study is necessary. In addition, a daily volume capacity analysis shows the surrounding roads are able to accommodate the expected increase in traffic and remain well below the planning -level capacities of each study road. Based on this information, traffic from this development is not anticipated to cause significant impacts on any of the surrounding intersections or roadways in such a way that mitigation would be required. The amount of off-street parking to be provided on site is anticipated to exceed the actual parking demand of the site. Good circulation is also anticipated at the site. Attachments • Site Plan 9-C1/nit Mix byT 3 Real Estate Equities A 16090 .Unit MIX by Floor =RRRR .RRRR .E RRR .R 6Lae ketb ft^u IN i i i 1 ii I _ 9R i,RR n.42 SRdRR 4R s 3 0 1 whP3mfPA 6+;,w+ s »3sazi 3eamavroit.moI w:mv nvrosiuL&oaeizl marn,m110**3l Stantec May 10, 2019 File: 193801702 Stantec Consulting Services Inc. 733 Marquette Avenue Suite 1000, Minneapolis MN 55402-2309 Attention: Heather Butkowski, City Administrator City of Lauderdale 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 Dear Heather, Reference: Lauderdale Senior Housing We have reviewed the preliminary plan submittal, traffic assessment, and stormwater management plan for the proposed senior housing development at 1795 Eustis Street. The plans are dated April 12, 2019. We have the following comments with regards to engineering matters: • A typical section for the Malvern Street bituminous patching should be included in the plans. The proposed patch section should match the existing section, which is anticipated to be 1.5" bituminous wear course, 2" bituminous base course, 8" Class 5 aggregate base, 12" select granular borrow, and geotextile fabric. • The two existing water services and existing sanitary sewer service from Eustis Street will be abandoned in 2019 in conjunction with the City of Lauderdale's 2019 Infrastructure Improvements project. • The proposed water service locations should be moved to Eustis Street in order to minimize the patching required on Malvern Street. • More detailed information should be provided for the stormwater system to include the following: o How drainage will be handled in the event of a heavy rain event in which the proposed infiltration tank and storm sewer system is at capacity. It appears that all excess runoff will drain into the underground parking area. o The proposed trench drain and outlet pipe should be heated to ensure that it functions during freezing conditions. • The EOF for the proposed drainage swale to the south of the building should be labeled on the plans. • All proposed water service connections should be reviewed and approved by St. Paul Regional Water Services. • All water main, hydrants, and other materials within the public right of way should conform to St. Paul Regional Water Services standards and specifications. Design with community in mind May 10, 2019 Heather Butkowski, City Administrator Page 2 of 2 Reference: Lauderdale Senior Housing • All relevant permits and approvals should be obtained from Rice Creek Watershed District, and a copy of permit shall be submitted to the City of Lauderdale prior to construction. Regards, Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Kellie Schlegel Associate Phone: 612 712-2125 Mobile: 651 775-5622 kel I i e. schl egel@stantec. com c. Darren Amundsen - Stantec Design with community in mind LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing Discussion X Action Resolution X Work Session X Meeting Date Mary 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER Bond Sale Resolution STAFF INITIAL APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Stacie Kvilvang of Ehlers will be at the meeting to discuss bonding for the portion of the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project not covered by Ramsey County or St. Paul Re- gional Water. The bond includes borrowing for the portion of the project that is being paid by adjacent homeowners via special assessments as the City will receive that money incre- mentally over the next ten years. The information put together by Ehlers details the anticipated debt service schedule and in- terest rate based upon the City's AA bond rating. Those numbers may fluctuate based on the outcome of the sale and any rate changes that happen in the market before the sale hap- pens. The financial modeling also shows the anticipated interest rate that would be charged to property owners that do not prepay their special assessments. In order to proceed with a bond sale, the City Council must pass the following resolution which allows Ehlers to advertise the bond sale and bring back the results to the June 11 city council meeting for final consideration. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to adopt Resolution No. 051419A—A Resolution Providing for the Sale of the $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A. Council Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 051419A CITY OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF $1,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2019A A. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, Minnesota has heretofore determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A (the "Bonds"), to finance the reconstruction of Eustis Street in the City; and B. WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota ("Ehlers"), as its independent municipal advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes Ehlers to assist the City for the sale of the Bonds. 2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on June 11, 2019, for the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds. 3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, Minnesota this 14th day of May, 2019. Mary Gaasch, Mayor ATTEST: Heather Butkowski, City Administrator -Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by City Council Member and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following City Council Members voted in favor thereof: and the following voted against the same: Whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. EHLERS I., LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE May 14, 2019 Pre -Sale Report for City of Lauderdale, Minnesota $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Prepared by: Stacie Kvilvang, CIPMA Senior Municipal Advisor Jason Aarsvold, CIPMA Senior Municipal Advisor Keith Dahl, Financial Specialist BUILDING COMMUNITIES. IT'S WHAT WE DO. .I info@ehlers-inc.com 1 (800) 552-1171 www.ehlers-inc.com Executive Summary of Proposed Debt Proposed Issue: $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Purposes: The proposed issue includes financing for a portion of the City's 2019 street reconstruction project of Eustis Street. The City will be utilizing $836,341 from Ramsey County and $817,013.33 from the St. Paul Water Fund for the project and therefore the par amount of bonds has been reduced by these amounts. Debt service will be paid from tax levy and special assessments. The City intends to levy a total of $454,592.67 in special assessments to benefitting property owners, of which $47,168 (10%) is anticipated to be collected in pre -paid assessments (the pre -paid assessments reduced the Bond amount accordingly). The remaining $424,512 of special assessments will be collected in years 2020 to 2029 at a rate of 2% over the True Interest Costs of the Bonds. Annual assessments are paid on an equal principal basis. Authority: The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters: • 429 — Street Improvements • 475 — General Bonding Authority Because the City is assessing at least 20% of the project costs, the Bonds can be a general obligation without a referendum and will not count against the City's debt limit. The Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith, credit and taxing powers are pledged. Term/Call Feature: The Bonds are being issued for a term of 11 years. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the years 2021 through 2030. Interest is payable every six months beginning February 1, 2020. The Bonds will be subject to prepayment at the discretion of the City on February 1, 2027 or any date thereafter. Bank Qualification: Because the City is expecting to issue no more than $10,000,000 in tax exempt debt during the calendar year, the City will be able to designate the Bonds as "bank qualified" obligations. Bank qualified status broadens the market for the Bonds, which can result in lower interest rates. Rating: The City's most recent bond issues were rated by Standard & Poor's. The current ratings on those bonds are "AA". The City will request a new rating for the Bonds. If the winning bidder on the Bonds elects to purchase bond insurance, the rating for the issue may be higher than the City's bond rating in the event that the bond rating of the insurer is higher than that of the City. Presale Report City of Lauderdale, Minnesota May 14, 2019 Page 1 Basis for Recommendation: We have based this pre-sale recommendation on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to us, our advisory relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal financing options. This coincides with the City's past practices to finance this type of project with this type of debt issue and this is the most overall cost-effective option that still maintains future flexibility for the repayment of debt. Method of Sale/Placement: In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will solicit competitive bids for the purchase of the Bonds from underwriters and banks. We will include an allowance for discount bidding equal to 1.3% of the principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the transaction. If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount (maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to reduce your borrowing amount. Premium Pricing: In some cases, investors in municipal bonds prefer "premium" pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds the yield to the investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of the bonds. The sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered "reoffering premium." The underwriter of the bonds will retain a portion of this reoffering premium as their compensation (or "discount") but will pay the remainder of the premium to the City. The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000. For this issue of Bonds, we have been directed to use the net premium to increase the net proceeds for the project. The resulting adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost of the issue, either up or down. The amount of premium can be restricted in the bid specifications. Restrictions on premium may result in fewer bids but may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of sale and unintended impacts with respect to debt service payment. Ehlers will identify appropriate premium restrictions for the Bonds intended to achieve the City's objectives for this financing. Review of Existing Debt: We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that there are no refunding opportunities at this time. We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City's outstanding debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities. Presale Report City of Lauderdale, Minnesota May 14, 2019 Page 2 Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has less than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to provide its Audited Financial Statements annually as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain reportable events to the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the "MSRB"), as required by rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City is already obligated to provide such reports for its existing bonds and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare and file the reports. Arbitrage Monitoring: Because the Bonds are tax-exempt obligations, the City must ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules throughout the life of the issue. These rules apply to all gross proceeds of the issue, including initial bond proceeds and investment earnings in construction, escrow, debt service, and any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds and how they track interest earnings on funds (arbitrage/yield restriction compliance) are common subjects of IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will be detailed in the Tax Certificate prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. We recommend that you regularly monitor compliance with these rules and/or retain the services of a qualified firm to assist you. You have retained Ehlers to assist you with compliance with these rules. Investment of and Accounting for Proceeds: In order to more efficiently segregate funds for this project and maximize interest earnings, we recommend using an investment advisor, to assist with the investment of bond proceeds until they are needed to pay project costs. Ehlers Investment Partners, a subsidiary of Ehlers and registered investment advisor, will discuss an appropriate investment strategy with the City. Risk Factors: Special Assessments: We have assumed 10 percent in pre-paid special assessments and we have assumed that the remaining assessments will be levied as projected. If the City receives more pre-paid assessments, it may need to increase the levy portion of the debt service to make up for lower interest earnings than the expected assessment interest rate. Other Service Providers: This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can coordinate their engagement on your behalf. Where you have previously used a particular firm to provide a service, we have assumed that you will continue that relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have identified a service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid from proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other sources. Our pre-sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, but the final fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified service providers or their role, or if you would like to use a different service provider for any of the listed services please contact us. Bond Counsel: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered Paying Agent: Bond Trust Services Corporation Presale Report City of Lauderdale, Minnesota May 14, 2019 Page 3 This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City's objectives for the structure and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the City's objectives. Presale Report City of Lauderdale, Minnesota May 14, 2019 Page 4 Rating Agency: Standard & Poor's Global Ratings (S&P) Summary: The decisions to be made by the City Council are as follows: • Accept or modify the finance assumptions described in this report • Adopt the resolution attached to this report. This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City's objectives for the structure and terms of this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the City's objectives. Presale Report City of Lauderdale, Minnesota May 14, 2019 Page 4 Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule Pre -Sale Review by City Council: May 14, 2019 Due Diligence Call to review Official Statement: Week of May 20, 2019 Distribute Official Statement: Week of May 28, 2019 Conference with Rating Agency: Week of June 3, 2019 City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: June 11, 2019 Estimated Closing Date: June 28, 2019 Attachments Estimated Sources and Uses of Funds Estimated Proposed Debt Service Schedule Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed with Bonds Sale Ehlers Contacts Municipal Advisors: Disclosure Coordinator: Financial Analyst: Stacie Kvilvang (651) 697-8506 Jason Aarsvold (651) 697-8512 Keith Dahl (651) 697-8595 Silvia Johnson (651) 697-8580 Alicia Gage (651) 697-8551 The Preliminary Official Statement for this financing will be sent to the City Council at their home or email address for review prior to the sale date. Presale Report City of Lauderdale, Minnesota May 14, 2019 Page 5 Lauderdale, Minnesota $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Assumes Current Market BQ AA Rates plus 25bps 10 Years Sources & Uses Dated 06/28/2019 1 Delivered 06/28/2019 Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds Ramsey County Funds St. Paul Water Fund Prepaid Assessments Total Sources Uses Of Funds $1,000,000.00 836,341.00 817,013.33 47,167.99 $2,700,522.32 Total Underwriter's Discount (1.300%) Costs of Issuance Deposit to Capitalized Interest (CIF) Fund Deposit to Project Fund 13,000.00 36,000.00 13,697.08 2,637,825.24 Total Uses 82,700,522.32 Series 2019 GO Imp Bonds 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 4/26/2019 1 9:50 AM gtEHLERS, Lauderdale, Minnesota $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Assumes Current Market BQ AA Rates plus 25bps 10 Years Debt Service Schedule Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total 06/28/2019 - - - 02/01/2020 13,697.08 13,697.08 13,697.08 08/01/2020 - - 11,575.00 11,575.00 02/01/2021 100,000.00 2.000% 11,575.00 111,575.00 123,150.00 08/01/2021 - 10,575.00 10,575.00 02/01/2022 100,000.00 2.050% 10,575.00 110,575.00 121,150.00 08/01/2022 - 9,550.00 9,550.00 02/01/2023 100,000.00 2.100% 9,550.00 109,550.00 119,100.00 08/01/2023 - - 8,500.00 8,500.00 02/01/2024 100,000.00 2.200% 8,500.00 108,500.00 117,000.00 08/01/2024 7,400.00 7,400.00 02/01/2025 100,000.00 2.250% 7,400.00 107,400.00 114,800.00 08/01/2025 - - 6,275.00 6,275.00 02/01/2026 100,000.00 2.350% 6,275.00 106,275.00 112,550.00 08/01/2026 - 5,100.00 5,100.00 02/01/2027 100,000.00 2.400% 5,100.00 105,100.00 110,200.00 08/01/2027 - - 3,900.00 3,900.00 02/01/2028 100,000.00 2.500% 3,900.00 103,900.00 107,800.00 08/01/2028 - 2,650.00 2,650.00 02/01/2029 100,000.00 2.600% 2,650.00 102,650.00 105,300.00 08/01/2029 - - 1,350.00 1,350.00 02/01/2030 100,000.00 2.700% 1,350.00 101,350.00 102,700.00 Total $1,000,000.00 8147,447.08 81,147,447.08 Yield Statistics Bond Year Dollars Average Life Average Coupon Net Interest Cost (NIC) True Interest Cost (TIC) Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes All Inclusive Cost (AIC) IRS Form 8038 $6,091.67 6.092 Years 2.4204719% 2.6338782% 2.6498437% 2.4140642% 3.3254170% Net Interest Cost Weighted Average Maturity Series 2019 GO Imp Bonds 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 4/26/2019 1 9:50 AM 2.4204719% 6.092 Years EHLERS n0EF S 10 PWILIC 101014(1= Lauderdale, Minnesota $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Assumes Current Market BQ AA Rates plus 25bps 10 Years Net Debt Service Schedule Fiscal Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I CIF Net New DIS Total 06/28/2019 - - - - - 02/01/2020 - 13,697.08 13,697.08 (13,697.08) - 08/01/2020 - 11,575.00 11,575.00 - 11,575.00 02/01/2021 100,000.00 2.000% 11,575.00 111,575.00 111,575.00 123,150.00 08/01/2021 - 10,575.00 10,575.00 10,575.00 - 02/01/2022 100,000.00 2.050% 10,575.00 110,575.00 - 110,575.00 121,150.00 08/01/2022 - 9,550.00 9,550.00 9,550.00 - 02/01/2023 100,000.00 2.100% 9,550.00 109,550.00 109,550.00 119,100.00 08/01/2023 - - 8,500.00 8,500.00 - 8,500.00 - 02/01/2024 100,000.00 2.200% 8,500.00 108,500.00 - 108,500.00 117,000.00 08/01/2024 - - 7,400.00 7,400.00 7,400.00 - 02/01/2025 100,000.00 2.250% 7,400.00 107,400.00 - 107,400.00 114,800.00 08/01/2025 - 6,275.00 6,275.00 6,275.00 - 02/01/2026 100,000.00 2.350% 6,275.00 106,275.00 106,275.00 112,550.00 08/01/2026 - 5,100.00 5,100.00 - 5,100.00 - 02/01/2027 100,000.00 2.400% 5,100.00 105,100.00 105,100.00 110,200.00 08/01/2027 - 3,900.00 3,900.00 3,900.00 - 02/01/2028 100,000.00 2.500% 3,900.00 103,900.00 103,900.00 107,800.00 08/01/2028 - 2,650.00 2,650.00 - 2,650.00 02/01/2029 100,000.00 2.600% 2,650.00 102,650.00 - 102,650.00 105,300.00 08/01/2029 - 1,350.00 1,350.00 1,350.00 02/01/2030 100,000.00 2.700% 1,350.00 101,350.00 101,350.00 102,700.00 Total $1,000,000.00 $147,447.08 $1,147,447.08 (13,697.08) $1,133,750.00 Series 2019 GO Imp Bonds 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 4/26/2019 1 9:50 AM LEADERS IN Lauderdale, Minnesota $1,000,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Assumes Current Market BQ AA Rates plus 25bps 10 Years Detail Costs Of Issuance Dated 06/28/2019 1 Delivered 06/28/2019 COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL Financial Advisor $16,000.00 Bond Counsel $9,500.00 Rating Agency Fee $9,500.00 Miscellaneous $1,000.00 TOTAL 536,000.00 Series 2019 GO Imp Bonds 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 4/26/2019 1 9:50 AM g,,,AEHLERS O N N •L VJ ui 0 c MO w ^c Q W Lo E N Q) tn O )- CQ a) C rd rd 4.3 O o Ch F CD c _ - m C p N C G c m RS CO 2 i p d O o c N J Hg Q Debt Service Schedule LL U a O CO) w C O a O 0 a a` w t6 0 O o O O O N M 0, 0 7 l0 N N N 0 00 50 50 50 00 00 O O 0 0 n n O O 00 o M ( 1 O CO Q N CI N N N N Cl 0000000 01 000 M 00 50 O M "n O O kr, 1- 00 a, O. N 7 1- D\ hl M M M M 7 N O 00 'O 00 00 00 7 7 O O O O O n O O O O 1- O O 'n 7 1- — 00 VD 0 00 kr) M o <0 oo 7 M 1- N 7 7 'Cr O M W 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O V1 V1 O O M 05 N N hl 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O 'O O O O 00 vl 01 o0 M 7 N O 'n O O O O O (`I O 00 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 1- O O O O O V1 00 0 0 M M - 05 1` N N - O O O 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ,n O O O 0o kr, N 0o v (moi 0 0 00 O O O N O 00 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0- 0 0 0 0 rn k k O O M M ^ 05 1- N N - 0 0 0 0 o O O O 0 o O o — N N N N o o 0 0 0 0 O 0 o o 0 0 o o O o O OO o o O O o O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n o o 0 0 V N 00 M 7 N o h 'n 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 kr, vi O O o N M 7 kr) vO N N N N 01 o o 0 o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O N 0 rl 0 0 cc 0 O O -" Cl M 7 CI N CI N N 0 0 0 0 0 \1 \1 01 \1 01 kr) 'O h 00 T N N N 1`1 0 0 0 0 0 N Q N '1 o o 0 o 0 N N N N N o o 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N c`1 N N `1 0 0 0 0 0 O N $1,190,437.50 $1,133,750.00 $1,147,447.08 00 0 K 0- $1,000,000.00 <0 H Significant Dates 0, 0 N 0 0 00 (5 0 N 0 O 50 ro 1.2 Yield Statistics 2.6338782% 2.6498437% 2.4140642% 3.3254170% Series 2019 GO Imp Bonds 1 SINGLE PURPOSE 1 4/26/2019 1 9:50 AM Lauderdale, Minnesota $424,512 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2019A Assessments - 10 Years 2.0% over TIC - Equal Principal Assessments Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I 12/31/2020 42,451.20 4.650% 19,739.80 62,191.00 12/31/2021 42,451.20 4.650% 17,765.82 60,217.02 12/31/2022 42,451.19 4.650% 15,791.84 58,243.03 12/31/2023 42,451.19 4.650% 13,817.86 56,269.05 12/31/2024 42,451.19 4.650% 11,843.88 54,295.07 12/31/2025 42,451.19 4.650% 9,869.90 52,321.09 12/31/2026 42,451.19 4.650% 7,895.92 50,347.1 1 12/31/2027 42,451.19 4.650% 5,921.94 48,373.13 12/31/2028 42,451.19 4.650% 3,947.96 46,399.15 12/31/2029 42,451.19 4.650% 1,973.98 44,425.17 Total 8424,511.92 $108,568.90 $533,080.82 Significant Dates Filing Date First Payment Date Series 2019 GO Imp Bonds 1 SINGLE PURPOSE I 4/26/2019 1 9:20 AM 1/01/2020 12/31/2020 gs EHLERS LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing Discussion X Action X Resolution X Work Session Meeting Date Mary 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER No Parking Resolution STAFF INITIAL -f-622 APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Parking restrictions, primarily on Eustis Street, will be needed during the 2019 infrastructure improvement project. The following resolution prohibits parking on Eustis Street and pro- vides the city engineer with the authority to establish no parking zones as necessary to com- plete the infrastructure improvement project. Vehicles, trailers, dumpsters, etc. in the prohib- ited areas they will be ticketed and towed as necessary to prevent delays in the construction process. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to adopt Resolution No. 051419B A Resolution Restricting Parking during the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project. RESOLUTION 051419B CITY OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION RESTRICTING PARKING DURING THE 2019 INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 010819E ordering the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project; and WHEREAS, Eustis Street from Larpenteur Avenue to Roselawn Avenue is currently undergoing reconstruction; and WHEREAS, Roselawn Avenue from the TH280 right-of-way to Fulham Street is currently undergoing reconstruction; and, WHEREAS, for the orderly and expedient completion of the infrastructure improvements, it may be necessary to restrict parking; and WHEREAS, the City Council has authority to establish No Parking Zones within the City and may delegate that authority to the city engineer as needed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Lauderdale City Council prohibits the parking of motor vehicles, trailers, dumpsters, and similar items on Eustis Street from Larpenteur Avenue to Roselawn Avenue effective immediately and other such areas as determined necessary by the city engineer until such time as the city engineer declares the parking restrictions no longer necessary. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, Minnesota, on May 14, 2019. Mary Gaasch, Mayor ATTEST: Heather Butkowski, City Administrator LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing Discussion X Action Resolution Work Session X Meeting Date Mary 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER Petition and Waiver Agrmnts STAFF INITIAL APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Property owners along Eustis Street have inquired about replacing sanitary sewer and water services in the right-of-way as part of the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project. This is possible with the consent of the City Council and agreement by the property owners to pay for the costs of the service. Property owners will have the option to reimburse the City for the cost by November 1, 2019 or have the costs spread out over a term of years subject to a six percent interest rate. Attached is the agreement for one property owner. In addition to approving this agreement, staff is asking the Council to authorize the mayor and clerk to sign future agreements. Staff will work with property owners in setting terms based upon the costs they are incurring. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to approve the Petition and Waiver Agreement as presented and authorize the mayor and clerk to sign future agreements. PETITION AND WAIVER AGREEMENT THIS PETITION AND WAIVER AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made this day of May, 2019, by and between the city of Lauderdale, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and Beverly Powell and Harold Powell, owners of 1819 Eustis Street, Lauderdale, Minnesota (the "Owners"). WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the Owners are the fee owners of certain real property located in Lauderdale whose legal description is the North 10 feet of Lot 12 and all of Lot 11, Block 7, Lauderdale's East Side Addition, PIN 17.29.23.32.0096, (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Owners have a deteriorated sanitary sewer line in the right-of-way; and WHEREAS, the Owners have requested that the City replace their sanitary sewer service line from the sanitary sewer main to their property line as part of the 2019 Infrastructure Improvement Project; and WHEREAS, the City is willing to specially assess the Owners for the full cost of the sanitary sewer service line replacement; and WHEREAS, the City is willing to forgo notices and hearings, provided the assurances and covenants hereinafter stated are made by the Owners to ensure that the City will have a valid and collectable special assessment as it relates to the sanitary sewer service line replacement. NOW, THEREFORE, ON THE BASIS OF THE OBLIGATIONS CONTAINED HEREIN, THE PARTIES HERETO AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Owners represent and warrant that they are the fee owners of the Property and that they have legal power and authority to encumber the Property as herein provided and that there are no other liens or encumbrances against the Property except those of record. 1 482485v2 LA135-3 2. The Owners hereby petition the City for replacement of the sanitary sewer service line from the sanitary sewer main to the property line and grant permission for the City and its contractor to enter the Property for the purpose of carrying out the sanitary sewer line replacement (the "Project"). 3. The Owners consent to pay for the sanitary sewer line replacement by November 1, 2019. If the amount is not paid, the City will levy a special assessment for the Project against the Property in accordance with Minn. Stat., Section 429.061. The principal amount of the special assessment shall not exceed $3,500.00, including all legal and administrative expenses associated therewith. 4. The Owners waive notice of hearing and hearing pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 429.031 on the Project and notice of hearing and hearing on the special assessment levied to finance the Project pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 429.061 and specifically request that the Project be carried out and the special assessment be levied against the Property without notice of hearing or hearing. 5. The Owners waive the right to appeal the levy of special assessment in accordance with this Agreement pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 429.081 and further specifically agree with respect to such special assessment against the Property that: a. All requirements of Minn. Stat., Chapter 429 with which the City does not comply are hereby waived by the Owners; and b. The increase in fair market value of the Property resulting from completing the Project will be at least equal to the amount of the special assessment levied against the Property and that such increase in fair market value is a special benefit to the Property. 6. The special assessment levied against the Property shall be payable over five years and shall bear an interest rate of six percent per annum. The first installment of principal and interest shall be included in the first tax rolls completed after adoption of the resolution levying the special assessment. 7. The waivers and agreements contained in this Agreement shall bind the Owners and their successors and assigns and shall run with the Property. It is the intent of the parties hereto that this Agreement be in a form which is recordable among the land records of Ramsey County, Minnesota and the Owners and the City agree to make any changes in this Agreement which may be necessary to effect the recording and filing of this Agreement against the title of the Property. 8. Any notice required to be given under this Agreement shall be deemed given if delivered personally or sent by U.S. mail: 2 482485v2 LA135-3 a) as to the Owner b) as to the City Beverly and Harold Powell 1819 Eustis Street Lauderdale, MN 55113 City of Lauderdale 1891 Walnut Street Lauderdale, MN 55331 Attn: City Administrator or at such other address as either party may from time to time notify the accordance with this paragraph. 9. This Agreement shall terminate upon the final payment of all special against the Property for the Project. above. other in writing in assessment levied IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set their hands the day and year first written By: By: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) OWNERS OF 1819 EUSTIS STREET Beverly Powell Harold Powell The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of May, 2019, by Beverly Powell and Harold Powell, married to one another, owners of 1819 Eustis Street. Notary Public 3 482485v2 LA135-3 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) ) ss ) By: By: CITY OF LAUDERDALE Mary Gaasch, Mayor Heather Butkowski, City Administrator - Clerk The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of May, 2019, by Mary Gaasch and Heather Butkowski, the mayor and city administrator -clerk, respectively, of the city of Lauderdale, a municipal corporation under the laws of the state of Minnesota, on behalf of the City. Notary Public 4 482485v2 LA135-3 LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing Discussion X Action X Resolution X Work Session Meeting Date Mary 14, 2019 ITEM NUMBER Dog Park STAFF INITIAL P• If' nation APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE AND PAST COUNCIL ACTION: Dog park users have noted that the drainage system installed in and around the Dog Park is doing a great job of moving the water through and decreasing issues related to extended muddy times. They would like to reestablish wood chips in the area that doesn't grow grass due to the heavy use. They raised money for this once before but the wood chip company ultimately donated the chips so that money remains available. By approving the resolution, the Council is permitting the delivery of wood chips to be paid by the donations received. Other users would like to donate the money to purchase a screen like the one attached to the memo. They propose installing it on the north side of the fence from the east side of the gate to the corner. They believe the screen would minimize noise and barking at pedestri- ans. We really don't know what the quality level of the item is or how it would work with weed whipping. If the Council approves the purchase and installation, it would be like a test to see if it works. If it doesn't, it would be taken down. OPTIONS: The memo is drafted to accept donations for the wood chips for the dog park. If the Council is interested in the screening, staff would prepare a resolution for the next meeting with rele- vant details. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Motion to adopt Resolution No. 051419C—A Resolution Accepting Donations for Improve- ments to the Lauderdale Dog Park. RESOLUTION NO. 051419C CITY OF LAUDERDALE COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE LAUDERALE DOG PARK WHEREAS, the Lauderdale City Council has long recognized the benefits of having a place where residents and their dogs can congregate, recreate, and socialize; and WHEREAS, the Friends of the Lauderdale Dog Park have organized to add amenities to the Lauderdale Dog Park; and WHEREAS, this passionate group of volunteers are soliciting donations and willing to give of their time to improve the Lauderdale Dog Park; and WHEREAS, they have identified a need to improve the turf within the Dog Park and their research concluded that hardwood mulch was appropriate for the conditions; and WHEREAS, Innovative Landscape Products is willing to deliver 25 cubic yards of hardwood mulch to the Lauderdale Dog Park at a cost of approximately $672.00; and WHEREAS, The Friends of the Lauderdale Dog Park will provide the labor to spread the mulch and provide the on-going maintenance needed to keep the mulch in the area not covered by vegetation. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lauderdale, that staff is directed to contract with Innovative Landscaping for the delivery of mulch after receipt of $672.00 from the Friends of the Lauderdale Dog Park. ADOPTED by the City Council of Lauderdale this 14'x' day of May, 2019. Mary Gaasch, Mayor ATTEST: Heather Butkowski, City Administrator Skip to main t contrynP i me Deliver to Saint Paul 56117 Garden & Outdoor - Your Amazon.com Today's Deals Gift Cards Olik Gifts under $30 for Mom EN Hello, Sign in - Account & Lists - Orders Try Prime - 0 Cart Amazon Home Shop by Room Discover your Style Shop by Style Home Decor Furniture Kitchen & Dining Bed & Bath Garden & Outdoor Home Improven 11111 1 I t ( Tools to get the job done sNorxow • Patio, Lawn & Garden > Outdoor Decor > Decorative Fences Lower Priced Items to Consider 0 ColourTree 2nd Generation 4' x 50' Green Fence Privacy... 37 $44.99 Is this feature helpful? ves l 1 klo Royal Shade 6' x 50' Black Fence Privacy Screen Cover... 14 $46.99 50' Green een Cover Heavy mets, e r reviews his item wilt be measurement is 5' tly and perfectly thable which ugh, made of UV duty commercial ty polyethylene), xposure and all gives you the completely ount of privacy Custom Size Available ! I Grommets Roll over image to zoom in an. . oc age, Installation: Edges are finished with heavy duty black binding and stainless brass grommets, 4 grommets in each corner, other grommets are placed evenly along the edges, 12" apart on vertical edges, 24" apart on horizontal edges. Warranty: 3 years limited warranty, there are lots of different ways to use: protection for vegetable garden plants, greenhouse covering, wind blocking for plant nursery area, window shades, tennis court, shades for pet pen / kennel, construction site, etc. Breathable weaving fabric allows water and air to go through freely, resistant to both UV and water, no maintenance needed. Compare with similar items Royal Shade 4' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Cover... 9 $56.94 Currently unavailable. We don't know when or if this item will be back in stock. Deliver to Saint Paul 55117 Add to List Share Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon IfUneril CfJ/2 Artificial Boxwood Topiary Hedge Plant Pa... Artificial Boxwood Topiary Hedge Plant Suitable for Both Outdoor or Indoor, G... 150 $84.99 'prime Ad feedback Sponsored products related to this item {YE 05701/IES/IFR ColourTree 2nd Generation 6' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabr... 46 $49.99 Shade&Beyond 6' x 50' Privacy Fence Screen Sand Heavy Duty 150 GSM Sand Fencing Mes... 40 $51.99 6'X50' WICUSIOM/IES/lf/// Ad feedback _ PERMINISSIE rH ColourTree 6' x 50' White Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabric Shade Tarp N... 9 $54.99 What other items do customers buy after viewing this item? 0 TR Industrial TR88302 Multi -Purpose Cable Tie (100 Piece), 8", Black 1,088 $6.99 beneralion V % Green Fence P1 Screen Windsc Cover Fabric 51 Tarp Netting M Cloth -... •c UPGRADE Fence Privacy Screen Fence 4' x 50' Shade Cover with Brass Grommets Heavy D... 14 $40.99 Windscreen4less Heavy Duty Privacy Screen Fence in Color Solid Green 6' x 50' Brass Grommets w/3 -Year Warranty 150 GSM 508 $52.69 ColourTree 2nd Generation 6' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabric Shade Tarp Netting Mesh Cloth - Commercial Grade 170 GSM - Heavy Duty - 3 Years Warranty - CUSTOM SIZE AVAILABLE 46 $49.99 Monoprice Cable Tie 8 inch 40LBS, 100pcs/Pack - Green Q 493 $4.99 Customers who bought this item also bought Windscreen4less Heavy Duty Privacy Screen Fence in Color Solid Green 6' x 50' Brass Grommets w/3... 508 $52.69 6'150' IWCUS/OM/IES/IE/// ColourTree 2nd Generation 6' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabric Shade Tarp... $49.99 46 Special offers and product promotions Item Package Quantity: 1 1 Size: 6' x 50' ColourTree 2nd Generation 4' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabr... 37 $44.99 ALEKO PLK0650DG Fence Privacy Screen Outdoor Backyard Fencing Windscreen Shade Cover... 22 $37.78 Monoprice Cable Tie 8 inch 40LBS, 100pcs/Pack - Green $4.99 493 Strong Ties Altai -1 Cable Zip Ties, Premium Heavy Duty, Nylon Wire, 50 Ib. Tensile Strength, Indoor... 603 $6.79 Sunny, Privac Heavy Shade $45.9S. Ad feedback • Get a $75.00 statement credit after first Amazon.com purchase made with new Discover it®O card within 3 months. Terms and conditions apply. See offer for details. Apply now Have a question? Find answers in product info, Q&As, reviews Compare with similar items This item Royal Shade 6' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Cover Windscreen, with Heavy Duty Brass Grommets, Custom Make Size I See Details 1 Customer Rating (8) Price Shipping Sold By dragon hill Material Type Polyurethane, Polyurethane Product description Item Package Quantity:1 1 SIze:6' x 50' B07D9WB3R2 Product information Item Package Quantity:1 1 Size:6' x 50' Product Dimensions Item Weight Shipping Weight Manufacturer ASIN Item model number Customer Reviews Best Sellers Rank 7 x 8 x 8 inches 10 pounds 10.1 pounds Royal Shade B07D9WB3R2 B07D9VWB3R2 4.0 out of 5 stars Windscreen4less Heavy Duty Privacy Screen Fence in Color Solid Green 6' x 50' Brass Grommets w/3 -Year Warranty 150 GSM Add to Cart (508) $5269 FREE Shipping on orders over $25 WindscreenSoCal Polyurethane 8 customer reviews #161,280 in Patio, Lawn & Garden (See Top 100 in Patio, Lawn & Garden) ColourTree 2nd Generation 6' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabric Shade Tarp Netting Mesh Cloth - Commercial Grade 170 GSM - Heavy Duty - 3 Years Warranty - CUSTOM SIZE AVAILABLE Add to Cart (46) $4999 FREE Shipping on orders over $25 Colourful Tree Polyurethane WICUS10M/IFS/!F/O YEAR , RSlT ColourTree 5' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen, Commercial Grade 170 GSM Heavy Duty, We Make Custom Size Add to Cart (78) $4699 FREE Shipping on orders over $25 Colourful Tree Polyurethane, Polyurethane Warranty & Support Product Warranty: For warranty information about this product, please click here Feedback If you are a seller for this product, would you like to suggest updates through seller support? Would you like to tell us about a lower price? #614 in Decorative Fences Related Video Shorts (0) Upload your video Be the first video Your name here Sponsored products related to this item Shade&Beyond 6' x 50' Privacy Fence Screen Sand Heavy Duty 150 GSM Sand Fencing Mes... 40 $51.99 UPGRADE Fence Privacy Screen Fence 4' x 50' Shade Cover with Brass Grommets Heavy D... 14 $40.99 lir Cut Siic 1 I blc! 1 ° Royal Shade 6' x 50' Black Fence Privacy Screen Cover Windscreen, with Heavy Duty B... $46.99 14 Alion Home Elegant Privacy Screen Fence Mesh Windscreen for Backyard Deck Patio Bal... 183 $27.99 Sunnyglade 6' x 50' Privacy Screen Fence Heavy Duty Fencing Mesh Shade Net Cover fo... 7 $45.99 tum' XiaZ P Screen Alumir Fencin $19.95 Ad feedback TV + Internet Get in on the $ each a mo. / 1 yr. Xfinity Spring Sale. when you bundle both with 1 -yr. agrmnt. Y p 9 xfinity 1-800-xfinity Equipment, taxes, and other charges extra and subj. to change. See disclaimer for details. Get It Now Ad feedback Customer Questions & Answers See questions and answers 8 customer reviews Customer images 4.0 out of 5 stars 5 star 4 star 3 star 2 star 1 star 63% 25% 00/0 00/0 12% Review this product Share your thoughts with other customers Write a customer review HANOVER Beautiful patio dining sets. Easy to assemble. Traditions 7 -Piece Outdoor Dining Set 85 $1,408.54 Shop now Ad feedback See all customer images Top Reviews Kelly Galinato Size is perfect for a pickleball court August 17, 2018 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Verified Purchase So I bought this wind screen for those gusty days at the pickleball courts. The fact that this screen is 6 feet tall and 50 feet long was enticing. The price tag on this was very affordable as well. Since I only plan on putting this up when needed, I wanted light weight. First off, this screen has many metal loops for attaching it to the fence. Today, I was only putting it up for photos so I used just a few carabiners to hang it. In the future, I will be using bungee cords to get it more secure and easier to put up and take down. For my purposes, the handful of carabiners worked fine. The day was a little breezy so I decided to take the screen to the courts and test it. Once I had it up, it shielded very well from the breeze. The wind by the screen was considerably less than on the adjacent court. It's simple as that. The screen did what it was supposed to. The edges were atieched well. The grommets were a nice, sturdy metal. This seems to be a well made screen. If I had a concern, it's that the material seemed a bit thin. It works as it should but if I were to leave it up all the time, I'd be worried about durability. However, the thinner material is lighter and easier to hang than some nice put up in the past. All in all, this screen suits my needs very well. It's huge but easy to transport. Hanging it will be a breeze. I may get a second one to better enclose my playing space. 2 people found this helpful Helpful Comment Report abuse Crystal Cannon Don't waste your time or money April 11, 2019 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Verified Purchase Early Reviewer Rewards (What's this?) Not durable at all. One wind and it was ripped apart. It lasted less than 24 hours from the time it was put up. Helpful Comment Report abuse Kerrine Thompson Its deff sturdy April 11, 2019 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Verified Purchase Early Reviewer Rewards (What's this?) We used it uo against our fence bcuz every time our one unfriendly neighbor was outside our dogs would bark problem solved. Helpful Comment Report abuse Amazon Customer Better than I expected! April 15, 2019 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Verified Purchase Early Reviewer Rewards (What's this?) Using it as a safeguard for animals on a Targe upper balcony. Cat has climbed it twice and it has been in high winds and shows no wear or damage Helpful Comment Report abuse Michael Swenson Great privacy screen! April 25, 2019 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 32' Verified Purchase Early Reviewer Rewards (What's this?) Great privacy screen! Easy to put up and 1 foot increments make it easy to size. Helpful ccstylin Comment Report abuse Quality March 26, 2019 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Verified Purchase Good quality privacy screen for warehouse parking lot Helpful Comment Report abuse Amazon Customer Early Reviewer Rewards (What's this?) Five Stars June 22, 2018 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Great product ! Blocks dust from next door. Keeps dogs from seeing each other . Perfect fit . 3 people found this helpful Helpful Comment Report abuse Emma Brizuela Small PATIO?...No Problem! January 18, 2019 Item Package Quantity: 1 Size: 6' x 50' Verified Purchase NOW I Enjoy Privacy Amongst CLOSE Neighbors gloin Pad Thanks Guys, Helpful See all 8 reviews Comment Report abuse Write a customer review Customers who viewed this item also viewed 5'150' 4'150' Windscreen4less Heavy ColourTree 2nd Generation Duty Privacy Screen Fence 6' x 50' Green Fence in Color Solid Green 6' x Privacy Screen Windscreen 50' Brass Grommets w/3... Cover Fabric Shade Tarp... 508 46 $52.69 $49.99 WFCUSTIIM/IIS/If/// ColourTree 5' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen, Commercial Grade 170 GSM Heavy... 78 $46.99 �1 b1ijJIJJ/ 1Jt11/ W, INC ColourTree 2nd Generation 6' x 50' Beige Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen, Commercial... 26 1 offer from $149.99 WfCUSIOM/IfS/lf/// ColourTree 2nd Generation 4' x 50' Green Fence Privacy Screen Windscreen Cover Fabric Shade Tarp... 37 $44.99 L LAUDERDALE COUNCIL ACTION FORM Action Requested Consent Public Hearing Discussion Action Resolution Work Session X Meeting Date: April 23, 2019 ITEM NUMBER 2019 Day in the Park STAFF INITIAL JB APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR DESCRIPTION : This will be a follow up discussion to the April 23 city council meeting regarding setting a date for Day in the Park. Staff will be meeting with community volunteers helping with the event on May 13 and be able to bring feedback from them. OPTIONS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: